Favorite Fighter Planes?

[Unstung]

Hm, there's the F-21 Kfir that's based on a Mirage, using a delta wing. It may not be my favorite fighter in terms of capability, but I certainly like the look and idea of the Delta wing.

 

[Ark]

Too bad the ejection system was buggy (often triggered without warning, see the end of the video) !

:lol::lol::lol: That would SUCK.

 

[Dambuster]

JAS-39 Gripen

Spitfire
Eurofighter Typhoon - I used to be quite 'meh' towards it, but I've come to be quite impressed with its capabilities and overall looks.

And there's a whole lot of other planes out there which I quite like...those top two really stand out though.

 

[Turbinator]

The F-16, hands down.

Those curves, that bubble cockpit, the small and nimble size, the location and the shape of the intake, and... dat ass.

 

[Izack]

From WW2 era, I like the Horten Ho-IX (aka Go-229) most - although only one prototype flew under jet power. Among piston engine planes, the P38 and Do 335 are my preferred ones.

Nice to see I'm not the only one who remembers the Do-335. It's one of my favourites.

Also up there are the Bf.110, Fw 190 Dora, J7W Shinden, F6F Hellcat, La-5/7, and for some reason the SS.37 Gladiator.

But overall, this just has to be my favourite design:

 

[SiberianTiger]

The Yak-38 was another VTOL attempt... Too bad the ejection system was buggy (often triggered without warning, see the end of the video) !

I don't know details of the accident, but action of the ejection system might be necessary. Maybe it was an engine or control system failure whose effect we could not immediately see on the vid.

 

[Urwumpe]

I don't know details of the accident, but action of the ejection system might be necessary. Maybe it was an engine or control system failure whose effect we could not immediately see on the vid.

Not really surprising, this looks complex:

 

[SiberianTiger]

Not really surprising, this looks complex:

The prototype, Yak-36, had an additional steering nozzle extended on a long pole protruding from front end:

 

[Notebook]

Spoilt for choice, but this is one of my favourites:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saunders-Roe_SR.A/1

This gets a favourable mention...

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2Y_Sea_Dart"]Convair F2Y Sea Dart - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

N.

 

[Sky Captain]

You can't beat the Su37 when it comes to extreme stunts

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWN3-s9ACpw&feature=related"]YouTube - Russian SU-37 Manuevers[/ame]

 

[N_Molson]

I don't know details of the accident, but action of the ejection system might be necessary. Maybe it was an engine or control system failure whose effect we could not immediately see on the vid.

The "problem" is that the ejection system was automatic when the aircraft was in the "hover" phase of the flight. It seems it was especially "sensitive" during the transition phases.

Now maybe it's another problem on the video, of course (I'd say that the forward thrusters have failed, seeing how the plane is spinning after the ejection).

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_488.shtml

Designed in conjunction with Yakovlev, the SK-EM (Sistema Katapultirovaniya Ekstremalnaya, extreme ejection initiation system), which had earlier been evaluated in the Yak-36, was engaged when the aircraft left the deck and was engineered to automatically eject the pilot on his ‘zero-zero’ seat on the failure of any one of the three engines. In addition, the SK-EM monitored parameters relating to aircraft attitude and rate of descent; any combination of dangerous factors resulted in an automatic pilot ejection. The system disengaged as the main engine nozzles rotated for horizontal flight, or it could be deactivated manually. In case of an emergency at sea, the pilot’s seat was ejected towards the port side, avoiding the possibility of a collision with the ship’s starboard-side superstructure. On at least one occasion the SK-EM functioned unexpectedly, ejecting a Yak-36M pilot through the cockpit canopy while transitioning to normal level flight; another Yak-36M accident resulted in injury to the pilot as a result of the SK-EM having been disengaged during the landing phase.

 

[mc_]

I-185... If only Policarpow could finish it, he could defeat Willy Messerschmitt and become a new "king of WW2 fighters".

 

[Urwumpe]

if what-if designs are also permitted, what about this one?

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Heinkel_Lerche

 

[Voyager]

Hmm... Mostly WWII fighters. Supermarine Spitfire, P-51, P-38, P-47, F6F, F-4, F-86, SBD, TBF, B-17, B-29. (Note: Bombers were used as fighters in some cases)

 

[Pilot7893]

The F-16, hands down.

Those curves, that bubble cockpit, the small and nimble size, the location and the shape of the intake, and... dat ass.

Could not have said it better myself. God, I love the Falcon.

 

[TMac3000]

F-20 ( I don't think you said in production. . .)

Out of production is okay. Too bad the YF-12 didn't see service: a U.S. Mach 3 interceptor would have been bad-ass.

 

[Mantis]

ALMOST all were destroyed (RL-206 ).

Sadly it's just the nose section and cockpit that's left of 206. It's in the National Aviation Museum in Ottawa.

 

[yagni01]

Why? You only need the enemy to draw numbers and be punctual on the appointments, because once you missed him, you need to fly a long turn until you are back...

Ya, and while you're turning back, the bad guys are all over your buddies. If I was in a brawl and someone came through swinging on the chandelier scattering some, and didn't come back for half an hour, I wouldn't say he was 'fighting'. I'm defining fighter as something that can stay in the furball. But we can expand that to include interceptors.

 

[Linguofreak]

Well, I've always liked the P-38, and the F-14 is somewhat of a favorite of mine as well, though I'm a bit frustrated by how hard it seems to be to find a well-put-together model of it for X-Plane. Nothing I can find seems to behave in approach configuration like the numbers I've found for the real thing seem to suggest. (Maintaining the proper AOA and airspeed on a carrier approach is pretty much impossible, and flyability with flaps deployed seems to be compromised by a tendency for the horizontal stabilizer to stall with stick-back input, making it very difficult to adjust the nose upward if it is needed).

I've also been fiddling around with some Soviet fighters in X-Plane recently. I've quite taken to the MiG-21 and 23.

 

[Urwumpe]

Ya, and while you're turning back, the bad guys are all over your buddies. If I was in a brawl and someone came through swinging on the chandelier scattering some, and didn't come back for half an hour, I wouldn't say he was 'fighting'. I'm defining fighter as something that can stay in the furball. But we can expand that to include interceptors.

LOL, we already had done such jokes on somebody in my BattleTech chapter... his assigned Mech rarely hit anything, but also rarely got damaged, so we said that he did not fight, he merely took part in the battle. :lol: (Of course, he was moving around and scaring the enemy from our position, but the enemy didn't really dare shooting at him).

I think it was an Archer mech, but I am not sure, but if it was an Archer, such puns are sure better than the classic parking meter jokes for Archers (since they usually just choose a good place on the map, ideally with some forest and then camp there until they run out of ammo. And then, being in a forest has an huge advantage for the afterlife - the life after ammo ran out.)