Search the archive:
 YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
  Simviation Forum › Real World › Real Aviation › Why?
(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
Why? (Read 809 times)
Feb 2nd, 2005 at 8:42pm

Mobius   Offline
Colonel
Highest Point in the Lightning
Storm
Wisconsin

Posts: 4369
 *****
 
Does anyone know why some attack aircraft have the identifyer /A and others don't.  e.g.  F/A-18, F/A-22 as opposed to F-16, F-15E.  Is it because the F-16, F-15, and others were originally designed as A2A fighters only and not strike aircraft.   ???

Thanks

...Yarrrr!                                                                                                                       ...
 
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - Feb 2nd, 2005 at 8:50pm

jimclarke   Offline
Colonel
So many add-ons....so
little time.....
Arizona

Gender: male
 Posts: 636
 *****
 
I believe you are correct.  The F-15 and F-16 were designed as ATA and later adapted for ATG.

Jim
 
No God? Know God!
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - Feb 2nd, 2005 at 9:33pm

beefhole   Offline
Colonel
common' yigs!
Philadelphia

Gender: male
 Posts: 4466
 *****
 
Yup.

The "F" stands for fighter, and the "A" stands for attack.

For example, the F-16 was never meant as ATG strike aircraft, same with the F-15. The F/A-18 was designed with a dual role in mind, and yes lassies, I do think this is the best fighter aircraft currently available (will you brits stop it with the tornadoes Grin)

Just a quick question to pose: Am I the only one that FREAKS when I see the Hornet labeled as the F-18 (it's F/A)? I go completely ape**** when I see that. Please tell me someone else does... I feel so alone...
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - Feb 2nd, 2005 at 9:47pm

Nexus   Offline
Colonel
The greater of two evils...

Gender: male
 Posts: 3282
 *****
 
10 bucks to the guy who can solve the swedish acrynom in JAS-39 Gripen (Griffon)  Wink
-------------------
Time's up!

J= Intercept
A=Attack
S= Recon

And yes, it can even land on carriers, if needed  Grin
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - Feb 2nd, 2005 at 10:01pm

Mobius   Offline
Colonel
Highest Point in the Lightning
Storm
Wisconsin

Posts: 4369
 *****
 
But why, for example did they not change it to F/A-16 or something, they changed the F/A-22 from F-22 a few years ago years after the started testing it.  It too was slated to be only a figher and not an attack aircraft but they changed the name when they changed the role.  Did the F/A-18 start out development as just the F-18 or as the F/A-18? ???
 
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 3:51am

SilverFox441   Offline
Colonel
Now What?
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada

Gender: male
 Posts: 1467
 *****
 
Strangely, the F/A-18 started development as the YF-17.

Just had to throw that wrench into the works. Smiley
 
Steve (Silver Fox) Daly
&&
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 3:55am

Ivan   Offline
Colonel
No, I'm NOT Russian, I
only like Russian aircraft
The netherlands

Gender: male
 Posts: 6058
 *****
 
there was a F/A-16 once... but the GAU-8 cannon damged the airframe and the speed wasn't suited for tankbusting
 
Russian planes: IL-76 (all standard length ones),  Tu-154 and Il-62, Tu-134 and An-24RV&&&&AI flightplans and repaints can be found here
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #7 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 5:34pm

Woodlouse2002   Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender: male
 Posts: 12574
 *****
 
I don't see anything special about F18's. Any Tornado would give it a whooping and time. Grin
 
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #8 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 5:47pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Quote:
I don't see anything special about F18's. Any Tornado would give it a whooping and time. Grin



Grin, particularly at low level...

I think the we are very goog on this side of the pond. For example we've had...

FR
FGA
FGR
GR
GA
F
FA
FRS

and thats just on fighters...

