What is the best Interceptor and why is it the English Electric Lightning?
The Tornado F.2 is fully the equal of the F-15C, and the GR.4 of the F-15E.
>>30429908
Because you're a bongoloid.
>>30429908
Because your nationality leaves you extremely biased.
>>30429908
Ahem
On a more serious note the MiG-31 is probably the winner.
>>30429931
>>30429930
>All these butthurt hamburgers
>>30429939
>>>/r/cuckold
>>30429929
This meme again.
>Climbing vertically after takeoff in 50s before F-15
>>30429944
>shitposting
I guess thats all you can do now that you went full Brexit in soccer to.
>>30429959
Did it have a positive thrust to weight ratio?
>>30429939
>mfw Vatnik brings in slavshit MiG-25
>>30429963
>>>/r/Brexit
>>30429963
Holy shit
>>30429968
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CDLbokf9sg
>>30429908
>inferior to F106 ;)
>>30429968
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC8CsVpg64o
>>30429982
Any plane can do that but they will lose speed while doing it.
>>30430006
Very, painfully wrong anon.
>>30430006
kek
>>30429973
>>mfw Vatnik brings in slavshit MiG-25
Not a vatnik, and nobody has mentioned the MiG-25.
Is this the thread where we talk about MiG kills?
>>30430006
>>30430011
I didnt watch the entire video so I might be a retard but didnt it just climb?
>>30429990
Just have to say it again,
>inferior to F106
Nice try, Bongoloids.
>>30430037
>nuclear A2A missiles
This makes my dick feel funny
>>30429990
>>30430037
>Can't even zoomclimb to 70,000ft
>>Thrust/Weight of .74 so climbrate is useless
>>30430012
>>30429939
>Can't fly at mach 3 sustained or engines will destroy themselves
>Can't even fly at those speeds low level or airframe will turn molten
>>30430049
Depending on what you mean by low level, there isn't an aircraft in existance that can sustain mach 3.
>>30430059
>Vatnik does it again
Also, SR-71 says your an idiot
>>30430076
SR-71's Mach 3.2 cruising speed at 80,000ft.
Care to cite anything saying it can sustain that at low level flight? (I know for a fact you can't)
>>30430049
>can't even zoomclimb to 70,000ft
>average Soviet bomber ceiling ~45,000ft
>climbrate is useless
Now you're just mad. That's okay, it must hurt being perpetually eclipsed by big brothers shadow ;)
>>30430049
>Can't fly at mach 3 sustained or engines will destroy themselves
>Can't even fly at those speeds low level or airframe will turn molten
And I assume your magical bongplane can?
>>30430094
Very well Vatnik, you're right even though i didn't say anything else could, just a fact, but i also know for a fact that your slavshit plane cant even do it at all.
>>30430110
How does it feel there are stories of EELs zoomclimbing and falling on top of SR-71s at crusing alt almost giving your hamburger pilots heart failure? Pretty sure it can do that to your hamburgermobile
>>30430123
Funny how i didn't even mention that it could
>>30430172
I don't know why you're calling me a Vatnik, anon. Wasn't talking about any slavshit.
Might as well say
>Isn't capable of interceptions in lunar orbit
if all you meant was that nothing could do it.
Moron.
If I had one I would sleep with it every night and never cheat on it. 10/10 aircraft would wife.
>>30430189
>I don't know why you're calling me a Vatnik, anon. Wasn't talking about any slavshit.
>PROOFS?!?!?!
>MIG-25 GOOD PLANE
>WHAT DO MEAN I WAS TALKING ABOUT XYZ?
>>30430216
Did you skip your meds today?
>>30430220
No but you must be short on your shitposting quota
>>30430172
Feels pretty good that your main selling point is an attribute completely useless to the role of an interceptor(especially considering the F106 shit stomps the EEL in every other category). ;)
>>30430172
>Funny how i didn't even mention that it could
You were implying that the MiG-31 was inferior for not beeing able to do this.
>>30430232
>completely useless to the role of an interceptor
<<<<pic
>>30430246
Well quite underwhelming given it's reputation to say the least
>>30430268
>completely useless to the role of an interceptor
Yes, thank you for reposting my factual statement. Feel free to refute. ;)
>>30430304
>;)
I don't care about what you're argung about but stop this reddit tier shit.
>>30429908
The best interceptor was the F-4 Phantom because it started as an interceptor and became a long range fighter-bomber and the backbone of the free world's aviation services for decades. Greece and Japan still have a few flying.
Stats jerking doesn't matter, real life performance does, and the Phantom wins on that count.
>>30430268
>Well quite underwhelming given it's reputation to say the least
>Its far better than any other interceptor
>B-but it isnt as good as some Soviet propaganda made specifically to confuse the west stated.
