PDA

View Full Version : OT: Whaddya think? History's Greatest Fighter



SkyChimp
04-07-2005, 09:00 PM
Gotta pick?

I'm leaning towards the F-4 Phantom or the F-15 Eagle. 30+ years of service, each. Stalwarts in the Cold War. The Phantom used by a huge number of countries. The Eagle with a 100+:0 air-to-air kill:loss ratio.

VW-IceFire
04-07-2005, 09:02 PM
Difficult.

Historys greatest fighter says the F-15 is it. Current technology suggests the Su-27 or some variant therein is the greatest fighter. Future technology in a couple of months presumes that the F/A-22 will be the best fighter in service anywhere.

BaldieJr
04-07-2005, 09:03 PM
As far as I'm concerned, Ray "Boom Boom" Mancini was the greatest fighter ever.

Shakthamac
04-07-2005, 09:21 PM
i think my pick would have to be either the phantom or the p51. The phantom is truly a great aircraft and has been in so many different national inventories I can't even come close to mentioning, but heres a try. The USA (Air Force, Navy, ANG, and Marines), Australia, Egypt, West Germany, Greece, Iran, Israel, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Spain, Turkey, and Britain (RAF and RN).

The p51 earned its great fame during world war 2, served through Korea and into the ANG until 1957. Hell, it has served in various air forces until it was finally retired in 1983 by the Dominican Republic. 40+ years of service, not too shabby.

I think some other notables would be the Mirage series and the MiG 21.

robban75
04-07-2005, 11:26 PM
The J29 Tunnan. When the superpowers were arguing between the F-86 and MiG-15, the J29 owned them both.

Hristos
04-07-2005, 11:28 PM
http://www.brucelee.com/classic.JPG

Badsight.
04-07-2005, 11:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Current technology suggests the Su-27 or some variant therein is the greatest fighter. . <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>MIGHT have been true during the eighties & nineties , but the USAF has the best avionics & missiles now

& the most uber dominant fighter ever surely has to be the F/A22

it does what all modern fighter pilots want to be able to do , the safest fighter to be flying in a modern air-war enviroment

besides that , id say the F15 to due to its service history , mind you im only going as far back as the start of WW2 , dont know stuff all about WW1 planes

(the F4's worst nightmare = Mig17s , not like those crappy Mig19s)

TAGERT.
04-07-2005, 11:47 PM
http://www.sci-fi-london.com/2002web/moviepics/gigantor.jpg
http://www.helmetband.com/discography/gigantor.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig1.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig2.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig3.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig4.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig5.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig6.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig7.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig8.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig9.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig10.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig11.jpg
http://www.toontracker.com/gigantor/gig12.jpg

And just encae Oleg is interested in adding another 109Z type of plane

http://webpages.charter.net/webduderick/gigan.jpg

And now for something completly different

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rogers/ken.gif

BuzzU
04-08-2005, 12:50 AM
I'll put my money on Superman.

carguy_
04-08-2005, 01:15 AM
I was actually thinking of Skeletor.Because no matter how many times he f@cked up he didn`t stop fighting He-Man.

Jagdklinger
04-08-2005, 01:24 AM
A difficult question. If you restricted it to time frames it might be easier - i.e. WWI, between wars, WWII, WWII-1970, 1970-present?

F4 seems a little to flawed to be greatest; long service isn't a good guide to 'great'- more testament to cost of replacement/politics/budget...

F-15 100:1 kill ratio is as much about pilots as the plane... (i.e. see Korean War Sabre:MiG15 ratios)

So the winner is.... the Bf109Z - it owns them both...

GerritJ9
04-08-2005, 02:24 AM
Brewster Buffalo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

tigertalon
04-08-2005, 03:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
Gotta pick? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Post WW2 MiG-21 by far.

Used by much more countries than F4 and F15 COMBINED.

In use for 50 years. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Participated in more conflicts than both upper COMBINED.

Produced twice as many as upper two, combined.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
The Eagle with a 100+:0 air-to-air kill:loss ratio. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

U sure about that? I would rather say:

"By US claims, the eagle with a 100+:0 air-to-air kill:loss ratio."

