F-4 Phantom vs F-22 Raptor

[nickbrown360]

Me and my friend were arguning about what would win in a dog fight a F4 Phantom or an F-22 Raptor. What do you think and why?

[Legacy]

true boredom being displayed.

[THEICEMAN]

true boredom being displayed.

Agreed!

But, really what a stupid question! The F-22 hands down (given you have a pilot with equal abaility)

The F-22 just outperforms the F-4 in every way.

[Doc]

But the F4 is just so HOT!!!

[Rockie]

true boredom being displayed.

Agreed!

But, really what a stupid question! The F-22 hands down (given you have a pilot with equal abaility)

The F-22 just outperforms the F-4 in every way.

Forget the equal ability, even a brain dead F22 pilot (if there is such a thing) can badly embarrass the most capable F4 driver. Sometimes ability just can't overcome equipment deficiencies and this is one of them. I agree with Doc though, I just love the F4. It makes the Raptor look like a meterosexual wussy.

[Hedley]

Interesting thing to remember is that the F-4 was designed
without an internal cannon - it has no "gun" which meant
that at less than the minimum distances of the missles,
it was harmless (terrible pun - sorry).

From the wiki:

The F-4's biggest weakness, as it was initially designed, was its lack of an internal cannon. For a brief period, doctrine held that turning combat would be impossible at supersonic speeds and little effort was made to teach pilots air combat maneuvering. In reality, engagements quickly became subsonic. Furthermore, the relatively new heat-seeking and radar-guided missiles at the time were frequently reported as unreliable and pilots had to use multiple shots just to hit one target. To compound the problem, rules of engagement in Vietnam precluded long-range missile attacks in most instances, as visual identification was normally required. Many pilots found themselves on the tail of an enemy aircraft but too close to fire short-range Falcons or Sidewinders. Although in 1967 USAF F-4Cs began carrying SUU-16 or SUU-23 external gunpods containing a 20-millimeter M61 Vulcan Gatling cannon, USAF cockpits were not equipped with lead-computing gunsights, virtually assuring a miss in a maneuvering fight.

Coincidentally, the F-22 does have a gun (M61A2) and I am sure
it has a fancy pipper.

[Rockie]

The F4E had an internal gun (M61) and was the most numerous version produced. I don't know how capable the gunsight was though. In modern fighters it is a death dot. With a radar lock the computers calculate a firing solution taking into account all kinds of things: airspeed, attitude, G loading, distance, relative motion, time of flight of the bullet etc, so that you could put the pipper on the guy's helmet and pull the trigger. As long as he didn't change anything during the time the round is travelling it will hit him in the head. Now spray out 100 rounds a second and your chances of a hit are pretty good as long as he's in your sights.

[sigmet77]

What? This isn't even a good troll and it still work. But since I am typing...the F22 on autopilot will blow the F4 and a bunch of its buddies to pieces, which would be sad because the F4 is a cool jet.

[Tubthumper]

Yeah, bad trolling. However, if the F22 just came out of the latest Red Flag excercises with a 36 to 1 kill ratio (....yes, count it), dealing with F-15s, 16s, 18s and all the other cool toys that show up.... well, you do the math. No contest. The F22 has more power in ONE engine (35,000 lbs per sq inch) that the F4 did with both engines (only about 16000 lbs ea). If any one thinks I'm making it up, I'll reveal my sources L8r.

[Scuba_Steve]

F-4 wins for sexyness...

Yeah its soo ugly it looks good..I love the F4

[Youngback]

The only way the Phantom could possibly win is if we were talking about real dogs here and they happened to be named Phantom and Raptor.

[hazatude]

I would beat both flying a Piper Tomahawk equipped with a S&W Model 28 Highway Patrolman. I could get a lucky shot...

[costermonger]

In the grand scheme of hypothetical dogfights, this isn't a fair match.

[THEICEMAN]

In the grand scheme of hypothetical dogfights, this isn't a fair match.

Unless your THEICEMAN

[sky's the limit]

Ok,

I'm sitting in an internet cafe on the Chinese boarder with Vietnam, a VERY cool place may I add, and two Mig 21's went screetching over my head this afternoon..... They win, hands down... Very sexy.

