Most successful jet fighter of all time?

[sovietstar]

So I was wondering whether anybody would want to discuss this with me, I wanted to know what other people think was the most successful jet of all time in terms of

1) Units sold

2) Innovative technology at time of release(?)

3) Reliability

Thank you very much, I'm guessing its probably going to be something like the MIG-21 or something but I really couldn't say.

Cheers!

Edited January 16, 2015 by sovietstar

[Parabat]

Apparently it's the Mig-15 (18,000+) and then Mig-21 (<14,000).

[bzn20]

On serviceability?

Not sure if a comecon jet sold to a captive market means its successful. Have you seen their most successful cars of the cold War? Trabant,Lada,Moskovitch, Zil etc..

Just the most numerous.

[phildagreek]

It's my favourite so I might be biased, but I'd suggest the good ol' F4 Phantom.

[tomprobert]

Surely the F-4 Phantom must be up there... hugely versatile, exported widely, and still in service 50+ years after first flight?

The F-16 can't be far down an 'all time greats' chart either...

Tom

[ChrisL]

The F-16 sold well and also scores well on the innovation front - it blazing a trail with respect to fly by wire and relaxed stability.

[andym]

When all things are considered I'd say it's a toss up between F-4 and Mig-21.

Andy

Edited January 14, 2015 by andym

[Giorgio N]

The mig-21 sure has been exported to an impressive number of countries and many of these could choose differently if they wanted. The mig had a good compromise between performance and simplicity. For this reason it was sure a hugely successful fighter.

In terms of innovation however I believe no aircraft can beat the Phantom! The Phantom was a revolution, with this design the jet fighter fully entered the era of the multirole aircraft where the on-board equipment is as important if not more important than the airframe. Of course other aircrafts had introduced a degree of this but it's with the Phantom that the modern jet fighter is born

[Muzz]

My first instinct is to say Mig-21, I'm pretty sure it would beat the F-4 Phantom on units sold and reliability. Maybe not so much on the innovative front.

Others in the running that I can think of would be the F-4 Phantom (units sold, innovative, reliable), F-5 Freedom Fighter (units sold, reliable), F-16 Falcon (units sold, innovative). The Mig-23 Flogger and the Mig-29 Fulcrum would possibly be in contention too.

That's my lot!

Muzz

[Roland Pulfrew]

Surely there can be a debate over eras as well; I would throw in Hawker Hunter. First flew in 1951 and still be used operationally (even if that is in a contractor role) today. Not built in huge numbers in comparison to the Migs, F-4 and F-16, only around 2000 but operated around the world. For a 1950s jet a 60-odd year operational life span must put it in one type of most successful bracket.

[cmatthewbacon]

relaxed stability.

Now that is something I've been trying to achieve all my life...

I'd have to vote for the Phantom or F-16, though I'll throw the Mirage III into the mix as well for innovation, evolution and longevity...

bestest,

M.

[JohnT]

The three criteria are conflicting and when applied most likely will give different answers. For example you get one aircraft if talking about production but a different one if considering innovation and arguably a third answer again if looking at reliability.

On numbers the Mig scores highly but I am not certain about reliability. I thought that TBO on Soviet engines was short compared to Western engines

if going for a "package" the Phantom is hard to beat as is the F16

It has to boil down to a contest between a product from the Soviets or USA though as no one else produced bigger numbers.

it gets to be more fun if you lose the numbers produced factor and leave in innovation and reliability while adding performance (in the broad sense of role capability)

[Ptmvarsityfan]

Agree with bzn20,dont think the migs were 'sold' and would be interesting to know how many were bought by countries which had a choice. Did any country choose to buy MiG 15's over the Sabre?

Interesting thread and look forward to debate!

Cheers, Paul

[bzn20]

In older times the Hurricane had more kills than the superior Spitfire. Everyone (almost) will say the Spitfire was the best when the hurricane did more damage. Both answers are acceptable.

When it comes to selling fighters there was so much bribing/backhanders going on they bought the plane for any reason and not to their original spec. Which company had the biggest slush fund?

Think Starfighters for one.

Edited January 14, 2015 by bzn20

[Mike V]

The F-16 sold well and also scores well on the innovation front - it blazing a trail with respect to fly by wire and relaxed stability.

