Su-15TM vs F-104G

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

Good morning friends

Just wanted to start a discussion to compare these 2 cold warriors

by late 70s -1982 both stood at the peak of their deployment

approx 500 each

one was a pure interceptor , other was mainly for strike and had only IR weapons , the su-15TM got R-60 from 1979 onwards

both are not renowned for their agility not sure which one is worse

su-15 might not have faced f-104 in central europe but around the southern flank and in far east there is a strong possibility of two running into each other incase of a conventional war for 2 reasons

1-There were few mig-23 units there
2- many of these nations like turkey can use the f-104G in strike role

TM version of flagon was somewhat improved over others , and maybe used gunpods too ?

so what is the likely outcome of encounters between these 2 types ?

Original post
Profile picture for user paralay

Member for

14 years 3 months

Posts: 1,344

F-104 in competition with the MiG-21
F-106 compare with su-9 / su-11
F-101 - Yak-28P and Tu-128
Su-15 it makes sense to compare with the F-4
I Think it would be fair

Attachments

Member for

13 years 10 months

Posts: 2,813

F-104 in competition with the MiG-21
F-106 compare with su-9 / su-11
F-101 - Yak-28P and Tu-128
Su-15 it makes sense to compare with the F-4
I Think it would be fair

F-104G compares with the Yak-28B as a tactical nuclear bomber.

F-106 compares more with the Yak-28P and Su-15 in armament and range as interceptors

Closest aircraft to the MiG 21 in the 1960s was probably the F-5A

No real Soviet equivalent to the F-4 as a multi-role aircraft.

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

F-104 in competition with the MiG-21
F-106 compare with su-9 / su-11
F-101 - Yak-28P and Tu-128
Su-15 it makes sense to compare with the F-4
I Think it would be fair

But even in fighter role su15tm is not even comparable to f-4C/D versions ?
how do you see it?

Profile picture for user paralay

Member for

14 years 3 months

Posts: 1,344

Tasks that performed f-4 Phantom in the US air force in the USSR air force performed three types:
Su-15, MiG-23 and Su-24

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

Agreed but in terms of missile armament, agility , performance isn't su15 more similar to f104 than f4 ?

Profile picture for user paralay

Member for

14 years 3 months

Posts: 1,344

F-104, wing load 494 - 723 kg/m2, thrust 0.54 - 0.79 kgf/kg
F-4, wing load 383 - 570 kg/m2, thrust 0.58 - 0.86 kgf/kg
Su-15TM wing load 470 - 489 kg/m2, thrust 0.75 - 0.78 kgf/kg

Phantom has the advantage

Member for

7 years 1 month

Posts: 137

What was the job of the Su-15? Wasn't it a pure interceptor? So agility wasn't demanded. Phantom can not be taken for comparison, because it was a multi role fighter. I would not compare similar aircraft. I would compare specific fighter with their likely opponents. Who were the opponents of the Su-15? In the southern area it was F-104 and F-4. The typical indicators say, that Su-15 should be more agile than F-104. Now we should take a deeper look into the details. Is there a flight manual of the Su-15 around?

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

You are right even in the pure interceptor role su15 is likely to encounter especially in the Southern sector F104 or mirage configured for a strike role also personally I think phantom is head and shoulders above the flagon in terms of performance

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 11,742

The Su-15 was useless against a F-104 in the striker-role at low level and its weaponary did not allow a turning contest higher up. Ask the Italiens about that. High-up and supersonic the wing-load comparison no longer works, when it comes to the lift ratio of the wing design. .

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

The Su-15 was useless against a F-104 in the striker-role at low level and its weaponary did not allow a turning contest higher up. Ask the Italiens about that. High-up and supersonic the wing-load comparison no longer works, when it comes to the lift ratio of the wing design. .

so high wingloading at high altitudes makes you more agile ?

and 1979 on the TM versions were cleared to carry R-60

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 11,742

Yes in that very case. You forgot the thickness of the wing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-104_Starfighter See under Airframe about that.
The F-104 becomes better with rising speed, there it gives a superior lift-drag-ratio and a better role-rate to start a faster turning. See the MiG-23 about that, when it is going supersonic. There is no sustained turning demanded any longer. The TM got the R-60 for smaller targets and self-defence, its limited turning performance in mind. The R-60M with a cooled seeker offered the use in head on engagements.
https://wikivisually.com/wiki/R-60_(missile)

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

Pakistanis used f104 in combat and was widely accepted as inferior to mig21fl which was a poor low level performer itself

Member for

13 years 10 months

Posts: 2,813

Pakistanis used f104 in combat and was widely accepted as inferior to mig21fl which was a poor low level performer itself

No, it is not "widely accepted" that the F-104 was inferior to the MiG-21 - wherever did you get that idea?

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

Well look at the combat record of both in this intense albeit brief conflict

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 11,742

Just a small number of events near ground level. http://www.i-f-s.nl/f-104-operators/
http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/may/f-104.htm
1971 Pakistan-India War
Dec 12th 1971 over Jamnagar several MiG-21s of 47 Sqn fought attacking F-104s of 9 Sqn and shot down one.
Dec 16th 1971 over Shakargah the biggest battle when two F-104s were shot down by a MiG-21s CAP of 29 Sqn. Source: Air Wars And Aircraft by Victor Flintham in 1989

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

Yeah in most modern combat its all about " small number of events "
F 104 was not involved in any bigger conflicts so we will never know
nor is the su15 going to be exhumed anytime soon
but the comparison was based on the potential of their conflict , given both served in great numbers in the same era

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 11,742

Everyone can make up his mind, why the Su-15TM was never based near a central battle field and was in PVO-service only. A pure interceptor to deal with higher flying bombers at first.
https://hushkit.net/2019/04/26/inter...ding-the-ussr/
Here you learn about the 6 G-limit of the Su-15 and the B-52, its main target.
https://warisboring.com/the-su-15-was-the-doom-of-airliners-and-a-cosmonaut/
I give that link my first sentence in mind.

Member for

14 years 10 months

Posts: 545

Everyone can make up his mind, why the Su-15TM was never based near a central battle field and was in PVO-service only. A pure interceptor to deal with higher flying bombers at first.
https://hushkit.net/2019/04/26/inter...ding-the-ussr/
Here you learn about the 6 G-limit of the Su-15 and the B-52, its main target.
https://warisboring.com/the-su-15-wa...d-a-cosmonaut/
I give that link my first sentence in mind.

Aircraft do not always fight the ones they were designed to combat
it depends on the circumstances and situations
And the targets available , that's why mig17 fought f4 in Vietnam and f86 Sabres fought mig21 in indopak wars etc etc
If su15 is in a warzone where there are no b52 bombers and there is a shortage of VVS fighters to intercept intruding strike planes like f104 , I'm sure they will be scrambled.

Btw thanks for the first link

Member for

8 years

Posts: 5,849

[USER="62"]Sens[/USER] : nice read. Thank you.

Member for

6 years 1 month

Posts: 2,014

F-104, wing load 494 - 723 kg/m2, thrust 0.54 - 0.79 kgf/kg
F-4, wing load 383 - 570 kg/m2, thrust 0.58 - 0.86 kgf/kg
Su-15TM wing load 470 - 489 kg/m2, thrust 0.75 - 0.78 kgf/kg

Phantom has the advantage

Slat version of F-4 is fairly maneuverable