Pls, don't get me wrong, It is a superb fighter, with kill/death ratio at least 10:1, maybe even 20:1, maybe, just maybe even 100+:0.

Jagdklinger
04-08-2005, 04:04 AM
So most-produced = greatest? Maybe my Bf109 comment wasn't so far off by that reasoning.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

F15 100:0 does sound a bit over the top. I presume these kills occurred in Israeli service as the handful of helicopters and obsolete MiGs downed by USAF surely don't count....

Billy_BigBoy
04-08-2005, 05:22 AM
1 And the winner is ... Republic P-47 Thunderbolt

At least according to this site...
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200308/ai_n9261306
concerning WWII aircraft in the European Theatre, meassured in cold numbers:
"The bottom chart shows that the P-47 Thunderbolt flew twice as many sorties, dropped 2,010 percent more bomb tonnage, destroyed 62 percent of the enemy's aircraft in the air and 75 percent on the ground; it suffered only 58 percent of the losses (per sortie) of the P-51 Mustang runner-up. The P-47, therefore, earned its nomination as being the best fighter in the ETO."

Engrs
04-08-2005, 05:34 AM
Hawker Hunter.

Haele
04-08-2005, 05:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Engrs:
Hawker Hunter. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good man. Can't beat British steel.

MEGILE
04-08-2005, 06:22 AM
Sea Fury... uber fast.. well just plain uber.

chaikanut
04-08-2005, 06:58 AM
It has to be Mighty Mouse....


Oh, you mean airplane?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Avro arrow.

The190Flyer
04-08-2005, 07:45 AM
LMAO Tagert. I'd also have to say F-15 for now. The Raptor is supposed to be all the F-15 was and much more. But seriously I think Shredder is a great fighter, he kicked the **** out of them turtles!!!

Btw kewl pic buzz. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

AWL_Spinner
04-08-2005, 07:59 AM
The trouble is "Greatest" is a purely objective term. It has no particular metric. But then I guess that makes for a more entertaining thread as you have to justify your selections.

For me, "greatest" would equate to "had the most impact in it's arena of conflict and amongst it's peers".

Therefore the Sea Harrier. Without which the Argentine flag would be flying above the Falklands. Combined with, for the Yankophiles, the superb AIM-9L.

Not even the much-lauded Spitfire can claim to have single-handedly won such a decisive air battle, the Hurricane more than shouldering it's fair share of responsibility during the Battle of Britain.

Although it would be my second choice http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
04-08-2005, 07:59 AM
The American Dream baby! And don't forget that million dollar elbow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.members.tripod.com/%7ERaven01/dusty.jpg

LStarosta
04-08-2005, 09:00 AM
Nope... The 100:0 kill/death ratio for the F15 is true, albeit a bit modest, because there were actually more than 100 A2A kills scored by pilots of this fighter. 100 is just a safe estimate.

However, that is more due to relative pilot skill rather than pure technological prowess. If the US, Israel, or any other F15 user had been in serious combat with any really well trained, well organized air force, the outcome would not have been the same. There hasn't really been a major clash of comparable air forces in a long time.

Udidtoo
04-08-2005, 09:09 AM
Ok technically they were 2 seperate entities but how can you not include Johny Socko and his Giant Robot? I mean c'mon. Rockets shot out of his fingers! Thats just biatch n cool.

horseback
04-08-2005, 09:22 AM
Agreed. If the F-15 (flown by US, Japanese, or Israeli pilots) went up against the best available opposing air force flying a contemporary fighter, the ratio would probably go down to something like 50:1. That's how much better it was than anything flying for the first ten-fifteen years after its introduction in 1971 or '72.

Add in the intense training its pilots got during the Cold War, and what the Abrams did to the T-72 in the first Desert War wouldn't look nearly so much like clubbing baby seals...

cheers

horseback

AWL_Spinner
04-08-2005, 09:40 AM
50:1 would VASTLY over-estimate radar and missile effectiveness against the best equipped contemporary aircraft and countermeasures.

And the F15 had it's behind handed to it in mock dogfights with my contender, above, in the early eighties http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

MEGILE
04-08-2005, 09:59 AM
Eurofighter has owned the F-15C in mock dogfights in the UK... but that don't mean shiz.

