my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM Forum Archive   » Game Discussions (Genre)   » Jets   » Fligh Sim With F-8 Crusader

   
Author Topic: Fligh Sim With F-8 Crusader
Nick
unregistered

posted 01-01-2000 04:26 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'm new to the flight-sim genre. Can anyone tell me if there are sim's out there that include F-8 Crusaders (The Mig Master)?
IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-01-2000 05:02 AM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
US Navy Fighters '97 has a F-8 in it.

And the "MiG master" title must go to the F-105D Thunderchief. It shot down more MiG's than North Vietnamese AAA and SAMs combined.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member
Member # 358

posted 01-01-2000 05:21 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hey Nick,

Be forewarned, the F-8E feels very, hmmmm, underpowered? Underaccelerated? Something like that.

Yet if you play the game at X2, it gets near-impossible to launch and the slightest climb leaves you 'hanging' with less than 45` on the pitchbars and zero airspeed.

You cannot really turn with the MiGs (you can get close in X1 but they will eventually beat your butt blue on pure numbers) and, unlike the F-4, it's pretty near impossible to run an energy game on them. Getting much above 600-620 knots is a near impossibility until your last dregs of fuel.

Oh! I should also mention that for a machine that flew a pretty fair range profile, you burn gas like an elephant in a fireworks display.

Unfortunately, unless it's available in one of the MSoft sims, I can only think of one other option: Flight Of The Intruder.

It might have had a Crusader, I dunno. Your chances of finding both a copy and a machine that it will run on are pretty slim.

OTOH, if you can get a TK by Duosoft, you can experiment around with Fighters Anthology or USNF'97's airframe performances a bit. Even in the 'demo-mode' (unregistered, single modified system allowed).


Kurt Plummer


LINK-
Duosoft Products http://www.tir.com/~duosoft/prod-t.htm


P.S. the reason I don't play X1 in USNF'97 is the length of FQ gun passes which are semmingly never ending in the standard game.
Can't get past the 3-9 to start working them, can't generate enough lateral energy across their nose to avoid them...


Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Nick
unregistered

posted 01-01-2000 07:06 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
To Major Tom:

I don't know much about the F-105, but my reference to "Mig Master" is the title of a book written by Barret Tillman (1980(90), Naval Institute Press).

Thanks for the info..I'll see if I can find the US Navy 97 sim.


IP: Logged
JimG
Member
Member # 153

posted 01-01-2000 08:53 AM     Profile for JimG   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Look for a sim called "Janes Fighter's Anthology" it can be found for ~$15 at Best Buy. Also, there is a way to do some mods to the plane in the sim, if you get it and there were several folk out there, including myself, who made mods to a lot of the stuff in the sim, using a toolkit which produced libraries that the game accessed for info.
Some of the libs are still posted on sites, even though FA is ~'97 era.

"MiGMaster"? The F-4 would be the plane to wear that crown.


Posts: 1012 | From: Columbia, S.C. | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Birdman
Member
Member # 287

posted 01-01-2000 07:36 PM     Profile for Birdman   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Fighters Anthology has F8 planes and lots more, it's a great survey sim with lots of different planes and you can have lots of fun with dissimiliar plane combats, especially online with other players.

If you add the 714th add-on libs you'll get more models of F8 and improved (more realistic) flight models too. Go to http://exo.com/~gregoryp/ and follow link to FA sections. You can download the libs there.


Posts: 229 | From: California, USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Nick
unregistered

posted 01-02-2000 03:27 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Birdman, thanks for the link to the 714th. Here's one for you - http://www.cloudnet.com/~djohnson/migmstrs.html

Also, check out- http://www.tailhook.org/


IP: Logged
florrb
unregistered

posted 01-03-2000 01:21 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Major Tom, did you mean to say that the F-105 shot down more Migs than 'NORTH Vietnamese' SAMs and flak? That particular statement needs explaining. How many Migs were shot down by South Vietnamese gound-to-air, for that matter? How much were Migs used against the South ?
IP: Logged
nick moyrand
Member
Member # 214

posted 01-03-2000 02:08 AM     Profile for nick moyrand   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
As a piece of trivia, it should be remembered that about half of all the F 105's produced were shot down over North Vietnam, more or less 360 planes in all, an enormous number by anyone's standards.

------------------
Nick Moyrand


Posts: 897 | From: www.lakah-group.com | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
JimG
Member
Member # 153

posted 01-03-2000 04:01 PM     Profile for JimG   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
No MiGs in S. Vietnam...simply not an effective strategy for NVN. MiGs were used as interceptors in NVN.

