F-8 Crusader

That whole 'get back to the Crusader' thing just isn't going to happen, is it?

That whole 'get back to the Crusader' thing just isn't going to happen, is it?

Dunno, if I post 2 f-4's, does that count as an f-8?

Well the F-4E was the better dogfighter, and not just because it came with a gun :)

 

The slats helped the turning performance quite a bit, and AFAIK apart from the weaker radar the F-4E feautured more toys overall.

Its not so easy. It had superior turn rate and slats helped with that a lot. A lot. But this comes at a price. From the accounts I read, F-4 was a very manly aircraft. It told you exactly what was happening to it. And so if you were pulling high angles of attack, you knew what was going on and how much more you can pull or not. Slats killed all that feedback. They also reduced noticeably rate of climb and top speed (I'm comparing here J to S). Finally, due to slats aircraft bled the energy even more than ever (that is something you get to experience with FC3 MiG-29 as well). So it really depends what you wanna do with it. If you wanna turn, F-4E and S are for you. But if you can pay attention to the energy levels and keep fight in the vertical, F-4B or J would be just as good. Especially with all the added features Navy had for dogfights and launching missiles in close combat. F-8 had some of that too. And F-8 also had IRST (albeit primitive).

Who cares about the branches & insignias, it's all about the technical stuff :D

You cant buy skill :pilotfly:

Whatever gets chosen, it will make a great teammate to the Crusader!

 

And yes, you were right about the weapons, radar and training of the USN F-4's Hiromachi! Just like the F-8 pilots, they were the deadliest in the skies.

 

Although the F-4B's saw service, none of them say in -N standard. Slatted F-4E saw combat and made multiple aces with both the USAF and Israel, which most people forget. The IDF has nine aces in the F-4E which saw combat in the Yom Kippur war with slats and the gun making them pretty good dog fighters.

 

Back to the F-8 though, it will be a beast... it's better than the F-5 in virtually every way so I can;t wait to have cold war servers with it available.

The N saw service most certainly. Got a lot of pictures from 70s and 80s. They just might've missed Nam earlier, but by the end of 1973 one Navy squadron was station in Japan (Atsugi base I think). Also, I seriously dont think slats had anything to do with F-4E success. More so employment of AIM-9D and vast organizational superiority over Syrian and even Egyptian Air Force. Tom Cooper's got that right in his massive 6 volume history of Arab air wars. I really recommend reading that one.

F-8 will be a bold fighter. Lots of power and lots of tricky characteristics. F-5 is gentle thing, predictable. Combination of AIM-9D/G/H, SEAM and APQ-124A make F-8 a really capable close combat platform, but it will be demanding. All the accounts I read so far make it obvious, that aircraft was fantastic to fly but it punished you for every mistake. But then again, thats what 21 does already :joystick:

I hope a F-4 and A-4 come eventually but I'm pumped for the F-8. That's a really cool fighter I never thought we would get. Hopefully Ed shifts it focus out of the teen series.

I hope a F-4 and A-4 come eventually but I'm pumped for the F-8. That's a really cool fighter I never thought we would get. Hopefully Ed shifts it focus out of the teen series.

I have a feeling they will. At this point, they've exhausted most of the low-hanging fruit..ie most recognizable modern aircraft that have the broadest appeal/recognition. Moving forward means moving into more niche, character-rich older aircraft

Pretty sure the F-4S also had slats, and in fact it supposedly turned better than the -E because the gun in the -E made it more nose heavy (source: somewhere in here

sorry if I can't do better).

More weight in the nose shouldn't really make a difference, if the S turned better then it was probably just because the E was heavier than the S in general.

Great video btw.

An F-4S would be awesome too btw.

This:

 

 

 

 

is cooler than this:

 

 

 

 

Period.

You are just wrong, period :D

Time to get this back to Crusader territory :)

My favourite Crusader air wing: USS Oriskany 1971-1976. Two F-8J Crusader squadrons and three A-7A/B Corsair squadrons on a tiny SCB-125A conversion Essex-class carrier. That is a lot of firepower for a WWII ship.

The F-8 is gonna be king of the dogfight. I recall reading in some book that the F-8 pilots prior to Vietnam really focused on the A2A dogfight aspect to the point that it was acceptable to lose aircraft in accidents as long as a lesson was learned.

While im not entirely convinced of its authenticity, the book Over the Beach by Zalin Grant is an excellent F-8 book.

The Crusader has simply captured by phascination. I primarily build 1/72 scale models. Built a few F-8Es and wanted something to use some kick ass decals. Back-modeled an F-8E kit to a F8U-1. Lots of plastic surgery, but looked that much meaner. Seriously, I can not wait to see more of this F-8 project come to phruition.

The F-8 is gonna be king of the dogfight.

Hope you are ready to get disappointed frequently.