1 vs. 1 turn fights are not representtitive of today's combat.

The F-15C is a great High altitude Interceptor, combined with excellent training of the USAAF pilots and the best support systems in the world, like AWACS, maintenance etc.
This combination creates an ultimate fighting force. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

The F-22 blows all competition away with its stealth capabilities, and state of the art avionics, and Thrust vectoring.
Go against a squad of F-22s in BVR combat and you will have an Aim-120C in your face before you can say, "wtf, stealth n00b".

BuzzU
04-08-2005, 10:07 AM
With BVR, the F-15 doesn't need to dogfight. Which is why it's never been shot down.

ZG10_Oiink
04-08-2005, 10:19 AM
F-15......F-22......well i have to agree on all what have been said, but in my opinion the plane that should be greatest is one that have had to comply to multi role tasks, and have pressed what the plane was made to do from the start and what it is used to today....My vote is for the F-16 fighting falcon. Same age as the F-15, but have been used in more roles and atleast in all the same theaters as the F-15

F-16 is the most used and upgraded plane in service world wide, and they even have made the upgrades so it can be effective even in this "super" machine time age and atleast 5 more years....

Daiichidoku
04-08-2005, 10:20 AM
Fokker Eindecker E.1

AWL_Spinner
04-08-2005, 10:21 AM
Quite Megile/BuzzU, however the 7:1 mock kill ratio Royal Navy Harriers achieved against Eagles (F15E) included BVR (simulating Sparrow) capabilities for the F15s and no BVR for the Harriers. Now of course that doesn't mean the Harrier is a better plane, but that statistic is no more/just as meaningless as some of the others in this thread.

I agree the Eagle has been the world's best all-round air superiority fighter for many a year but overly exaggerated claims do it a disservice.

On another tack, idle speculation about non-like-for-like comparisons re: "greatest EVER" produce some interesting questions.

How would a modern fighter cope with a three hundred bomber raid of Heinkels and Messerschmitts? Would it's radar be able to lock up individual targets in that sort of close clutter? Would it's BVR missiles be confused? Would it be able to lock up Sidewinders at close range when there were six hundred plus low-emmision propellor engine exhausts in close proximity? Would it be limited to guns only slashing attacks? Would it be at all vulnerable to boxed defensive gunfire if it got slow trying to lock something up/shoot at it?

I don't know if it'd be the right tool for the right job there. It almost definitely wouldn't be the right tool against WW1 aircraft, where any sort of missile lock would be nigh-on impossible due to a complete lack of doppler, and canvas construction, and our man in the Mach 2 beast wouldn't be able to keep the bead on such a slow and hard-turning aircraft for a gun attack.

Not that it'd be under any threat itself, mind you. But that's not really the point. "Greatest fighter" without context and/or comparative metrics is an implausible concept although it does provide some entertaining "what ifs".

huggy87
04-08-2005, 10:33 AM
I have some great HUD footage of F-15s in dogfights. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif Yeah, they are not the best dogfighters in the world. However, they have a great t/w ratio so you have to make sure you get the first shot. Once you bleed down they can just rate around on you while you are stuck waffling.

As mentioned earlier their real strength lies in their BVR capabilities. Their radar is excellent. However, more importantly, the Charlie squadrons train exclusively in Air to Air. While vipers and hornets are pretty good A/A platforms as well, we only spend about 60% of our missions practicing air to air. We used to joke before the second Iraq war (when we thought the Iraqis might actually come up to play) that we would never get a kill because the Eagles would hog all the glory.

Is this thread exclusively about air to air. While my ride, the hornet, does not have the air to air record to compete with the eagle or viper (lack of opportunity), we have been the most involved tactical platform of the last 5 years. In October 2001 we were flying countless sorties with nare' an air force tactical plane to be seen. Well, they did send one strike eagle from the gulf region. The blasted thing sucked up several tankers that that the navy could have used to feed a dozen sorties.

The hornet has been around since 1978. And guess what, we are still building them. I flew a super last week that had less than twenty hours on it. Hornets will still be around when eagles are baking in the sun of the aircraft graveyard and I am taking my grandchildren for walks in the park.

I am a little partial.

