F-14 vs. F/A-18

Which Plane is Superior

  • F-14 Tomcat

    Votes: 18 51.4%

  • F/A-18 Hornet

    Votes: 17 48.6%
  • Total voters
    35
draqon said:
cause u are not from Kostroma, Russia.
Click to expand...

Okay, "not from" isn't the right phrase, "lived there" is. I was born there in 1989. At 3 years old I was moved away to a different country. After the collapse my family immigrated to the U.S. and, here I am today. :truce: I have gone back there though. Nice place, I don't remeber a thing.
 
Borsviek said:
Okay, I saw a bit of the movie Stealth on my vacation in the UK a few years ago. First of all, its not UMCV, it is UCAV. Second, it sucked. That dogfight scene was just more subliminal American military propaganda. Why did the US navy send out the UCAV fully loaded on its second mission?!:mad:

Good job in pointing out the fact that there were a lot of female USSR pilots in WWII and even to this day. I'm not sure if the Su-37 will go into service, but I am hopeful.
Click to expand...

Dude, the Su-37 is AWESOME. I can always tell when a fighter is a russian disign, the wings are slightly situated farther back on the plane, that's how I could tell the difference between the MiG-25 and F-15. But they're still awesome. Did you hear that a MiG-25 (Libyan) shot down an F/A-18? And the Foxbat is just an interceptor (not made for dogfights)!
 
UCAV, whoops not UMCV.

UCAV:
Unmanned Combat Airial Vehicle

What I thought:
UnManned Combat Vehicle
 
Hey draqon and borsviek, argue about each other's life stories on PM! This thread is about the f-18 vs. f-14. Stay on topic please!
 
Speaking of which, today during practice after high-school, I actually saw an f-18 fly over the football field. It was no less than 300m in the air! I live in the center of America. No where near a navy base!
 
USS Exeter said:
Speaking of which, today during practice after high-school, I actually saw an f-18 fly over the football field. It was no less than 300m in the air! I live in the center of America. No where near a navy base!
Click to expand...

I'll bet that stupid pilot had somthing to remember for life after he got back to base...
:spank:​
 
Oli said:
Not?
Page 34 of Sprey's document: better turn.
F-18 has a higher acceleration, better lift coefficient (in instantaneous turns), higher cruising speed, and is a smaller aircraft = less maintenance, cheaper to buy and as a first-order approximation, cheaper to service.




:D
Click to expand...


the data in that PDF is questionable at best.
here is data from M.A.T.S. on the F-14
cruise speed 630mph, wingloading 92, 94 and 96 psf (for each model); t/w ratio=.91, max speed=2.34 mach, acceleration from 0.8 to 1.6 mach in 1.27min

the f/a-18 specs are as folows (multiple sources):
cruise speed=660mph, wingloading 93 psf, t/w=0.95, max speed=1.8 mach
acceleration from 0.8 mach to 1.6mach in under 2min.

as you can see the hornet is not superior at all. and this is the C variant. the E model data is still hard to obtain, but rumors say that C is actualy faster, has more acceleration, but has less t/w.
 
here is what i've found on f-15 and f-16
f-15:
top speed 2.5 mach, cruise sped 570mph, wing loading 73.1 psf, t/w=1.12-1.3;
acceleration ???(help anyone)
f-16:
top speed 2.0 mach, cruise speed 550+mph, wing loading 88.2psf, t/w=0.89-1.09; acceleration from 0.9mach to 1.75mach in 2min

i know turning radius and turning rates are classified, but i'd still apreciate some speculations for f-14,15,16 and 18. AoA too. i've seen f-14 perform 45 degree sustained AoA for more then 30 secs. does anyone have some more data?:shrug:
 
antaran_1979 said:
the data in that PDF is questionable at best.
here is data from M.A.T.S. on the F-14
cruise speed 630mph, wingloading 92, 94 and 96 psf (for each model); t/w ratio=.91, max speed=2.34 mach, acceleration from 0.8 to 1.6 mach in 1.27min

the f/a-18 specs are as folows (multiple sources):
cruise speed=660mph, wingloading 93 psf, t/w=0.95, max speed=1.8 mach
acceleration from 0.8 mach to 1.6mach in under 2min.

as you can see the hornet is not superior at all. and this is the C variant. the E model data is still hard to obtain, but rumors say that C is actualy faster, has more acceleration, but has less t/w.
Click to expand...

Which supports the source of info I gave at the very beginning of the thread.
 
I mean come on, a mediocre multi-role replacing half the fighters on the carrier, and the "Super Hornet" with worse statistics than the Hornet replacing the rest of the aircraft.

F/A-18C Hornet (average multi-role)

A-7 Corsair II
A-6 Intruder
Proposed as a Tanker (which is almost seemingly a joke because the hornet has such a bad fuel range as it is)
F-14A Tomcat :)wtf:)
F-14B Tomcat :)wtf:)


F/A=18E/F Super Hornet (considered an upgrade, but is considerably worse than the Hornet)

F-14D Super Tomcat :)wtf:)
EA-6B Prowler (Via EF-18A "Growler" [why they even get it to rhyme with the good fighter they're replacing])
(Why doesn't the USN put a randome on top and have it replace the E-2 Hawkeye?!?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top