Your Top 10 Favorite Fighter Aircraft.

  • Thread starter Thread starter TVRKing
  • 161 comments
  • 5,157 views
I forgot about the Focke-Wulf. I love that one, too. :drool:

icemanshooter23
f15_f4_p_39_p_51.png


This sums up a few, took the picture this summer. :D

Can anyone identify them?
Of course! Beautiful picture, btw. 👍 P-38 was very close to making my list.

the_cobbinator
My favorite jet of all time is the SR-71 Blackbird, hands down. Such a beautiful plane, all around.
They are beautiful, indeed. I don't think it's equipped with any weapons though, so strictly a "spy" plane. :) If you go to Seattle, you can sit in the cutout cockpit at the museum.
 
Yeah, at 8 billion, the project was costing a little more than they thought. And given the hard time the Apaches have had recently, it was toast.

Oh, the Starfighter was SOO cool back in the day. I had a model I truned into a missile! ;)

I'm going to make an RC model P-38 when I get a little time. Some of the kits look perfect, and they are the COOLEST WWII fighter EVER!

And the YF-12A was originally designed to be a VERY high altitude, very high speed interceptor. But it was so fast, the bullets from the gun kept coming back and hitting the jet. So they tore out all the armament capability, and put in cameras and stuff. And the SR-71 was born.
 
skicrush
And the YF-12A was originally designed to be a VERY high altitude, very high speed interceptor. But it was so fast, the bullets from the gun kept coming back and hitting the jet. So they tore out all the armament capability, and put in cameras and stuff. And the SR-71 was born.
Are you pulling my leg? :D No, I'm joking. I think I heard that story before. It's too cool!
 
Yeah, and I don't they were terribly manouverable, especially at Mach 3+. Which was a pretty bad liability.
 
Why do you need to be manouvrable at Mach 3?

You out run just about everything and there's not much to fly into at 60,000 feet.
 
ExigeExcel
Why do you need to be manouvrable at Mach 3?

You out run just about everything and there's not much to fly into at 60,000 feet.

Well there's Dunc............
 
icemanshooter23
f15_f4_p_39_p_51.png


This sums up a few, took the picture this summer. :D

Can anyone identify them?

I could, but I won't say what they are. I should post some of my pictures from EAA this year.
 
Ummm....
If I knew any fighter aircraft should probably post my 10 favorite but....no.
 
Next hot topic for a new thread, top 5 favourite tanks :D
 
ExigeExcel
Next hot topic for a new thread, top 5 favourite tanks :D

I only know 4. :dunce:

Sherman
Panzer
Cheiftan
BMW X5

:D
 
ExigeExcel
Why do you need to be manouvrable at Mach 3?

You out run just about everything and there's not much to fly into at 60,000 feet.
Well, to compare, an F-14 can fly mach 2.3 tops, an F-15 2.4-2.5. An F-16 and F-18 top out about 1.8, and they're all fairly competitive with one another. Another thing to think about is that most missiles cruise at around MAch 5. That's kinda hard to evade, although there's not much out there that has enough range to chase an SR-71 down at those speeds. Let's see:
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-54.html
Development of the Phoenix began in late 1960, after the U.S. Navy's projected F6D Missileer and the associated AAM-N-10 Eagle long-range interception missile had been cancelled. Hughes then started to develop a new long-range missile, designated AAM-N-11 by the Navy, together with the AN/AWG-9 FCS (Fire Control System). The new missile and FCS used technology previously tested by the AIM-47 Falcon and AN/ASG-18, respectively, in the USAF's YF-12A program. The Phoenix/AWG-9 combination was originally intended as the main armament for the F-111B, then planned to become the Navy's new air superiority fighter and long-range interceptor. In June 1963, the AAM-N-11 was redesignated as AIM-54A. Flight tests of XAIM-54A prototypes began in 1965, and the first guided interception succeeded in September 1966. While the Phoenix test program continued, the F-111B was cancelled, and the AIM-54 and AN/AWG-9 were incorporated into the new F-14 Tomcat, which was to take over the role of the F-111B. The first production AIM-54A missiles were delivered in 1973, ready for deployment with the first F-14A squadron in 1974.