>>30430311
>no ;)
>>30430329
>>30430329
Why would you want to shit up a board where you obviously spend time with bullshit like that and memegenerator images?
>>30430313
>Stats jerking doesn't matter, real life performance does, and the Phantom wins on that count.
Going by that the Spitfire or P-51 should be better as it downed way more aircraft than the Phantom ever did.
The best plane for intercepting fast high-altitude aircraft is probably the F-22, and that isnt even an interceptor.
>>30430320
>B-but it isnt as good as some Soviet propaganda made specifically to confuse the west stated.
>Still shit anyway
>>30430339
>>30430352
>Better than any other interceptor
>Still shit anyway
I can really feel the way you are trying your best to keep this b8 thread up.
>>30430351
>Going by that the Spitfire or P-51 should be better as it downed way more aircraft than the Phantom ever did.
They're definitely the best of the subsonic, guns-only, propeller dominated era. Comparing anything from that era to anything jet powered, supersonic, and missile-carrying is kind of silly though.
>>30430361
I'll bite, please kill yourself, I'm not even being ironic.
>>30430008
How is that wrong what the fuck?
Ever throw a ball up in the air? It goes up for a bit, and then comes back down. You can do the same damn thing with a plane while having the afterburners on. I mean yeah eventually your going to stop and begin to move tail first towards the earth but it was fun while it lasted.
>>30430349
The only ones currently shitting up this shitposting thread are you and >>30430311 getting so triggered you couldn't ignore my post and had to start a reddit arguement.
>>30430372
Thats what I mean, in the same way that a Phantom designed in the 50s is a far worse interceptor than a 1980s MiG-31.
>>30430189
>you will never zoomclimb in your EEL to intercept russian spacecraft
Why even fucking live???
>>30430374
Of course you'll bite, I purposefully went to google images, typed in "reddit meme" and picked the one must likely to make you butthurt. Calm that tism Splerg McFerguson.
>;)
>>30429908
Bumping for British MIG-21 copy
>>30430406
>>30430419
That's actually quite a relief
>>30430420
>>30430376
I don't know what balls your throwing that have an engine with >1.0 T/W ratio, anon.
>>30430420
If you think that way because of the shockcone intake then you're retarded and probably samefag >>30430320
>>30430400
>in the same way that a Phantom designed in the 50s is a far worse interceptor than a 1980s MiG-31.
A fully updated Phantom can still get up to Mach 2+ in a hurry and fire AMRAAMs, thus providing bomber intercept for everything but the XB-70 (lol) and can do it from a carrier deck which the MiG-31 can't.
>This insane clapburger that apparently didn't take his meds in time
This is entertaining, please proceed.
>>30430535
Which one?
>>30430535
http://testpilot.ru/review/mig_pilot/ch_1.htm
One of your pilots talked so highly of your plane when giving information to western experts :)
>>30430468
>Muh carrier
That was never part of the question. But sure, the best carrierborne interceptor is probably the F-4
>>30430468
So it is slow as fuck obsolete plane with pigmy payload and tremendously short range? Thanks for confirming it is by no means a match for MiG-31.
>>30430603
>>30430546
The one that implied aircraft go Mach 3 at low level.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG28U_ENNRw
>vid of foxbat going supersonic low
So your saying that no other aircraft can do that?
Also even though the other anon didn't mention it the B-1A was made to go mach 2.25 at low level while other fighters struggle past 1.2-.3, including your demi-god plane
>best interceptor
Is this even a competition?
>>30430603
>tremendously short range
>compared to a MiG-31
laughingKC135pilots.tar.gz
>>30430674
No.
protip: it had to be in service
>best interceptor
>not one mention of the F-14
God, day/k/are is retarded.
>>30430663
It's transonic on that vid, the title is wrong. And no, I am not saying no other aircraft can do that. I am saying that no aircraft go Mach 3 at low level.
>B-1A was made to go mach 2.25 at low level
No, it was not. The fuck is even wrong with you.
>>30430684
The soviets also had tankers faggot.
>>30430674
Faulty dusty prototypes are sure out of the competition.
>>30430684
>Has to refuel an interceptor in order for it to do anywhere
>Even with refueling still probably has less range than MiG-31 without refueling
Lol, get your pathetic ass out of here.
>>30430690
Bullshit, F-14 is based as fuck. One retard above even implied F-4 is the best carrier-based interceptor, lol.
>>30430695
>It's transonic on that vid, the title is wrong. And no, I am not saying no other aircraft can do that. I am saying that no aircraft go Mach 3 at low level.
So what your saying Ivan is that you can judge speeds of aircraft just by looking outside?
>>30430731
MiG-25 did not have a refueling probe
>>30430744
>One retard above even implied F-4 is the best carrier-based interceptor, lol.
