# Of the "Big 4" American Fighter Plane Types of the 80's-90's, who was the loser overall? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 30, 2022, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818 "2022-07-30T06:38:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Asuka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@Asuka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asuka)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/1 "2022-07-30T06:38:40Z")
The big four fighters that were all introduced to the US Air Force or US Navy inventories starting in the 1970’s and almost all of them are still seeing active use in the US military inventories to this day. I’m speaking of which the F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, F-16 Falcon, and F/A-18 Hornet. My question is, of all those aircraft, which would be seen as the “failure” of the group despite all of them at various points showing signs of brilliance? The Tomcat has the whole pop culture recognition thing, but wound up having it’s role supplanted by the Hornet and forced into retirement, but at the same time in export markets (pretty much Iran) the Tomcat has proven it’s combat mettle. The Eagle in Israeli service has been battle proven and given remarkable work and is even being built in upgraded forms to this very day. The Falcon has seen the most widespread adoption by foreign militaries and is still the most cost-efficient of all 4 jets. The Hornet has been such a success that it retired the Tomcat and has basically taken over almost every aircraft role in the US Navy carrier fleet, but it’s seen the least amount of actual combat compared to the other 3 aircraft. I don’t intend this to be too serious of a discussion, but I am curious of all four of those aircraft which of them can be seen as a “failure” in comparison to the rest? ---
**Author:** ![gnarator](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gnarator/32/8266_2.png) [@gnarator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnarator)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/2 "2022-07-30T07:07:42Z")
I suppose if one just looks at number built it would be the F-14, but it served for over 30 years. The F/A-18 is really two different aircraft, as the E/F Super Hornet is a larger redesign of the original F/A-18A. The main attraction over the F-14 was that it was cheaper. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/3 "2022-07-30T07:25:40Z")
I am not a pilot or aviation expert, but as I understand…of the Teen Series, I would guess that the F-14 has done the worst, even though it did bag some kills against Libya. Its engine was notoriously finicky, and the Tomcat didn’t get much done overall. More of a hangar queen than the other Teen jets. Compared to the others: The F-15 Eagle has a 108-0 win-loss record, never been killed in aerial combat, and has slain a huge number of foes, mostly over the Bekaa Valley. The F-16 Falcon has been a veritable workhorse for decades, doing everything in every theater. The F-18 Hornet hasn’t done as much as the Eagle or Falcon, but still has gotten a great deal done. ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/4 "2022-07-30T07:37:50Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > I would guess that the F-14 has done the worst, even though it did bag some kills against Libya. Its engine was notoriously finicky, and the Tomcat didn’t get much done overall. More of a hangar queen than the other Teen jets. The claims of over 150 F-14 kills during the Iran-Iraq War may be exaggerated, but what is the real estimate? ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/5 "2022-07-30T18:31:28Z")
Even though the F-14 is my personal favorite of these, based on what I can tell is the criteria here, it has to be the “failure”. It’s the only one that’s had its role taken over by another plane, having been supplanted by the F-18, and never really saw the kind of Cold War anti-USSR action that it was designed for. ---
**Author:** ![TheCuse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thecuse/32/2854_2.png) [@TheCuse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheCuse)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/6 "2022-07-30T18:41:01Z")
I’m biased towards the F-16 and RF-4Cs. Don’t even know if he RF4s are still use. ---
**Author:** ![Bonum\_Legatum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bonum_legatum/32/6183_2.png) [@Bonum\_Legatum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bonum_Legatum)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/7 "2022-07-30T18:47:32Z")
Is this an “apples to oranges” comparison? I mean, wasn’t the F14 an earlier generation than the others listed - like the F4 Phantom was an earlier generation? ---
**Author:** ![Asuka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@Asuka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asuka)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/8 "2022-07-30T19:01:53Z")
Iirc the Tomcat, Eagle and Falcon all entered service within 5 years of one another. The Hornet is the outlier, I believe it deployed 8 years after the Tomcat. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/9 "2022-07-30T19:12:25Z")
