Iduno Alvis… I was thinking. (need to do more research though)
But if the F8E crusader is faster than the F-18C at lower altitude having weaker thrust, that means the F-18C has terrible aerodynamics.
How does it accelerate really “good compared” to the 4th generation 1:1+ speed demons?
F8E
Mach 1.8
1,227 mph at 36,000 ft
Thrust-to-weight: 0.62
F-18C
Mach 1.8
1,190 mph at 40,000 ft
Thrust-to-weight:0.96
The answer to that in my opinion is it doesn’t.
The F-5E out-accelerates Mig-21F-13 despite being slower just cause of the superior TWR.
Don’t feed the local troll, let’s keep the topic on the F-18 please.
Ziggy’s not a troll, and my F-5E to Mig-21F-13 comparison was to counter their F-18 to F-8E comparison.
Pretty much me defending that F-18 out-accelerates F-8E handily.
Just a curiosity, MiG 21 F-13 have same acceleration like F-15A/C.
You’re sure it has nothing to do with high-speed power retention?
My country had MiG 23 in BN, MF, ML versions. I love these MiGs.
I do not know much about the F-13, but it makes sense!
Well aerodynamics plays a critical part in how much speed is retained, right?
So, if the F-18C @ 0.96 thrust to weight cannot push it faster than the F8E crusader @ 0.62 even if it is flown at a higher altitude in thinner atmosphere … Then there must be is a serious design issue in the F-18C’s “high-speed power retention” right?
It can either be limited in how long it can sustain in AB due to poor engine design and poor aerodynamics. Or it actually can be both. Or it can also be the increased weight the Navy placed on the YF-17 for it to become carrier capable without upgrading the engines and called it the F/A-18.
The reinforced airframe, tailhook, landing gear etc…
But the point is the F-18C is not going to magically out accelerate the notoriously insane acceleration of the F16 and F15 & Mig29. I think we sufficiently proven that right?
It’s not beating anything in top speed either and gets chased down by Mig23s, F4 phantoms and is no faster than a Crusader. It’s definitely not going to out accelerate the Harriers and Yak141 either. The F-18 is not going to be the best at anything except landing and taking off from a boat.
Angle of attack? The Flanker can go over 90 degrees and still fly in a straight line up to 700km. The hornet cannot do it with its weak engines and poor lift and lack of vortex generators compared to it.
Again, Imo the greatest offensive strength for the F-18 is going to be its sensor suite and upgraded Aim-120 datalink. It should have a higher-than-average proficiency to other fighters.
But time will tell I suppose.
Also, the high mounted nose cannon will be pretty cool, should be very accurate and have a huge lead while turning and perform some nice snap shots.
Makes sense, I shouldn’t just assume things. He is known for purposeful derailment of threads and has been reprimanded often for it.
The aircraft can handle more than this, likewise the MiG-29 can handle more than 26 degrees… the flight control limitations are not hard capped of course. The last time I tested these were accurate, and when I reported the MLD lacking AoA they referred to the same formula.
On the flipside, the F-18 can handle nearly 40 degrees+ true AoA. Quite insane.
About the angles of attack according to GOST and the opinion of the pilots-not everything is as clear as you think…also in the message you got something mixed up …
2.SOUA-Was installed on the MiG-23M/MiG-23ML since 1977… starting in June 1979, previously produced aircraft were redesigned…On the MiG-23ML(A) / MiG-23MLD, SOS-3 was installed…
3.For comparison, the instruments of attack angles in the cabins are MiG-23M without SOUA / MiG-23ML(23-12) with SOUA / MiG-23MLD(23-18) with SOS-3…
4.In all cases, calibration no one canceled up to 40 degrees and Overpowering automation systems to limit the angles of attack…
5.Tests-Corkscrew/Angles of attack… Б.А.Орлов. «Записки летчика-испытателя» - Определение балансировочных характеристик (testpilot.ru)
Штопор на МиГ-23 / Авиация и космонавтика 2008 01 (libma.ru)
P.S-In any case, the corkscrew characteristics of the MiG-23 are better than those of the F-104/F-4…this factor is not taken into account in the game…
Reprimanded and loved.
I learn and repay those whose look out for me :)
I never turn against them. :)
Man you’ve derailed like half a dozen threads for weeks straight you deserve a thousand times what’s so far happened to you for the unimaginable pain you’ve inflicted on my fingers when I’m trying to find a particular bit of a thread and have to scroll past two thousand posts of whatever half related subject you’ve decided to be obtuse about this week
I’ve derailed nothing no more than the next man. You just don’t agree with what I have to say while others do. The problem is that you are offended by anything I have to say.
Personally and deeply offended. I rather like that.
I’m not going anywhere. You need to come to terms with that.
Is that understood random generic forum user I’ll forget exist after this post?
No sense feeding it, the only way he can continuously derail is by ensuring he says something provocative enough to evoke a reply. It’s what he wants.
Let’s keep the discussion steady here, no sense entertaining it.
Just because you produce best crap doesn’t mean anything. Not to mention as people said relevance to the F18.
The thing is that people are never fighting with something close to 30min (or 60% or whatever the test data we have) and those parts of models are where the biggest outliers in game sense appear
That’s correct, and the F-18 holds significantly more fuel than the F-16. As such, performance will increase more for the F-18 as it burns fuel than for the F-16. That is why I compared them with the F-18 having a much higher fuel loading than the F-16. In actual matches you can expect the two to perform very similar in sustained turns.
I don’t have much time, I’ll look at the sources later, thank you, they look good. The dangers of spin ( flat spin ?) in the MiG 23 were described by Valery Menitsky in his book, I will find the pages and post here, or ideally in the MiG 23 thread.
I have the materials for the F-104 and can look at the spin on it, I don’t suppose it would be easily recoverable, rather the opposite.
I can also go through the high AoA characteristics of the F-4, I don’t foresee the MiG 23 ML being better than the F-4, the MLD maybe. Maybe the MLD really was.
Interestingly, they changed the formula for calculating the actual AoA for the MiG 23 MF/MLD ( am I understanding correctly ?).
But the one I posted applies to the ML, right ?
For clarity, I’m posting the page and its sources directly.
In reality the F-18 C Hornet and the F-16 are quite equal overall, so why do you assume it is completely outclassed ?
Are you talking about dogfighting? A better pilot in an F-18 will almost always beat a worse pilot in an F-16.
Higher aspect wings, similar wing loading, only 10% less thrust to weight at maneuvering speeds off the top of my head… Why wouldn’t the F-18 outperform the F-16 in many regards to BFM?
And I’m on a phone!
