Why Red Flag exercises are not indicative of aircraft performance

13 Raptors compared to 2 Eagles doesn't bode well for the eventual Eagle replacement. I wonder if those represent unique pilot "kills".

the point picard is saying is:

 

1) the scenarios are set up so that the assumed disposition of forces are wrong F-22's should be more outnumbered

 

2) the probability of kills of the missiles used are extremely high, something that does not accord with history, resulting in excess kills for the modern weapons.

 

3) Red Flag seems very scripted eg: dont use this tactic! only use that tactic etc..

The point is his number and assumption are absolutely ridiculous and factually wrong

1) for example he said this : ''2005/2006 tests between the F-22 and the F-15 assumed:

a) a force ratio of 2 F-15s for each F-22 a realistic ratio would be 2,2x advantage in procurement numbers * 2,19x advantage in sortie rate = 5 F-15s for each F-22'' :megalol: so if there is 10 F-22 in the mission then the red force will have 50 F-15 ? how many air force even have 50 F-15 ?

or this ''. Taking into account cost and sortie rate, 12 F-22 would be expected to face 102 F-16Cs '' great very realistic , when was the last time we have 102 F-16 not from USA all in the air at the same place ?

2 ) he said this too : '' a radar guided BVR missile Pk of 0,65 (it was 0,34 in Desert Storm against non-maneuvering (cooperative) targets with no countermeasures; incidentally, Pk of 0,65 gives the F-22 two salvos with Pk of 95,7% each, meaning that only one in 22 F-15s might come to the visual range, whereas Pk of 0,34 would give two salvos with Pk of 64,1% each, allowing one in 3 F-15s to the visual range – and that is assuming that they fired salvos instead of simple additive ''

while Mig-29 9.12B didnt have an internal jammer it still have chaff and flares and radar

Mig-25 PD even have new N-005 Saphir-25 (RP-25M) Pulse-Doppler radar with look-down/shoot down capability and it have chaff and flare too

so his statement that Iraq aircraft are cooperative target that dont try to evade the target is ridiculous

3 ) Iam almost certainly sure that whoever the operator , mission planning of Red flag know more about tactic than Picard

and then he put load of other bs comment

''Agressors also “simulate” older Soviet aircraft, newest being Su-27 and MiG-29, latter of which does not have shining turning performance thanks to high wing loading''

:megalol::megalol: clearly dont understand aerodynamic

F-22 is vastly superior to the F-15 in WVR in every area except for maybe T/W depending on the fuel loads of both aircraft. T-38's train more often against Raptors. It's just that simple. BTW. The T-38's carry really nice ECM pods and can actually be a menace at BVR too!

T-38 likely train again F-22 at WVR , with that small radar i dont think T-38 can be much of a threat to other fighter at BVR

T-38 likely train again F-22 at WVR , with that small radar i dont think T-38 can be much of a threat to other fighter at BVR

The US need back their F-14's :( They used to wax F-5E's in WVR engagements.

The US need back their F-14's :( They used to wax F-5E's in WVR engagements.

And where, exactly, do you get the impression that the F-22 does not?

I'm reasonably certain well more than 13 F-14s were "waxed" by T-38s in any given year of the Fighter Weapons School.

The US need back their F-14's :( They used to wax F-5E's in WVR engagements.

the point of using F-5/T-38 is that they are small and hard to see in WVR engagement , and iam sure F-22 wax T-38 too , we only see the painting without knowing actual kill ratio so it may give a false impression that T-38 wax F-22 in WVR , it isnt

nevertheless , F-16 would be fair more dangerous than both F-14 and T-38 in dogfight

And where, exactly, do you get the impression that the F-22 does not?

 

I'm reasonably certain well more than 13 F-14s were "waxed" by T-38s in any given year of the Fighter Weapons School.

I'm not saying it is representative of anything, I'm just saying that the F-14 used to have its way with any aggressor aircraft in WVR when both were flown by experienced pilots (incl. the F-15) And I assume that the F-22 is only flown by experienced pilots.

But again we don't know the starting positions in those fights so its not representative of any difference in performance, it only shows that WVR capability is still important.

the point of using F-5/T-38 is that they are small and hard to see in WVR engagement , and iam sure F-22 wax T-38 too , we only see the painting without knowing actual kill ratio so it may give a false impression that T-38 wax F-22 in WVR , it isnt

nevertheless , F-16 would be fair more dangerous than both F-14 and T-38 in dogfight

The F-16 is a dangerous opponent to any aircraft in WVR, but it's actually no more dangerous than the F-14 in this role, infact the two aircraft are remarkably close in their dogfighting capabilities.

well... :)

kSlnAhSxPWY

well... :)

 

kSlnAhSxPWY

Hehe yeah? :)

Like I said they are very close, and with equal pilots it's 50/50 who comes out the victor really, as demonstrated every time a skilled pilot was behind the controls of both.

But of course there's plenty of footage of F-14's being in the crosshairs of aggressors when the F-14 pilots were green students there to learn how to dogfight in the first place - that was the point of the Top Gun course after all, to train Navy pilots in BFM :)

If you want a 100% fair aircraft vs aircraft comparison you can simply look in the released performance manuals where its clear how similar in capability the F-14 & F-16 really are, the F-14 generally holding the advantage up to and below Mach 0.65 and the F-16 generally above that. The F-14 enjoys a superior ITR at all speeds though.