Well as far as cold war birds go, it should be very good. The F86 and Mig15 are (relatively) underpowered, the Mig-19 is ok-ish but has worse performance than the Crusader (luckily now the UFO FM is gone), the Mig-21 is a rocket ship but a bit of a brick, the F-5 is underpowered and its maneuverability is overrated, the Viggen bleeds ALL the energy as soon as you start pulling.

Compared to those, I expect the F-8 to be above average (but not exceptional) in both agility and performance.

According to what I have found by now, the F-8 was inferior in turn rate to the MiG-21 and additionally has a lower thrust to rate ratio.

That strongly depends on the Mig-21 version. If I recall correctly from the Have Doughnut report (I think it was Have Doughtnut at least, may have been something from Feather Duster instead), that was a Mig-21F13 which is more maneuverable than our Mig-21bis by a good margin.

Could be. What I have found yet, was just talking about MiG-21, without a version. However reading further through that paper, I highly doubt its content, as it contradicts itself pretty well.

I will do further research, but till now, I am not very convinced the F-8 will be the ultimate dogfight weapon people claim it to be.

As was pointed out, the earlier generation Mig-21s (F-13, PF) were lighter and alittle more agile than the bis.

I expect the F-8J and Mig-21bis to be on pretty equal footing to one another. Although I'm looking forward to some of the Crusader's more unique features. I think much of the "ultimate dogfighter" talk was a result of the shift towards a dependence on missiles being toted by F-4 Phantoms, and that the Crusader was the only day fighter built with gun fighting in mind still in service in that period.

Time to get this back to Crusader territory :)

 

My favourite Crusader air wing: USS Oriskany 1971-1976. Two F-8J Crusader squadrons and three A-7A/B Corsair squadrons on a tiny SCB-125A conversion Essex-class carrier. That is a lot of firepower for a WWII ship.

 

 

 

Recomend the Bloody Sixteen: The USS Oriskany and Air Wing 16 during the Vietnam War

The E was the most widely used and produced. Though the G was probably the coolest.

 

For a navy phantom, F4J or S would work, but there are also the Brit phantom's to consider.

 

Honestly given the huge numbers produced and variants they should do both/a few.

Sure, the E was widely used and exportet but given Heatblurs Forrestal class carriers and a huge emphasis on carier based/naval operations a naval Phantom would make way more sense and fit into the general picture a lot better. Just imagine F-8's, Phantoms, F-14's, A-6's on the same deck.

That strongly depends on the Mig-21 version. If I recall correctly from the Have Doughnut report (I think it was Have Doughtnut at least, may have been something from Feather Duster instead), that was a Mig-21F13 which is more maneuverable than our Mig-21bis by a good margin.

It also doesnt specify which F-8 version they were talking about. We are getting the beefy J with the P420 engine and some aero improvements. I heard somewhere the F-8 has a better roll-rate than the 21bis.

Slats killed all that feedback. They also reduced noticeably rate of climb and top speed (I'm comparing here J to S). Finally, due to slats aircraft bled the energy even more than ever (that is something you get to experience with FC3 MiG-29 as well). So it really depends what you wanna do with it. If you wanna turn, F-4E and S are for you. But if you can pay attention to the energy levels and keep fight in the vertical, F-4B or J would be just as good.

All 100% agreed. The slick wing Phantoms were extremely good performers. On paper, the slats just killed the performance, but for me personally (and clearly a lot of other USN and USAF brass), trading off all that performance for better turning was worth it. Comparing manuals, even the slatted F-4E still blows the F-5, F-8E/J out of the water with top speed, climb and acceleration and has very similar performance to the MiG-21bis but with better sustained turning in general. The slick Phantoms were rockets but they would buffet in a sustained turn at mach 0.35 at Sea level... that's pretty fast for what feels like a stall!

The N saw service most certainly. Got a lot of pictures from 70s and 80s. They just might've missed Nam earlier, but by the end of 1973 one Navy squadron was station in Japan (Atsugi base I think). Also, I seriously dont think slats had anything to do with F-4E success. More so employment of AIM-9D and vast organizational superiority over Syrian and even Egyptian Air Force. Tom Cooper's got that right in his massive 6 volume history of Arab air wars. I really recommend reading that one.

The N and S are so cool - I saw an S in California last year. But for me, historical context is pretty important. The N and S served, but as far as I know, they did not see actual combat in any capacity and by the time they showed up, the F-14 was well into service with the F/A-18 arriving as well. By this time, historically, the F-4 was past its prime as a top-dog fighter. It was a new age. Any of its improvements are made a little moot to me simply because of the brand new jets which were far superior in aerial combat.

Further, I am not attributing the Israeli aces successes to slatted F-4E's - I am just saying that the F-4E has lots and lots of combat history especially with them and they happened to get slatted F-4E's - similar to the ones at the end of Vietnam which had used AGM-65's for the first time in combat.

