History, Politics And Current Affairs

Opinions expressed here are personal views of contributors and do not necessarily represent the companies, organizations or governments they work for. Nor do they necessarily represent those of the Board Administration.
It is currently Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:49 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: U.S. Navy Fighters V6.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 07, 2015 9:57 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:29 pm
Posts: 5285
TS-1 35.09
F4C-1 36.71
F6C-3 37.17
FB-5 43.13
F7C-1 41.74
F2B-1 42.52
F9C-2 38.30
F3B-1 40.51
F4B-2 51.65
F4B-4 50.68
F11C-2 Hawk II 45.91
F11C-3 Hawk III 55.22
FF-1 49.96
F2F-1 61.61
F3F-1 58.30
F3F-3 66.59
F2A-1 67.93
F2A-2 78.58
F2A-3 85.91
F4F-3 92.64
F4F-4 109.10
FM-2 99.77
F6F-3 121.68
F4U-1 134.48
F4U-4 130.31
F4U-5 141.35
F2G-2 142.78
F7F-1 159.94
F7F-2N 136.05
F7F-3 156.98
F8F-1 125.86
F8F-2 141.48
FR-1 129.98
FH-1 129.36
F2H-1 181.15
F2H-2 178.12
F2H-4N 189.20
F6U-1 176.45
FJ-1 149.79
F9F-2 179.51
F9F-5 199.59
F9F-6 197.35
F9F-8 201.56
F3D-1 172.58
F3D-2M 178.15
FJ-2 221.96
FJ-3 218.73
FJ-4 218.79
F4D-1 332.80
F2Y-1 237.61
F7U-3 234.50
F7U-3M 222.87
F3H-1N 220.57
F3H-2N 259.79
F11F-1 267.58
F8U-1 360.22
F8U-2 456.60
F-4B (AIM-7) 555.29
F-4B (AIM-7+AIM-9) 565.24
F-4J (AIM-7+AIM-9) 672.49
F-4S (AIM-7+AIM-9) 764.39
F-14A (AIM-54) 1008.88
F-14A (AIM-54+AIM-9) 1017.53
F-14D (AIM-54) 1149.67
F-18A 761.84
F-18C 913.48
F-18E 1151.61

_________________
There are 550 million firearms in the world, enough for one person in twelve of the world's population. The moral dilemma that faces us is how to arm the other eleven.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:13 pm
Posts: 14355
Location: PCE(R)-857
Do we have enough data on something like the F9U to rate it?

_________________
Shepard: "What kind of weapons does this thing have?"
Liara T'Soni: "It's a taxi; it has a fare meter!"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2016 1:13 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:29 pm
Posts: 5285
I'll give it a shot and see. By the way, its the F8U-3 in @; the F9U in TBO.

_________________
There are 550 million firearms in the world, enough for one person in twelve of the world's population. The moral dilemma that faces us is how to arm the other eleven.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:49 pm
Posts: 10917
Did it -- 768.5

Better than I thought.

_________________
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2016 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:37 pm
Posts: 7568
Location: BM-9, BB-30
The fact that that's better than any of the F-4s and even pips the F-18A says something, doesn't it?

_________________
RLBH wrote:
I'm sorry, but I prefer to carpet-shark my enemies. Much more mayhem, though it must be admitted that the laser-guided shark is cheaper.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 7:31 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:29 pm
Posts: 5285
The Bushranger wrote:
The fact that that's better than any of the F-4s and even pips the F-18A says something, doesn't it?

It's certainly interesting although we are moving into the era where missile armament was the primary driver (I assumed an AIM-7F and AIM-9J armament; replacing those with AIM-7E and AIM-9B would drop the figure by a significant amount.

Give the F8U-3 AIM-120s and we have a really nasty opponent. Problem is of course, its a pure fighter. No discernible air-to-ground capability. The other problem is the radar; its marginal by the standards of its day and hopelessly useless by todays and the design of the aircraft means we can't do much about it.