Sustained load factor figures taken straight from the manuals:

F-14D @ 55,620 lbs (50% fuel) w/ 4x AIM-7's + 4x AIM-9's @ 10,000 ft:

Mach = G-load

0.2 = 1.2

0.3 = 1.95

0.4 = 2.95

0.5 = 4.0

0.6 = 5.0

0.7 = 5.3

0.75 = 5.6

F-16C @ 26,000 lbs w/ 2x AIM-9 + 4x AIM-120's + 2x FT pylons @ 10,000 ft:

Mach = G-load

0.2 = CAT limited

0.3 = 1.8

0.4 = 2.7

0.5 = 3.55

0.6 = 4.5

0.7 = 5.5

0.75 = 6.0

F-15C @ 41,000 lbs (50% fuel), w/ 4x AIM-7's + 4x AIM-9s @ 10,000 ft:

Mach = G-load

0.2 = 1.0

0.3 = 1.8

0.4 = 2.6

0.5 = 3.4

0.6 = 4.3

0.7 = 5.25

0.75 = 5.7

The F-16 is a dangerous opponent to any aircraft in WVR, but it's actually no more dangerous than the F-14 in this role, infact the two aircraft are remarkably close in their dogfighting capabilities.

Iam almost certainly sure that F-16 is much better than F-14 in WvR with 4 AAM and 50% , it will likely wax F-14 in dogfight

Do you remember the X-31 program ? , NASA decided to test the effectiveness of thrust vector control , so they let the X-31 dogfight with F-18 , F-14 , F-15 , and F-16

X-31 totally wax F-14 and F-18 in close quarters with kill ratio of some where close to 8:1 , however when face off again fighter F-16 and F-15 , these airforce fighter were able to get superior kill ratio again the experimental thrust vector control X-31

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Flying_Beyond_the_Stall.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi9-q2B3ZPKAhXGXBoKHfdwCyI4ChAWCCYwAQ&usg=AFQjCNFB5xpHIh7QXt9pnrz_xL47ULmYsg&sig2=o11QHvLGwyqhIbBVKpoP6w

I also read that once F-14's were sent to train with Israeli pilots. The tomcats were handily outclassed in the WVR arena by the netz. The F-14 was deceptively agile for its size, but was still below the falcon in that regard simply because they were designed to specialize at different envelopes.

Here is the summary of the test between X-31 vs F-14 , F-15 ,F-16 and F-18

Iam almost certainly sure that F-16 is much better than F-14 in WvR with 4 AAM and 50% , it will likely wax F-14 in dogfight

Do you remember the X-31 program ? , NASA decided to test the effectiveness of thrust vector control , so they let the X-31 dogfight with F-18 , F-14 , F-15 , and F-16

X-31 totally wax F-14 and F-18 in close quarters with kill ratio of some where close to 8:1 , however when face off again fighter F-16 and F-15 , these airforce fighter were able to get superior kill ratio again the experimental thrust vector control X-31

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Flying_Beyond_the_Stall.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi9-q2B3ZPKAhXGXBoKHfdwCyI4ChAWCCYwAQ&usg=AFQjCNFB5xpHIh7QXt9pnrz_xL47ULmYsg&sig2=o11QHvLGwyqhIbBVKpoP6w

I've never heard such claims, all I can tell you is that if we take the pilot out of the equation and just look at what the aircraft are actually capable of then the F-14 will outmaneuver the F-16 below Mach 0.65, and even more easily so the F-15.

These results were roughly the same when top pilots in each type faced each other, with the F-14 winning rather convincingly over the F-15 in the few mock dogfights they had where both were piloted by highly experienced jocks.

One notable incident:

"Still, Hoser’s best experience during the AIMVAL/ACEVAL most probably came after the end of the trials. Even if Tomcat and Eagle drivers could not engage each other, Hoser and his RIO Bill “Hill Billy” Hill with Dan “Turk” Pentecost and Frank “Fearless” Schumacher onboard the second F-14, went 2 vs 2 against a couple of F-15 instructors from 415th Training Squadron (415th Flight Test Flight).

Both Eagles were gunned down and a gun camera film which showed the F-15 locked in the F-14 HUD almost caused Japan to revert its decision to buy the Eagle."

But really there is no point in arguing all this as the true relationship between these aircraft was proven through extensive flight testing that revealed the limits of each plane.

Sustained load factor figures taken straight from the manuals:

 

F-14D @ 55,620 lbs (50% fuel) w/ 4x AIM-7's + 4x AIM-9's @ 10,000 ft:

Mach = G-load

0.2 = 1.2

0.3 = 1.95

0.4 = 2.95

0.5 = 4.0

0.6 = 5.0

0.7 = 5.3

0.75 = 5.6

 

F-16C @ 26,000 lbs w/ 2x AIM-9 + 4x AIM-120's + 2x FT pylons @ 10,000 ft:

Mach = G-load

0.2 = CAT limited

0.3 = 1.8

0.4 = 2.7

0.5 = 3.55

0.6 = 4.5

0.7 = 5.5

0.75 = 6.0

 

F-15C @ 41,000 lbs (50% fuel), w/ 4x AIM-7's + 4x AIM-9s @ 10,000 ft:

Mach = G-load

0.2 = 1.0

0.3 = 1.8

0.4 = 2.6

0.5 = 3.4

0.6 = 4.3

0.7 = 5.25

0.75 = 5.7

I don't have F-14 manual so can you post it ?