The F-16 (like the F-15) is also undefeated air to air and was a lot more innovative than both the MiG-21 and F-4.

[Master Zen]

I vote F-16 too. It was the first true multi role fighter, first with all glass cockpit and digital fly by wire, excellent dogfighter and excellent bombing platform, great value for money, impressive combat record, nearly 4 decades of service and built about twice more than the next most successful 4th gen fighter.

[Master Zen]

The F-16 (like the F-15) is also undefeated air to air and was a lot more innovative than both the MiG-21 and F-4.

IIRC a Turkish F-16 was shot down by a Greek Mirage 2000

[bzn20]

Sea Harrier in the Falklands?

[Julien]

How about the F-15.

Pretty much total air superiority, good reliability and pretty much state of the art when it was introduced and still no slouch today.

[VMA131Marine]

How about the F-15.

Pretty much total air superiority, good reliability and pretty much state of the art when it was introduced and still no slouch today.

... and likely to be in production to at least 2018, or well over 40 years.

[Rich G]

My vote would be for the F-4 phantom, but I would also suggest the Mirage III, exported and copied by numeous countries and still in service in one form or other with Argentina, Brazil, Equador etc, it also served well in combat and introduced high speed and affordability, ease of maintanance and reliability to those nations that didn't necessarily have the budget to handle more advanced types.

Rich

Edited January 27, 2015 by Rich G

[upnorth]

Did any country choose to buy MiG 15's over the Sabre?

I think a fair few of the countries in Africa and the Middle East who used the MiG-15, while on friendly terms with the former Soviet Union, likely did have more freedom of choice than those directly in the Warsaw Pact. Whether the Sabre would ever have been offered to them is another matter.

The MiG-15 did have things in its favour though. It had a reputation as a pilot's plane and for a relatively undemanding maintenance regime so did become popular with pilots and ground crews.

It was also noted for having good cockpit ergonomics for the day, including a very good cockpit air conditioning system.

From an armament standpoint, the MiG-15 had bigger and sharper teeth than the Sabre in most versions.

Say what you like about the Sabre, in most fighter versions, it was a modern jet built around outdated armament.

[Giorgio N]

Apart from the Warsaw Pact countries, most other users of MiGs could buy what they wanted and many actually used the soviet aircrafts together with western types.

India for example used a large number of mig-21s yet has also been a good customer of British aviation industry. Egypt, Iraq and Libya had the mig but also mirages of various types. Last but not least, a number of countries that were not on good terms with the soviet union ended up buying Chinese made mig-21s.

The reality is simply that this aircraft offered a good overall package and allowed many countries to field a good mach 2 fighter at a relatively low cost. That part of this was due to the wish of the Soviets to build relations with many of these countries can't be denied and term "mig diplomacy" is a witness... But really the same applies to most arms sales in the world

[alpine_modeller]

Looking at the criteria posted by sovietstar in the original post, I would have said the Harrier.

Criteria 2) it wins hands-down (How many attempts did the US make ?? How cr*p was the Soviet attempt ??).

And considering 20 Sea Harriers took out the entire Argentine Air Force 8000 miles from home and in its own back-yard, I would say it wins for criteria 3) as well.

Edited January 15, 2015 by alpine_modeller

[Dennis_C]

I would say that the original question can't be answered in 'all times' perspective. Its more appropriate to define most successful fighters per generation.

In such perspective I would say

1) P-80 as an early first gen fighter. it was a total innovation in 1945. It was quickly outdated as a fighter due to rapid jet tech development - but extremely reliable judging from T-33 career - still in service in Bolivia

2) MiG-15 as late (second wave) first gen fighters. Reasons are well explained above

3) MiG-21 (followed by Mirage III) in gen 2 - also explained above. Just think why 'MiG diplomacy' became possible - simply it is the result of MiG-21 perfection. Too great value for loyalty.

4) Phantom as gen 3 fighter - again for the above explained reasons.

5) F-16 as gen 4 fighter - already explained

4+/5 generation is an open question though

What is better - e.g. F-16 or MiG-15 - I do not think it can be ever answered. They are just too different - and existed in too different political and technological environments...

Edited January 15, 2015 by Dennis_C