Fighter Acceleration/Climb-Rates

[PR19_Kit]

there was an unofficial test (race lol) between a lightning and an f15 both in service versions and they raced from brakes off to 30,000 feet.
the lightning won, so even the mighty eagle (and it was mighty) couldnt quite keep up with a lightning

... and then the Lightning turned around and landed having exhausted its fuel while the Eagle
continued on to the range, fired some missiles, made some gun passes and then returned to
base. 

Yeah, yeah, yeah, we all KNOW about the Lighning's short legs but a] it was designed for short range interceptions b] it only had to defend a small country a short distance from the potential enemy and c] it was 15- 20 years older than the darned Eagle anyway!

[Rheged]

there was an unofficial test (race lol) between a lightning and an f15 both in service versions and they raced from brakes off to 30,000 feet.
the lightning won, so even the mighty eagle (and it was mighty) couldnt quite keep up with a lightning

... and then the Lightning turned around and landed having exhausted its fuel while the Eagle
continued on to the range, fired some missiles, made some gun passes and then returned to
base. 

Yeah, yeah, yeah, we all KNOW about the Lighning's short legs but a] it was designed for short range interceptions b] it only had to defend a small country a short distance from the potential enemy and c] it was 15- 20 years older than the darned Eagle anyway!

I recall reading about  a discussion  between RAF and USAF pilots.

"A Lightning can reach 80,000 feet in two minutes......" "  So can an  F15 Eagle!" 

"A Lightning can supercruise"  " So can  an  Eagle"

"A Lightning is a superlative interceptor"  "So is an Eagle"

"A Lightning could do this in 1956"..........Silence from the other party.

[KJ_Lesnick]

eatthis

there was an unofficial test (race lol) between a lightning and an f15 both in service versions and they raced from brakes off to 30,000 feet. the lightning won

Could the Lightning out-turn the F-15 at combat weights?

[PR19_Kit]

eatthis

there was an unofficial test (race lol) between a lightning and an f15 both in service versions and they raced from brakes off to 30,000 feet. the lightning won

Could the Lightning out-turn the F-15 at combat weights?

Probably not, the wing areas and loading differ greatly, but it was an unlikely combat scenario anyway.

[eatthis]

there was an unofficial test (race lol) between a lightning and an f15 both in service versions and they raced from brakes off to 30,000 feet.
the lightning won, so even the mighty eagle (and it was mighty) couldnt quite keep up with a lightning

... and then the Lightning turned around and landed having exhausted its fuel while the Eagle
continued on to the range, fired some missiles, made some gun passes and then returned to
base. 

Yeah, yeah, yeah, we all KNOW about the Lighning's short legs but a] it was designed for short range interceptions b] it only had to defend a small country a short distance from the potential enemy and c] it was 15- 20 years older than the darned Eagle anyway!

I recall reading about  a discussion  between RAF and USAF pilots.

"A Lightning can reach 80,000 feet in two minutes......" "  So can an  F15 Eagle!"  NEITHER CAN DO THAT FROM A STANDSTILL (I DONT KNOW OF ANY MANNED MACHINE THAT CAN LOL)

"A Lightning can supercruise"  " So can  an  Eagle" EAGLE CANT LIGHTNING CAN

"A Lightning is a superlative interceptor"  "So is an Eagle" F15 IS 1 OF THE BEST ALL ROUND FIGHTERS EVER BUILT ( ALONG WITH THE SU27 IMO) THE LIGHTNING IS THE BEST PURE INTERCEPTOR EVER MADE (AGAIN IMO)

"A Lightning could do this in 1956"..........Silence from the other party. LOL

[eatthis]

eatthis

there was an unofficial test (race lol) between a lightning and an f15 both in service versions and they raced from brakes off to 30,000 feet. the lightning won

Could the Lightning out-turn the F-15 at combat weights?