MEGILE
04-08-2005, 10:35 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The F-15C has been the work horse for the USAAF for a number of decades.. and is still going strong.
But recent Military simulations point to it being weaker than other Western counterparts, including the F-22 and EuroFighter.
The JSF F-35 has some serious hardware too.. a guy over in the LOMAC forum posted the unclassified information he received on its avionics suite. Amazing stuff... including F-22 technology and more, but not surprising as it is its younger brother.

The F-15C aint the best air superiority fighter any more.. but who cares, there is no other force in the world which can match the USAAF. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

AWL_Spinner
04-08-2005, 10:41 AM
Saw a documentary on naval operations a while back that made the point that in terms of maintenence vs flying hours the Hornet is streets ahead of most other aircraft in the US inventory. The crews seemed to enjoy working with it more than Tom Cruise's ride, anyways!

MEGILE
04-08-2005, 10:46 AM
Not quite.
if the F-22 was using TWS, all the enemy plane would receive is a sweep tone on the RWR.. and not a lock Tone.
Besides, using data link, 1 F-22 can hang back, maintain radar lock, and send the data to forward F-22s who can get the kill, without switching the radar on.
By the time the Amraam goes active... its too late.

LStarosta
04-08-2005, 10:51 AM
Grr.. deleted my posts because on my end it looked like i had double posted when in fact there was just one post. Dammit...

Yes, that Data Link tech is something to behold. The first time I heard of it, it was installed on SAAB's. It's so excellent, you can recieve data from AWACS and have it be displayed on your avionics in relation to your aircraft. Very important in terms of stealth, sometimes even more so than stealth construction.

Slickun
04-08-2005, 11:10 AM
Greatest has to include longevity in some fashion, right?

It's not the F-15's fault that during its early years it blew all opposition out of the water. Still today, 30 years after its operational debut,it is still a very very dangerous platform. That's against today's fighters. 30 years ago it was going against the fighters of THAT era. There should be no penalty in the thinking here.

Inflated claims? No F-15 has been lost in air to air combat. Period.

horseback
04-08-2005, 12:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> How would a modern fighter cope with a three hundred bomber raid of Heinkels and Messerschmitts? Would it's BVR missiles be confused? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Easily, and not really.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Would it's radar be able to lock up individual targets in that sort of close clutter? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. AFAIK, further detail is classified, but I've heard the engineers who worked on that radar's design claim that you can measure your target's turbine rpm...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Would it be able to lock up Sidewinders at close range when there were six hundred plus low-emmision propellor engine exhausts in close proximity? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. Sidewinders have sufficient sensitivity to fire in head on engagements using the difference in aircraft skin temp from air temp. Piston engines generate a somewhat greater temperature differential at almost any altitude or angle of approach. I believe the number of choices of target may confuse AIM-9X at extreme range, but from within five-seven miles or so, should be able to give you tone (lock). The real problem will be the flaming wreckage still in the air from the earlier AMRAAM/Sparrow shots.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Would it be limited to guns only slashing attacks? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, but those gunnery passes after the first 8-12 missile kills would be significantly more accurate and effective than any made with WWII technology, and could be accomplished from beyond range of the bombers' defensive weapons.

The M61 Gatling would need a very short burst to cut a Heinkel in two, so I would expect that even after using up their missiles a flight of Eagle drivers caught in a Time Warp over Kent could pretty much wipe out significant portion of the Kampfgeschwadern over southern England on any given day (or night) in 1940.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Would it be at all vulnerable to boxed defensive gunfire if it got slow trying to lock something up/shoot at it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not aware that the bombers used during the BoB being armed with anything more powerful than a few 7.92mm MGs. Not suitable for killing modern warplanes. A 'Golden BB' shot is possible, but highly unlikely unless the F-15 decided to drop all his flaps and deploy his airbrake in the middle of the bombers' formation.