Posts: 1012 | From: Columbia, S.C. | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Ozias
unregistered

posted 01-03-2000 05:40 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
For the fellow that was quoting Flight of The Intruder, it only features the F4 Phantom and the A-6 Intruder as flyable aircraft.

It was however a pretty good game for it's time.


IP: Logged
Fubar
Member
Member # 1715

posted 01-04-2000 03:19 PM     Profile for Fubar     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
A new game called AirWarrior: Vietnam which is coming out soon will probably feature the F-8. It will feature ALL USN,USMC,USAF,VPAF aircraft of the 1964-1968 time period. It also will have great multiplayer.

Also if you are looking for USNF '97 or Fighters Anthology which both feature the
F-8 they can be found for a low price in the Electronic Arts CD Rom Classics Series which can be found at most computer/retail stores. If you buy one you can get the second on free with a special deal they have.

[This message has been edited by Fubar (edited 01-04-2000).]


Posts: 151 | From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
florrb
unregistered

posted 01-04-2000 04:17 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
How many Migs were shot down by F-105's? That's something I hadn't run across; 'Chuck Yeager's AC' said that they never carried missiles, but of course they had the Vulcan. I knew there were a few cases, but I had seen them treated as rarities, with B-52's being the most likely to attract Migs.
IP: Logged
Nick
unregistered

posted 01-04-2000 04:33 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Florrb,

I don't know how many Mig kills are attributed to the F-105, but if you go to -- http://www.cloudnet.com/~djohnson/migmstrs.html -- it will tell you how many Migs the F-8 shot down.


IP: Logged
JimG
Member
Member # 153

posted 01-04-2000 06:05 PM     Profile for JimG   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Thuds typically did not carry missiles in the earlier phases of Rolling Thunder ~'65-'67, however I have seen photos of Thuds with sidewinders out on the wings near the tips. Also, remember; the 2 seater Thuds were used as Wild Weasels from ~'67-'68 and then again during the Linebacker I & II campaigns of 1972. These carried Shrike and Standard ARM missiles.
When you talk about B-52s attracting MiGs, remember we are only talking about a 11 day campaign (Dec 18-31, 1972) and two MiG-21s were shot down by B-52 tail gunners.

Posts: 1012 | From: Columbia, S.C. | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Slickster
Member
Member # 384

posted 01-05-2000 02:13 PM     Profile for Slickster   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
The whole question of what was the "Mig Master" is kind of tied up to the F8's role in the USN being rolled back as the F-4 became more important. The saying, "out of the F8 and out of fighters" was used by Crusader jocks to sort of tweak the F-4 jocks' huge, ungainly multi-role mount. The Crusader was pretty much a pure A/A fighter. It's kill ratio was the best in the VN war. By all accounts it was a very good fighter, but hard to bring onto the carrier.

The Thud got it's share of kills as well. I believe it's ratio was around 1-1, not bad for a mud mover.

It could carry a sidewinder, but so many switches had to be thrown to go from bomb to gun to missile, oftn in the heat of battle it was impractical.

------------------
Rick "Slick" Land


Posts: 551 | From: Fayetteville, AR, USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-07-2000 11:39 AM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
27.5 and possibly more is the number of kills the F-105 racked up. The F-105 flew over 75% of all the combat missions in the Vietnam conflict. It was there from day one and was the last to leave. It's not like the USAF was loosing 10 F-105's a mission, it was more like 1 every 4th mission. Those numbers add up after time. The F-105 was probably the most survivable aircraft of the war by far. Take into account the other figures, not just the number of F-105's downed.

It killed the most MiG's, flew the most missions and got the most pain.

Remember that those combat losses of F-105's are just that combat loses. A greater percentage of brit Sea Harriers have been written off in peace time than the combined percentage losses of the F-105's.

Those F-105's would still be in service today if we hadn't lost so many in combat. The F-105's retirement wasn't because of poor performence or anything like that. It was because they just didn't have enough and it was impossible to build more at this point. If you could fit a F-105G with modern SEAD equipment, it would be a far more capable aircraft wild weasle than the retired F-4G or the current F-16.

In my mind we never replaced the F-105, it's kind of a void that has yet to be filled by the USAF. Much like the navy's F-8, the F-105 covered a certain niche. And neither aircraft have gotten a suitable replacement yet.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
jk
unregistered

posted 01-07-2000 11:47 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
you ppl might want to check out http://www.webruler.com/aircombat/ they have large lists of aircombat kills, from the 50's onward.
IP: Logged
Armchair Aviator
Member
Member # 931

posted 01-07-2000 12:01 PM     Profile for Armchair Aviator   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
The F-8 Crusader is indeed the MiG Master. It has the best kill ratio of all U.S fighter aircraft in Vietnam. Yes, even better than the F-4 Phantom.

