Fighter performance; F-4 vs MiG-21; actual plane analysis

[Six Nifty .50s]

This is not unlike comparing a Spitfire with a Mosquito. The performance envelopes were somewhat different, but one of them was obviously more versatile than the other.

The MiG-21 was a short-range interceptor with the same strengths and weaknesses as the F-5: both were valuable for local defense, but with limited offensive capability, little room to carry advanced sensors (radars, jamming equipment, etc), and the pilots were not able to fight very far from their own bases. Their success or failure was largely dependent upon the ground radar station that was controlling them. Even with air refueling equipment, both the MiG-21 and the F-5 required too much tanker support and ECM aircraft to be practical as long-range escort fighters.

Robert Wilcox in his Scream of Eagles gives a good background and overview on the creation of TOPGUN, and through various interviews he provides a step-by-step explanation of how U.S. Navy F-4 pilots learned how to outmanuever smaller jets. The navy's brand of "dissimilar" air combat training included the practice of intentionally throwing the Phantom out of control to gain the upper hand. The original TOPGUN instructor pilots noted that this type of advanced dogfight training was not intended for F-8 pilots because they did not need it, although some Crusader pilots asked to be reassigned to Phantoms after the F-4s began to consistently defeat the smaller F-8 during training exercises.