F-4 in service

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by Bob McDob
As far as I know, Israel is considered No. 1 in Air Force, and Antarctica No. 0 with no Air Force. :D It's a safe bet the US's somewhere in between. :)
Click to expand...
Man for man, Israel has the best ground soldiers in the world. I think few would argue that. However, in terms of pilots, I truly believe (fighting back any national bias) that the U.S. man-for-man -- or pilot-for-pilot -- is at least equal, if not better than, anyone else in the world. Through Top Gun and the like into the equation, and it becomes a no-brainer.
 
Hi,

Israel probably have the most air to air combat experience. The problem for them is that most of the people they face do not train as well as they do, so overconfidence may become a problem.

America has some of the best aerial equipment in the world and fairly decent training (but very good training for a few).

However, even with fairly useless air to air capable aircraft, I would have to go with the British RAF. They are well trained and occasionally very inovative in tactics.

Personally, for best trainer, I would go with the Hawk. Having been in one, I may be a little biased.

Cheers
 
The Tornado F3 is hardly useless. It's a capable BVR interceptor, and its VG design make it, while hardly in the F-16/MiG-29 class, a good dogfighter in the hands of a skilled pilot.

Best, Raptor
 
In fact, I would daresay that the Tornado is higher up on the food chain than the Phantom, considering that the Tornado is rather newer than the F-4.

Israelis do tend to be highly rated combat soldiers, considering that they lived surrounded by countries who had sworn to destroy them, but I don't know that they are necessarily the best in the world. From what I have heard, they tend to be prima donnas who are used to winning all the time. After all, when is the last time the Israeli army fought anybody more advanced than Palestinian snipers? Of course, I'm presently joining the USMC, so I probably have some bias as to who has the best combat troops in the world.:D
 
one day without checking and the threat changed subject :)

back to ghost, yeah the tucano is turbo-helice
which is why I mentioned its for basic training, while the pampa (jet) is for advanced training

on the top 5 list part
First, the listing was related to pilot training and abilities. The USA may have the best equipment, but that doesnt mean they have the best pilots
the same way, small countries doesnt mean they have the best pilots
far from that, some countries dont even have an air force that has airplanes (or even armed forces, like Costa Rica)

An airforce can be considered worse for its equipment or better for its experience. the importance here on that top 20 (I think) was average pilot skills

Israeli force was in it, for sure, but I really dont remember. I believe among the top 5

it actually talked of how the American AirForce and Israeli would be considered top because of equipment, number and experience, but the matter was skill and training
in general, American pilots "take it easy" for the higher technology and avaliability of craft and equipment that is easier to use and/or maintain, which is also a factor in how skilled a country´s pilots are

Btw, brazil, though a peaceful 3rd world country, has seen its share of combat in the past, being one of the most active allied airforces during WW2 in Italy and also operating in other parts of europe
Out of this, mentions go to the "esquadrilha da fumaça" (or Smoke Squadron) its the brazilian stunt squadron, think Blue Angels
They are amazing and can do a lot of shit in a Tucano
 
Again I question your rankings... Firstly compare the number of Topgun and Redflag graduates compared to the number of pilots in other nation's airforces. It would be quite a good percentage (perhaps with GB excluded) But back to my point... Americans have the best training, equipment, selection of pilots, fuel and money to train... you can see my point. Americans hands down.
 
Originally posted by Kalfor
First, the listing was related to pilot training and abilities.
Click to expand...
I think those of us involved in the thread are aware of that. I know I am.

Originally posted by Kalfor
The USA may have the best equipment, but that doesnt mean they have the best pilots
Click to expand...
A direct relation, no. But I don't think that's what anyone is saying. Again, I know I'm not.

Originally posted by Kalfor
it actually talked of how the American AirForce and Israeli would be considered top because of equipment, number and experience, but the matter was skill and training
Click to expand...
Where, I still would maintain, the US remains at or near the top. Equipment notwithstanding, American combat pilots are among the most highly trained military personnel in the world. Equipment and technology may facilitate matters, but it's no replacement for a skilled aerial soldier. Given equal equipment, I'd take an American pilot -- particularly a Top Gun grad -- over anyone in the world, and come out on top the vast majority of the time.

Originally posted by Kalfor
in general, American pilots "take it easy" for the higher technology and avaliability of craft and equipment that is easier to use and/or maintain, which is also a factor in how skilled a country´s pilots are
Click to expand...
This is just complete nonsense.
 
I served as a USAF PJ (Pararescue Specialist) for 6 years. We cross-trained with the SAS, and trained Israel's pararescue equivelant.

Israel's soldiers are well trained, disiplined, and experienced. But U.S. pilots are the BEST. Anybody who says american pilots take it easy is completely insane. How many american fighter pilots are there? Out of a country who's population numbers around 300 million, this is a VERY small amount of people. American pilots have to be serious, well-trained, and in better shape than any other pilots in the world, because there is always someone who wants to take their place. With lowering military budgets, this is made more important.

With such a huge investment in pilots, you can see why the PJ's job is so important.

p.s. PJ graduation excercises blow the USMC crucible away.
 
Hi Raptor,

The Tornado F3 was ok in it`s day (when the likely threat would be Mig 21s,23s or25s) but even in the mid nineties, the aircraft it might face would in theory be more agile in a dogfight, and carry longer range missiles for BVR. Given the RAF`s small size compared to the usual threat that they originally trained for, they would also probably be outnumbered.

The Tornado ADV was set up to be more of a interceptor than a fighter. One scheme they mentioned in the late eighties was, in case of war, assign between six and eight Hawk trainers with AIM9 sidewinders to each Tornado F3 and use the Tornado as a combined AWACS/Long range missile platform.

All the above said though, at low level, the Tornado is a lethal aircraft (because of the original low level attack design) but I still wish the UK had bought the Tomcat when they were thinking about it.

Cheers
 
first, You cant compare graduate numbers in a special pilot course. Many countries dont even have the money to invest in such trainings, at least not in large quantity.

I was discussing with my grandfather (retired Airforce LtCol) and my boss (retired Colonel, pilot) recently on those things. USA´s armed forces have airplanes (and so pilots) in all its branches. That in itself obviously raises the chances of having better pilots
the same way, as someone mentioned before, a smaller country with a smaller force would only accept the best pilots (which is not so true in all cases)

Connecting this to the second point
When I said american pilots "take it easy", you guys twisted it. See the ""? that means I dont mean exactly and completelly that.
Any armed force´s life is harder than a civilian one

What I ment is, with the best equipment, pilots need less effort to do somethings, compared to countries with less technology. The same way, those pilots have to deal with malfuctions, lack of material/replacement parts, ordenance and others less often that, for example, 3rd world countries

Also, the terrain itself, the cenario in which those pilots are presented, having less resources and technology, bring in another factor that leds pilots (and brass) to invest on new tactics and strategies

the usa, for example, as several fire and forget ordenance, stealth aircraft, even cruise missiles that in a way apply (since it takes part of what a pilot would need to do). They also have a lot more resources, as that ordenance and ammo is not limited by a country´s low budget or economy. They can rely on them

Before any comment on that, I dont mean american pilots are idiots who press a button and go home without doing anything, but in a majority of the situations, they dont even need to worry much about skill, as the computer does most of the job until things get close (if they even do)

I wont even go into the point of "america has to be like this cause there is always someone trying to take its place" cause thats the kind of discussion I dont want to get into cause some people are just impossible to discuss and that subject have already ended in heated discussions and flames many times before
 
Frostycos1 I would not be to concern about topgun training
the United states Air Force pilots today grew up on video games they been training for this since they were knee high to a grashopper
 
Kalfor, with that statement you just proved you have NO idea what it takes to be an American pilot in our armed forces. To be a pilot you have to be hot crap when it comes to many things. Not only that, our pilots in the airforce are ALL required to have 4 year degrees at accredited universities. Furthermore a VERY LOW percentage of these candidates who apply even make selection into flight school. Even fewer of them make it into fighter slots. Also, our pilots are trained quite extensively in the use of the vulcan cannon that uses very little computer assistance. In conclusion America has the best of the best.


PS-In the end doesnt it come down to what pilots can get the job done and come home?
 
In the event of war though I think that extensive training schemes would go out the window and it would be as many pilots trained in the least amount of time possible, I'm not just saying that about america, it would be the same in any country
 
Newer combat jets are projected to require every time less exceptional skills to be flown
aircrafts like the F16, for example, has fly-by-wire flight command. the pilot doesnt spin down out of control (dont know how you call it in english) cause the computer doesnt allow it. Much less stall, cause there are limiters linked to the FMS. If the pilot forgets the flap, the computer warns him, if he is flying the landing strip too low, the aircraft tells him. If he is too fast on landing approach he is alerted and he can land using his HUD and attack angle

thats my point on higher technology and resources making pilots need less skills
 
Originally posted by icetiger
Again I question your rankings... Firstly compare the number of Topgun and Redflag graduates compared to the number of pilots in other nation's airforces. It would be quite a good percentage (perhaps with GB excluded) But back to my point... Americans have the best training, equipment, selection of pilots, fuel and money to train... you can see my point. Americans hands down.
Click to expand...

Wrong, french pilots aren't bad, you can see the RedFlag... Unfortunately, we don't have as many bucks as the USAF, but I really think we have the best training (swiss pilots are good too...)

And forget the Blue Angels - Come in France, and see the PAF (Patrouille de France)... lol
 
Originally posted by Kalfor

thats my point on higher technology and resources making pilots need less skills
Click to expand...

Of course, but u know, I'll have next May the capacity to enter the french Air force academy (we have to study hard here to enter it - this is one of the most prestigious school in the country)... unfortunately, my eyes aren't perfect, and I know I will never fly... pilots need all the skills they needed 10 or 20 years ago... because higher technology means expensive planes...
 
Still, budget and resources show the difference on number of pilots

USA has more F15Cs than Brazil has fighters
they actually have around 1100 F15s from A to F
Imagine how many fighters they have in total

Its pretty hard to join the academy here too. I know a few cadets and ex-pilots (like my grandfather and one of the managers in the company I work for). I wanted to be a pilot too, butI have the same problem you had (not to mention the marines wanted me when I enlisted)

BTW, back to the initial F4 discussion, here is an answer
The Luftwaffe used F4Fs
They have 147 (till jan 2000 at least)
they are to be replaced begining next year by the Typhoon (Eurofighter)
 
Originally posted by Kalfor
Newer combat jets are projected to require every time less exceptional skills to be flown
aircrafts like the F16, for example, has fly-by-wire flight command. the pilot doesnt spin down out of control (dont know how you call it in english) cause the computer doesnt allow it. Much less stall, cause there are limiters linked to the FMS. If the pilot forgets the flap, the computer warns him, if he is flying the landing strip too low, the aircraft tells him. If he is too fast on landing approach he is alerted and he can land using his HUD and attack angle

thats my point on higher technology and resources making pilots need less skills
Click to expand...

Without Fly-by-Wire, jets like the F16 and f117 would be practically unflyable
 
Without Fly-by-Wire, jets like the F16 and f117 would be practically unflyable
Click to expand...

So?
What Im talking about is how high tech makes the average pilot less skilled compared to those from countries that dont have that to rely on

something like 2000 of USA´s fighter aircraft has such system
thats quite a lot, in case you are not aware

replace those fly-by-wire aircraft by ones without it and you will notice how they will have a hard time fighting pilots from other countries in similar aircrafts
 
sorry but that is BS, because for instance the F-16 and the F-22 are significantly more manuverable than any non-fly-by-wire craft because they are inherantly unstable and the fly be wire allows them to normally have some stability, but a controled amount of instability which is what manuberability is. As such they can fly circles around other aircraft and are therefore superior craft.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top