An F-14 can carry up to 6 Phoenix missiles, on LAU-93/A (F-14A/B) or LAU-132/A (F-14D) launchers, respectively. The AN/AWG-9 FCS uses a TWS (Track While Scan) pulse-doppler radar, and can track up to 24 targets simultaneously at ranges of up to 240 km (130 nm). Therefore, an F-14 can effectively attack 6 targets simultaneously. When an AIM-54A is launched, its Rocketdyne MK 47 or Aerojet MK 60 solid-fueled rocket motor (in an MXU-637/B propulsion section) propels it to a speed of Mach 4+. For mid-course guidance, the missile's AN/DSQ-26 guidance section employs an autopilot, which gets regular target position updates by semi-active radar tracking. The FCS radar periodically illuminates every target to which a missile has been dispatched. For maximum range, the missile flies an optimized high-altitude trajectory for reduced drag, and the AIM-54A can engage head-on targets at a distance of up to 135 km (72.5 nm). For the final 18200 m (20000 yds) of the interception, the Phoenix switches to active radar homing for high terminal accuracy. Minimum engagement range is about 3.7 km (2 nm), in which case active homing is used from the beginning. The 60 kg (132 lb) MK 82 blast-fragmentation warhead is detonated by a fuzing system consisting of a MK 334 radar proximity, an IR proximity, and an impact fuze.

Lots of interesting info, including mention of the YF-12A!

Hey, what about an M1A1 Abrams? Don't you guys like the new kid knocking down the block?
 
Su 27 Flanker B

The new versions of this are pointless.

It has always been able to out manouevre (off angle at least) all American planes without the use of thrust vectoring.

The Mig 29 A would be second but only because of its light capabilities.

Yes I'm proRussia :|
 
keram
Su 27 Flanker B

The new versions of this are pointless.

It has always been able to out manouevre (off angle at least) all American planes without the use of thrust vectoring.

The Mig 29 A would be second but only because of its light capabilities.

Yes I'm proRussia :|

Nothing wrong with Russian planes. (except maybe the Forger.)

:)
 
keram
Su 27 Flanker B

The new versions of this are pointless.

It has always been able to out manouevre (off angle at least) all American planes without the use of thrust vectoring.

The Mig 29 A would be second but only because of its light capabilities.

Yes I'm proRussia :|
Isn't Su-27, like the best fighter plane Russians have? They are supposed to have crazy maneuvability, if I remember correctly...

keram
Forger? which one was that?
I think Forger was a coffee. :p Actually, I thought they were jump-jet. STOL or VTOL or both.
 
The YAK-38 Forger was the jump jet, I believe :)

My top 10:

1.Douglas A-1 Skyraider - SPAD!!!!!!
2.North American P-51D Mustang - The most beautiful sounding Symphony ever
3.Republic F-105D Thunderchief - Thud. (there's one on pillars outside the Chillicothe, MO airport, why isn't it in a hangar?:()
4.McDonnell-Douglas F-4 Phantom II - It's that cool.

and,

De Havilland DH. 110 Sea Vixen
Vought F-4U Corsair
Fairchild A-10 "Warthog" - It was built around a gun. How cool is that?
Sukhoi Su-34 Flanker
Dassault Mirage F1
Vought F-8 Crusader
 
In no particular order:

P-51D "Mustang"
F-4 U "Corsair"
P-39 "Aircobra"
P-40 "Warhawk"
P-61 "Black Widow"
P-38 "Lightning"
Hawker Hurricane
Spitfire
F-14 "Tomcat"
F-15 "Strike Eagle"
F-16 "Falcon"
F-86 "Sabre"
T-38 "Talon"
Me-262
Me-109 "Focke-wulfe"
Ju-89 "Stuka"
A6-M5 "Zero"

I realize that's more than 10. But there have been so many good-to-great fighter/pursuit planes to come out of various countries. I left off quite a few Russian planes, as the best ones, tend to be updated copies of some of our better planes.
I also left off some of the "stealth" stuff.