Pretty crazy, being in a villiage where there are very few, if any white folks coming through, and having the fastest internet I've ever seen..! The "road" to get here was 150km of what would pass for less than a logging road in Canada, what a world.

stl

[sigmet77]

STL, how's the dog? Oh-oh, maybe that crossed the line. But seriously, find out the IP and send me their link:) Probably better than the cable Videotron has hooked up to my house.

[splitpin]

Yeah, bad trolling. The F22 has more power in ONE engine (35,000 lbs per sq inch)

Pounds per square inch????? Jeez!!

Thrust Basics
The goal of a turbofan engine is to produce thrust to drive the airplane forward. Thrust is generally measured in pounds in the United States (the metric system uses Newtons, where 4.45 Newtons equals 1 pound of thrust). A "pound of thrust" is equal to a force able to accelerate 1 pound of material 32 feet per second per second (32 feet per second per second happens to be equivalent to the acceleration provided by gravity). Therefore, if you have a jet engine capable of producing 1 pound of thrust, it could hold 1 pound of material suspended in the air if the jet were pointed straight down. Likewise, a jet engine producing 5,000 pounds of thrust could hold 5,000 pounds of material suspended in the air. And if a rocket engine produced 5,000 pounds of thrust applied to a 5,000-pound object floating in space, the 5,000-pound object would accelerate at a rate of 32 feet per second per second.
Thrust is generated under Newton's principle that "every action has an equal and opposite reaction." For example, imagine that you are floating in space and you weigh 100 pounds on Earth. In your hand you have a baseball that weighs 1 pound on Earth. If you throw the baseball away from you at a speed of 32 feet per second (21 mph / 34 kph), your body will move in the opposite direction (it will react) at a speed of 0.32 feet per second. If you were to continuously throw baseballs in that way at a rate of one per second, your baseballs would be generating 1 pound of continuous thrust. Keep in mind that to generate that 1 pound of thrust for an hour you would need to be holding 3,600 pounds of baseballs at the beginning of the hour. If you wanted to do better, the thing to do is to throw the baseballs harder. By "throwing" them (with of a gun, say) at 3,200 feet per second, you would generate 100 pounds of thrust.

[Hedley]

Does this mean that I can talk about slugs now?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slug_%28mass%29

How about the rate of change of acceleration?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerk

[Adanac]

This may be the perfect thread to post this question to all the F-4 fans out there;

I heard a rumour that when they were doing aerodynamic testing on the F-4, they happend to put the test model in backwards and without realizing it, started up the test. All of the test readings came back better than normal! So is it true that the F-4 is more aerodynamic flying backwards?

Can't wait to hear what has to be said about this.

My info came from a physics teacher at Soo College.

Cheers

Adanac

[Tubthumper]

...and think the F22 engines kick a$$ for a fighter? How 'bout the F35 engines........(gulp)..... 40,000 lbs per sq inch max, the most powerful single engine figher in history.



Btw, at best, the F4 only turned at 11 degrees/second in a horizontal turn, the Mig-17 turned at 19 degrees/second.....

[sigmet77]

Tubthumper, not only would that be the most powerful, but I am pretty sure it would launch into space on takeoff and compress the pilots body to the depth of a poster. Pounds per square inch, where did they get that engine, the Milenium Falcon? lol.

[shimmydampner]

I gotta go with STL on this one, the Russians know how to make the coolest fighters by far.

For sexiness, the SU-47: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1wXsygQTVA

For maneuverability (and still pretty damn sexy), the SU-37: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWN3-s9A ... re=related

[Guido]

I gotta go with STL on this one, the Russians know how to make the coolest fighters by far.

For sexiness, the SU-47: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1wXsygQTVA

They put the wings on... BACKWARDS!

[GilletteNorth]

TubThumper:

However, if the F22 just came out of the latest Red Flag excercises with a 36 to 1 kill ratio (....yes, count it), dealing with F-15s, 16s, 18s and all the other cool toys that show up.... well, you do the math. No contest.

Just curious, which aircraft(s) was/were the "1" that beat it in the 36:1 ratio?

[Nark]

The Superhornet has "shot" it down a few times.