This concludes this episode of 'Fantasy Theatre.'

cheers

horseback

Hristos
04-08-2005, 12:58 PM
http://aerostories.free.fr/profils/kogler/img0.jpg

SweetMonkeyLuv
04-08-2005, 01:09 PM
BUTTERBEAN!!!!

http://ko.sherdog.com/pictures/k1_031304/Butterbean%20Amada_small.jpg

( apologies for continuing the hijacking jokefest, but any opportunity to get a pic of BB in is worth taking )

ElektroFredrik
04-08-2005, 02:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LStarosta:
There hasn't really been a major clash of comparable air forces in a long time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So if all of EU got very grumpy and declared
war on the US within the next five minutes,
you'd have two rather large air forces against
each other. What would the outcome of that be?

And the greatest fighter is the white rabbit in
monty Python and the holy Grail http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

Bremspropeller
04-08-2005, 03:09 PM
When it comes to the Eagles: don't forget the Saudis - a pilot of them shot down two Mirage F.1Qs during Desert Sorm (AFAIK "Al-Shamrami" was his name).

I've read an article of israeli F-15s (local name "Baz") slashing MiG-21s.
One of them was killed by a Sparrow - now, if that's not an overkill http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
I guess the Fishbed vanished into thin air http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif


But when it comes down to the "greatest" fighter (of the modern/jet era) - I'd rather tend towards a rather "fancy" fighter: the Fighting Falcon ("Viper" sounds kinda odd).
It's agile, accelerates quite fast, has a decent weapon-load, is relatively cheap (~20mio. USD ?) and offers quite a view out of the pit.

My other favourite ride (WW2-era) is the Fw 190.


Both a/c have some similarities: backswept pilot-seat, a decent pilot-aircraft interface (Kommandoger√¬§t and control-surface-harmony with the 190 ; HOTAS and FBW). Both planes have relatively high wing-loadings (compared to other a/c of their class) and like to be flown at high speeds.Both of them were a benchmark of pilot-vision when they were introduced. Both have one engine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif
And both are best at low/ medium alts.


Now come and tare me apart http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

ploughman
04-08-2005, 04:16 PM
Let's face it. The F-15 never got to show it's spurs against a worthy opponent. It's got great stats, but Israel v Syria or Coalition v Iraq is hardly a first team face off.

I'd probably say, thus far, it's either P-51 or the Bf109. The P-51 because of it's range and what that implied to the nature of air warfare at the time, the Bf-109 because of it's numbers, excellence, and adaptability. The Spitfire and Hurricane get an honourable mention (hard to distinguish the two under the circumstances of the BoB) because they won the most decisive battle of the Twentieth Century but they were on the defensive and had alot going in their favour strategically.

My money's on the Bf 109. Otherwise we'd just be choosing the last thing to come off the production line.

Jirozaemon
04-08-2005, 04:43 PM
Musashi Miyamoto

SkyChimp
04-08-2005, 06:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ploughman:
Let's face it. The F-15 never got to show it's spurs against a worthy opponent. It's got great stats, but Israel v Syria or Coalition v Iraq is hardly a first team face off.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

4 Serbian MiG-29s (with Russian trained pilots) shot down on March 3, 1999 by USAF F-15s. One F-15 got 2 MiG-29s in that encounter. USAF pilots stated the Serbs displayed excellent tactics.

FoolTrottel
04-08-2005, 06:39 PM
http://www.dmbcrtaf.thaigov.net/aircraft/Fighter/BoeingP-12E/P12E.jpg

Grisha7
04-08-2005, 06:48 PM
Which fighter has notched up the most kills overall? Surely it would be a WWII fighter, and I'd hazard a guess it would be German just because of the huge number soviet machines downed 1941-42.

psychoslaphead
04-08-2005, 09:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Billy_BigBoy:
1 And the winner is ... Republic P-47 Thunderbolt

At least according to this site...
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200308/ai_n9261306
concerning WWII aircraft in the European Theatre, meassured in cold numbers:
"The bottom chart shows that the P-47 Thunderbolt flew twice as many sorties, dropped 2,010 percent more bomb tonnage, destroyed 62 percent of the enemy's aircraft in the air and 75 percent on the ground; it suffered only 58 percent of the losses (per sortie) of the P-51 Mustang runner-up. The P-47, therefore, earned its nomination as being the best fighter in the ETO." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

62%? 75%? Wow, this guy apparently can't handle basic math. The thing that sucks about the internet is anyone can post drivel pronounced as "fact" for everyone to see.

