A short response from my friend who flew several of the jets mentioned here. Jimbo entered the USAF, began his flight training in 1969...retired a colonel some time later. His short, in caps, response:

THE F111! THE ONLY ONE THAT COULD GO OVER A 1000 KNOTS AT 200'

JIM

I'll take the word of a guy who flew 'em! :D (edit)...hmmm, no wonder Jim says his Corvette bores him, is thinking of selling it. After riding at 1,000 knots, 200 feet above the deck? Can't think of many rides more thrilling than that...

Jim,

The F-15 was certainly not Boyd's vision of a fighter....he despised the fact the put a huge great radar in the nose and BVR missiles...loved the guns.. loved the Sidewinder and tolerated twin engines.. hated the fact it became physically too big..

His version was lighter, smaller and single engined...his ideal version was used as a base for the technology demonstration contract which gave rise to the YF-16....which again suffered from 'Gold plating' as it became the F-16...

His biography, whilst clearly weighted against the 'heavy weight fighters' gives a good indication of what he envisaged was the optimum fighter.....

Stijn,

The F-14 was great well except for the A model's engines...which imposed severe restrictions in service...and degraded perfrmance... the D model was altogether better and in flight terms what was originally intended..

PW..

The F-111 a fighter....? as the Admirals said... 'even with all the thrust in Christendom it will never be a fighter'.... great bomber tho...

Keep in mind, my friend flew both F111 and F15...the f15 when he was in the air guard. Not all F111's were bombers only...I've never flown a military jet of any kind...so I gotta go with the opinion of a guy I've known since childhood...if he prefers the F111 to anything he's flown? If he calls the F-111 a fighter? Then it's a fighter. Sure is a big one, I'll admit.

I had the pleasure of working on the F4 Phantom and the A10 Thunderbolt II while in the USAF. The A10 isn't a jet fighter but it's one heck of a machine. The F4 is like the SC, all mechanical, but in its day, it was king of the skies.

I also had the pleasure of working on the F16 as a civilian. That thing is like the 996 in that it's very modern and advanced. The flight control computer is digital fly-by-wire and quadruple redundant. And this was back in the early '80s! As far as agility, the F16 could be compared to the Elise.

PW..

Don't let the F prefix on the 1-11 mislead you.. the only F-111 ever designed to engage in combat with other aircraft was the F-111B; intended for the fleet defence role of the USN, as a long range interceptor.
(The USAF use the F prefix inconsistently, the F-117 Nighthawk being another good example, not exactly a fighter...)

None of the F-111s that entered USAF service were intended as air to air assets...From the A to the K model they were all 'fighter bombers/ deep strike interdictors/ tactical fighters or other euphemisim', a role in which they were pretty much unmatched and the FB-111As were pure bombers, both nuclear and conventional capability.

The EF models were electronic warfare variants developed for the European theatre primarily...

You could ask your friend what his primary tasking was as an F-111 pilot...it may very well be different from the F prefix and it may not have included 'officially' any air to air....but it does certainly sounds better to say its a fighter...

Certainly for the 20 plus years of Upper Heyford operations the F-111s were never tasked with air to air.. nor were they tasked for that during the raids to North Vietnam, Libya or in GW1...

The F-111 is one of the most powerful and capable F prefixed aircraft ever and low flying is certainly a blast...not done 1000knots at 200ft... but 750 at 50....inverted..I would imagine is in the same ballpark...

Your friend is telling the truth.. its the best 'fighter' it all depends on what you call a fighter....

Take someone who has flown them all (the prop planes) and the Spitfire and FW-190 would come out tops as a pure prop fighter plane. Mustang was just too heavy on the controls. It won out due to sheer numbers, same with the P-47 and the P-38 which were good planes but much heavier in weight.

Jets, well the Mig 15 flew circles around the F51's in Korea until the F86 arrived, then got their ass handed to them, part due to the excellent plane, and part due to our pilots being trained better.

F-104 was a wonderful high speed interceptor, but its not really a fighter. It would eat complacient pilots alive and took many of them to their graves. Flown correctly its a good plane but really a rocket with wings stuck on.

