F-16 beats F-35 in a dog fight

Just avionics and integration into whatever tech will help it kill the right people better (comms, guidance, etc)

 

Having worked flight test for the B and C variants over the last 5 years, I can tell you that aircraft isn't near being the piece of shit that all these "experts" think it is. The speculation cracks me up though.

 

It also makes me chuckle when people compare the F-35 to the F-14. Great looking plane. Horrendous pile of garbage to maintain.

 

Who did that? It's more akin to the f-16 and f-18 isn't it?

 

I did not compare the F-14 to the F-35. I pointed out that the F-14 arose when the navy decided the "one plane for both branches" F-111 was an unworkable solution for carrier use and pulled the plug and moved to develop the naval role specific F-14.

Go back to WWII and move forward...historically air force and naval aviation has required different solutions with regards to fighter and attack aircraft with the F-4 being the standout exception. 7500 feet of stationary runway vs 400 feet of pitching and rolling steel will do that.

Regarding maintenance, variable geometry wings (just like the F-111) are/were very complex and maintenance intensive, that's pretty obvious.

 

Just ask the Iranians, haha.

 

No source for spares tends to gradually ground the fleet. Killing or imprisoning he techs and pilots isn't all the helpful either.

 

That was an interesting read but predictable.From a lot of the aggressor pilots I've talked with the F18 is more of an in you're face knife fighter than the F16 and were talking C and D model hornets not even the super Hornet which has a superior AOA to the F16.The F 35 really is corporate welfare of the highest order.

 

The F-18 is awesome plane, low and especially low and slow its still considered the best in the world by many.

 

Well all the F35 pilots I have talked to (quite a few) LOVE it. These are all -18, -16, and Harrier pilots. Considering all these "dogfights" are theoretical I'd take it with a grain of salt. I've worked on every current weapons platform in the US military and the f35 has been by far the most enjoyable. I'm not going to deny it is overpriced. Then again all of them are.

 

Forget dog fights. How well does it drop $400,000 bombs on $10 tents?

 

It can out maneuver an F-35 but how well does it handle against a Cessna?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/07/07/f16-crash-south-carolina/29815069/

 

Very well indeed!

 

Interesting stuff, I worked on the F-111 for a plane made in the late 60's to 1996 it did pretty well. It laid the ground work for the F-14 again served the military very well. Both got old and tired like many things improvement and new technology made them obsolete even with new electronic packages.
The F-4 was a predecessor to the F-35 being a piece of shit because it was forced to be an everything plan. Jack of all and master of none.
Hell the F-4 didn't even come with a gun for Air to Air and earned the name lead sled for a reason, you could see it coming from the black smoke well before seeing the plane.
IMO the F-15 and F-16 were for there time the best planes made.
The 15 was designed for one thing be the best in long range Air to Air, the 16 for dog fights.
Find it funny they are wanting to put the 16 in mothballs while they still fly the B-52.

On the A-10 the F-35 will never come close to matching the tank killing power or be able to take hits like the A-10 can with the bathtub it has.

After working the the F-111 spent 3 years on the F-16 it was a real joy to cut the rug with and it was also the first fly by wire aircraft.

And yes blowing the money and getting something is better than pissing it down a rat hole and getting nothing but grief from ingrates who say the government does not steal enough from those who work and invest. Because we are racist pigs.

 

The F-4 could take battle damage and keep flying that would literally have blotted an F-16 (and most any other fighter) from the sky. They came back missing half a wing...most of the tail sections, shot full of holes and additionally they were not prone to catch on fire. The F-4 brought a lot of crews back that wouldn't have made it in any other jet.

Additionally, with over 5,000 copies produced IIRC it was the most successful western jet fighter ever.

 

Interesting with the 15 being originally intended as an air superiority fighter, then morphing into a competent deep interdiction strike figher (E model). People complain about how much the LANTIRN project cost, but it does work and across platforms.

I'd suspect the 15 air frame will stick around for a while.

 

The Bradley needs a Kongsberg Medium Cal RWS (30mm).

All those problems will be solved.

 

I thought the Sgt York was the big boondoggle.

Growing up in Hampton Roads in the 80s I remember seeing JSF cartoons in the local paper basically stating that it was vaporware. Amazing how long this project has been going on.

What's the reasoning for discontinuing the F22 program, superseded by the F35?

 

Its hard to let go of something with a thrust to weight ratio greater than 1.:up:

 

The F-15 has done the same. Lost half the main wing and one stabilizer wing and still come back home. Just sayin'.
The 15 is an awesome aircraft.