ALL THAT SAID - if we got an F-4J (or even an S) I would not complain. Carrier landings are among my favourite things to do in sims and all F-4's are welcome to me (except the recon versions lol).

F-8 will be a bold fighter. Lots of power and lots of tricky characteristics. ... All the accounts I read so far make it obvious, that aircraft was fantastic to fly but it punished you for every mistake. But then again, thats what 21 does already :joystick:

The F-8 is not going to be a magical fighter. Just like any other fighter of the time it had its limitations. But its a badass, carrier-capable fighter with more of everything good than the F-5 we have now (which I also love to fly). Finally we will have the option for FOUR AIM-9's and the best of the best at the time, the AIM-9G!

Looking forward to many a tail strike while practicing carrier landings!

It also doesnt specify which F-8 version they were talking about. We are getting the beefy J with the P420 engine and some aero improvements. I heard somewhere the F-8 has a better roll-rate than the 21bis.

I believe it was confirmed that we are getting the best F-8J's with the more powerful J57-P-420.

Time to get this back to Crusader territory :)

 

My favourite Crusader air wing: USS Oriskany 1971-1976. Two F-8J Crusader squadrons and three A-7A/B Corsair squadrons on a tiny SCB-125A conversion Essex-class carrier. That is a lot of firepower for a WWII ship.

 

 

That is a busy crowded deck.

Re the comparison with the Mig-21, you can just Google the Have Doughnut report. It goes very in depth with many US jets of the time.

Have Doughnut was based on MiG-21 F-13. Lower weight and much better maneuverability than MiG-21bis, but also lower thrust. Emergency afterburner on MiG-21bis makes a huge difference, in vertical especially. However F-8, if it manages to stick in a longer fight, should be able to survive. MiG-21bis with emergency burner will burn fuel rapidly while F-8 was known for a very good range and moderate fuel consumption.

All 100% agreed. The slick wing Phantoms were extremely good performers. On paper, the slats just killed the performance, but for me personally (and clearly a lot of other USN and USAF brass), trading off all that performance for better turning was worth it. Comparing manuals, even the slatted F-4E still blows the F-5, F-8E/J out of the water with top speed, climb and acceleration and has very similar performance to the MiG-21bis but with better sustained turning in general. The slick Phantoms were rockets but they would buffet in a sustained turn at mach 0.35 at Sea level... that's pretty fast for what feels like a stall!

Tac manual says simply: "At medium to high altitude, buffet onset occurs early and is several G away from stall. Therefore, it cannot be used to define optimum turn. A 16-unit aoa turn will produce a relatively good rate of turn without excessive energy bleedoff. Optimum turning radius is obtained between 18 and 21 units of AoA, depending on Mach and altitude. This means considerably deeper into buffet than is experienced with most other aircraft."

Buffet is a good sign, you have to understand it, not be afraid of it.

The N and S are so cool - I saw an S in California last year. But for me, historical context is pretty important. The N and S served, but as far as I know, they did not see actual combat in any capacity and by the time they showed up, the F-14 was well into service with the F/A-18 arriving as well. By this time, historically, the F-4 was past its prime as a top-dog fighter. It was a new age. Any of its improvements are made a little moot to me simply because of the brand new jets which were far superior in aerial combat.

I guess B / N would be natural. Some other sims got it that way.

The F-8 is not going to be a magical fighter. Just like any other fighter of the time it had its limitations. But its a badass, carrier-capable fighter with more of everything good than the F-5 we have now (which I also love to fly). Finally we will have the option for FOUR AIM-9's and the best of the best at the time, the AIM-9G!

Flight manual even mentions newest loadout with AIM-9H.

Have Doughnut was based on MiG-21 F-13. Lower weight and much better maneuverability than MiG-21bis, but also lower thrust. Emergency afterburner on MiG-21bis makes a huge difference, in vertical especially. However F-8, if it manages to stick in a longer fight, should be able to survive. MiG-21bis with emergency burner will burn fuel rapidly while F-8 was known for a very good range and moderate fuel consumption.

Buffet is a good sign, you have to understand it, not be afraid of it.

...

 

I guess B / N would be natural. Some other sims got it that way.

These are good words to live by! Perhaps I don't give the hard-wing Phantoms enough credit.

Flight manual even mentions newest loadout with AIM-9H.

Are you adding the AIM-9G as well as the H the F-8? I think either missile would be the best rear-aspect missile compared to what's in game now.

Re the comparison with the Mig-21, you can just Google the Have Doughnut report. It goes very in depth with many US jets of the time.

Yup, unfortunately it doesn't pertain to the Mig-21bis we have in game, so many of those conclusions have to be re-evaluated.

AIM-9B, C, D and G were mentioned in the updates but Hotel is pretty much the same as Golf, only tiny improvements. Will see.