Re: F-16 v F-15
av8instyle said:
Air to Ground: F-15C - nothing. F-15E: Good bomber, but all above applies.
Winner: F-16
That's a pretty bold statement, making the Strike Eagle the "loser" of the air-to-ground comparison with absolutely zero to back it up, other than "it's big and it has weak engines".
Last I checked, what mattered in air-to-mud was how much ordnance you could put on how many targets and how precisely.
So, let's compare:
Missions: That's nice that you quote so many different missions that the Viper can perform. The 15E can, and does, do the same (and some more), save for SEAD. Winner: Draw
Types of Ordnance: Hmm, the F-15E can carry everything that the Viper can with the exception of the HARM. The F-15E can carry and employ the AGM-130 and GBU-28, which the Viper cannot. Since the Bunker Buster and AGM are quite in vogue with the JFACC these days, I think we can safely say....Winner: Beagle
Amount of Ordnance: The Strike Eagle can tote 20K # of bombs. The Viper can carry somewhere on the order of 15K. Do the math. Did I mention that we can also carry a 3 x 1 air to air load with the CFTs full of bombs and two bags of gas hanging under the wings? Winner: Beagle
Precision Targeting: Yup, some Vipers can employ LANTIRN, but can you *effectively* do it at night and low level? Nope. Low at night is "exclusive turning room" owned by the 15E. How about a self-guide GBU-24 down in the weeds? Didn't think so -- also exclusively 15E territory. How about PGMs? Can you shoot an AGM-130? Nope. How about air-to-ground fighter datalink? If you don't have the Handheld Terminal Unit or your funny little integrated data modem, can you do comm-out XINT or TCT? Nope. Also exclusive Mud Eagle capabilities. Winner: Beagle
So, let's be fair and call a spade a spade. The Viper is a great, low-cost, lightweight multirole fighter. Comparing it to the "heavy hitters" and pontificating about how great it is all around is comparing apples to oranges. Different airplanes for different missions.