_________________
There are 550 million firearms in the world, enough for one person in twelve of the world's population. The moral dilemma that faces us is how to arm the other eleven.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 7:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:37 pm
Posts: 544
Because another thread brought it to mind, how does the FM-2 Wildcat stack up?

I suspect we'll see some regression in score from the F4F-4 as a consequence of optimizing for CVE operations, with the decrease in firepower more than offsetting the slightly improved flight performance. But maybe it'll go the other way.

_________________
"Gotta say, doctor, your talent for alienatin' folk is near miraculous."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 9:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:41 am
Posts: 6363
Location: Cambs, UK
And it's opponent in Lion Resurgent, the Mirage F.1 C (I'm guessing?) scores 629... Massive differential.

_________________
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Bernard, Ministers should never know more than they need to. Then they can't tell anyone. Like secret agents, they could be captured, tortured.
Bernard Woolley: You mean by terrorists?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: By the BBC, Bernard.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 9:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:51 am
Posts: 2072
Location: Georgia
Frank Underwood wrote:
The Bushranger wrote:
The fact that that's better than any of the F-4s and even pips the F-18A says something, doesn't it?

It's certainly interesting although we are moving into the era where missile armament was the primary driver (I assumed an AIM-7F and AIM-9J armament; replacing those with AIM-7E and AIM-9B would drop the figure by a significant amount.

Give the F8U-3 AIM-120s and we have a really nasty opponent. Problem is of course, its a pure fighter. No discernible air-to-ground capability. The other problem is the radar; its marginal by the standards of its day and hopelessly useless by todays and the design of the aircraft means we can't do much about it.


I bet there's a modern radar out there you could shoehorn into the existing space--you'd have to do that anyway, given an AIM-120 load.

Problem is, you'd still be stuck with all the other ancient systems and attendant maintainability issues, and you'd stand out like a billboard.

_________________
To do much in this life, you must learn much.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:49 pm
Posts: 10917
gtg947h wrote:
I bet there's a modern radar out there you could shoehorn into the existing space--you'd have to do that anyway, given an AIM-120 load.


I dunno, that nose is really tight. I'm playing around with grafting the nose of an F-16 on to the F8U-3 fuselage and giving it the high-speed cockpit layout that distinguishes TBOverse aircraft (as on the @ F-106). That would be the F10U-1 Matamoros.

Quote:
Problem is, you'd still be stuck with all the other ancient systems and attendant maintainability issues, and you'd stand out like a billboard.


That is true; it applies to all ancient systems of course. I was thinking of a new-build aircraft to give pure fighter interceptor capability back to the carriers without going to the size and complexity of an F-14.

In the TBOverse, stealth isn't really a consideration. Technology has gone a different route. In @, a putative F8U3 revival would have to do some signature reduction.

_________________
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 1:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:51 am
Posts: 2072
Location: Georgia
Francis Urquhart wrote:
gtg947h wrote:
I bet there's a modern radar out there you could shoehorn into the existing space--you'd have to do that anyway, given an AIM-120 load.


I dunno, that nose is really tight. I'm playing around with grafting the nose of an F-16 on to the F8U-3 fuselage and giving it the high-speed cockpit layout that distinguishes TBOverse aircraft (as on the @ F-106). That would be the F10U-1 Matamoros.


I sketched one up for you a couple years ago: viewtopic.php?p=99207#p99207

Quote:
In the TBOverse, stealth isn't really a consideration. Technology has gone a different route. In @, a putative F8U3 revival would have to do some signature reduction.

Yeah, I wasn't thinking TBO .

_________________
To do much in this life, you must learn much.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 3:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:45 am
Posts: 5155
Location: EGUD
Francis Urquhart wrote:
I dunno, that nose is really tight. I'm playing around with grafting the nose of an F-16 on to the F8U-3 fuselage and giving it the high-speed cockpit layout that distinguishes TBOverse aircraft (as on the @ F-106). That would be the F10U-1 Matamoros.

How does it compare in size to that on the Harrier? They got Sea Vixen on the nose of the FA.2, and that was AMRAAM capable - and the Harrier was always space and weight critical.

