…with guns only, no missiles. Against anything that is currently flying.
My wild guess is: F-15, F-16, F-18, F-14
And where is the MiG 29 in this group?
Normally, I’d say an F15 without question. But, since you wanted guns only, you’re in close. I’d say the F16 would be my first choice. Definetly not the Tomcat for guns dogfight.
Where’s the Mig29 in this group? As a dogfighter, I’d say somewhere around the F18.
What the hell are you people talking about? I’ve had it with these dog-bashing threads, with people talking about shooting dogs, or poisoning dogs, and now this! Are you people so terrified of dogs that you have to…
Oh.
nevermind.
This is definately an IMHO thread and I’m sure the mods will be along soon.
That said guns woudn’t be a good option in a dogfight as you rarely get the chance to choose what weapons your enemy would use in the real world.
Anyway, the F-14 is an excellent dogfighter considering it’s size and weight but I honestly think a skilled pilot could do equally well in any of the other three planes.
F-16 for guns only. I think it’s the most agile of the bunch.
Since we’re guns only, what about the A-10? Certainly its manueverability is exceptional and it could turn well inside any of the others.
…And if you’re going to go there, since gunfights almost by definition have to be subsonic, why not go for a Harrier?
I’d rather have a Sukhoi Su-27.
Whoops…that should be 37, not 27…
Okay, talking to the Col (Marine Corps fighter Pilot) he says it depends on what you are up against and the situation, distance, altitude…etc. but his preference was either the F-16 or the F-18. He also said if you get down low enough and slow enough to try to fight an A-10, that warthog will eat you up. He said the same for an attack helo.
I might make this a new thread, but here goes anyway.
How much do helicopter pilots practice dogfighting?
And since it’s helicopters, not planes, do they call it catfighting? 
Speed and K.E. count for a lot but with a smaller caliber, faster firing gun the A-10 could hold its own. IIRC a spad* shot down the first MiG in Vietnam with 2" rockets. The F8 crusader had the best reputation and I’m told an unarmed photo F8 from VFP-63 got a kill. The story goes he got in behind the MiG and the godless commie decided he was done for and punched out.
*not the WWI French made Spad but the AD-1 Skyraider, a piston engine plane that went into service at the tail end of WWII
Airwolf!
While you’re all at it, could someone explain to me in plain language the different purposes and roles of these different fighters. I’ve seen websites that describe them as “air superiority” fighters and similar technobabble, but as a layman I’ve never really understood which was which, and why a military commander would use one over the other (except that some are carrier-capable and others are not).
Air superiority means just that, it dominates the skys by shooting everything else down (allies excluded preferably) and making sure none of the enemies planes go up.
Back when I was in AWG-9 weapons school I learned that the F-14’s primary role was not air superiority but fleet air defense. The idea was to use long range AIM-54 Phoenix missles to shoot down attackers before they became a threat. In reality I don’t think I ever saw an F-14 loaded with more than two Phoienix missles at sea and rarely more than one. The aft stations caused an unfaforable center of gravity (two AIM-54 + rails = about 4,000 at the back of the plane) and the wing pylon stations were dangerously awkward to load with such heavy missles at sea. Typical load was a single Phoenix on a forward belly station, a single AIM-7 Sparrow on a pylon (they weigh 450-550lbs so could be loaded by hand) and one or two AIM-9M Sidewinders.
Me I’ll go with what Chuck Yeager said (working from memory so don’t flame me if it’s not word or word)
In his autobiography he tells the story of telling this to anther pilot when he was test flying a captured MIG 15. The other guy did not believe him and thought that the -15 was flat a better plane. He let the other guy fly the -15 and Yeager waxed his tail with an F-86. Then they changed planes and Yeager did it again.
I agree with WillSantini. Of course, the said F-1X could jusy do many, fast passes and jjust try to shoot it out of the sky. But, if the supersonic planes went low enough, say goodbye. A 30mm cannon firing at 3,900 rounds per minute tears pretty much anything to shreds. Might I also say that the A-10 carries twice as much ammunition as these “fancy” plans. Of course, that’s neccesary when you fire it twice as fast…
F/A-18E Super Hornet, without a doubt. Assuming, of course, equal pilot quality, enviromental conditions, etc.
The F/A-18E is not simply a improved Hornet, it is a all-new aircraft, cleverly called ‘Super Hornet’ to sneak development funds through a Congress that didn’t want to approve a F-14 replacement for the Navy. (The F-14 is at the end of its usefull life.)
The F-15C is a fine aircraft, but does not have the incredible angle-of-attack flight envelope of the Super Hornet, nor is its electronic suite as modern.
The F-16 series is the jack of all trades of the USAF, but master of none.
Can I please get the new YF-22 Raptor? Awesome machine.
No way, dude!
Blue Thunder!