Armchair Aviator


Posts: 502 | From: Forest Hills, NY, USA | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged
JT
Member
Member # 310

posted 01-07-2000 12:16 PM     Profile for JT     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
>It has the best kill ratio of all U.S fighter aircraft in Vietnam. Yes, even better than the F-4 Phantom.

Isn't this because Phantoms weren't fitted with guns initially?

By the way, I'd love to see an F-8 in a new sim.... I like all planes from that era, but I'm especially fond of the F-8. I guess I just like the way it looks. I think it's a reall badd-*** lookin plane.


Posts: 200 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Spins_321
Member
Member # 163

posted 01-07-2000 01:21 PM     Profile for Spins_321   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Major Tom,

I always love it when people make a plane "Would still be flying today.." statement.

I love the F-105, but Maj Tom, honestly, what makes you think the F-105 would POSSIBLY be flying today? :-)


Posts: 89 | From: Odenton, MD, USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-07-2000 04:06 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Long legs

Fast speed on the deck

Heck fast speed all around, even by todays standards the THUD hauls *** and hauls a lot

Excellent load carrying capacity

Very Durrable, one took a hit from a sidewinder missile in the tail and kept on running

Combat tested, pilot approved! Find me a guy who didn't like flying the Thud.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
florrb
unregistered

posted 01-09-2000 03:41 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Was the J-79 engine especially good down low? I understand that the F-4 could outrun an F-15 near the deck, was this also true of the thud? I remember Cunningham saying that the best way to fight the Mig-17 was to start out below 5000 ft. and take the fight vertical.
Also, how was the wing-loading of the f-105? Wouldn't the F-16's maneuverability give it an edge for nap-of-the-earth flying?

IP: Logged
tony draper
Member
Member # 519

posted 01-09-2000 03:58 PM     Profile for tony draper   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
there was a excelent documentry on discovery awhile back on the crusader called the last gunfighter the pilots recconed it was a hell of a piece of kit, i understand they upgraded it towards the end of its life to super crusader but new navy specs called for all carrier aircraft to be twin engined, you can download one and fly it in ms combatsim.. not sure where i got it from now....good luck tony d
Posts: 1280 | From: england | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Skoonj
Member
Member # 80

posted 01-09-2000 04:40 PM     Profile for Skoonj   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
"Long legs
Fast speed on the deck
Heck fast speed all around, even by todays standards the THUD hauls *** and hauls a lot
Excellent load carrying capacity
Very Durrable, one took a hit from a sidewinder missile in the tail and kept on running
Combat tested, pilot approved! Find me a guy who didn't like flying the Thud."

For speed and payload, the F-111 replaced it. Now the F-111 is retired. The limitation of the F-105 was that though it was extremely fast, durable, and carried a big load, it could only go in a straight line. Turn with it and it turns to mud. And modern surface and air threats require more agility.

Yes, the pilots all loved the "legend." Even flying fast and low, it was smooth as silk (like a Buccaneer, by the way). When Thud drivers flew the F-4, they hated the way it bounced them around on the deck. The F-16 has smoothed things out again, though.

Skoonj

------------------
Excelsior, Fathead!
--Jean Shepherd



Posts: 541 | From: Naples, Florida, United States | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-09-2000 09:24 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
The F-111 never did have a very good war record. I dont know why that was. It probably just couldn't take the same amount of punishment the Thud could.

Aardvarks never where capable dogfighters, they just couldn't keep their energy state up. Now I'm not saying the Thud was the end all be all of dogfighters But When flown right it was capable of at least getting it's self out of trouble. You had to hit a Thud from ahead, otherwise it'd blow right by you and you'd be left eating dust. A F-111 you can catch from behind with a MiG.

If the term Fighter/Bomber could be stapled to any one aircraft it'd be the Thud.

The good ol' Thud never could win a cornering fight, but then again, what's the point of air combat if your aircraft has every advantage? It did the things it was supposed to and still does them better than the rest.

If there is one part of the design I liked about the Thud, it was it's ability to pick and choose where and when it got into a dogfight.

I think it's important to remember that all this missile evasion the Thuds did over Vietnam was done without the assistance of modern countermeasures.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
BoneDome
Member
Member # 190

posted 01-10-2000 05:18 AM     Profile for BoneDome   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Major Tom, I understand your appreciation of the F-105, but unfortunatley it's service record does not suggest that it was quite as good as you say. Remember that just over half of the total number of Thuds built were destroyed during the Vietnam conflict.
It wasn't much of a dogfighter either, otherwise it would have gained the same reputation as the F-4 from the North Vietnamese pilots.

