I think its thrust/weight was poor, but the A-7 had twice the range or payload of the A-4 Skyhawk that it replaced. It also had more advanced avionics.

I have a question: When a MiG-17 drops its wing tanks, do the side braces go with them, or do they stay with the plane? How about the pylon that connects it to the plane? I have never seen a photo of a MiG-17 with pylons and no tanks attached to them. :confused:

I can’t believe that anyone knows what range the F-22 can be detected by Russian radars. Whatever it is, it will be drastically less than the detection range for an F-16. Just because the F-22 can be detected by Russian radar doesn’t alter the fact that that the detection range is greatly reduced. The MiG-31 tracking range against the F-22 will be very poor. The F-22 is going to know exactly where the MiG-31 is, and AIM-120 range is not going to be degraded in the least. The MiG-31 is going to be in big trouble.

> Rocky
> They had a fly off between the two because congress wanted
> to save money by buying only one of the two. The F-15 won.
There waas no “fly-off” in fact Congress passed a law that prohibited ACM between the two fighters.

Adrian

Oops, I rechecked that and the flyoff was just a propasal.

“in March 1973 another investigation was made by the Senate Armed Services Committee to discuss modifying the F-15 for the Navy, since the F-14 was still having severe problems. Deputy Secretary of Defense Clements favored an Air Force versus Navy fly-off battle…”
“There were some heated discussions about flying the two aircraft against each other, one pilot belligerently insisting that live ammunition be placed in both aircraft to make the solution final.”
“There was a great deal of inter-service rivalry involving the two aircraft. Design proposals were made on both sides of the fence, one being to modify the F-15 for Navy use, the other to modify the F-14 for Air Force use. Memos, fact sheets and all kinds of data were passing back and forth in the Pentagon and the Department of Defense trying to convince people of both sides.”
F-15 EAGLE by Jeff Ethell

thought the tomcat was less able to pull g than the eagle, like only seven and a half as the eagle does nine gs?

Your numbers are right, but they are limits to preserve airframe life. In war, an F-14 pilot can pull 9gs if he has to. Someone wrote on another thread that the Navy has restricted the F-14 to 6.5g or 5.5g lately.
The F-14 has a lower effective wing loading. The F-15 has a higher thrust/weight ratio. The F-15 can out climb, and out accelerate the F-14. The F-15 has a better sustained turn rate. I think it has a better roll rate too, but I’ve never seen the numbers. The F-14 has the advantage at very slow speeds, but unless the F-15 pilot is foolish enough to loose his airspeed, the F-15 should win. Unless he gets blown out of the sky by a Phoenix launched from 100 miles away.

Its a slow, fat freakin cargo aircraft with guns.

Try convincing the thousands of Iraqis and insurgents who’ve seen their firepower brought to bear.

Or how about the thousands of NVA regulars and VC troops who saw not only the firepower of the AC-130, but of the AC-119, and AC-47.

Hey, I said it had its uses. Its terrific when there is nothing around to blow it out of the sky. The AC-130 can make life hell for enemy troops, but its still a slow, fat freaking cargo aircraft with guns. 😮 = the expression on an AC-130 pilot’s face as a MiG-29 rolls in to say hi.

Everyone seems to want to send in an AC-130. It has its uses, but its not like its a survivable aircraft when there are any kind of air defences. Its a slow, fat freakin cargo aircraft with guns.