I was watching a "Greatest Ever" marathon on the Military Channel, and I can't believe what I just saw.
The F-18 is #4 and the F-15 doesn't even make the list! :bleeding:
http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/greatest-ever/fighterplanes.html
Muhammad Ali.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 31, 2009, 08:56:41 PM
I was watching a "Greatest Ever" marathon on the Military Channel, and I can't believe what I just saw.
The F-18 is #4 and the F-15 doesn't even make the list! :bleeding:
http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/greatest-ever/fighterplanes.html
'
And they have the F-117 in the top 10...despite the "F" designation, it's not even really a "fighter" aircraft.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on May 31, 2009, 11:54:12 PM
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on May 31, 2009, 11:21:37 PM
Muhammad Ali.
Lost 5 times.
and won like 56 times. (iirc)
Also figured out how to beat many he shouldn't have been able to. His only flaw was staying in the game too long.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on June 01, 2009, 01:13:17 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on May 31, 2009, 11:54:12 PM
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on May 31, 2009, 11:21:37 PM
Muhammad Ali.
Lost 5 times.
and won like 56 times. (iirc)
Also figured out how to beat many he shouldn't have been able to. His only flaw was staying in the game too long.
That makes him, what, an ellevefold fighter ace?
The Fokker Triplane was pwned by the Sopwith Camel
The Zero was pwned by the Wildcat and Hellcat
The MiG-21 can make a claim to greatness for it's performance in the Vietnam War, but the Arab-Israeli wars performance was pathetic
If you want to be on the "greatest ever" list for anything you really really need to be able to beat your immediate contemporary rivals.
Other.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmitglied.lycos.de%2FSTARWARS_Blueprints%2F1imperial_fighters%2Ftie_defender.jpg&hash=5ff80a471dc5e695ff8f7eaf4ebd7b991fb5861d)
Even the A-Wings were powerless against this fucker.
Quote from: Viking on June 01, 2009, 04:07:45 AM
The Fokker Triplane was pwned by the Sopwith Camel
Um, just no. The Triplane could certainly be beaten by a Camel with a better pilot, but the Triplane was a superior dogfighter. The difference was that the Camel could dive away and out of combat, and the Triplane couldn't leave combat if it was losing.
Having said that, the Camel was the superior plane, because it was an earlier design and was much better-built. The Triplane came too late in the war to affect anything, and didn't stay in service long because the D.VII was better at pretty much everything. Only a little over 300 Triplanes were even built.
QuoteThe Zero was pwned by the Wildcat and Hellcat
The Zero pwned the Wildcat. The Hellcat came much later, so was not a real "contemporary" of the Zero. It definately belongs on the list.
QuoteThe MiG-21 can make a claim to greatness for it's performance in the Vietnam War, but the Arab-Israeli wars performance was pathetic
The MiG-21 was an excellent aircraft, but never really got to show its stuff because it never fought in the numbers its design demanded. It is placed about right on the list.
QuoteIf you want to be on the "greatest ever" list for anything you really really need to be able to beat your immediate contemporary rivals.
And this is why the Zero and MiG-21 belong on the list, and the Triplane does not.
The top 10 fighters of all time should include:
P-51
Me-109
Spitfire
Me-262
MiG-21
Zero
Camel
F-14
Albatross D.III
Dassault Mirage
We can debate the ordering, of course, and there may be a couple of candidates I missed.
Irish Mickey Ward.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 31, 2009, 08:56:41 PMand the F-15 doesn't even make the list! :bleeding:
Why would it? It hasn't seen much air-to-air combat in its career, Timmay. You chemo fuckstick.
As usual do the "greatest ever" program mess up their own list, this time by including a none- fighter plane: the Lockheed F-117...
the Lockheed F-117 is totally unarmed apart from the bombs it can carry in it bomb bays... :rolleyes:
P-47 Just because the P-51 lovers are like the Tims of aviation history.
I'm still waiting for Neil to post in here that the greatest-ever fighter is, in fact, a dreadnought.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 31, 2009, 08:56:41 PM
I was watching a "Greatest Ever" marathon on the Military Channel,
There's your problem.
Quote from: Tonitrus on June 01, 2009, 07:49:07 AM
I'm still waiting for Neil to post in here that the greatest-ever fighter is, in fact, a dreadnought.
