MiG-19 vs. the Best European Fighters of 1956

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
Admiral Beez	MiG-19 vs. the Best European Fighters of 1956	Lead	[-]
Posts: 4477 (17-Apr-2008 04:32:03) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	When the MiG-19 entered widespread Soviet service in 1956, how would it have compared in combat against the best European fighters? With the Dassault Super-Mystère not entering service until 1958, France would have to send its Dassault Mystère, which entered service in 1954. The Hawker Hunter entered service in 1956, and may be the best choice to tackle the MiG-19. The Saab A32 Lansen could also give a credible fight, having also entered service in 1955/56. Too bad the fighter J32 isn't ready until 1958/9. The British Fleet Air Arm will be useless in this fight, as their straight-wing Sea Hawks must soldier on until 1958.
A G Williams		#1	[-]
Posts: 1686 (18-Apr-2008 09:08:22) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	The Hunter didn't have the performance, but was possibly more agile (I'm not sure) and certainly had more firepower, that quartet of Adens throwing out twice the number of shells per second as the trio of Nudelmanns. I'd say that the MiG ought to win, though. Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk and discussion forum: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/
Obi Wan Russell		#2	[-]
Posts: 169 (18-Apr-2008 19:24:51) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	The British Fleet Air Arm will be useless in this fight, as their straight-wing Sea Hawks must soldier on until 1958. And yet a few years earlier in the Korean war, straight winged PISTON ENGINED Sea Furies defeated swept wing Migs in air to air combat. The Sea Hawks were likewise very manouverable and not to be underestimated in a turning fight. The winner of a dogfight is the one who plays to his own strengths and forces his opponent to play to his weaknesses. The most important component in any aircraft is the one in the pilot's seat.
seasick		#3	[-]
Posts: 4593 (19-Jul-1939 22:08:54) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I was told once that the way for a piston engined fighter to defend from an attack by a jet is to "turn-turn-turn". Get inside the jets turning circle. Nicotine: America's number one mind altering chemical.
seasick		#4	[-]
Posts: 4594 (19-Jul-2013 21:08:54) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	MIG-17 were being produced in Poland at the time so do they count????
emc		#5	[-]
Posts: 3685 (18-Apr-2008 21:30:17) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Obi Wan Russell wrote: The British Fleet Air Arm will be useless in this fight, as their straight-wing Sea Hawks must soldier on until 1958. And yet a few years earlier in the Korean war, straight winged PISTON ENGINED Sea Furies defeated swept wing Migs in air to air combat. The Sea Hawks were likewise very manouverable and not to be underestimated in a turning fight. The winner of a dogfight is the one who plays to his own strengths and forces his opponent to play to his weaknesses. The most important component in any aircraft is the one in the pilot's seat. There were also AD Skyraider pilots who shot down MiGs, during the War in Vietnam. It does back up your main thesis: playing to your opponent's strength is not exactly a winning tactic. That Sea Furies and Skyraiders shot down MiG-15's and -17's doesn't say anything about the quality of the piston-engined aircraft; it says a lot about the quality of the MiG drivers.
Zen9		#6	[-]
Posts: 3446 (19-Apr-2008 00:24:50) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Sorry is'nt this the era of the Venom? How does a Mig19 fare against aircraft able to see it from beyond visual range?
emc		#7	[-]
Posts: 3686 (19-Jul-1966 21:08:56) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Zen9 wrote: Sorry is'nt this the era of the Venom? How does a Mig19 fare against aircraft able to see it from beyond visual range? I'm sorry, but I'm baffled by your second sentence. Did the Venom have some magical system to enable its pilot to see beyond the range of of his vision?
bager1968		#8	[-]
Posts: 2895 (19-Apr-2008 02:43:32) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	The Venom was a 2-seat radar-equipped "night/all-weather" fighter... thus could "see" opponents from a longer range, and in worse visual conditions, than a "visual-only/radar-assisted day" fighter could.
emc		#9	[-]
Posts: 3688 (19-Apr-2008 03:07:43) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Thank you.
jlyons97		#10	[-]
Posts: 1441 (19-Apr-2008 03:57:56) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	bager1968 wrote: The Venom was a 2-seat radar-equipped "night/all-weather" fighter... thus could "see" opponents from a longer range, and in worse visual conditions, than a "visual-only/radar-assisted day" fighter could. Fine. But a Venom still had to get to 20mm range to shoot down anything. So, what's the advantage? And, what's the advantage in daylight?

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

MiG-19 vs. the Best European Fighters of 1956

MiG-19 vs. the Best European Fighters of 1956

Quick Reply