Charlie Smiley
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #9 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 5:50pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Quote:
(will you brits stop it with the tornadoes Grin)


The Tonka is a rubbish fighter, but a reasonable interceptor, that can outrun anything at low level (I think that would mean it could catch anything at LL too...), and is crewed by arguably the best trained crews in the world (we do have the oldest military flying training system in the world), who are used to fighting with technically inferior equipment... Smiley
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #10 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 5:56pm

Woodlouse2002   Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender: male
 Posts: 12574
 *****
 
Quote:
The Tonka is a rubbish fighter, but a reasonable interceptor, that can outrun anything at low level (I think that would mean it could catch anything at LL too...), and is crewed by arguably the best trained crews in the world (we do have the oldest military flying training system in the world), who are used to fighting with technically inferior equipment... Smiley

Oh I dunno. Some of the stuff we were making in the 60's still doesn't have anything that can really match it. Lightning, Buccaneer, Vulcan, Harrier etc. All of which could trounce the F18. Grin
 
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #11 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 5:59pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Quote:
All of which could trounce the F18. Grin


That's because the '18 is so blimmin' slow... Grin
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #12 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 6:09pm

Woodlouse2002   Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender: male
 Posts: 12574
 *****
 
I've always wondered why Yanks are harping on about the F22's super cruise as if it's something new in jet fighters... Tongue Grin
 
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #13 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 6:38pm

Craig.   Offline
Colonel
Birmingham

Gender: male
 Posts: 18590
 *****
 
you two really like stirring the pot dont you:)
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #14 - Feb 3rd, 2005 at 10:11pm

beefhole   Offline
Colonel
common' yigs!
Philadelphia

Gender: male
 Posts: 4466
 *****
 
Quote:
Oh I dunno. Some of the stuff we were making in the 60's still doesn't have anything that can really match it. Lightning, Buccaneer, Vulcan, Harrier etc. All of which could trounce the F18. Grin

Half of which we are proud owners (Vulcan, harrier). I've never heard of a brit hornet though, has anyone ever heard of one?
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #15 - Feb 4th, 2005 at 12:23am

SilverFox441   Offline
Colonel
Now What?
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada

Gender: male
 Posts: 1467
 *****
 
One '18 drops the Bucc, Lightning, Vulcan and Harrier with BVR AMRAAM shots and then switches to A/G to crater the runway. Smiley

The old "Speed is Life" design theory is gone...the Hornet doesn't need to go fast to do what it does. What matters now is the ability to point your nose on target.

Nothing does that better than a Hornet...at least nothing that doesn't have vectored thrust.
 
Steve (Silver Fox) Daly
&&
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #16 - Feb 4th, 2005 at 1:16am

Mobius   Offline
Colonel
Highest Point in the Lightning
Storm
Wisconsin

Posts: 4369
 *****
 
Second Smiley

Well F-15E maybe, but that's a whole different discussion...
 
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #17 - Feb 4th, 2005 at 5:18am

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Quote:
One '18 drops the Bucc, Lightning, Vulcan and Harrier with BVR AMRAAM shots and then switches to A/G to crater the runway. Smiley


Thats cause they're all in museums... Wink ok, except the Harrier, which will probably be at the Brit version of low level which could cause a problem... Smiley

Quote:
The old "Speed is Life" design theory is gone...the Hornet doesn't need to go fast to do what it does. What matters now is the ability to point your nose on target.


Which in a BVR fight means you don't need to be all that manourvable... Wink

Quote:
Nothing does that better than a Hornet...at least nothing that doesn't have vectored thrust.


I'll have an F-15E please.... or a Typhoon...
Grin
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #18 - Feb 5th, 2005 at 5:36pm

Ivan   Offline
Colonel
No, I'm NOT Russian, I
only like Russian aircraft
The netherlands

Gender: male
 Posts: 6058
 *****
 
Su-30MKI (early batch, pre mod whitout TVC) does better compared to the F/A-18.

