F4wso From United States, joined Oct 2003, 796 posts, RR: 9 Reply 1, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1086 times:
The best comparison is to look at the Ps curves for each airplane. A quick interent search turned up a flight sim site on the F-16. http://www.simhq.com/_air3/air_117b.html
Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
F4wso From United States, joined Oct 2003, 796 posts, RR: 9 Reply 3, posted (1 month 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 906 times:
It was just an example of the type of data you can research to answer your question in a form that is easy to compare one plane to another.
The versions I used were on transparency film that could be overlayed to look at speeds and altitudes where it could be seen where one plane would have an advantage on another. It was an easy way to see where the corner velocity is established.
Gary
Cottage Grove, MN, USA
Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
LY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5493 posts, RR: 10 Reply 5, posted (1 month 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 870 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 4): And corner velocity is the tighest turn-radius an airplane can pull right (with or without losing speed out of curiousity? I forgot)?
Corner velocity (Vc) is the slowest speed at which an aircraft can achieve its maximum G loading, therefore producing the tightest turn possible. Velocity will be lost, but even if it wasn't it wouldn't affect the definition of Vc.
EBJ1248650 From United States, joined Jun 2005, 944 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (1 month 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 737 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Thread starter): How maneuverable was the F-100 Super-Sabre compared to the F-86 Sabre, the F-105 Thud, the F-8 Crusader, and the F-4 Phantom?
The Super Sabre is more manueverable than the F-105, at least in the vertical plane. I suspect the F-8 Crusader is more manueverable than the F-100; the F-86 is almost certainly more manueverable than the '100. Don't know whether the F-4 is more manueverable, though I suspect it's not 'cause it's a lot bigger airplane.
474218 From United States, joined Oct 2005, 2531 posts, RR: 3 Reply 8, posted (1 month 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 726 times:
IMO, most maneuverable to least:
F-86 Sabre
F-8
F-100
F-4
F-105
The F-86, F-100 and F-8 were designed as air to air combat aircraft, all were comparatively light and maneuverable. The F-4 was a missile platform, designed for long range intercept, pressed in to air to air combat because there was nothing else available. The F-105 was a fighter bomber carried a heavy load but with minimal maneuverability.
MissedApproach From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 680 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (1 month 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 707 times:
I think the maneuverability of the F-100 was pretty reasonable, especially when compared to the F-104 & -105. It's weak points were thrust ratio (low, at least in the A & C models) & take-off performance (hairy). It was maneuverable enough to serve as the Thunderbirds' mount from 1956-1969.
Blackbird From United States, joined Oct 1999, 2951 posts, RR: 5 Reply 11, posted (1 month 5 days ago) and read 677 times:
If the F-100 was better than the F-4 and F-105 in terms of maneuverability, then why was it considered to be "unsurvivable" in Vietnam?
Andrea Kent BTW: Also how does the F-100 have a low T/W ratio. From the weight figures I remember seeing, and from what I remember hearing it wasn't all that bad. Better than the F-105 anyway...
L-188 From United States, joined Jul 1999, 27930 posts, RR: 69 Reply 12, posted (1 month 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 671 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 11): If the F-100 was better than the F-4 and F-105 in terms of maneuverability, then why was it considered to be "unsurvivable" in Vietnam?
AFAIK there wasn't a F-100 vs. Mig fight in Nam.
The F-100's where used as fighter bombers quite extensively.
F4wso From United States, joined Oct 2003, 796 posts, RR: 9 Reply 13, posted (1 month 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 564 times:
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 11): If the F-100 was better than the F-4 and F-105 in terms of maneuverability, then why was it considered to be "unsurvivable" in Vietnam?
Maneuverability is only one factor of the equation. I also don't think it was considered unsurvivable since it was used extensively for close air support and in the MISTY FAC program. It was also the forerunner of the Wild Weasel. It did lack the air to air radar for beyond visual range.
Other considerations are range vs payload, theatre serviceability, and employment doctrine.
Gary
Cottage Grove, MN, USA
Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
MissedApproach From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 680 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (1 month 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 557 times:
The ability to turn is only one aspect of maneuverability of course- thrust ratio & climb also factor in. ( I apologize in advance for quoting Wikipedia extensively) The figures for the F-100D give a thrust ratio of .55, for a loaded airplane in reheat. The same condition for the F-8E gives a thrust ratio of .62, with .74 for the F-105D & .86 for the F-4E. Not only that, but the earlier engines on the F-100A & C were prone to compressor stalls, & the airplane had stability problems that killed a lot of pilots (not just nuggets either).
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Oct 1999, 2951 posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5493 posts, 
Printer friendly format