Well, I don't really have to when others are willing to do it for me. I mean, let's look at it: Range, armament, durability, aesthetics. The only things that conventional fighters have going for them are speed and climb rate.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 01, 2009, 06:04:35 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 31, 2009, 08:56:41 PMand the F-15 doesn't even make the list! :bleeding:
Why would it? It hasn't seen much air-to-air combat in its career, Timmay. You chemo fuckstick.
Then why does the F-14 belong? I think the -15 has seen more combat than it has...
Quote from: Berkut on June 01, 2009, 08:01:50 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 01, 2009, 06:04:35 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 31, 2009, 08:56:41 PMand the F-15 doesn't even make the list! :bleeding:
Why would it? It hasn't seen much air-to-air combat in its career, Timmay. You chemo fuckstick.
Then why does the F-14 belong? I think the -15 has seen more combat than it has...
Because the F-14 was actually good.
Also, Top Gun.
Quote from: PDH on June 01, 2009, 07:32:00 AM
P-47 Just because the P-51 lovers are like the Tims of aviation history.
No love for the Corsair? :(
The triplane has to be the most over-rated plane of WWI. Manfred von Richtofen made it famous and he didn't get most of his kills in it. It was awesome at climbing and diving but it was never really popular with German pilots. The Fokker D. VII was the favorite aircraft of the German pilots.
But then Rene Fonck was the best fighter pilot of WWI so why don't we talk about how great the SPAD XIII was the greatest fighter plane of all time? :frog:
Quote from: Neil on June 01, 2009, 07:59:19 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on June 01, 2009, 07:49:07 AM
I'm still waiting for Neil to post in here that the greatest-ever fighter is, in fact, a dreadnought.
Well, I don't really have to when others are willing to do it for me. I mean, let's look at it: Range, armament, durability, aesthetics. The only things that conventional fighters have going for them are speed and climb rate.
I'd definitely rate them low for range, I mean there's 30% of the planet that's completely inaccessible.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on June 01, 2009, 09:00:01 AM
Quote from: Neil on June 01, 2009, 07:59:19 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on June 01, 2009, 07:49:07 AM
I'm still waiting for Neil to post in here that the greatest-ever fighter is, in fact, a dreadnought.
Well, I don't really have to when others are willing to do it for me. I mean, let's look at it: Range, armament, durability, aesthetics. The only things that conventional fighters have going for them are speed and climb rate.
I'd definitely rate them low for range, I mean there's 30% of the planet that's completely inaccessible.
Maybe, but a full fuel tank could get them 10-12,000 km. Name a contemporary fighter with that kind of range.
Quote from: Valmy on June 01, 2009, 08:43:10 AM
The triplane has to be the most over-rated plane of WWI. Manfred von Richtofen made it famous and he didn't get most of his kills in it. It was awesome at climbing and diving but it was never really popular with German pilots. The Fokker D. VII was the favorite aircraft of the German pilots.
But then Rene Fonck was the best fighter pilot of WWI so why don't we talk about how great the SPAD XIII was the greatest fighter plane of all time? :frog:
Nobody cares about Frogs. Germans are cooler.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 01, 2009, 09:15:45 AM
Quote from: Valmy on June 01, 2009, 08:43:10 AM
The triplane has to be the most over-rated plane of WWI. Manfred von Richtofen made it famous and he didn't get most of his kills in it. It was awesome at climbing and diving but it was never really popular with German pilots. The Fokker D. VII was the favorite aircraft of the German pilots.
But then Rene Fonck was the best fighter pilot of WWI so why don't we talk about how great the SPAD XIII was the greatest fighter plane of all time? :frog:
Nobody cares about Frogs. Germans are cooler.
And this is key. The reason that Napoleonic France was so cool is the exact same reason that France in the 20th century is treated with utter contempt.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 01, 2009, 08:33:43 AM
Quote from: PDH on June 01, 2009, 07:32:00 AM
P-47 Just because the P-51 lovers are like the Tims of aviation history.
No love for the Corsair? :(
Pappy does give the Corsair a +1 to rep...