But as they are being upgraded to Su-30MKI standard (as they wanted it, with TVC, because Lyuka was still testing the TVC engines when the first ones were delivered) they probably don't count
 
Russian planes: IL-76 (all standard length ones),  Tu-154 and Il-62, Tu-134 and An-24RV&&&&AI flightplans and repaints can be found here
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #19 - Feb 5th, 2005 at 9:46pm

beefhole   Offline
Colonel
common' yigs!
Philadelphia

Gender: male
 Posts: 4466
 *****
 
Whether or not (YOU PEOPLE think) this or that individual aircraft would do better against the F/A-18 (which I still stress it's the best fighter available), I would like to extend a reminder as to who would have air superiority in any war ever Grin Grin

And I'm just messin around (although it's true), let's not take offense Roll Eyes

And the brits can share the air superiority if they really wanna Tongue
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #20 - Feb 6th, 2005 at 3:29am

Ivan   Offline
Colonel
No, I'm NOT Russian, I
only like Russian aircraft
The netherlands

Gender: male
 Posts: 6058
 *****
 
I think you would be surprised...

While iraq didn't have that much to throw at you uality wise, India and China are a different story (as is Iran), Changing to a commercial business model doesn't allow you to give the customer second-best quality...

Let's list some of the aqircraft in sevice there and compare these to the F/A-18

Iran
  • F-14A with upgraded radar, Air-Ground capabilities and glass cockpit. Even with 25 of these around, the US tends to hate these so much that they shot down a passenger liner in confusion...
  • MiG-29, some 1990's export spec and some new. Your usual average MiG-29
  • Su-27, mostly new. No TVC, but modern missiles
  • F-5 and it's modified versions. A few stealth versions hanging around lately
  • MiG-21 or the chinese version of it, with new missiles


China (only the well known ones)
  • MiG-21, export and own produced, with a lot of upgrades
  • MiG-29, early export, late export and own production
  • Su-27, late export and own produced
  • J-10, own produced ef2000 lookalike
  • MiG-25
  • MiG-31


India
  • Su-27, late export
  • MiG-25, early and late export
  • Su-30MKI, late export with and without TVC


Of these, China and India will kick your ass in air superiority and don't underestimate the S300 SAM (which all of them have)
 
Russian planes: IL-76 (all standard length ones),  Tu-154 and Il-62, Tu-134 and An-24RV&&&&AI flightplans and repaints can be found here
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #21 - Feb 6th, 2005 at 8:43pm

beefhole   Offline
Colonel
common' yigs!
Philadelphia

Gender: male
 Posts: 4466
 *****
 
LOL. I'll stop at reminding you air superiority isn't all about the aircraft, friend Grin.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #22 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 6:00am

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Quote:
LOL. I'll stop at reminding you air superiority isn't all about the aircraft, friend Grin.


Seconded... Smiley
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #23 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 1:54pm

Woodlouse2002   Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender: male
 Posts: 12574
 *****
 
So what is air superiority about if not having more, better aircraft than your opponent with which to wipe the skies clear?
 
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #24 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 2:47pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Air superiority is just a state of affairs - ie, better than a Favourable Air Situation (where enemy air effort can hinder, but not prohibit, friendly land, sea or air ops), but not as good as Air Supremacy (the situation where the opposing force is incapable of effective interference against joint operations).

Against any nation with very large numbers of aircraft and personnel it would be very difficult to achieve anything above air superiority, unless you achieve enough success as to cause any remaining enemy aircrew to think better of the idea of resistance, or you destroy their capabilities completely on the ground...