That was me, and I forgot about the F-14. The F-14 is the best carrier-based interceptor
>>30430695
>>30430749
>B-1A was made to go mach 2.25 at low level
>No, it was not. The fuck is even wrong with you.
Sorry, B-1A was designed for Mach 2 low level penetration but was ruled out because of high maintenance costs
>>30430749
>MiG-25 did not have a refueling probe
And nobody gives a shit about the MiG-25. What part of MiG-31 is it that is so hard to understand?
>>30430782
>ruled out because of high maintenance costs
And because the concept was outdated. The USAF was better of just spamming cruise missiles from long range.
>>30430787
gee downplaying your superior soviet engineering now?
>>30430802
The concept wasn't outdated until Look down-shoot down radar was developed
>>30430835
Maby not, but the USAF cancelled it on based on that.
>>30430804
The MiG-31 was far superior to the 25 in every aspect exept for top speed.
>>30430879
Not before four prototypes were built therefore not being a concept.
>>30430749
>So what your saying Ivan is that you can judge speeds of aircraft just by looking outside?
Generally speaking yes, you can use your mk1 Eyeball and see terrain is not moving at 330 m/s. More importantly though, you can see an airspeed indicator to the left of gyro horizon ranging around "9".
>>30430749
>MiG-25 did not have a refueling probe
This argument is about MiG-31.
>>30430782
>B-1A was designed for Mach 2 low level penetration
No, it was not, anon. For the love of god, stop embarrassing yourself.
>>30430932
Generally speaking yes, you can use your mk1 Eyeball and see terrain is not moving at 330 m/s.
Before going around telling someone to stop embarrassing yourself why don't you?
>>30430932
and see terrain is not moving at 330 m/s
>>30430984
Good job ignoring the actual argument. Though I do not require advices from a person that thinks B-1A was meant to go Mach 2 at low level.
>inb4 someone thinks pic is real
It is not.
>>30431022
Ever heard the saying "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"?
>>30431049
You tried. But then you implied B-1A was meant to go Mach 2 at low level. After that you stopped even trying.
>>30431084
Then you went on to insult me about embarrassing myself, then had the audacity to claim that >>30430632 was flying subsonic just by looking, talk about trying to mask your mistakes, at least i tried to correct myself.
>>30431084
>RT reports multiple bears at MiG-31 airfield, details to follow
>>30429963
>you went full Brexit in soccer too.
Get fucking rekt
>>30429908
>>30429944
>>30430049
>>30430076
>>30430172
>>30431084
little kitters should not be on runway
>>30431111
That is because you embarrassed yourself.
>just by looking
Once again, good job ignoring the actual argument.
>>30431112
They just didn't know it was an airfield :^)
>>30431128
>Capitalists hate kittens
>Anyone else is the Axis of Evil
The west has shown its true face once again.
Why no love for the rafale though
>>30431148
>mig-25 in snow (4).jpg
And I just realised the title was wrong all this time I had this pic and it is actually MiG-31. Oh well.
>>30431148
How anyone can hate kittens or cats in general is beyond me
cats are built for hugs and sleeping under the covers
>>30431149
Its decent but not really growing like its brothers.
Dassault is a cuntish company, too.
>>30431129
What argument?
Do you mean:
>"Generally speaking yes, you can use your mk1 Eyeball and see terrain is not moving at 330 m/s"
By "Generally speaking" I assume you were meaning that you were 'slightly' in the wrong (aka you are completely wrong)
Or: if you were talking about the gauge then yes, your right it did show "9", after a relatively sharp climb towards the end of the video which almost certainly bleed speed
>Anyone else is the Axis of Evil
The west has shown its true face once again.
How does it feel getting paid fuck all for shitposting?
>nerds arguing
>posting all this plane porn
keep fighting! i am enjoying this
>>30431171
Who knows.
>>30431192
laser rave
>>30431205
>"A weapon, to surpass metal gear"
>>30431149
>Why no love for an aircraft that has never had BVR weapons?
>>30431210
>>30431177
Are we really still discussing the possibility for aircraft to go Mach 2 or even 3, as you implied earlier, at low level? Lol.
>>30431225
But the Mica missiles got a maximum range of 80km.
>>30431230
I think this is a JAS-39 cockpit
>>30431175
>Dassault is a cuntish company, too.
And Lockheed Martin isn't?
>not really growing like its brothers.
Didn't get that.
>>30431231
Like i said, at least i tried correcting myself unlike this guy pulling shit out of his ass >>30430932
>DAH YES COMRADE, IT CLEARLY VEZIBLE THAT PLANE FLY SUB-SONIC!, YES I CAN TELL BY LOOKING AT GROUND MOVE!
>>30431246
>>30431267
>>30429908
This would be a comfy jet thread if it wasn't for the spergy limey.
