F-104 vs. MiG-21
- Thread starter Iceyl86
- Start date
Maj.Striker
Swabbie
Banned
Quarto said:
That's true, it certainly helped during the actual 6 day war but the 245 kills that I referenced were "air to air" kills...
Quarto
Unknown Enemy
Well, strictly speaking, I can - you did violate a cease-fire, which most definitely qualifies as a dishonourable thing to do (...even though the rest of the world does it too). Still, that's besides the point. All I was getting at is that the Six Day War didn't do much to demonstrate the IDF's superior dogfighting skills (or the Mirage's superiority over the MiG-21), because there just wasn't enough dogfighting to provide any reliable statistics.HammerHead said:
Quarto said:
I think that violating a ceasefire might qualify as a dishonorable thing to do when certain things, such as the withdrawl of UN troops, disruption of shipping and seizure of ships and crews, and a massive millitary build up on the border by known and proven enemies, are not taken into account.
There were other battles in Israel's history were the IDF proved its superior dogfighting skills. Notable is a (relatively) famous battle that took place in July 1970, since we are talking specifically about MiG 21s vs. Mirage IIIs here.
Quarto
Unknown Enemy
No, none of those things matter at all. Honourable behaviour is not about doing the right thing as long as the other guy is doing the right thing - it's about always doing the right thing, regardless of what the other guy does.Primate said:
Circumstances can, of course, justify dishonourable behaviour as a wise and reasonable thing to do (as it was in this case) - but honour was never about being wise or reasonable.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
I will personally murder you all to death if you turn this into some kind of Israeli foreign policy thread.
Bandit LOAF said:
Far be it for me not to jump on the bandwagon, but I think its time. Isn't killing someone to death a little on the redundant side?
(P.S. Sieg Hiel baby!
)Plus, I find it funny how I can ask a question about an old American fighter, and an old Soviet fighter... and the topic can quickly turn from a fighter thread into one about foreign politics!
I should make a thread about the Navy... maybe I'll get lucky and it will turn into a thread about European Space Programs (AKA Rocket Luge).
HammerHead
Rear Admiral
Bandit LOAF said:
Well, Since I started it, I feel obligated to finish it...
You're not, though. When I say stop, you stop. Post removed.
Mjr. Whoopass
<FONT color=lightblue><B>I was going to say someth
Back on topic.. The combat record clearly shows the Mig-21 defeating the F-104's in their engagements. The two are very similar in their statistics and one could attribute the winner as being due to superior circumstances or pilot skills. In the few instances where the two fighter craft were engaged in combat, it seems the situations favored the Mig-21. The F-104's were attacked by Mig-21s while they were engaging other enemy targets. In one instance the F-104s were finishing up an attack behind enemy lines on ground targets when they were jumped by Mig-21's.. One F-104 escaped. In another instance the F-104's were attacking a bomber formation that was being escorted by Mig-21's.
In one of the Mig-21's F-104 kills, it began the engagement on the six o'clock position of the F-104's engaging the enemy ground targets, which is hardly a fair fight. In the instance of the F-104's attacking the bomber formation, one of the F-104's pilots launched a heat seeking missile while traveling head on- the first indication of a novice pilot flying the F-104.. The F-104's were later shot down while trying to out turn the Mig-21's. This was the second, fatal, and last indication of the lack of flying skill and knowledge of the F-104 pilots.
Since WW2, history has generally favored the faster fighter in equal combat by skilled pilots due to the fact that the faster fighter can dictate the terms of the engagement and use it's superior speed to "extend" and either escape or re-engage on it's own terms.. one of the more famous instances of these tactics were those used by the "Flying Tigers" (Starlancer fans will recognize this squadron) to rack up an astounding kill ratio vs. more agile enemy fighters. The statistics of the variants shown on this thread show the F-104 as being the faster fighter, giving it this powerful advantage. Given these statistics, an F-104 pilot can nullify the Mig-21's superior turning ratio by simply avoiding a turning battle.
Unfortunately, the F-104 wasn't particularly effective at head on combat since its guns weren't superior (possibly inferior?) to the Mig-21. Since its missiles were heat seeking, it would need to maneuver it's way to the enemy fighter's six. This would be very difficult vs. a Mig-21. Likewise a Mig-21 would probably have a slightly harder time maneuvering onto the faster F-104's six IF the F-104 pilot wisely refused to engage in a turning battle.
