Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
F-16 Fighting Falcon vs. AV-8B Harrier. Who wins?
Both are great designs but built for different missions. Who wins, in my opinion, would probably greatly depend on pilot ability especially to control the engagement, but I would give an edge to the Harrier. Its vectored thrust makes it extremely maneuverable and it would have a decided edge in a low-altitude environment. The Falcon is much faster and more capable at higher altitudes, and also has better cockpit visibility.
I would think in either fighter the gun would be the better weapon than missiles, simply because either could outmaneuver a missile if the pilot knew it was coming. The AIM-120 would probably be more effective than the AIM-9 but a good pilot should be able to evade either one.
F-16 carries an internal M61 20 mm Vulcan cannon. AV-8B would carry an external GAU-12 25 mm Equalizer cannon. Both could be highly effective in a dogfight, but both have limited ammunition supplies.
I think either pilot would find this dogfight to be a challenge. Surprise and a lucky first shot could carry the day.
The scenario would be a close-in dogfight, more than likely at medium to low altitude.
Lest people get the wrong idea, I actually like the F-16 better. It is a better all-purpose design.
But the Harrier has an advantage in addition to its VTOL capabilities, and it comes from the same technology--vectored thrust that gives it an ability to stop, rise vertically, fly backward or sideways and change position quickly. The Royal Navy used this to considerable advantage in the Falklands War in 1982.
The F-16s faster speed would be an advantage under some but not all circumstances. It should be noted that in Vietnam the MIG-17s racked up a surprising number of kills against the USAF's F-4s, decidedly faster and better armed fighters. Pilot skills and training were a huge factor.
The better USAF F-4 pilots and most Navy F-4 pilots could handle the MIG-17--it was still a challenge.
As I prepare to select a best answer to this question let me just add one or two things. First, I hope Harrier pilots get the opportunity to fly simulated combat against aircraft like the F-16. Honing skills against dissimilar aircraft has proven to be of very great value to combat pilots.
There are a number of very good answers to this question, and most bring up valid points. Missiles are effective, but typically the AV-8B and F-16 would carry two each, AIM-9 and AIM-120. Each pilot would get up to four missile shots, and one missile could bring the opponent down. The AMRAAM is the better of the two types, since it operates using a radar lock and the only way to evade it is to outmaneuver or outrun it. Most jet fighters could probably evade the AIM-9 fairly easily if the pilot knows it's coming.
The key to success in this match-up would be pilot ability and control of the engagement. If I'm in the F-16 I would try to draw the combat up to an altitude where I had the
6 Answers
- WayneLv 69 years agoFavorite Answer
F16
The F16 can do up to Mach 2, the AV8B cannot even reach Mach 1. Therefore, it is much more faster and could easily throw the opponent off it's tail, and when being engaged by the guns can simply outrun the rounds entirely. The gun only really matters in a very close range dogfight - missiles are what wins modern Air to Air combat, and it is incredibly difficult in a close quarters dogfight to evade a missile, when the missile will reach you in a few short seconds - you may not even realize it was fired. At a longer range dogfight even, it is still difficult to evade a missile, because the opportunity to evade a missile once it has been locked on and fired will only arise in those few short seconds before the impact, even if it were in the air for minutes. Otherwise, the missile will still have a lock on you if you do it too early. And of course, do it too late and BOOM. But because of the F16's very high speed, it gives the pilot more time to evade the missile.
The only advantage a Harrier actually has over the F16 is that it has VTOL capabilities, and thus can be easily deployed to ships. And it is the only real purpose a Harrier is designed to fit.
- 9 years ago
Possibly the Harrier.......... it can slow down for turning in to make a kill WAY faster by using the thrust vectoring nozzles (also known as a "VIFF") - used to great effect on the British original when dogfighting with Argentinians in the 1982 Falklands war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtQRHm1CZdI&t=4m43s
- Mark FLv 79 years ago
Whichever pilot shoots first.
Honestly, these apples vs. oranges "matchups" are so pointless. Machines don't fight each other anyway, people do. And it is the people who will decide this.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- ?Lv 59 years ago
With modern weapon systems the missile is far more dangerous than guns. What you are describing is a close-in dogfight. The f-16 is the more nimble and maneuverable aircraft. However the skill of the pilot almost always carries the day. The more skilled pilot would use his aircraft's capabilities to the maximum avoiding the advantages that the opposing aircraft might have.