>>30431112
>at MiG-31 airfield
Saying.
>>30431239
Thanks, wikipedia-reader.
Operationally, it can't actually do anything at that range.
>>30430782
Are you that fucking cretin? No current plane can go past Mach 1.3 at ground level, not even F22, and the record of Mach 1.5 is still held by a Ye-155 from 50 years ago.
>>30431252
Eurofighter is filling out into the A2G role while retaining clear A2A superiority
>>30431246
Thats a Typhoon.
>>30431365
>the record of Mach 1.5 is still held by a Ye-155 from 50 years ago
Really? Nice, didn't know that.
>>30431171
not mine, he would prefer to jump from a building than let himself be hugged. And it has been like that from the day i got him, at less than 5 weeks old. But it's still mine, warts and all.
>>30431423
Looks just like my uncle's tomcat. Was called Predator for a reason, that furious bastard. Wish I had scanned photos.
>>30431318
I'm afraid our swivel-eyed loons have rather taken over recently
Daily reminder that this was a thing.
>>30431084
>>30430456
If it looks like chicken it is a FUCKING chicken
>>30429929
Blue Circle is the best radar ever.
>>30431365
>Are you that fucking cretin? No current plane can go past Mach 1.3 at ground level, not even F22, and the record of Mach 1.5 is still held by a Ye-155 from 50 years ago.
>>30431405
>Really? Nice, didn't know that.
Not really. Get fucked commies... by amateur autist with plane made from left over spare parts and trophies.
>The Red Baron was a highly modified Lockheed F-104 Starfighter which set a FAI Class C-1 Group III 3 km speed record of 1,590.45 kilometres per hour (988.26 mph), in 1977 which still stands.[1] It was assembled by Darryl Greenamyer and sponsored by Ed Browning and the Red Baron Flying Service of Idaho Falls, Idaho. The aircraft was destroyed in an accident in 1978.
>On 2 October 1976 Greenamyer flew an average 1,630 kilometres per hour (1,010 mph) at Mud Lake near Tonopah, Nevada. A tracking camera malfunction eliminated the necessary proof for formal records. On 24 October 1977 Greenamyer flew a 3 km official FAI record flight of 1,590.45 kilometres per hour (988.26 mph).[4]
He tried to break MiG-25's altitude record with it as well, plane didn't was destroyed practice run, it was something rather unlikely to actually achieve with F-104.
MiG-25 has simply too much drag to compete with F-104 at low altitude.
And yeah we are talking about record that will be very unlikely to be broken.
>>30430674
Most impractical interceptor in history. Read about SR-71 flight profile and flight preparations.... you might understand.
Not to mention irrelevant factor known as operating costs. F-22 is cheap as hell when compared with YF-12 and it's operational costs. YF-12 is fine plane as experimental launch platform for missiles and as proof of concept why mach 3 interceptor is stupid as fuck program. As recon plane A-12/SR-71 might be worth cost... as interceptor... nope.
>>30430376
>Doesn't know about Vspeeds
>Assumes a plane going straight up will fall directly down if it runs out of thrust.
I'd say go back to playing Kerbal but even they have better understanding of stall speeds than you.
>>30429908
Lightning zoom climb didn't mean much when 1- It such a small radius of action, and 2-A totally lackluster radar.
Classic aircraft and all, but don't get carried away.
>>30430049
As a weapons system the F-106 was so much better than the Lightning it wasn't even funny.
>>30434626
>AI.23
>"lackluster"
what
>>30434972
Go to any decent aviation site or forum and search for a discussion or article on the Lightning. You will almost always find mention of it's radar shortcomings. Even former Lightning pilots commonly mention it.
"During the 1960s, as strategic awareness increased and a multitude of alternative fighter designs were developed by Warsaw Pact and NATO members, the Lightning's shortcomings in terms of range and firepower became increasingly apparent. The withdrawal of McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantoms from Royal Navy service enabled these slower but much longer-ranged aircraft to be added to the RAFs interceptor force"
>>30429929
This meme needs to die a slow, painful death.
>>30429999
>fuel tanks above wings
This is one of my favourite things about the Lightning
>>30436258
I know the brits did above wing hardpoints on the EEL and Jaguar and maybe a couple other things. Did anyone else do this? It always looked nuts to me, but strangely cool. Like 1980's action star loading up before the big Act3 fuck your face battle with a couple dozen grenades, three rifles, eight handguns, a couple shotguns, six knives and a big purple dildo cool.
>>30431171
And rat catching. I fucking love them for that.
>>30431205
You shoot dogs with that rifle you mad man?
>>30431761
And you post like an angry teenager. Does that make you an angry teenager?
>>30431049
I think regardless of your housing situation you should just not throw rocks inside.
