Aircraft of the RAF...

there is a Jaguar at RAF Coltishall that went into a play dog-fight with an F-16, the pilot of the Jaguar bent the wing trying to escape, engineers said he was lucky to be able to land, and that Jaguar is now non-flyable, it is used to practice putting weapons on etc, I think the F-16 would be sutable replacing the Jaguar,

The Jag would NEVER come into combat with A F16 or better. The RAF fast jets would have already sorted that. But we have no bad people with F16's of better so a bit point less.

The F16 sucks at BVR, but the F3 is very good at BVR and the Typhoon is better!

I watched a Tornado F3 mixing it with an F-16 at altitude over the Wash a few years ago. The F3 was all over the guy, and finally the F-16 bugged out straight and level. I was mightily impressed at the F3's agility in a dogfight situation

I thought the Tornado only had Average manauverability compared to the F-16's high manauverability? or is the Tornado more manauverable at lower speed with it's variable geometry wings?

The F-16 is more agile than the Tornado F.3 which was built as a BVR interceptor of Soviet bombers. Maybe it was only a USAF F-16?







That is a joke by the way boys, don't spit your dummies out.

The F3 I saw was making much use of it's variable geometry and was a lot more agile than I'd at first thought. It was sticking to the F-16 like glue for the 4 or 5 minutes of tail chasing before the F-16 levelled out.
It may have been designed primarily for intercepts at long range with missiles but showed it can still mix it up close if needed
I'll be sorry to see them go

RAB I am telling you what the engineer told me about the jaguar, by the sounds of it, it wasnt a planed thing.. I am amazed to hear about the F-3 mingle with an F-16 and practically win, so they are still useful, I think that with all this firering out of visual range thing is stupid, that isnt testing pilot skill, or aircraft skill, you might as well have robots do it if the pilots are then usless, just flying straight for 10 min and return to base after launching some long range kick ass missile, but that would mean hundreds upon hundreds would loose their jobs, more unemployment for the government to deal with, we should stick with dogfights and in visual range combat, screw this pilot fatality ratio thing, I would most likely go into a dogfight if need for the country, as I am sure many others would to, as long as they have the skill to back up the enthusiasm of course.

Once upon a time I saw a RAF F3 murder a Mig23 and Mig 29 on exrecise much fun a clapping :-) the F.3 has helish radar and good low speed handling thanks wings

Sorry bout the semiling ha it's Christmas wish all a good one RAB

The F3 is an underated dogfighter

It may not be the best... but it holds it's own when a good pilot is at the helm

The F3 I saw was making much use of it's variable geometry and was a lot more agile than I'd at first thought. It was sticking to the F-16 like glue for the 4 or 5 minutes of tail chasing before the F-16 levelled out.
It may have been designed primarily for intercepts at long range with missiles but showed it can still mix it up close if needed

Depends on who is flying it. The F.3 does have good maneuverability and is more efficient due to it's variable geometry wings.
On paper the F-16 would pounce the Tornado but in the real world it�s up in the air. Pilots usually train more for their weaknesses so they will be of good quality all around. I believe that the Tornado pilot probably had more experience then the Viper pilot... Kind of like the time the A-10s pounced the Tornado and the times when USN F-14s pounced German (?) Mig-29s...
One must remember the F-16 was conceived as a �knife fighter�.

The F16 sucks at BVR, but the F3 is very good at BVR and the Typhoon is better!

Oh, how do you figure? It's mid versions had respectable radar and missile complement. The latest version has AESA, extreme jammers and counters, and long range Slammers... Its more then a match for any fighter...