For the F-15 A/C I have read that the wing loading is lower than the F-16 under most circumstances. I have also read that the F-15 has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio under most circumstances. The body and control surfaces of an F-15 are larger, allowing airflow to be diverted for a higher turn rate. The overall surface of the bottom of the F-15 should allow it to fly at slower speeds, and the higher thrust to-weight ratio should allow a lower loss of altitude during a turn-battle in a dog-fight.

How is it that I have read about and seen videos of F-16s winning dog fights against F-15s?

Obviously don't violate OPSEC.

Because Doug Masters is just that good.

Obviously don't violate OPSEC.

Wait...I shouldn't violate OPSEC?

Because Doug Masters is just that good.

...only when his Walkman is on.

This thread has what I like to call P O T E N T I A L.

Maybe.

Because Doug Masters is just that good.

Where is, by now I'm assuming he's at that point, Col Masters?

Has he gone ops to ops to ops to ops?

What're his thoughts on UAVs?

Is he scoping out the Iranian threat for any nuclear production strike?

Any hot Israeli or Russian babes on his arm?

For the F-15 A/C I have read that the wing loading is lower than the F-16 under most circumstances. I have also read that the F-15 has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio under most circumstances. The body and control surfaces of an F-15 are larger, allowing airflow to be diverted for a higher turn rate. The overall surface of the bottom of the F-15 should allow it to fly at slower speeds, and the higher thrust to-weight ratio should allow a lower loss of altitude during a turn-battle in a dog-fight.

How is it that I have read about and seen videos of F-16s winning dog fights against F-15s?

Obviously don't violate OPSEC.

Stop being retarded.

I have read...I have also read that ...How is it that I have read about....

Quit reading kid. It makes you stupid.

Edited June 28, 200916 yr by Danny Noonin

For the F-15 A/C I have read that the wing loading is lower than the F-16 under most circumstances. I have also read that the F-15 has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio under most circumstances. The body and control surfaces of an F-15 are larger, allowing airflow to be diverted for a higher turn rate. The overall surface of the bottom of the F-15 should allow it to fly at slower speeds, and the higher thrust to-weight ratio should allow a lower loss of altitude during a turn-battle in a dog-fight.

How is it that I have read about and seen videos of F-16s winning dog fights against F-15s?

Obviously don't violate OPSEC.

My girlfriend feels bad for your future classmates of your future nav class.

16:58: Are there any questions on this Friday afternoon?

*Silence*

16:59:59: Moostang: Sir, I've read about what you just talked about on the internet, and it doesn't seem to be the same. Could you tell me why? Please take your time and go into as much detail as possible, without violating OPSEC of course.

Geez dude I fly the things and I don't know what the hell you mean by "the overall surface of the bottom of the jet should allow it to fly blah blah blah." Are you serious? I'm in the last week now at SOS and I still think that's the dumbest thing I've heard in months.

Face it, Doug Masters can kick anyone's ass short of Chuck Norris. Well him and the remote control thingie from Stealth.

I'm in the last week now at SOS and I still think that's the dumbest thing I've heard in months.

Haha, nice.

For the F-15 A/C I have read that the wing loading is lower than the F-16 under most circumstances. I have also read that the F-15 has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio under most circumstances. The body and control surfaces of an F-15 are larger, allowing airflow to be diverted for a higher turn rate. The overall surface of the bottom of the F-15 should allow it to fly at slower speeds, and the higher thrust to-weight ratio should allow a lower loss of altitude during a turn-battle in a dog-fight.

How is it that I have read about and seen videos of F-16s winning dog fights against F-15s?

Obviously don't violate OPSEC.

Aerodynamics ... Learn some

Face it, Doug Masters can kick anyone's ass short of Chuck Norris.

How'd he loose to a couple of Russians flying F-4's? I mean surely a 10G turning F-16C carrying nothing but Aim-9s over the bearing strait can take on a fat brick like a phantom.

Hades Bomb. Nuff said.

I bet moostang changes his name to "whitestang" because his feelings are hurt, and starts another stupid a$$ thread with retarded questions.

What about a squadron of T-6 Texan's? Can't forget those bright yellow painted bad boys....

What about a squadron of T-6 Texan's? Can't forget those bright yellow painted bad boys....

They filmed Iron Eagle IV in Canada...so they were Harvards, not Texans.

16:58: Are there any questions on this Friday afternoon?

*Silence*

16:59:59: Moostang: Sir, I've read about what you just talked about on the internet, and it doesn't seem to be the same. Could you tell me why? Please take your time and go into as much detail as possible, without violating OPSEC of course.

Sounds like my typical college course. Professor mentions letting us go early and then some idiot(s) ask stupid questions that could easily be looked up on google.

Wait a minute....I remember when I was a young lad seeing how Air Wolf could totally kick any fighter jet's ass. Not too bad for having a semi-rigid rotor system.

I bet moostang changes his name to "whitestang" because his feelings are hurt, and starts another stupid a$$ thread with retarded questions.

Do you really want someone to link to your thread? It's probably best to just get the popcorn and watch.

Do you really want someone to link to your thread? It's probably best to just get the popcorn and watch.

2

I was about to say the same thing. It wasn't long ago that you were in his shoes...

My girlfriend feels bad for your future classmates of your future nav class.

16:58: Are there any questions on this Friday afternoon?

*Silence*

16:59:59: Moostang: Sir, I've read about what you just talked about on the internet, and it doesn't seem to be the same. Could you tell me why? Please take your time and go into as much detail as possible, without violating OPSEC of course.

Damn, how much do you hate that guy?

Do you really want someone to link to your thread? It's probably best to just get the popcorn and watch.

2

I was about to say the same thing. It wasn't long ago that you were in his shoes...

Hehe, I figured somebody would say something about that. Believe it or not I actually beat both of you guys linking to my thread with a link in his first thread previous to this second thread of his.....told him to shut it and go read my thread before arguing. Personally, I happen to think my thread(despite being wrong for not shutting up) was less stupid than some of (black/moose)stang's questions. Some people may disagree, but at least I didn't whine about how mean everyone was and melodramatically change my name. I don't like popcorn, so I might as well jump on the give people shit when they deserve it bandwagon. I'm cool if the haters wanna jump on and gimme some more shlt as well.

Edited June 28, 200916 yr by MegaPieBoy

Google "Defensive Egg," it is the gold standard of BFM...

Speaking of which, is anyone still making the t-shirts?

Cheers! M2

I don't like popcorn

That's about the most egregious thing I've seen posted on here in a while. Popcorn is delicious and I'll defend it's goodness with my life...it's really the only thing I liked about the Transformers 2 sh*t-show outside of Megan Fox's fine self

That's about the most egregious thing I've seen posted on here in a while. Popcorn is delicious and I'll defend it's goodness with my life...it's really the only thing I liked about the Transformers 2 sh*t-show outside of Megan Fox's fine self

Most people didn't mention it, but I thought the chick robot was pretty hot/cool too until the tongue on a tail thing crept out of her @ss.