Gen. Robin Olds actually had to pretend that his flight of F-4s were `105s just so the migs would go up and tangle with them, and that probably accounts for the Thuds superior Mig scorecard. The Mig pilots simply ran away when they saw F-4s coming, but they engaged F-105s all the time.
(FWIW, I think Gen. Olds mission had the highest number of mig kills in one mission, evidence that the F-4 was a much better fighter, but never got into as many engagements as the Thud)

If you were to look at the total number of engagements between Thuds and Migs, you might be surprised at which had the most success. Notice I said "might", because I don't have that data, and I could be wrong.

Still, it was probably the most survivable jet in the Vietnam war, and the fact that so many were lost is testament to how "hot" it was up north.


Posts: 171 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
kbedford
Member
Member # 1451

posted 01-10-2000 05:48 AM     Profile for kbedford   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
For those who want to fly the Crusader and have Microsofts Combat Flight Simulator there are a set of Vietnam missions (including Crusader, Thud, Phantom, Mig & Huey & more) at my website (//members.xoom.com/KeithBedford/).
Dont laugh - I know CFS is originally a Props simulator but it handles Jets surprisingly well and so long as you stick to dumb weapons (bombs and 20 mikemike) quite realistically.
Cheers,
Keith

Posts: 71 | From: Hemel Hempstead,UK | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
kbedford
Member
Member # 1451

posted 01-10-2000 05:51 AM     Profile for kbedford   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Forgot to mention that I saw one of the last active Crusaders whilst on holiday in France last year. The French Navy are in the process of decommisioning their F8s but we were lucky to be on the beach as one blasted past at 1000ft....
Cheers,
Keith

Posts: 71 | From: Hemel Hempstead,UK | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
LeadHead
Member
Member # 184

posted 01-10-2000 01:52 PM     Profile for LeadHead   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Well, In Sweden we retired another aircraft of the same generation as the F-105 and F-4 - The J-35 "Draken" ("Dragon") in 1996.

Still we have other more modern fighters...

It leads me to the conclusion that the F-105 sure could have been in use today.

BTW, doesn't the Luftwaffe use the F-4 as an AMRAAM carrying interceptor?

------------------
Lead-Head's Simulation Site:
http://fly.to/lead-head


Posts: 775 | From: PiteŚ, Norrbotten, Sweden. | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Skoonj
Member
Member # 80

posted 01-10-2000 04:48 PM     Profile for Skoonj   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Leadhead: I don't know about the German F-4 (F-4F?) still in service, but it's possible. I was in F-4 RTU in 1973 at George AFB, and the Germans were training there in my squadron. They were picking up the first F-4Fs off the line right then. There are certainly other countries still flying the F-4.

Concerning the F-8, the Philippines was flying them for a long time. I can't remember what Flip said about them, whether they were still flying or scrapped. The Philippines liked their short field capability.

Skoonj

------------------
Excelsior, Fathead!
--Jean Shepherd



Posts: 541 | From: Naples, Florida, United States | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
Member
Member # 1256

posted 01-10-2000 07:04 PM     Profile for Major Tom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
It was the most survivable plane of the war. Look at the numbers of missions flown by the Thud's and the percentage losses per mission. Then look at the number of missions flown by the Phantom and it's percentage loss rate.

The phantom has a much higher loss rate per mission than the Thud. But they why did we lose so many Thud's, you may ask. There is a simple answer, the Thud was in the conflict a lot longer than the phantom and flew X times as many missions. I'm not going to get into the types of missions the Thud flew. How many F-4 pilots would describe their missions as suicidal?

It's a wonder the F-105 had such few percentage losses. 1 plane downed every 10th or 11th mission does add up. And it isn't like every Thud lost in combat was blown out of the sky by fighters or Sams outright. A large number made it back to their respected bases and where deamed total losses either by crash landings... or nearly everything on board worth anything had hole in it. Even more thuds made it to a US controlled area then the pilot ejected.

MiGs rarely got off the ground to engauge US fighter planes till late in the war. The F-105's own reputation was probably as much of an asset to it with the MiG's as anything. MiG pilots that got cockey with the Thuds, wound up dead. All it takes is a split second bad decision, overshooting a Thud, running between formations, head on attack and a Vulcan can unload a lot of ammo in a split second, with deadly accuracy.

If given a choice of aircraft to complete 100 missions in, smart moneys on the F-8 and F-105.

Just think, only 380 Thuds lost for all that fighting they did. A testiment to both the aircraft and the pilots that flew her.


Posts: 1352 | From: Prescott, AZ | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

© COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b

Sponsor
© 2014 COMBATSIM.COM - All Rights Reserved