JAS Gripen would probably be the best ever in a game made by a certain Swedish company. :whistle:
Quote from: Valmy on June 01, 2009, 08:43:10 AM
But then Rene Fonck was the best fighter pilot of WWI so why don't we talk about how great the SPAD XIII was the greatest fighter plane of all time? :frog:
Because X is the best pilot, Y is the best airplane? :huh:
The Spad XIII should probably be in the running, though I think its relatively poor maneuverability might make it lose out to the Camel, despite its superior speed. OTOH, it being in service for so long has to give it an edge over aircraft like the D.VII.
Quote from: grumbler on June 01, 2009, 09:59:15 AM
Because X is the best pilot, Y is the best airplane? :huh:
I was lampooning labelling the Fokker Triplane the best of WWI simply because Richtofen flew it for 20 of his kills.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 01, 2009, 08:33:43 AM
No love for the Corsair? :(
The Corsair lacked the legs to be truly great at Pacific A-A fighting. It could take a lot of punishment, though (unlike the far more fragile P-51), and so it proved to be one of the great ground attack planes of the war (much like the P-47, only with more legs).
Greatest fighter ever is Martinus.
In his head, he have never lost an argument.
Quote from: Valmy on June 01, 2009, 10:08:34 AM
I was lampooning labelling the Fokker Triplane the best of WWI simply because Richtofen flew it for 20 of his kills.
Ah. Well, I suppose it would have been funnier had anyone actually made the claim that the Fokker Triplane the best of WWI simply because Richtofen flew it for 20 of his kills, but you cannot have
everything.
Quote from: grumbler on June 01, 2009, 10:13:14 AM
Quote from: Valmy on June 01, 2009, 10:08:34 AM
I was lampooning labelling the Fokker Triplane the best of WWI simply because Richtofen flew it for 20 of his kills.
Ah. Well, I suppose it would have been funnier had anyone actually made the claim that the Fokker Triplane the best of WWI simply because Richtofen flew it for 20 of his kills, but you cannot have everything.
Am I going insane? The entire point of this thread was to comment on an article that claimed just that.
Unless you want to argue the Zero, the Harrier, the Sabre, the ME 109, the F-18, the MiG 21, the Spitfire, and the Mustang are WWI fighters that is precisely what that article was saying.
So the someone was simply, you know, the article we were supposed to be discussing. But we cannot all be
literate.
Tough day to make a case for the Airbus 330. Maybe tomorrow.
Quote from: Valmy on June 01, 2009, 10:17:31 AM
Am I going insane? The entire point of this thread was to comment on an article that claimed just that.
Unless you want to argue the Zero, the Harrier, the Sabre, the ME 109, the F-18, the MiG 21, the Spitfire, and the Mustang are WWI fighters that is precisely what that article was saying.
:huh: The article says
QuotePerhaps the classic World War I fighter, noted for the successes chalked up by Baron Manfred von Richthofen better known as the Red Baron.
and then goes on to claim that
QuoteThe extra wing allowed the plane to climb higher and to climb faster.
When the DR1 was rolled out in 1917 it wasn't just the superb wings and the top speed pf 115mph that made it an awesome fighter, it also had machine guns that fired through the propellor arc, a revolutionary World War I innovation.
so it seems clear to me that, while the plane was
noted for being BvR's plane, it was superior due to its climbing rate and firepower.
It nowhere states that the plane was superior "simply because Richtofen flew it for 20 of his kills."
QuoteSo the someone was simply, you know, the article we were supposed to be discussing. But we cannot all be literate.
How about, before you get snippy, you learn to
fucking read? <_<
Bruce lee.
Quote from: lustindarkness on June 01, 2009, 10:29:52 AM
Bruce lee.
He has to be. He beat Chuck Norris in "Way of the Dragon;" and Chuck Norris can do wheelies on a unicycle.
Quote from: grumbler on June 01, 2009, 10:27:56 AM
How about, before you get snippy, you learn to fucking read? <_<
Me? You were the dude who attacked me for no reason. I thought we were just talking about planes.
Anyway the Fokker Triplane is called the best WWI fighter all the time and undeservedly so and IMO it is because of Richtofen. If the article did not consider it the best then why did it put it in its top ten and not another fighter plane? Why would it have even considered that plane without Richtofen? It was not a very numerous plane and did not exactly dominate the skies at any point. Even the Nieuport Baby and the Fokker Eindecker at least did that.