The F-4 was an excellent airplane but heavy. Only thing that saved it was its good radar and RIO who could keep his heads on the instruments and pickle missles as needed. It did not have a gun on the first versions but was added later when they found out that many of the dogfights were too close for missles to lock on the target. Considering that it was designed on sliderules in the 1950's, and is still in active service with some countries, its hard to beat the Phantom.

Once the F-15 arrived, the game was over for most of the other fighters. Yes the Mig and Sukoi companies make some very nice planes but they never reliable until the last versions to be available in large enough numbers to make a difference. The Eagle has been around for over 35 years and thats amazing for a front line fighter.

The F-111 is NOT a fighter, nor is the A-10. One is a bomber, the other ground support vehicle with wings and a very large cannon hung on it! The Ardvaark is called a "fighter/bomber" but it is just too heavy to do anything but bomb. It may go very fast both on the deck and up high but its no fighter.

F-16 is a nice airplane but they do not call it the "lawn dart" for nothing. Early models had massive electrical problems and while thats been cured, it still has issues. Glad to have it on our side but the F-15 will still take it down in a head to head fight IMHO.

F-22 and so on are not proven. Hope that they are better than the F-15 but considering the cost they better be nice.

F-22
 

A2A:

F-15 Eagle(gotta love a kill ratio of infinity), F-14D Tomcat(the greatest naval interceptor- ever), F-86 Sabre.

A2MUD:

A-10 Warthog, F-18 Hornet, F-16 Viper.

About the A-10, no, it is no fighter. But you do not want to get into low altitude turning fight with one at guns range either. Many a young and exuberant Viper or Ronin driver has fallen to the mighty 30mm gun in the nose of the A-10 Warthog. :)

Okay so it's not a fighter... but it sure is purdy...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1163542196.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1163542227.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1163542245.jpg

M21 -

A2Mud: A-10; A-6; AC-130; A-1E

Nobody messes with the AC-130!

As long as the US government has total air and ground superiority, the AC-130 does fine. They tried them in Desert Storm, after one or two never came back, they were removed from combat. The AC-130 is not good against an enemy that can shoot back.

Hadn't read about losing any, though it's countermeasures are pretty good, it's a slow target. I felt compelled to put in a word for it even though the thread is about fighters because they are an Awesome sight in action.

Joe said..
"F-16 is a nice airplane but they do not call it the "lawn dart" for nothing. Early models had massive electrical problems and while thats been cured, it still has issues. Glad to have it on our side but the F-15 will still take it down in a head to head fight IMHO."

LOL never heard the Viper refered to as the "lawn dart", but my brother who has been flying the F-16 for 19 years does have a nice assortment of F-15 kills from the numerous training exercises he's participated in with them.

I've seen them working out once or twice, very impressive from the ground, both visually and audibly.

No one has mentioned the Vought Cutlass, the F7U in Naval parlance. While not the greatest of all time, this unusual aircraft pioneered several systems that are common today.
http://www.dvhaa.org/f7u.html

http://images20.fotki.com/v356/photo...wimage1-vi.jpg

http://images19.fotki.com/v358/photo...wimage2-vi.jpg

http://images19.fotki.com/v33/photos...wimage3-vi.jpg

http://images19.fotki.com/v27/photos...owimage-vi.jpg

In the bottom photo, to the right appears the North American FJ-3 Fury; the Navy's version of the F-86.

AC-130
 

The Spectre is the most accurate weapons system in the US arsenal, and the most persistant attack asset ever, but it's not a jet. ;)

The A-1 SPAD/Skyraider was also an awesome machine, but it also had one of those pesky props! ;)

They just upgraded the fleet with Mk144 30x173mm guns(same caliber as the A-10 fires) to increase the birds standoff range. Should help some, but the AC-130 is definitely vulnerable to a lot of anti-aircraft systems. The main think is the use of solid and evolving tactics. Used properly, the AC-130 is a scalpel.

The F-16s nickname among EVERYONE outside the F-16 community is "Lawndart".

It has been for decades, and is not an obscure term. Do a google search, lol. ;)

F-16 troops and drivers call the jet the "Viper", after the colonial vipers from the ORIGINAL battlestar galactica!

M21 -

"The Spectre is... not a jet"

Turboprop, AKA "Propjet" <g>


"The A-1 SPAD/Skyraider... also had one of those pesky props!"

Know that, but I felt like taking a little liberty. Besides, it'll put a 2.75 between your feet with a good pilot.