Ok look, you made a claim about F18 being superior to F16 in several rather specific characteristics, which isn’t true and I’ve pointed that out and documented that.
You didn’t and now you make more ridiculous claims like “the fa-18’s has better dogfight maneuverability“.
Dunno why you do that, but it seems the military aviation is a D.Tracy/Top Gun type of issue for you, when it’s a very serious business in reality, in which ppl get killed.
So, if you have something solid (actual figures, not empty talk) to add on F16-F18 comparison table, let’s have it, otherwise let’s just drop the subject.
you are trying to shift the goal post, i originally replied to you about the FCC and maneuverability, roll, turn, as shown in posts 1-4.
i have said several times that biggles ww1 tactics that are discussed on this site are fun, but nowdays its a total systems event and not at a platform 1 vs 1 level
so your stated ‘ridiculous claim’ isnt valid and a poor attempt to try and score a point
in fact you are the master of 1 vs 1 , how top speed and supersonic agility is very important and give little relevance to systems, radars and missiles
1. Originally Posted by Cola1973
A comparison of F16 and F18, from a pilot’s point of view.
2. Originally Posted by jackjack
except that as you fully know and have been told, it is pointless judging the fa-18 with the old FCS, pre 2003/4
3. Originally Posted by Cola1973
Why?
Is it because the V2 FCS gave F18 more lift? better T/W ratio? Less drag?
The answer is neither and the pilot in the text compared performances, which remained unaltered, so his observations stand.
4. Originally Posted by jackjack
flying in a straight line performance still stands
any manoeuvrings doesnt still stand and in fact falls over, it was a very significant upgrade, which in truth should have had the money spent to be done earlier
your link said the fa-18 has better instantaneous turn at Mach 0.7 °/sec
f-16c 18
f-a18c 18.5
my picture said the fa-18 has better sustained g, which is more deg in a sustained turn, giving the higher g, as i see it
my picture showed a slight gain in f-16 transonic speed and so i corrected post 6 in post 7
i also said in post 7
“i have said that the f-16 is better in supersonic up high”
this was in reference to and repeating an earlier statement, you may recall the reply i made in which i underlined my reply to your points within the quote, it seems this was removed as it didnt comply with accepted posting practice
5. Originally Posted by Cola1973
JJ, FCS doesn’t alter performance (well, it does if the original was downloaded from Inet) but handling, whether those are measured in climb, level flight, dive, or in turn…doesn’t matter.
I was talking about performance issues, since some guys managed to conclude (in their infinite wisdom) that F16 and F18 have “practically” the same performance.
6. Originally Posted by jackjack
why dont you put a bit of reality in your posts now and then ?
the fa18c has better transonic acceleration and sustained g than the f-16
the fa18c post 2004 has a much superior maneuverability envelope
the f16 has better instantaneous g than the fa18
7.
i was drawing attention to ‘your’ quoted pilot and what he said about dogfights, even with the old FCC
the fa-18’s has better dogfight maneuverability, i have shown that the fa-18c has similar transonic speed
now there are plenty of sources to the maneuverability of the fa-18c & SH including your very own pilot, it seems you want to pick and choose what is accurate in what he said
i have said that the f-16 is better in supersonic up high
now back to maneuverability and the FCC, old and new, as per post 2
YOUR source said quite clearly using the ‘old’ FCC
“There’s no better performing fighter in the close-in, slow speed, knife-in-the-teeth dogfight than the F/A-18 Hornet, except maybe, of course, a Super Hornet”
“The Hornet flies very comfortably at AoAs of up to 50 degrees and has great pitch, roll and yaw authority between 25 degrees of AoA and the lift limit of 35 degrees of AoA. …
On the other hand, a Viper has a 25-degree AoA limiter built into its software, and even fewer degrees of AoA are available if it’s carrying air-to-ground goodies on the hard points”
“In a Hornet, it’s difficult not to get the first shot in a close-in dog-fight that starts from a perfectly neutral merge …
As a Hornet driver, I have never lost to a Viper guy that I saw”
the new FCC takes the roll and yaw at 35 deg aoa to 55 deg aoa, a significant improvement giving even greater maneuverability to the fa-18c
as i said in the deleted post,
“the fa-18 is better in low, transonic maneuverability, the f-16 is better in supersonic up high where radar, bvr missiles and such come into play and so isnt that relevant”
its even more irrelevant if we include the SH in the fa-18 comparison
Sign In
