A4 Skyhawk, built as an Attack Aricraft. How would you rate it as a fighter?

Question

The A4 is essentially a 50's design. How would you rate it, as a fighter, against 60's and 70's Aircraft. F-16 etc.

Answer 1

It's reasonably nimble for it's age, but way too slow.

It would get blown out of the sky before the Scooter pilot knew what was happening.

Answer 2

agile.

note they were used by the aggrssor squadrons

however being subsonic, and without the radar, it would suffer in the air combat of the 60ites and 70ies.

i would not compare it wiht the MiG 21 even though it was used to mock the MiG. they are basically extremely different, MiG being optimised for supersonic flight.

btw i think that the A4s were used to act like the frescos MiG 17 rather than Mig 21s. the F 5 were used as the Mig 21 and the F4 were used to act like Mig 23 flogger. at least the usage of F4 in the ground suipport role MiG 23/27 was mentioned in a documentary about a Red flag.

citing wiki:

> Trainer versions of the Skyhawk remained in Navy service, however, finding a new lease on life with the advent of adversary training, where the nimble A-4 was used as a stand-in for the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-17 in dissimilar air combat training (DACT). It served in that role until 1999.<

>With renewed emphasis on Air Combat Maneuvering (ACM) training brought on with the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN) in 1968, the availability of A-4 Skyhawks in both the Instrument RAGs and Composite Squadrons at the Master Jet Bases presented a ready resource of the nimble Skyhawks that had become the TOPGUN preferred surrogate for the MiG-17. At the time, the F-4 Phantom was just being exploited to its full potential as a fighter and had not performed as well as expected against the smaller North Vietnamese MiG-17 and MiG-21 opponents. TOPGUN introduced the notion of dissimilar air combat training (DACT) using the A-4E in the striped "Mongoose" configuration with fixed slats<

***hey ladies, having the apg 53 does not mean it is capable of Air to Air combat. its fire control device, not air interception.***

Sure if you place the A4 against the F16/f18 to fight the maneuver combat, then the pilot with better tactics should win, especially if thee A4 pilot is the teacher there, and the F16 the student. However the air combat is NOT just about dogfighting. in a real life the odds would be against the A4, in terms of 30+kms range of Amraam vs. 14 kms at the best of the sidewinger. plus the interceptor planes have the advantage of better situational awareness.

Answer 3

yep, agree with grommit,

its small and reasonably maneuverable but its speed is way too slow, especially when carrying anything.

i guess it can fight with its gun and AIM-9X 'winders but nothing that would require an Air to air radar to launch.

so, against anything NATO has, like the f-15, -16 or even the 14, not to mention f22 and f35, it won't last very long

it will stand a chance against the mig-21 and even the mig-23  if the skyhawk has some AWACS support.

ps: top gun did use the f-5s and A-4s to simulate mig 23 and mig 31 respectively (and that fact isn't from the movie)

Answer 4

It was a fair analog for a MiG21.  Small, and bled off energy quickly in a turning fight-though it's instantaneous G was impressive.  At low altitude and in the right profile also a good sim for a MiG17.  Otherwise at medium altitude similar to a Fishbed in those aspects.

OK, Fight's on.  Where did you get your data on Top Gun's use of A4 v Eagles, Vipers and Hornets?

There is also a difference between what you read/see on TV, what is a training scenario and what many of us here flew...

To recap:  it's small, bleeds off energy quickly in a turning fight-it has almost no sustained G.  Any Eagle, Viper, Hornet or even Tomcat can get a shooting solution in a single scissors.  Took longer in the F4, but we were also able to whack it...