F-16s to Iran or Cuba

[Thorgal]

Originally posted by MMC

A decent pilot in a Harrier could probably take on most of these planes (assuming it was fitted with modern radar and missiles), and Harriers aren't even supersonic. All the pilot would need to do, would be to let the opponent reach maximum firing range (from behind), and then slam the Harrier into reverse... Most US pilots would fly a standard jet at top speed, let off a missile or several, fly past, then turn around for another run... with the Harrier in reverse, the missile would fly straight past before arming, giving the Harrier time to a) launch defences, and b) launch a missile up the tailpipe of the opponent's jet as it flies past.

Agree. As some people has said yet, there are not much difference beetwen fighters indeed, there are other much more important factors to have in mind. As pilot training, maintenace, information enviroment (so AWACS), planing, etc...

For instance, in the Malvinas Harriers would have been destroyed by Mirage III if the argentnian pilots had no accepted low speed- low altitude combat. The Mirage was much faster, and better handled at high altitude than the Harrier and it could use Matra Super with much larger range than Sidewinder. However Mirages in the Malvinas war never used these cabalities, they were used to do some dogfight at short range, low altitude and low speed, where harrier were superior. OTOH Harrier never went above some thounsands of meters above sea level becuase his work was to protect land and sea units of argentinian attack planes and because Britanic pilots were much better trained and Britain planned the war much better.

Another example of a theoretically superior plane doing poorly against lesser oponents (Vince is not going to like this one ). In the Iran-Iraq war Iranian F-14s ratio in air to air combat was really poor. While Iraqi sources claim 14 or 15 F-14 shot down and Iranian sources only one or two, most reliable sources agree that 5 F-14s were shot down by iraqi mig-21s and Mirage F-1s agaisnt 4 iraqi fighters shot down by Iranian F-14.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Joseph
The Mig-25 was built to shoot down the B-70. Jimmy Carter cancels the B-70.

You are about 10 years too late. The B-70 was cancelled in the 60s.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Agathon


You are about 10 years too late. The B-70 was cancelled in the 60s.

And when do you think the MIG-25 was designed? For it to be operational in the mid-70's, it must have been in design in the mid-60's at least, if not early 60's. Hence Joseph is about right.

Again, MIG-25's were not designed to do dogfighting. They are there to intercept enemies, not to mix it up with enemy fighters for control of the air.

And in the end, as was stated, its the RADAR systems and the missiles in the end that will decide the outcome, not the airframe for the most part, unless one gets real close, and in most modern air combact that will not happen. In that regard the US still has the lead not only because it has top notch radar on its planes, but because of systems like AWACS that complement and surpass the systems within the planes themselves.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Thorgal

Another example of a theoretically superior plane doing poorly against lesser oponents (Vince is not going to like this one ). In the Iran-Iraq war Iranian F-14s ratio in air to air combat was really poor. While Iraqi sources claim 14 or 15 F-14 shot down and Iranian sources only one or two, most reliable sources agree that 5 F-14s were shot down by iraqi mig-21s and Mirage F-1s agaisnt 4 iraqi fighters shot down by Iranian F-14.

I doubt the Iranians were getting too many spare parts and upgrades for their few F-14's from the US for hostages at that time. That and possible losses of trained pilots and air force staff with the revolution. I would think that a fair number of high ranking Iranian military men left Iran along with the Shah, having been in his pocket for the most part. One of the reasons Saddam invaded Iran in the first place, the Iranian military, which nominally should have been able to whoop his ass easily, was in disarray after the revolution. Iraq would have never tried to invade Iran if it were not for the revolution, both because of the Ayatollah's meddling in Iraq,and because Iran lost its patron and also had internal disarray.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Thorgal
Another example of a theoretically superior plane doing poorly against lesser oponents (Vince is not going to like this one ).

Thats okay.
I always believed the most important factor is pilot quality, motivation, and training. That is what makes the Israelis so great. It also explains why many countries suck so bad with otherwise decent Russian planes. The Russians make poor trainers when they treat even friendly nations as inferior lifeforms.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by GePap


I doubt the Iranians were getting too many spare parts and upgrades for their few F-14's from the US for hostages at that time. That and possible losses of trained pilots and air force staff with the revolution. I would think that a fair number of high ranking Iranian military men left Iran along with the Shah, having been in his pocket for the most part. One of the reasons Saddam invaded Iran in the first place, the Iranian military, which nominally should have been able to whoop his ass easily, was in disarray after the revolution. Iraq would have never tried to invade Iran if it were not for the revolution, both because of the Ayatollah's meddling in Iraq,and because Iran lost its patron and also had internal disarray.

First thank you. You are correct, many of Iran pilots got the heII out town, because some or most that did not leave were soon dead.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Agathon


You are about 10 years too late. The B-70 was cancelled in the 60s.

Cancel in 1969 by Nixon. Yes it was the B-1 that Carter cancelled.

Mig-25 first flight was in 64. In production before 69.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Thorgal

I frankly cant see the F-106 Delta Dart with too many possibilities against a Mig-25. The F-106 was a century series fighter. a generation older than the Mig-25. Its missiles were too primitive and of very short range. It was designed to fight big and slow soviet bombers. The weapon system was so primitive they used an nuclear unguided rocket a la WW2 (the Genie) to assure target destruction.

It was OK as interceptor for the 50s and first 60s but it was obsolete against the new generation of Migs.

When you used a Nuc. all you have be is close. And at that height, the Nuc would spead a lot more than if you are down at 20,000.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Joseph
That is what happen to our F-14. Iran gave one or more to Russia. Now they have the Mig 29 and Su 27/30 series

Those were F-15's, IIRC. And I strongly doubt that Iran gave any to the USSR.

[GePap]

NO, Iran bought F-14's, never F-15's. IIRC Iran was the only state to buy F-14's outside the US. If Iran had stayed in the US camp they would probably have been able to buy F-15's.

[DaShi]

UR, where do you get this stuff? Seriously.

[Zkribbler]

Yeah, the MiG 29 looks frighteningly like the F-14.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Those were F-15's, IIRC. And I strongly doubt that Iran gave any to the USSR.

Sorry the US sold F-14 to Iran. No F-15s.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Yeah, the MiG 29 looks frighteningly like the F-14.

Knowing the KGB, they probably stole one somewhere's. I mean the F-15. If you have follow the Soviet Union military, you find that they get something and then they used the tech, but produce something else. They got the B-29 in WW 2, then built the TU-4 Bull that was a Russian built B-29, and then when on to built the Tu-95 from the Tu-4. In the 30s Mr Cristie built a small tank that the US Army did not want, he than was allowed to give it to Russia, and later they had the T-34. If you look at Cristie tank and the T-34, you would notice how close they look.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Joseph
Knowing the KGB, they probably stole one somewhere's. I mean the F-15. If you have follow the Soviet Union military, you find that they get something and then they used the tech, but produce something else. They got the B-29 in WW 2, then built the TU-4 Bull that was a Russian built B-29, and then when on to built the Tu-95 from the Tu-4. In the 30s Mr Cristie built a small tank that the US Army did not want, he than was allowed to give it to Russia, and later they had the T-34. If you look at Cristie tank and the T-34, you would notice how close they look.

All they took was the suspension, nothing else was worth it.