[ridenrain]

Saw this and laughed my ass off. What an unusual and biased test.

http://www.cdi.org/pdfs/Sprey%20Quarter%20Century.pdf

[Hyack]

Well the facts speak for themselves

[sasquatch2]

Facts what facts?

This guy is about as current as a climate alarmist.....

He ignores the effect of standing patrols of Tempests near the Me262 bases.

He perpetuates the exagerated claims of the Korean War.

He refers to the F5 as a viable fighter......not a commercial success----little adoption.

The F22 has a better rate of climb, higher service ceiling, better range, is super-sonic, has a better all round maneuvering envelope, a more potent gun armament, vastly better fire control, better avionics than any known fighter. New russian fighters are very much an unknown quantity.

Any claim of superiority for the F86 is simply preposterous sophistry.

My bad....the F86 is much much cheaper to buy. You certainly get what you pay for. APCs and MIFV made of cardboard are cheaper too.

The F86, in it's heyday, was inferior to the MiG15, which was such a dog, that the Soviets rapidly replaced it with the MiG17. The claimed kill ratio over Korea was largely exageration. The only reason Sabres had any success at all was the superior experience of the Sabre pilots---

Viet Nam emphasised that the then current F4 was inferior to a MIG17 in a dogfight. AAM designed to shotdown bombers were unsuited to engaged rapidly maneuvering fighters. The MiG15 was designed to shoot down B29s and was at a disadvantage against fighters. Indeed 1 MiG15 fell to the guns of a prop-driven skyraider over Korea. The first Mig kill was achieved by a F80 shooting-star.

Trivia means little.

"It's not the boldest but the oldest."

The formula this guy seem to recommend is that of the MiG29. Fast, cheap and light. It achieved this by leaving the electronics on the ground but that limited it to point defence and susceptable to jamming. Unable to track only one target made them suicidally vulnerable.

[sandorski]

There was a Canadian Docu-Comedy thingy that came out in the 80's or 90's that this reminds me of. It had to do with the CF-18 purchase and how a Canadian Inventor/Designer was overlooked and ignored despite having built a "superior" Aircraft. Only saw it once and I don't recall the name of it, but I remember finding it hilarious. Basically the guys Aircraft was a piece of crap, but it was so cheap to make that sheer numbers would make up for it.

[ridenrain]

I remember seeing that. It was a big
hunk of aluminum that the guy pounded on with a baseball bat to show how solid it was. I don't recall seeing it fly though.

[bootlegga]

sasquatch2 sasquatch2:

Facts what facts?

He refers to the F5 as a viable fighter......not a commercial success----little adoption.

The F-5 wasn't a commercial success? Don't tell that to everyone who operated it...

$1:

Operators of Northrop F-5 Tiger

Bahrain
Botswana
Brazil
Canada
Chile
Ethiopia
Greece
Honduras
Indonesia
Iran
Jordan
Kenya
Libya
Malaysia
Mexico
Morocco
Netherlands
Norway
Paraguay
Philippines
Republic of China (Taiwan)
South Korea
Saudi Arabia
Singapore
Spain
South Vietnam
Vietnam Air Force
Vietnam
Vietnam People's Air Force (several captured ex-VNAF planes)
Switzerland
Thailand
Royal Thai Air Force
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkish Air Force
United States
United States Air Force
United States Navy
United States Marine Corps
Venezuela
Yemen

It was built under license in several countries (Canada, Norway, Spain and Taiwan) and still operates in some third world countries. I agree that their day has passed, but it was an affordable, effective light fighter/fighter-bomber, as well as the basis for the Talon trainer.

[BartSimpson]

He may have been thinking of the F-20 and not the F-5.

[-Mario-]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

He may have been thinking of the F-20 and not the F-5.

That makes more sense.

Another point, why do they forget about the Crusader in the Vietnam War. Modern Tactics are based on a dogfight that lasted 10 mins. and no-one was shoot down. With one Crusader and 4 Mig 17.

[BartSimpson]

Vietnam saw a LOT of anomalies.

Skyraiders in Vietnam were creditied with kills, they also were loaded with up to 18,000 pounds of bombs which far exceeded the original specs.

A Huey was credited with a MiG kill when a MiG strafed a chopper at low altitude and the door gunner splashed the MiG.

A nice guy named Carlos Hathcock converted a .50 machine gun into a sniper rifle.

And etc. etc. etc.

It seems there were no rules in that particular war.

[Kenazo]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Vietnam saw a LOT of anomalies.

Skyraiders in Vietnam were creditied with kills, they also were loaded with up to 18,000 pounds of bombs which far exceeded the original specs.

A Huey was credited with a MiG kill when a MiG strafed a chopper at low altitude and the door gunner splashed the MiG.

A nice guy named Carlos Hathcock converted a .50 machine gun into a sniper rifle.

And etc. etc. etc.

It seems there were no rules in that particular war.

Speaking of Hathcock, have you read his book? Very interesting stuff. I think the standard Canadian sniper rifle now is a .50, though not a machine gun:

$1:

The current world record for the longest range sniper kill is 2,430 meters (7,972 feet), accomplished by a Canadian sniper, Corporal Rob Furlong, of the third battalion Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry (3 PPCLI), during the invasion of Afghanistan, using a .50 BMG (12.7mm) McMillan TAC-50 bolt-action rifle. This meant that the bullet had a flight time of ≈ 4.5 seconds, and a drop of ≈ 70 meters (230 feet).

Wikipedia

[sandorski]

A drop of 230 ft???

[twister]

Aim a little over his head....windage.. kill.

[sandorski]

twister twister:

Aim a little over his head....windage.. kill.

"A little"

With that much drop you'd think there'd be a lot of potential for left/right drift as well. Must be many misses for any 1 hit with those distances.

[DrCaleb]

Ran across this . . .

http://www.f22-raptor.com/media/video_g ... angley.wmv

It's like a dolphin in the sky . . .

[sasquatch2]

Way back when I had a scope rigged to fit an M2.

My impression it was more artillery than sniping.

Sandorski

$1:

twister wrote:

$1:

Aim a little over his head....windage.. kill

.
"A little"
With that much drop you'd think there be a lot of potential for left/right drift as well. Must be many misses for any 1 hit with those distances.

Windage is not much of a factor with the big heavy 50 cal bullet.

Windage can drive you nuts with 17Rem or .222 Rem or 22/250.

This fades away with the 30 cals but nearly disappears with the .50 cal at practical distances for practical purposes. At 400m even holdover is less a factor for trajectory than the difference between the bore and the line of sight with a 50 cal.

The Soviet 120mm tank gun allows for NO aim-off out to 2 km. That's flat.

Extreme ranges like 2.5km are another matter. Even 155mm experiences windrift out that far.

It was not for naught that a 50Cal coax loaded with tracer was a popular sighting mechanism for western tanks mounting the L7 Vickers 105 mm. They are more or less ballistically identical.