That was a projection on my part. It did not say that the Triplane was the best because Richtofen shot down 20 planes in it...but then I didn't put fucking quotes around it or claim that was a direct quote from anything. It was my own opinion and analysis of why the Triplane is over-rated.
Anyway it literally says:
QuotePerhaps the classic World War I fighter, noted for the successes chalked up by Baron Manfred von Richthofen better known as the Red Baron.
Why was it the classic World War I fighter? What did it do besides have Richtofen fly in it?
GSP
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mailintalks.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F02%2Fgsp.jpg&hash=7949c49617baded74f75701cc0b6caf5d9afbbc8)
Brewster Buffalo.
Just to move the discussion along, "The Greatest Ever" has it's own criteria... but what criteria should be used to define the world's greatest.
The world's greatest fighter is another fighter.
Quote from: Viking on June 01, 2009, 11:34:06 AM
Just to move the discussion along, "The Greatest Ever" has it's own criteria... but what criteria should be used to define the world's greatest.
The Octagon
Quote from: PDH on June 01, 2009, 09:26:46 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 01, 2009, 08:33:43 AM
Quote from: PDH on June 01, 2009, 07:32:00 AM
P-47 Just because the P-51 lovers are like the Tims of aviation history.
No love for the Corsair? :(
Pappy does give the Corsair a +1 to rep...
That's for damn sure. The Black Sheep never flew no F-15 or a triplane.
Quote from: grumbler on June 01, 2009, 05:49:53 AM
The top 10 fighters of all time should include:
P-51
Me-109
Spitfire
Me-262
MiG-21
Zero
Camel
F-14
Albatross D.III
Dassault Mirage
We can debate the ordering, of course, and there may be a couple of candidates I missed.
So why is the Me109 on your list but not the Fw190?
Quote from: derspiess link=topic=1062.msg47266#msg47266
So why is the Me109 on your list but not the Fw190?
Kurt Tank sucked monkey balls.
Quote from: Valmy on June 01, 2009, 10:36:31 AM
Me? You were the dude who attacked me for no reason. I thought we were just talking about planes.
When you throw around lines like "but we cannot all be literate," expect a like response.
QuoteAnyway the Fokker Triplane is called the best WWI fighter all the time and undeservedly so and IMO it is because of Richtofen. If the article did not consider it the best then why did it put it in its top ten and not another fighter plane? Why would it have even considered that plane without Richtofen? It was not a very numerous plane and did not exactly dominate the skies at any point. Even the Nieuport Baby and the Fokker Eindecker at least did that.
I have no idea why the article rated the plane so highly. I suspect that it was because the author didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and this was the only WWI fighter he had any idea about. The implication that the Triplane was the first to have synchronized machine guns (when they had, in fact, been in service for over two years when the D.I entered combat) makes his judgement even more suspect. As I stated long before you, it was not considered, even in its time, the best fighter (though it was probably the best in a dogfight).
QuoteThat was a projection on my part. It did not say that the Triplane was the best because Richtofen shot down 20 planes in it...but then I didn't put fucking quotes around it or claim that was a direct quote from anything. It was my own opinion and analysis of why the Triplane is over-rated.
And when I pointed out, quite corectly, that no one was making the argument you claimed to be refuting, you claimed that the article was making that argument (when you knew good and well, apparently, that it wasn't making that argument and that you were simply projecting again), and got snippy.
QuoteWhy was it the classic World War I fighter? What did it do besides have Richtofen fly in it?
The author's email address is probably available from Channel Five. Why don't you ask him?
Quote from: derspiess on June 01, 2009, 12:27:28 PM
So why is the Me109 on your list but not the Fw190?
The -109 was in service far longer. Fighters on the drawing boards or in prototype don't shoot down any enemy aircraft.
Others may put different interpretations on "greatest," of course, but that's how I see it.
Quote from: Berkut on June 01, 2009, 08:01:50 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 01, 2009, 06:04:35 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 31, 2009, 08:56:41 PMand the F-15 doesn't even make the list! :bleeding:
Why would it? It hasn't seen much air-to-air combat in its career, Timmay. You chemo fuckstick.
Then why does the F-14 belong? I think the -15 has seen more combat than it has...
IIRC it's 104-0
Quote from: grumbler on June 01, 2009, 01:25:30 PM
Others may put different interpretations on "greatest," of course, but that's how I see it.