Probably not, the wing areas and loading differ greatly, but it was an unlikely combat scenario anyway.

i dont know id guess its possible and i do know a lightning pulled 13 gs once and still made it home

[eatthis]

i dont know id guess its possible and i do know a lightning pulled 13 gs once and still made it home

Did it have more dihedral when it landed than when it took off?

a little  i think it cracked the main spar but they repaired it and gave it to the saudis and it never failed

[PR19_Kit]

i dont know id guess its possible and i do know a lightning pulled 13 gs once and still made it home

Did it have more dihedral when it landed than when it took off?

It would do as Lightnings have ANhedral to kick off with. 

[Mossie]

From the article I posted earlier, by an RAF pilot who flew both machines:

Manoeuvrability in the F-15 during the 1 v 1 was outstanding throughout the entire flight envelope from less than 100 knots in a BFM engagement, to more than Mach 2.0 interceptions, and I have no doubt that the Eagle would be more than a match for the Lightning. With so much thrust, optimum manoeuvring speed was easily maintained, with little if any need to unload in order to maintain it.

[eatthis]

From the article I posted earlier, by an RAF pilot who flew both machines:

Manoeuvrability in the F-15 during the 1 v 1 was outstanding throughout the entire flight envelope from less than 100 knots in a BFM engagement, to more than Mach 2.0 interceptions, and I have no doubt that the Eagle would be more than a match for the Lightning. With so much thrust, optimum manoeuvring speed was easily maintained, with little if any need to unload in order to maintain it.

yeh he does also say the lightning was exceptional too

ps what is a bfm engagement?

[scooter]

yeh he does also say the lightning was exceptional too

ps what is a bfm engagement?

Basic Fighter Maneuvers.  AKA "Air Combat Maneuvers" or Dogfighting

Basic fighter maneuvers (BFM) are tactical movements performed by fighter aircraft during air combat maneuvering (also called ACM, or dogfighting), in order to gain a positional advantage over the opponent. BFM combines the fundamentals of aerodynamic flight and the geometry of pursuit with the physics of managing the aircraft's energy-to-weight ratio, called its specific energy. Maneuvers are used to gain a better angular position in relation to the opponent. They can be offensive, to help an attacker get behind an enemy, or defensive, to help the defender evade an attacker's weapons. They can also be neutral, where both opponents strive for an offensive position, or disengagement maneuvers, to help facilitate an escape.

[KJ_Lesnick]

eatthis

there was an unofficial test (race lol) between a lightning and an f15 both in service versions and they raced from brakes off to 30,000 feet.
the lightning won, so even the mighty eagle (and it was mighty) couldn't quite keep up with a lightning

This is a rather silly sounding question but what was the takeoff speeds for the English Electric Lightning F.3, and F.6?


joncarrfarrelly

I'm well aware of the Lightning's history, it's a favourite aircraft, just making a joke about its long acknowledged Achilles heel.  

Actually the Lightning F.6 had a decent fuel-load (nearly doubled from the earlier design) and fraction.  Admittedly it's power-to-weight ratio took a bit of a hit in the process, and drag might have gone up (airframe).  I'm not actually sure if it's T/W ratio was better than the earlier F-104A's, regardless the J79-GE19's probably put it on top though I could be wrong.


Rheged

"A Lightning can supercruise"  " So can  an  Eagle"

I thought the F-15 needed it's burner to get up to and to hold supersonic flight...


PR19_Kit

Probably not, the wing areas and loading differ greatly, but it was an unlikely combat scenario anyway.

Well, it depends on the variant of the Lightning I suppose: The F.3 has pretty good wing-loadings (About 68-72 lbs/sq ft) when armed (the center store was often used as a tank so that's where the weight discrepancy came from), with combat weights going all the way down to 63-64; the F.6 on the other hand would usually see wing-loadings in 82-83 when it was carrying the gun-pack and missiles, at combat weight you'd see a little under 72 to slightly over 73.6 lbs/sq ft).

[KJ_Lesnick]

I'm curious which could accelerate better (straight-line, all out)

• F-104A (J79-GE19): 2 x AIM-9; No drop-tanks
  
• F-104G (J79-GE19): 2 x AIM-9; No drop-tanks
  
• MiG-23: 4 x AA-2: No drop-tanks
  
• F-16A: 2 x AIM-9; No drop-tanks