Opinion on the F-5?

It doesn’t get much love regarding Vietnam and is often overshadowed by the earlier F-4 or F-100+ and the later F-14/15/16

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    area 88 was rad.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Did the F-5 deploy to Vietnam after all?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      *at all

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Did the F-5 deploy to Vietnam after all?

        Yeah a lot actually.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          They were mostly flown by the South Vietnamese though.
          The US hardly used the F-5 as a combat aircraft at all apart from two test units 4503rd TFS who acted as the combat evaluation unit, and 10th Fighter Squadron (Commando) who served as an conversion unit, training the VNAF aircrews and ground crews in combat conditions

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, they sent a testing squadron to try it out and they racked about 1.5k missions during their stay doing ground attack, with pretty much stellar reports.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    not my favorite but the widebody stance looks good from bottom angle

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Sexo.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Uohhhhhh

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    great plane for the value,

    F-20 would have been great too but the Government wanted to appease the CCP so they stop the production of it so Taiwan couldn't get them.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >F-20 would have been great too but the Government wanted to appease the CCP so they stop the production of it so Taiwan couldn't get them.
      No, you fricking moron.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The YF-17 with a single F404 would be far better than the F-20.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It wasn't about performance but the affordability of that performance.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          On paper it had that performance, in real life it didn't solve any of the short comings of the F-5E. It was something similar -or worse- than the MiG-21bis.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Not really. It WAS better than the F-5 in all respects.
            The problem is, the niche it was designed to fill, I.e. “inexpensive export fighter that’s better than an F-5 and isn’t an F-16 which we can’t export” was made redundant when the administration allowed the sale of F-16’s which were superior to the F-20.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >and isn’t an F-16 which we can’t export” was made redundant when the administration allowed the sale of F-16
              in other words, Northrop's lobbyists were worse than General Dynamics lobbyists

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                F-16 was just a better plane altoghether, though. If you could pick between the two you'd just pay a bit more for the F-16, no question about it.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    it's neat i guess but not as neat as the f4

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They looked great as aggressors and MiG-28s

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Wasn't the F-5 made primarily to be an export/donation for US allies?

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The F-5 was a vastly superior dogfighter to either the F-4 or the Mig-21 and would have slotted the shit out of some migs if they had given it the chance.

    Nowhere near as upgradable or versatile as the F-4 but it still would have been far better at the its role in Vietnam

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >would have slotted the shit out of some migs if they had given it the chance
      It was and and it did, just not in US service.

      F-5 is also one of the few planes that killed a Mig-25.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It was good for what it was (a cheap day fighter). I have great respect for it since my favorite aircraft is the Sea Harrier which is another short king that punched above its weight and proved that a shitty subsonic IR only fighter piloted by a British NATO pilot is worth more than a supersonic air superiority fighter flown by an argentina chimp. The only reason people bully the F-5 is due to the morons like Sprey who think it was better than the F-4 and that the US should have adopted an aircraft with no radar.

    The Sea Harrier FA.2 is basically what the F-5 could have been turned into since was turned into a 4th gen fighter by adding an extremely power PD radar, AMRAAMs, The same extremely accurate swedish computer INS/Nav-Attack as the Gripen plus integration of anti-ship missiles and PGMs. Wargames against the US Navy proved that the FA.2 was a devious little bastard and massive pain in the ass for F/A-18s to deal with due to being a tiny adorable A-4 Skyhawk sized aircraft with a similar missile engagement range to a Legacy Bug meaning the Harrier would often get the first missile off.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It sucks, but still in service while the phantom and big cat are out to pasture. If you're a fan then thats a win for you.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >while the phantom and big cat are out to pasture

      several countries still use the F-4 (Greece and Roaches both have them). Iran has F-5s, F-4s and F-14s

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I'm talking about in the United States dipshit.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          US doesn't operate the F-5. The T-38 isn't identical.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >a cheap, easy to maintain plane in an era of bloated overweight giants, introduced the concept of life cycle costs and designed to be easily managed from the get-go
    >light, small and nimble fighter with the aerodynamic configuration ahead of its era, looks like a 4th gen and eventually evolved into one with the F/A-18. is still supersonic.
    >still a solid ground attacker, carries the bombload of a Skyhawk or a Super Sabre into combat effectively.
    It could've become the low part of the hi-low mix in the USAF along with the Phantom and it's a crime that it didn't, overshadowed by the F-104 both in the short-lived US service and in abroad sales. Quite a few nations did end up adopting it in the 70s but it could've happened a decade earlier if it was given the chance, turning its success into a triumph and the plane into the symbol of freedom it was meant to be, like the F-4.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Pretty much the start of the US jet exports. Simple, cheap, dependable, and with just enough sophistication to be a threat to any air force of it's time. F-5s wouldn't win a war but they'd give their users a chance against a more powerful air force.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *