Stealth from above-Cliff, I have a question.
Cliff:
If you are still there, how stealthy are these various designs if they are viewed by a radar from above rather than below or from the same altitude?
Well aware of all that. We need a 'tongue-in-cheek' smiley...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
carl
Ken: I disagree with you at my peril but I must in this case. The FJ-1 never made it into combat, only 31 were produced.
Totally true -- but it was the granddaddy of the F-86. My indirect allusion was to that fact :wry:
Quote:
The FJ-3 was a Sabre and didn't make it into service prior to the end of the war.
Also true, thus my comment that it logically should have been as good as the Saber because it was a Saber (my Wife says my humor needs work...). The FJ2 flew, IIRC in late 51 or early 52 but didn't hit the fleet until the mid-50s. The delay in getting it and the FJ3into service was due to the genealogy; the FJ1 led to sweeping wings and a Saber but the AF didn't need the beef that Carrier jets require. So they lightened it up and then had to re-toughen things up to satisfy BuAer. That took more time.
Quote:
The other straight wing jets had no chance at all against the MiG-15 which is why they were all turned into light bombers.
I know a few F9F pilots who don't totally subscribe to that but I do realize that's basically true -- even though I also added my comment on the big, slow, lumbering and very straight wing F3D shooting down one Mig (true)...:D
Quote:
The author of "Sabres over MiG Alley" stated the only thing that prevented a "wholesale slaughter" of our aircraft when the MiGs first appeared was the high experience level (WWII guys) of the F-80 and prop pilots vs. the relatively low experience level of the Soviets flying the MiGs.
Werrell may have said that but he wasn't there. He also as a 1960 AFA grad may have skewed the tale a bit. Others contend that the Soviet Pilots were, like the US pilots, a mix of WW II experienced guys and new kids. Others also mention that the AF version of Korea omits much comment on Naval and Marine aviation in country. It was extensive and effective.
Quote:
The Air Force didn't get Sabres over there quick for nothing.
Totally true -- and the quickness for technological reasons was required to offset the hard fact that, regardless of technical superiority or experience levels, we were losing too many aircraft -- and something needed to protect the B-29s which the Migs were slaughtering. That's what gave 'Mig Alley' its name as they tooled in to swat the B29s trying to do 'interdiction.' :rolleyes: Which fact really drove the AF train, not support of the grunts...
Quote:
It really was one of those times in history where a single weapon made a critical difference.
Probably. However, technical superiority has been known to be beaten by Mass, which I sort of alluded to -- the North Koreans (and USSR) had the Mig -- we had more capability to flood the zone with lesser birds and as Cliff pointed out "The big issue is numbers- only 187 F-22s is an issue if our adversaries have significant numbers of even somewhat inferior fighters." We could've trumped 'em on numbers because history also shows that if one thing doesn't get the job done, another will -- which was my point with my tongue in cheek comment that did seriously acknowledge "The Mig was better than the early available US birds, no question, ...
That comment also included the statement "...however the fairly large number of experienced USSR pilots made more difference than did the aircraft" and that was based on my recollection of public and private comments at the time. Whether it was true or not will have to remain a matter of conjecture and opinion. ;)