Yuku free message boards

I haven't changed the qualifications. Feel free to fight at night, in poor weather, whatever you'd like.

I do think though, IMO, that taking factors beyond the actual aircraft and its on-board weapons capabilities makes the comparison overly complex. If we add consideration of other factors such as ground control, radar intercept and AEW capabilities, fuel supply logistics, pilot training, military leadership, aircraft maintenance regimes and expertise, airfield location, etc, etc... then we're no longer comparing aircraft, but are comparing the entire military infrastructure and support systems of the opposing sides. Feel free to do, but that is no longer a comparison of aircraft, but of each nations' fighting ability.

I chose 1956 as this was when the MiG-19 entered general service, having been first introduced a few months earlier in mid 1955. It's not the MiG's fault that NATO had little to compare against the MiG until 1957 or later.

Why not consider the F-102 Delta Dagger, which entered service in 1956? You wouldn't want the delta-winged bomber killer to enter into a dogfight with the MiG, but with its credible radar and AIM-4 Falcon AAMs (also entered service 1956), and good turn of speed, it should have a good chance.

How about the Gloster Javelin, which also entered service in 1956? It has a slower top speed and rate of climb that the MiG-19, but with its 4x 30 mm ADEN cannons and four de Havilland Firestreak air-to-air missiles, plus its Westinghouse AN/APQ-43 radar (and the advantage of a back-seat crewmate to handle some of the workload), it should stand a credible chance against the MiG-19. The Javelin was slightly lighter than the MiG-19, and had significantly more powerful engines (2× Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire 7R turbojets, 12,300 lbf vs. 2× Tumansky RD-9B afterburning turbojets, 7,178 lbf each).