Flyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2439 times:
For air-to-air operations, there are light and heavy fighters, interceptors, and fighter-bombers.
Light fighters (examples being the F-16 and MiG-29) are primarily used for close to home, visual, close in dogfights. They are usually the most manuverable of all fighters.
Heavy fighters (examples being the F-15 and Su-27) are primarily used for longer distance, beyond visual range dogfights. They are usually much more advanced and complex aircraft than light fighters, with much more firepower. They are also the aircraft more often used for combat air patrols due to greater stores and loitering capability.
Interceptors (examples being the F-14 and MiG-31) are primarily used to defend the homeland, naval fleet, etc. They are often have long range, high speed, and very impressive weapons/radar systems. Most are usually not very manuverable and are not dogfighting aircraft.
Fighter-bombers/multirole (such as the F-15E and F-111) are aircraft that can dogfight and deliver bombs. They are usually quite good bombers as well as capable fighters, although they may not be able to perform dogfighting and bombing missions at the same time.
Air superiority fighters are those designed to be able to go into hostile airspace and out dogfight any opposition until control of the airspace has been gained. These can be any of the above types usually, yet usually are in the mid-heavy fighter range.
Some aircraft fit into more than one catagory, for example, the F-14 is an interceptor, yet it can also be a quite capable heavy fighter. The F-16 is a light fighter but is quite often used as a multirole aircraft due to the fact that bombs need to be delivered and its full dogfighting capabilities are often not necessary for the mission at hand.
Hoped that cleared some things up instead of making you more confused...its a quite complex classification, without very clearly defined groups as there are no two aircraft that perform the exact same job.
Flyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2421 times:
The F-15 is definately a much more capable dogfighter than the F-16, and (from what I've heard) is just as manuverable. Yet, in close in visual dogfights, the F-15 has the advantage of being smaller...much harder to see and shoot that than the quite large F-15.
Superflanker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2422 times:
in the past the craft were usually designed for one or two roles but now everybody[exept usa,they have much $$$$$$$$$$$$$]want multiroles crafts.
Su-30 is a good example of multirole a/c ,dogfighting,intercepting,strike.
Well there is this categories widely used: Ground strike :A-10 thunderbolt Su-25/su-39 .They are designed to destroy ground targets such tanks ,bunkers ,artilery,man power.
They could also do other roles but not good enaphe.
imagine su-25 vs su-27 [ok maybe near ground su-25 has some chance ] strike Su-34 ,f-117, su-24 etc air superiority light weightsuch mig-29 ,f-16, heavy weightsu-27,f-15,f-14 fighters bombersstrike eagle,su-30/35/37 interceptormig-25 ,mig-31 and maybe f-14[weapons are not bad but low speed}]
Superflanker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2407 times:
Actually youngster i was speaking aboutnowdays[but your statement about the past it's partly true ].
What about f-22 what kind of multiroles could it do
name one other country who could/want to pay 130 millions for only one role air superiority?
And typhoon is also not a multifunctinal ,too much dedicated to air combat no good strike capabilities.
So if you want MF a/c check su-30 [air combat,strike , interceptor] not to mention su-37 .
well actually su-39 is modification of su-25 http://airwar.ru/photo/su25.html
LY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 11 Reply 8, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2405 times:
The F-22's ground-attack capability is limited to JDAM bombs (not all that bad). Considering its air-domination abilities, the lack of AG capability is quite acceptable.
The Typhoon is at least as multi-role as the Su-30MK and the Su-37.
If my statement is partly true, what part of it is false?
BTW, I'd appreciate it if you didn't call me "youngster" etc.
Superflanker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 2402 times:
Hm you're more than 20 years younger than me i was in aviation [not pilot but in the airpots] and sow those crafts almost every day fulcrums ,flankers foxbats etc etc ect, and only your knowledge comes from internet and books ,but ok if you mind i won't .
Every fighter could be used in many roles but how good would it be in that.Also su-25 could be use for a air combat but against which a/c .So only reason to cut this discussions is to confront those a/c [remember Simponov statement 'any where any place' but no challengers] and there is no chance for it.
If you remember fireblades' thread latest mig-29 vs latest f-16 you would see that all numbers were on fulcrums side[exept about 29's shorter range ]
[my english is realy bad]
Hm after fireblade left the forum there is a lack of ok threads we need a new topic master [don't even think about me my english is so bad that sometimes even i don't understand it]I'll leave for while
Warlord From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (11 years 8 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2376 times:
There's no such thing as deep penetration fighter or a air supremacy at least not in the widely used roles.
Thre is : air superiority,interceptor,ground strike,strike .
But allmost all fighters could be used in many roles for example mig-29 is a primaru fo air superiority than for strike and it could be even used as a interceptor.