> [@Asuka](#): > > The Tomcat has the whole pop culture recognition thing, but wound up having it’s role supplanted by the Hornet and forced into retirement, but at the same time in export markets (pretty much Iran) the Tomcat has proven it’s combat mettle. The F-14 would have served for longer, but the F-18 was able to take its place, and the fact that Iran was using them factored heavily into the decision to retire the F-14 early. Exports of F-14s and spare parts were banned, and a lot of the remaining F-14s ended up being shredded specifically to prevent any spare parts from somehow finding their way to Iran. > [@Bonum\_Legatum](#): > > Is this an “apples to oranges” comparison? All of this is an apples to oranges comparison. The F-16 and F-18 are both multi-role fighter/attack aircraft. The F-14 and F-15 were designed as air superiority fighters. They all serve different roles in combat, especially given the differences between Navy and Air Force missions. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2022, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/10 "2022-07-30T20:02:28Z")
As I recall, the F-14 was also designed as a delivery system for the Phoenix missile, which was a long range, fire-and-forget AA missile. The Tomcat could target and fire on six different targets at the same time, long before it was in range of the enemy’s missiles. The Phoenix turned out to be very expensive, the first ones fired in anger failed or missed, and the missile could 't be used in anything but the Tomcat. So both platforms suffered as a result. The Tomcat itself was a very expensive, very complicated aircraft. Without the Phoenix, the Tomcat was a very large fighter that I’m not sure was competitive with the new generation in an air superiority role. And once the F/A-18 got the AIM-120 AAMRAM missile, the gap between the capability of the Phoenix vs other missile systems narrowed dramatically. So my vote would be the Tomcat as the ‘failed’ fighter, although even it was successful in its role for a long time and was a beautiful and very high oerformance aircraft. ---
**Author:** ![gnarator](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gnarator/32/8266_2.png) [@gnarator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnarator)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2022, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/11 "2022-07-31T18:01:46Z")
> [@Asuka](#): > > Iirc the Tomcat, Eagle and Falcon all entered service within 5 years of one another. The Hornet is the outlier, I believe it deployed 8 years after the Tomcat. The F-14 entered service in 1974, the F-15 in 1976, the F-16 in 1978, and the F/A-18 in 1983. The F/A-18E/F Super Hornet ( the redesign that replaced the Tomcat) entered service in 1999. The F-14 was a very capable aircraft, with a large performance envelope, but it was quite expensive. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2022, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/12 "2022-07-31T18:46:40Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > I am not a pilot or aviation expert, but as I understand…of the Teen Series, I would guess that the F-14 has done the worst, even though it did bag some kills against Libya. Its engine was notoriously finicky, and the Tomcat didn’t get much done overall. More of a hangar queen than the other Teen jets. I had also read (probably here on the SD) that the swing-wing mechanism(s) were a stone bitch to work on and maintain. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2022, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/13 "2022-08-01T12:22:03Z")
I’d ask the OP why one of them has to be a “failure”. You can reasonably ask which of the 4 was most or least capable for its era, most or least suited for its planned-for or actual in-use mission, etc. But in fact none of the 4 were a “failure.” Each worked (or still works) just fine in its intended role during its heyday. The F-14, despite the name, wasn’t really a fighter. It was a long-range interceptor. There is a difference. Interceptors are about speed, and range of aircraft, radar, and missile, at the expense of maneuverability and excess thrust. Which circle the designers tried to square using the infamous swing wings. The F-14 was utterly bleeding edge tech when designed. Radar, missiles, engines, aerodynamics, you name it. But the state of the art was moving rapidly and in many ways it was behind the times once fielded. While at the very same time being utterly in a class by itself in terms of its ability to do missions nothing else could. On the rare occasions everything onboard was working well. Between that Day One bleeding edge obsolescence, extreme complexity, and the difficulties of ship-board maintenance, it was destined to have a more difficult service life than the other types. There was an effort to create a radically updated Super F-14, but that died early, as the F/A-18 promised to do both the F-14’s interceptor role (albeit less capably) as well as the A-6 and A-7 roles. USN was facing the need to replace all 3 types more or less simultaneously and having just one type in replacement seemed like a great idea tactically, logistically, and budgetarily. Which has, over the years, proven to be a darn good idea albeit maybe not quite a great idea. So unlucky