For those of you into planes, I recommend two books by Dean Ing
The first is The Ransom of Black Stealth One the other is Falling to Pieces.
You will not be disappointed.
 
Fighters?
Hmmmm....
Lets say (in no order, and I'll group those that fought each other):

F4U Corsair
p40 (Flying Tiger paint, of course!)
Zero

F4 Phantom
MIG 21

P38
Focke Wolf
Hawker Hurricane

Odd-Balls:
SAAB Draken
SAAB J-29
(sucky jets, but I loved them as a kid)
 
Top 10

In no particular order,
P-51D Mustang
F4U Corsair
Supermarine Spitfire
F-15 Eagle
F-14 Tomcat
SR-71 Blackbird ( I know, this isn't a fighter.)
CF-105 Arrow (Not a fighter, either)
P38 Lightning
A-10 Warthog
F-86 Sabre

Not that it is relevant (well, kind of) but I am going to the Abbotsford Air Show in.... about 8 days. I believe it is (one of) the biggest airshows in Canada.
 
Top 9:
  1. F/A-22 Raptor
  2. F-15E Strike Eagle
  3. F-14D Super Tomcat
  4. P-51D Mustang
  5. F4U Corsair
  6. Supermarine Spitfire
  7. P-38 Lighting
  8. F/A-18E Super Hornet
  9. F/A-35
 
Nice to see many selecting Corsairs in their top 10, but my favorite U.S. Navy fighter's always been the F6F Hellcat. 👍

Viper Zero
Top 9:
  1. F/A-22 Raptor
  2. F-15E Strike Eagle
  3. F-14D Super Tomcat
  4. P-51D Mustang
  5. F4U Corsair
  6. Supermarine Spitfire
  7. P-38 Lighting
  8. F/A-18E Super Hornet
  9. F/A-35

Which one is the F/A-35? Is that the one Boeing and Lockheed fought over the contract to build?
 
I have seen it take-off vertically, but that was with no armaments.
 
The Republic P-47D-35-RA Thunderbolt
North American P-51D Mustang
Submarine Spitfire Mk. V
Mitsubishi A6M5 Zero
Chance Vought F4U-4 Corsair
Messershcmitt BF-109E
North American F-86A Sabre
McDonnell Douglas FA-18E Super Hornet
Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II "Warthog"
Sukhoi Su37 Flanker

Let's face it, nobody ever mentions the P-47. It was big, bulky and kind of ugly. But, damn, what a kill record. You can't deny it.

I wanted to list the P-38, but since I had three USA WWII fighters already listed, I decided to mention it here. The P-47, P-38 and the P-51 had probably the best kill rates of any WWII aircraft. But, I like the Corsair better. It didn't have the chance to prove it because how late of a start it got compared with the other fighters, but it was a fantastic aircraft.

How To Fly A P-47!

Or, whatever you want... http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/main.html
 
ledhed
Let an A-10 get behind you and let 'r rip with the nose cannon...bwaaahahahahahahaahha
Its been great knowin ' ya ... So what its an atack plane .. Its down and dirty and leathal as all hell . A killer is a killer....the A-10 is a skilla killa ...
atengun2X.GIF


Interesting facts about the Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II "Warthog":

They built the plane around the gun.

The gun is not centered because it would throw off the plane when fired.

If you held the trigger long enough, that's if it held enough ammo, it would stop the airplane in flight at full throttle, and start pushing it backwards. (Of course it would stall and fall first, duh.)

You could fly the plane with one wing and one engine just fine. (In real life, during the Gulf War, one A-10 had over half of one wing shot off, and one engined blown, and it flew like normal.)
 
Yeah, It's a cool plane, that will be around alot longer thanks to AMARC. They don't call it the "flying tank" for nothing...

Didn't the P-47 have a really high fuel consumption rate?
 
Back