European Theater Of Operations

P-51:

4,950 ATA Kills
4,131 ATG Kills
2,520 planes lost in combat operations
213,873 sorties flown

P-47:

3,082 ATA
3,202 ATG
3,077 Lost
423,435 sorties

P-38:

1,771 ATA
749 ATG
1,758 Lost
129,849 sorties

The P-47 was a great plane, but it didn't take out 62% or 75% of anything. If your mission criteria is to get the pilot home safely, then it's clearly the weapon of choice. But if you want to destroy the enemy in the shortest period of time, the P-51 is statistically the most efficient air weapon in the ETO. And please don't give me any of that drivel that the P-51 came along late, the LW was already destroyed, etc. The P-51 was in combat service in the ETO about a year before the P-38 OR the P-47, and the record shows that groups that switched to the P-51 from the P-47 or P-38 registered immediate and large increases in kill rates.

The F-15 rules the stats, but I'm a Falcon fan myself. And mock combat doesn't mean s***. What matters is the combat record...

HotelBushranger
04-08-2005, 11:05 PM
WW1: DH4, longest serving British bomber of The Great War

WW2: IMO, the P-40 series, wasnt the best, but still got the job done, and served for almost the entire length of the war.

1970's/Vietnam: THE HUEY! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif Most beautiful aircraft of all time

Present: Su-33 or Su-37, man I love the Flanker series, beautiful birds they are. Go to the LOMAC forums, and look for the aircraft vids thread, it should be stickied. There's a ton of awesome cr@p on it, including about a dozen flanker vids, of all the different types, 27 (+KUB, SK), Su-30MK, Su-33 (this is the best vid of them all http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif you should see what it does http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif), Su-35/Su-35UB, Su-37, Test team and the Russian Knights.

SweetMonkeyLuv
04-08-2005, 11:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Grisha7:
Which fighter has notched up the most kills overall? Surely it would be a WWII fighter, and I'd hazard a guess it would be German just because of the huge number soviet machines downed 1941-42. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A good gauge of greatness, I'd say...

I'd feel pretty confident saying its the 109 and its variants that have the most air to air kills, tho I don't have any numbers to show for it.

mtnman4
04-09-2005, 08:52 AM
Gentlemen,
Although, I would lean toward the F4 Phantom as well.(Still being used as Wild Weasels, I think) Lest we not forget the Navy's F-14 Tomcat.
I beleive the AF saw what the Navy had & thought: "Man I got to get me one of those"! hence was born the F-15.
The Tomcats' been doing it all for so long, it would be tough to count it out.

Bearcat99
04-09-2005, 09:16 AM
Id have to go with Hristos....

horseback
04-09-2005, 09:24 AM
Eagle was operational about 3 years ahead of the Tomcat, and always had the engines the Tomcat should have had (as a sort of penance for screwing up the F-111B, the Navy was required to use the POS engines intended for the navalized F-111 for almost 15 years instead of the best engine available).

The Tomcat was therefore 'porked' for most of its career, and having been carefully shut out of the air combat phase of the first Gulf War, cannot really qualify. The Sukhois have no air combat record, and if the Chinese or N. Koreans ever do get frisky with theirs, the first F-22 or F-35 they encounter will quickly put them in their place.

If air to air kills are the only measuring stick, then the Me 109 is the winner by default. No other point defense fighter operated as long in a target rich environment with at least technical parity. But if overall value as a war machine is the standard, it falls way down the list, below the Mustang, the Thunderbolt, the Spitfire, and the FW 190, which all excelled at several other necessary military chores, besides being more able to go and get the enemy when he wouldn't come to them.

cheers

horseback

Monty_Thrud
04-09-2005, 09:26 AM
Yup..put me down for the Bf 109 also, it was on all fronts in large numbers the German Aces high kill counts will come from(mostly) ATG on the Russian front and ATA(and inferior planes early on).

But my favourite Prop plane(fighter) would be the Hurricane(early war) Spitfire, Tempest/Typhoon, but of course theres many more.
And Jets, well i'm not a big fan, i only really like early jets but the English Electric lightning and Harrier spring to mind, also that jet that had the wings that moved back with the twin rudders, cant remember its d amn name now.