I only have something like this.

In general F-14 is better at slow speed while F-16 is good at high speed , but stay slow isn't favorable in dogfight , enemy will go vertical quick and try dash attack

Oh and by the ways what is the respective combat radius of F-14 vs F-16 with same mission profile ? I think we should equalize their fuel load before making comparison , 26000 lbs is f-16 with 100% fuel I think ?

turn rate = [1091*tan(bank angle)] /[true air speed in knots]

G-load is 1/cos( bank angle)

We can estimate what the fastest sustainable turn rate of F-14 compare to F-16

I don't have F-14 manual can you post it ?

I only have something like this.

In general F-14 is better at slow speed while F-16 is good at high speed , but stay slow isn't favorable in dogfight , enemy will go vertical quick and try dash attack

Yes, this is for 10,000 ft:

Here's the F-16C at the same alt but with a smaller loadout:

These are directly from the manuals, and as you can see both aircraft are very close, but the F-14 holds the advantage below Mach 0.65.

Against the F-15 the F-14B/D holds the advantage for even longer until Mach 0.75 and then again from Mach 1.2 onward, which is the reason the F-14 mostly won WVR engagements against the F-15 when both pilots were experienced in the types and also why Iran choose the F-14 over the F-15 after mock dogfighting trials between the types.

Iam almost certainly sure that F-16 is much better than F-14 in WvR with 4 AAM and 50% , it will likely wax F-14 in dogfight

Do you remember the X-31 program ? , NASA decided to test the effectiveness of thrust vector control , so they let the X-31 dogfight with F-18 , F-14 , F-15 , and F-16

X-31 totally wax F-14 and F-18 in close quarters with kill ratio of some where close to 8:1 , however when face off again fighter F-16 and F-15 , these airforce fighter were able to get superior kill ratio again the experimental thrust vector control X-31

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Flying_Beyond_the_Stall.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi9-q2B3ZPKAhXGXBoKHfdwCyI4ChAWCCYwAQ&usg=AFQjCNFB5xpHIh7QXt9pnrz_xL47ULmYsg&sig2=o11QHvLGwyqhIbBVKpoP6w

I had never heard of X-31's dogfighting anything, that is an EXCELLENT read...and I'm not even halfway through it! :thumbup:

I also read that once F-14's were sent to train with Israeli pilots. The tomcats were handily outclassed in the WVR arena by the netz. The F-14 was deceptively agile for its size, but was still below the falcon in that regard simply because they were designed to specialize at different envelopes.

In the context of BFM the F-14A was an underpowered airbrake, nobody will deny that - the later versions were better with added thrust.

EM charts might be good and might show some similarity with specific versions (and obviously will be tailored to the favour of the person comparing it :thumbup: ) - but they don't show the whole picture - even Boyd recognised that.

Yes, this is for 10,000 ft:

 

 

 

Here's the F-16C at the same alt but with a smaller loadout:

 

Drag index of 50 may be too high for f-16 in a dogfight don't you think ?

2 external fuel tank on F-16 only have drag index of 35

With 2 EFT +1 ALQ-184 F-16CJ have drag index of 53

An F-16 with 6 AIM-120 will have drag index of only 16 rather than 50

Drag index of 50 may be too high for f-16 in a dogfight don't you think ?

 

An F-16 with 6 AIM-120 will have drag index of only 16 rather than 50

50 seems good - though ideally half that or lower.

Off the top of my head for what is being used - 2 x 370 tanks add DI of 54 (without stores on 4 & 6)

You need to include the pylons for 4 of the AIM-120s

 

You need to include the pylons for 4 of the AIM-120s

According to flight manual , aim-120 + launcher + adapter on station 2, 8 , 3 ,7 of F-16 , each have drag index of 4

Seem reasonable enough

garrya,

A drag index of 50 is supposed to represent an F-16 with 6x missiles with their pylons as well as two empty fuel tank pylons.

A drag index of 0 represents a completely clean aircraft with at most 2x wing tip missiles.

Btw it needs to be said that a clean F-16 will beat pretty much everything in WVR, but operationally they almost always have multiple missiles and fuel tanks attached.

Hence I went for the drag index that represents an F-16 which just released its drop tanks (I understand that US F-16's can't do this?), and is flying with 6x missiles and two empty pylons.

garrya,

 

A drag index of 50 is supposed to represent an F-16 with 6x missiles with their pylons as well as two empty fuel tank pylons.

 

A drag index of 0 represents a completely clean aircraft with at most 2x wing tip missiles.

What if F-16 was armed like this ?

Belly tank dropped in dogfight , 6 Aim-120 +pylon have drag index of 16