:( This would make sense if you weren't a communist.
Quote from: grumbler on June 01, 2009, 01:25:30 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 01, 2009, 12:27:28 PM
So why is the Me109 on your list but not the Fw190?
The -109 was in service far longer. Fighters on the drawing boards or in prototype don't shoot down any enemy aircraft.
Others may put different interpretations on "greatest," of course, but that's how I see it.
In that case, and considering you put the MiG-21 on the list, the F-4 should be there as well.
Quote from: vonmoltke on June 02, 2009, 07:24:44 PM
In that case, and considering you put the MiG-21 on the list, the F-4 should be there as well.
:Embarrass: F-14 should read F-4. Much as I love the Tomcat, it's not top-ten. Phantom, yeah. Especially the older smokey ones.
Quote from: grumbler on June 02, 2009, 07:34:28 PM
Quote from: vonmoltke on June 02, 2009, 07:24:44 PM
In that case, and considering you put the MiG-21 on the list, the F-4 should be there as well.
:Embarrass: F-14 should read F-4. Much as I love the Tomcat, it's not top-ten. Phantom, yeah. Especially the older smokey ones.
That F-14 thing confused me after you nixed the -15 for not seeing enough combat to qualify.
Quote from: Berkut on June 02, 2009, 07:38:20 PM
Quote from: grumbler on June 02, 2009, 07:34:28 PM
Quote from: vonmoltke on June 02, 2009, 07:24:44 PM
In that case, and considering you put the MiG-21 on the list, the F-4 should be there as well.
:Embarrass: F-14 should read F-4. Much as I love the Tomcat, it's not top-ten. Phantom, yeah. Especially the older smokey ones.
That F-14 thing confused me after you nixed the -15 for not seeing enough combat to qualify.
How much combat did the Iranian F-14s see in their war with Iraq?
Quote from: Berkut on June 02, 2009, 07:38:20 PM
That F-14 thing confused me after you nixed the -15 for not seeing enough combat to qualify.
I didn't nix the F-15 for insufficient combat - I never even mentioned it. It's a great plane, but you do need to fight in real wars to get into the top 10 fighters
of all time. The Phantom itself barely qualifies, and only the fact that it was a mainstay for so many airforces and navies for so long really gets it into the top contention.
Quote from: Tonitrus on June 02, 2009, 08:37:30 PM
How much combat did the Iranian F-14s see in their war with Iraq?
Not a lot. They didn't have to parts to keep such a specialized beast going at full pitch. It actually was used more as an AWACs than a fighter (AWG-9 FTW!).
Quote from: Tonitrus on June 02, 2009, 08:37:30 PM
Quote from: Berkut on June 02, 2009, 07:38:20 PM
Quote from: grumbler on June 02, 2009, 07:34:28 PM
Quote from: vonmoltke on June 02, 2009, 07:24:44 PM
In that case, and considering you put the MiG-21 on the list, the F-4 should be there as well.
:Embarrass: F-14 should read F-4. Much as I love the Tomcat, it's not top-ten. Phantom, yeah. Especially the older smokey ones.
That F-14 thing confused me after you nixed the -15 for not seeing enough combat to qualify.
How much combat did the Iranian F-14s see in their war with Iraq?
Iran's claims don't seem credible to me, but I'm certainly not an authority on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_F-14_Tomcat#Iranian_Service
I would think the P-38 would be better then say the P-51. The 38 saw more action and had a longer life span.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 02, 2009, 09:21:42 PM
I would think the P-38 would be better then say the P-51. The 38 saw more action and had a longer life span.
But it was not as dominant in the air as the P-51, mostly because it took so much longer to learn to fly it well.
I personally think it was a better fighter than the P-51, but there is more than just technical ability to be considered, and the P-51 was certainly considered the better fighter by the bulk of the people who flew both (only the most highly-skilled pilots disagreed).
Best air superiority fighter in the world is the Baz. Period.
Quote from: Siege on June 03, 2009, 11:11:17 PM
Best air superiority fighter in the world is the Baz. Period.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fattach.high-g.net%2Fattachments%2Ff-15d_113_baz-200__baz_meshupar__with_f-15d_404_133th.jpg&hash=81da77247e71a4eb3b85095e681422586923b743)