In combat where all things are equal, the F-104 pilot would dictate the terms of the combat, but vs. an equally skilled Mig-21 pilot would have a tough time gaining any advantage vs. the high calibur guns the Mig carries as it engages in the continual head on engagements that could result. The question could be whether the F-104's speed advantage is enough to travel outside of the Mig's missile range by the time and distance it takes for the Mig to turn around. The F-104 could have a slight advantage as it could escape with more ease due to its superior speed while the Mig is trapped in combat. The F-104 may also be able to develop an altitude advantage by using its superior speed and thrust. The Mig would have time on its side though since the F-104 would run out of fuel faster.
These fighters are so comparable that it might boil down to the economics of which fighter is cheaper to build and easier to maintain. Unfortunately for the F-104, it had a terrible reputation for accidents.
The Mig-21 would appear to be a better choice for missions such as bomber escort, where it could use its advanage in range and use its maneuvarability to orient itself on the six of the fighters attacking the bombers. I think the F-104 would have a slight advantage in 1v1, all things being equal.
In one of the Mig-21's F-104 kills, it began the engagement on the six o'clock position of the F-104's engaging the enemy ground targets, which is hardly a fair fight. In the instance of the F-104's attacking the bomber formation, one of the F-104's pilots launched a heat seeking missile while traveling head on- the first indication of a novice pilot flying the F-104.. The F-104's were later shot down while trying to out turn the Mig-21's. This was the second, fatal, and last indication of the lack of flying skill and knowledge of the F-104 pilots.
Since WW2, history has generally favored the faster fighter in equal combat by skilled pilots due to the fact that the faster fighter can dictate the terms of the engagement and use it's superior speed to "extend" and either escape or re-engage on it's own terms.. one of the more famous instances of these tactics were those used by the "Flying Tigers" (Starlancer fans will recognize this squadron) to rack up an astounding kill ratio vs. more agile enemy fighters. The statistics of the variants shown on this thread show the F-104 as being the faster fighter, giving it this powerful advantage. Given these statistics, an F-104 pilot can nullify the Mig-21's superior turning ratio by simply avoiding a turning battle.
Unfortunately, the F-104 wasn't particularly effective at head on combat since its guns weren't superior (possibly inferior?) to the Mig-21. Since its missiles were heat seeking, it would need to maneuver it's way to the enemy fighter's six. This would be very difficult vs. a Mig-21. Likewise a Mig-21 would probably have a slightly harder time maneuvering onto the faster F-104's six IF the F-104 pilot wisely refused to engage in a turning battle.
In combat where all things are equal, the F-104 pilot would dictate the terms of the combat, but vs. an equally skilled Mig-21 pilot would have a tough time gaining any advantage vs. the high calibur guns the Mig carries as it engages in the continual head on engagements that could result. The question could be whether the F-104's speed advantage is enough to travel outside of the Mig's missile range by the time and distance it takes for the Mig to turn around. The F-104 could have a slight advantage as it could escape with more ease due to its superior speed while the Mig is trapped in combat. The F-104 may also be able to develop an altitude advantage by using its superior speed and thrust. The Mig would have time on its side though since the F-104 would run out of fuel faster.
These fighters are so comparable that it might boil down to the economics of which fighter is cheaper to build and easier to maintain. Unfortunately for the F-104, it had a terrible reputation for accidents.
The Mig-21 would appear to be a better choice for missions such as bomber escort, where it could use its advanage in range and use its maneuvarability to orient itself on the six of the fighters attacking the bombers. I think the F-104 would have a slight advantage in 1v1, all things being equal.
wolfboy
Captain
I've, got to agree in total with bandit. The 104 was built as a dedicated bomber intercepter and was not built for dogfighting. they were built to zapp in, put a missle or 2 and a few cannon rounds into the bombers and then zapp back out while their escort fighters like the F-4 kept the migs off their back. These were the reason that the dogfighting kill ratio dropped to something like 5 to 1 in the early years of Vietnam.
TankGunner
Rear Admiral
Mjr. Whoopass, you make some very good points. But I think that the F-104 was one of the first US fighters to carry the M-61 'Vulcan' gatling gun. This is probably the best gatling gun in the world, and has been in service for half of forever (the M2 .50 caliber being in service for forever) and is markedly superior to the MIG-21's 2 23mm cannon.
Also, I believe that by this point in history, the AIM-9 Sidewinders carried by the F-104 and other fighters were "all aspect", i.e. they could gain a lock with the other fighter head on. And I think that the F-104 could carry AIM-7 Sparrows (and the modern equivelent, the AIM-120 AMRAAM).
These is what I remember, I stress that I haven't had time to fact-check, so please correct me if I'm wrong. No time to check, I go on leave in....now!