timing for the F-14. The F-14 also suffered, like the B-1, from having its enemy evaporate early in its operational life. One the Soviet Union collapsed, the need for the USN to be able to defeat a fleet of incoming bombers 300 miles from the ship largely evaporated. Which was the total _raison d’etre_ of the F-14/AWG-9/AIM-54 combo. Bad timing strikes again. It’s also important in this discussion to talk about the realities of the service lives of the F-15, F-16, and F/A-18. The original F-15A model is long since obsolete and in the boneyard. The later F-15C is externally similar but is a vastly different and more capable weapons system. Which has since been upgraded in various ways. Same story with the F-16A vs F-16C. The A models I flew back in the 1980s are long since wasting away in the boneyard as combat-irrelevant against today’s threats. Even among the much more capable F-16C, USAF has the oldest and _least_ capable F-16Cs in the world’s inventory. The ones Lockheed is selling now to our allies and client states are vastly _more_ capable. There have been, and continue to be upgrade packages for USAF’s airplanes, but they’re struggling with aging airframe issues and also budgetary competition from the long delayed and very expensive F-35A. As said by others above the F/A-18E is an almost totally different airplane from an F/A-18A. It’s a much greater difference than between F-15 & F-16’s A & C models. It’s a third generation of F/A-18, whereas the -15 & -16 were capped off at 2 generations each. The latest F/A-18s look similar from a distance, but the E model is about 15% larger than the A/C models. And again vastly more capable for the modern networked nature of aerial warfare. If we look at the US service withdrawal dates of F-14A, F-15A, F-16A, and F-18A we don’t see such a large discrepancy: F-14A: 1974-~2000 = ~26 years F-15A: 1976-2009 = 33 years F-16A: 1978-2007 = 29 years F/A-18A: 1984-???? = ?? years F/A-18C: 1987-2018 =31 years In each of these cases, by the last few years of the type’s life, they were already relegated to second tier roles. For USAF F-15A / F-16A, that is generally the continental air defense interceptor role, otherwise known as post-9/11 airliner shoot-down duty. With a 737 or 777 as your adversary, you don’t need a bleeding edge fighter, a raggedy old one will do just fine. ---
**Author:** ![Asuka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@Asuka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asuka)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2022, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/14 "2022-08-01T17:31:39Z")
Thanks a lot! This is the type of info I wanted. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2022, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/15 "2022-08-01T17:56:55Z")
> [@Asuka](#): > > The Hornet is the outlier, I believe it deployed 8 years after the Tomcat Part of this is the fact that the Hornet was a reworked version of the non-selected candidate of the competition that chose the F-16. > **[Northrop YF-17](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YF-17)** > > The Northrop YF-17 (nicknamed "Cobra") is a prototype lightweight fighter aircraft designed by Northrop aviation for the United States Air Force's Lightweight Fighter (LWF) technology evaluation program. The LWF was initiated because many in the fighter community believed that aircraft like the F-15 Eagle were too large and expensive for many combat roles. The YF-17 was the culmination of a long line of Northrop designs, beginning with the N-102 Fang in 1956, continuing through the F-5 family. > ... ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2022, 9:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/16 "2022-08-02T09:56:43Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > The F-14, despite the name, wasn’t really a fighter. It was a long-range interceptor. There is a difference. Interceptors are about speed, and range of aircraft, radar, and missile, at the expense of maneuverability and excess thrust. It was terribly miscast in _Top Gun_. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2022, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/of-the-big-4-american-fighter-plane-types-of-the-80s-90s-who-was-the-loser-overall/968818/17 "2022-08-02T12:28:21Z")
In the F-16 we used to refer to them (F-14s) as “strafe rags”. That being the official term for practice targets for ground strafing. Which are utterly helpless, immobile, and don’t shoot back. The other term of derision (shared with the F-15) was “Rodan”, for their ginormous planform that was easy to spot at great distance and hard to miss once you got more or less lined up for a cannon shot. They were both the proverbial “broad side of a barn”, but the F-14 was an extra-large barn. OTOH, our success against F-14s depended 100% on us being able to get within 10 miles of them while still alive. Whereas their strong suit was to have already arranged for us to have been surprised by blowing up about 75 miles away before we even knew they were out there. I’ve said many times here and elsewhere that combat is a team sport. So how any two contenders would fare in one-on-one battle in a neutral arena is highly artificial, bordering on meaningless.