Edit, never mind: answered my own question - the F8U-3 had a 24" AN/APQ-50 radar, the same diameter as the APG-65 on the American Harriers.

_________________
War is less costly than servitude. In the end, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau. - Jean Dutourd


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 6:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:37 pm
Posts: 7568
Location: BM-9, BB-30
Well the FRS.2/FA.2 did carry Sea Vixen, but as I recall it had a somewhat...voluptuous radome to handle it, compared to the fuselage just astern. For a supersonic type, that could be an issue.

_________________
RLBH wrote:
I'm sorry, but I prefer to carpet-shark my enemies. Much more mayhem, though it must be admitted that the laser-guided shark is cheaper.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 9:52 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:29 pm
Posts: 5285
Philistine wrote:
Because another thread brought it to mind, how does the FM-2 Wildcat stack up? I suspect we'll see some regression in score from the F4F-4 as a consequence of optimizing for CVE operations, with the decrease in firepower more than offsetting the slightly improved flight performance. But maybe it'll go the other way.


I done it - came out as 99.77 with the difference being loss of firepower, some range and a bit of altitude, not quite offset by extra speed, better roll rate. It's added to the main listing.

_________________
There are 550 million firearms in the world, enough for one person in twelve of the world's population. The moral dilemma that faces us is how to arm the other eleven.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2016 1:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:37 pm
Posts: 544
Thanks!

And sure enough: it was good within its niche, but its niche was no longer "primary fleet defense fighter," and it shows.

_________________
"Gotta say, doctor, your talent for alienatin' folk is near miraculous."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2016 3:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:41 am
Posts: 6363
Location: Cambs, UK
Philistine wrote:
Thanks!

And sure enough: it was good within its niche, but its niche was no longer "primary fleet defense fighter," and it shows.


Maybe we need to see the fighter rating of bombers that you promised Stuart, and see how well the Fw.200 scores vs the FM-2 in this regard :D

_________________
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Bernard, Ministers should never know more than they need to. Then they can't tell anyone. Like secret agents, they could be captured, tortured.
Bernard Woolley: You mean by terrorists?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: By the BBC, Bernard.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2016 3:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:49 pm
Posts: 10917
What I want to do when time permits is a bomber rating of fighters . . . , That may be V.70 of the existing fighter ratings.

_________________
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 5:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:41 am
Posts: 6363
Location: Cambs, UK
How finger-breakyie would it be to ask for the straight numbers on each missile?

For instance, we can say that the F-4B with warload has a fighter effectiveness of n, but an unloaded one has an effectiveness of 0, as no gun armament. Sooooo... what do the missiles rate on their own, is that a study we can make or is it invalid without context of a/c sensors, airspeed & altitude etc?

_________________
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Bernard, Ministers should never know more than they need to. Then they can't tell anyone. Like secret agents, they could be captured, tortured.
Bernard Woolley: You mean by terrorists?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: By the BBC, Bernard.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 8:35 pm
Posts: 1593
F-11F-1 - while this is an airplane with some operational limitations and a relatively short USN career, something tells me that based on having an afterburning saphire as standard, and a small but significant afterburner "hump" on its speed altitude curve, it should compare well (or better than it does now) to the Hunter say, at least when intercepting swept wing jet bombers, or dogfighting above 30,000ft....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 7:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:49 pm
Posts: 10917
NewGolconda wrote:
F-11F-1 - while this is an airplane with some operational limitations and a relatively short USN career, something tells me that based on having an afterburning saphire as standard, and a small but significant afterburner "hump" on its speed altitude curve

The F11F-1 rating is the operational version. There were a lot of proposed developments including one with an afterburner-equipped J79 but their performance was purely theoretical and manufacturers estimates. So, we don't have a basis on which to make the calculations. Its the standard problem with most what-if aircraft. Very few such aircraft have real data to work on.

Quote:
it should compare well (or better than it does now) to the Hunter say, at least when intercepting swept wing jet bombers, or dogfighting above 30,000ft....

We're concerned here with an overview of the aircraft as a whole, not within a narrow operational niche.

_________________
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group