Charlie
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #25 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 3:14pm

beefhole   Offline
Colonel
common' yigs!
Philadelphia

Gender: male
 Posts: 4466
 *****
 
Aye exactly-I'm gonna list all the factors I can think of

1)AA units! They count too!
2)Numbers are great, but I'll take one advanced fighter against two middle-aged soviets any day (don't know about 1:3 odds though)
3)Ability to get those fighters in the air
4) Mobility (carriers)
5)Intel (when it counts, yes, it is reliable-assuming it's a wedding party we're trying to blow up Tongue)
6) Technology (The ALQ-something, supposed to be super-effective against AA missiles-guess who has it?)
7)Personnel (best programs are generally run by US-friendly countires, UK, France, Germany, etc.)
8 ) Ground forces! They help too, you can't capture airfields from the cockpit.

I had more, can't think of them now...

The only countries we would ever face a serious (I mean like, serious, of course the other countries would be trouble) are ones that simply have massive armies and amounts of aircraft, which eliminates Iran-for some odd reason i doubt we'll be getting into a fight with India, which leaves just China. Whew, would that be interesting.
« Last Edit: Feb 7th, 2005 at 4:33pm by beefhole »  
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #26 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 4:07pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Command and Control's the biggie...

Quote:
1)AA units! They count too!


If you meant AAA, then the defence really is to avoid them, or take the risk...


Quote:
2)Numbers are great, but I'll take one advanced fighter against two middle-aged soviets any day (don't know about 1:3 odds though)


This ratio could probably be higher. When the four ship of middle aged Eastern Bloc fighters see's their leader blown away by a BVRAAM from F-22 or Typhoon, it quite possible the other three may well just bugger off somewhere else - if they haven't suffered the same fate...

Quote:
3)Ability to get those fighters in the air


Probably not a problem for a large industrial nation...

Quote:
4) Mobility (carriers)


The US win that one. Of course the British would do though if we had more than 2 carriers in service at a time... Wink

Quote:
5)Intel (when it counts, yes, it is reliable-assuming it's a wedding party we're trying to blow up Tongue)


The US COS has made it well known that he wants the time between detection and desruction to be a single figure number - Satellites and UAVs rule the roost...

Quote:
6) Technology (The ALQ-something, supposed to be super-effective against AA missiles-guess who has it?)


You're thinking of the various jamming equipment/decoys used to disrupt radar guided missiles. Of course we still use the most rudimentary technology for this too, chaff and flares (for IR missiles). DIRCM is a bit more exciting though...

Quote:
7)Personnel (best programs are generally run by US-friendly countires, UK, France, Germany, etc.)


Does that include the US Wink Grin Smiley

Charlie
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #27 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 4:33pm

beefhole   Offline
Colonel
common' yigs!
Philadelphia

Gender: male
 Posts: 4466
 *****
 
Lol I was considering adding in a "and of course the US too", but didn't. Yea, that's what I meant.

And I just realized that I said "one advanced fighter against two middle-aged soviets". I'm talking about middle-aged soviet FIGHTERS, not people. My b Roll Eyes
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #28 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 4:43pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Quote:
And I just realized that I said "one advanced fighter against two middle-aged soviets". I'm talking about middle-aged soviet FIGHTERS, not people. My b Roll Eyes


Grin
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #29 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 5:12pm

Woodlouse2002   Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender: male
 Posts: 12574
 *****
 
Of course, AAA can be left blind once a Buccaneer with a laser designator and a Tornado with radar seeking missiles have done what the RAF does best....
 
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #30 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 5:14pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Quote:
Of course, AAA can be left blind once a Buccaneer with a laser designator and a Tornado with radar seeking missiles have done what the RAF does best....


Of course the Tonka's do it all by themselves nowadays... Wink
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #31 - Feb 7th, 2005 at 5:28pm

Woodlouse2002   Offline
Colonel
I like jam.
Cornwall, England

Gender: male
 Posts: 12574
 *****
 
Quote:
Of course the Tonka's do it all by themselves nowadays... Wink

Ah well, I still think the Tonka/Buc combo is a beautiful way to carry it out.
 
Woodlouse2002 PITA and BAR!!!!!!!!&&&&Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King.&&&&Viva la revolution!
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
  « Home ‹ Board Top of this page

Simviation Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge