Will the F-5 ever go away?

[Dayton3]

If, IF the right tactics are used. For years in the Vietnam War the Navy and Air Force used piss poor tactics for the F-4 Phantom that took advantage of none of the Phantoms assets.

Which is exactly why the Top Gun school was formed in the first place, as well as the Air Force Weapon School.

The problem is that the air forces stopped intensive training in dogfighting techniques, and started to rely to heavily on missiles. Those schools were formed after those hard lessons in Vietnam, in order to not let that happen again.

I'm afraid now the armed forces are relying way to heavily on drones.

 

[Mushroom]

If, IF the right tactics are used. For years in the Vietnam War the Navy and Air Force used piss poor tactics for the F-4 Phantom that took advantage of none of the Phantoms assets.

Which is exactly why the Top Gun school was formed in the first place, as well as the Air Force Weapon School.

The problem is that the air forces stopped intensive training in dogfighting techniques, and started to rely to heavily on missiles. Those schools were formed after those hard lessons in Vietnam, in order to not let that happen again.

I'm afraid now the armed forces are relying way to heavily on drones.

Not really.

For some missions, they are great. Want an aircraft to loiter for hours on end, a drone is the perfect choice. Need to deliver only a small payload and not risk a human pilot, a drone is the perfect choice.

Need pinpoint accurate in a fluid battlespace, drones are not a good choice. Need to take out a hardened target with friendlies in danger close proximity, drones are really not a good choice. Need to drop more than 2 or 3 payloads on a target, a drone is not a good choice.

Most drones are still only for reconnaissance, and for that they are great. But not so much for bombs on targets. And ultimately, no war has ever been won without boots on the ground. And drones will never be able to do that.

 

[Vrenn]

The US by that era was already using the F-4, which is more capable than the F-5.

If, IF the right tactics are used. For years in the Vietnam War the Navy and Air Force used piss poor tactics for the F-4 Phantom that took advantage of none of the Phantoms assets.

Never fight the other guys fight. Fight your own fight and force him to fight your fight. Even today, the F-5 is highly competitive to the Teen Fighters and Migs and SUs. Of course, the 5th gens are a different ball of wax. The weakest point in a turn and burn fight isn't the aircraft when dealing with the F-5 and the Teen fighters. It's the pilot. Pulling over 7 Gees for any time will cause some severe damage and fatique to the pilot. Yes, all of them can do a short stint at 9 Gees but just for a very short period. This is why the F-18 with it's 7.5 G limit is highly competitive. But remember this, all of them are capable of disengaging at any time when they want to. Especially the F-15.

 

[Stryder50]

An interesting "could have been" twist to the F-5 saga;
...
The Northrop F-20 Tigershark (initially F-5G) was a light fighter, designed and built by Northrop. Its development began in 1975 as a further evolution of Northrop's F-5E Tiger II, featuring a new engine that greatly improved overall performance, and a modern avionics suite including a powerful and flexible radar. Compared with the F-5E, the F-20 was much faster, gained beyond-visual-range air-to-air capability, and had a full suite of air-to-ground modes capable of firing most U.S. weapons. With these improved capabilities, the F-20 became competitive with contemporary fighter designs such as the General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon, but was much less expensive to purchase and operate.

Much of the F-20's development was carried out under a US Department of Defense (DoD) project called "FX". FX sought to develop fighters that would be capable in combat with the latest Soviet aircraft, but excluding sensitive front-line technologies used by the United States Air Force's own aircraft. FX was a product of the Carter administration's military export policies, which aimed to provide foreign nations with high quality equipment without the risk of US front-line technology falling into Soviet hands. Northrop had high hopes for the F-20 in the international market, but policy changes following Ronald Reagan's election meant the F-20 had to compete for sales against aircraft like the F-16, the USAF's latest fighter design. The development program was abandoned in 1986 after three prototypes had been built and a fourth partially completed.[1]
...

...

Northrop F-20 Tigershark - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Dayton3]

You miss a major reason that the F-20 failed to find any buyers. Three of the prototypes crashed. Not the fault of the airplanes apparently but needless to say when planes crash, buyers go away

 

[Stryder50]

You miss a major reason that the F-20 failed to find any buyers. Three of the prototypes crashed. Not the fault of the airplanes apparently but needless to say when planes crash, buyers go away

Actually, two of the three completed crashed. But there appears to be other factors involved as well.
...

Aircraft disposition​

The remaining F-20 is on display at the California Science Center in Los Angeles.

• 82-0062 (Northrop serial number GG.1001) – crashed at Suwon Air Base, South Korea on 10 October 1984. Pilot killed.[79]
• 82-0063 (Northrop serial number GI.1001) – crashed at CFB Goose Bay, Canada on 14 May 1985. Pilot killed.[79]
• 82-0064 (Northrop serial number GI.1002) – California Science Center in Exposition Park, Los Angeles, California.[80]
• Northrop F-20 Tigershark - Wikipedia

 

[Dayton3]

Actually, two of the three completed crashed. But there appears to be other factors involved as well.
...

Aircraft disposition​

The remaining F-20 is on display at the California Science Center in Los Angeles.

• 82-0062 (Northrop serial number GG.1001) – crashed at Suwon Air Base, South Korea on 10 October 1984. Pilot killed.[79]
• 82-0063 (Northrop serial number GI.1001) – crashed at CFB Goose Bay, Canada on 14 May 1985. Pilot killed.[79]
• 82-0064 (Northrop serial number GI.1002) – California Science Center in Exposition Park, Los Angeles, California.[80]
• Northrop F-20 Tigershark - Wikipedia

Sorry, my bad.

But once the F-16 gained AMRAAM capability the only operational advantage the F-20 had vanished.

 

[Stryder50]

Sorry, my bad.

But once the F-16 gained AMRAAM capability the only operational advantage the F-20 had vanished.

I suspect aspects that made the F-20 desirable were incorporated into the later versions of the F-5.
One major appeal of the F-20 was near same capabilities at significantly lower costs.

 

[Vrenn]

I suspect aspects that made the F-20 desirable were incorporated into the later versions of the F-5.
One major appeal of the F-20 was near same capabilities at significantly lower costs.

I think Northrop just had too much on it's plate during that time. Not only were they producing the F-5E but they were also pushing the F-20G. But at the same time, they were producing the YF-17 which was more than a serious contender in the FX program barely losing to the F-16 only because of the compatability of the F-16 to the F-15.

Then they reworked it into a real world beater.

 

[Dayton3]

I always wanted an F-5 for my states proposed aviation museum. But not just any F-5. I would like one that had been flown by the South Vietnamese Air Force then captured by North Vietnam when the south fell, and then flown against China by the Vietnamese.

 

[Vrenn]

I always wanted an F-5 for my states proposed aviation museum. But not just any F-5. I would like one that had been flown by the South Vietnamese Air Force then captured by North Vietnam when the south fell, and then flown against China by the Vietnamese.

When Vietnam became well off, they bought a lot of "Soviet" Military Equipment and claim they sold off the F-5s and other Vietnam Era equipment. But I wonder if they don't have a series of hangars and warehouses like they have with the captured M-48 Tanks.

But you may be able to contact Czechoslovakia who did purchase a bunch of the F-5s in the 80s from Vietnam.

 

[Mushroom]

But I wonder if they don't have a series of hangars and warehouses like they have with the captured M-48 Tanks.

Actually, shortly after they conquered South Vietnam, they sold off most of their captured American ground equipment. The only one they kept in any numbers are the M113 APC.

Even today, their main battle tank is the Post-WWII era T54. They have a small number of Cold War era export T90SK tanks, which are mixed in with their other units as "Command and Control" vehicles for their tank brigades.

But tanks are not a major part of their armed forces, as the terrain there is not very conducive for their use.

Ironically however, the backbone of their airlift capacity is still the roughly 500 C-130 aircraft that they captured. And they recently entered an agreement to but the T-6 Texan from the US for flight training.

 

[Vrenn]

Actually, shortly after they conquered South Vietnam, they sold off most of their captured American ground equipment. The only one they kept in any numbers are the M113 APC.

Even today, their main battle tank is the Post-WWII era T54. They have a small number of Cold War era export T90SK tanks, which are mixed in with their other units as "Command and Control" vehicles for their tank brigades.

But tanks are not a major part of their armed forces, as the terrain there is not very conducive for their use.

Ironically however, the backbone of their airlift capacity is still the roughly 500 C-130 aircraft that they captured. And they recently entered an agreement to but the T-6 Texan from the US for flight training.

Last I heard, they had warehouses and hangars with the M48s and APC113s in storage. I don't see where they would be doing anything differently with the captured servicable fighters that they haven't sold off or scrapped. The F-5 and A-37s are just too valuable even today. I know the Chinese didn't care for either of them.

 

[Mushroom]

Last I heard, they had warehouses and hangars with the M48s and APC113s in storage.

South Vietnam only had 20 M48 tanks when they were conquered by North Vietnam. And with both the US refusing to sell them any replacement parts and the Soviets offering them the best export tanks at the time, it made no sense to keep them. So they were sold off to other countries.

Same with their 100 or so surviving F-5 aircraft. With the pick of Soviet fighters to chose from, why keep them?

Now the M113 was a bit different, as South Vietnam had over 600 of them at the time they fell. And the ones that remained in service were the more specialized ones. Not true "M113 APCs", but the many variants of the base model.

Like the M106 (106mm) and M1064 (120mm) mortar carriers. The M132 Armored Flamethrower. The M577 Command Post variant. Or the M113 "Greyhound". Literally an M113, with the turreted main gun of an M8 Greyhound fitted to the roof. And the now unified Vietnam has also converted some of the APC models into armored ambulances.

But what remains in their service is not the standard"M113" that most people would think of. Once the country unified, those were all put into storage as spare parts, to keep the 200 or so that they did want to retain in service operating. The specialized vehicles that they got from South Vietnam simply did not exist as such in the Soviet inventory. Just as the US Army still has the M113 in active service to this day, but none of the old "Grunt Carriers" of decades ago. Those are all long retired, and the ones that are left are ones that are specialized, and they have not seen any reason to replace them.

Much like how the M60 Patton was retired by the US decades ago. But the M60 AVLB (bridge laying) version is still in use to this day. As is the M88 Armored Recovery Vehicle and the M728 Combat Engineer Vehicle. All made from the M60, but only in recent years has the Army and Marines finally gotten around to replacing them as there are surplus M1 hulls in inventory to be converted into those variants.

 

[Vrenn]

South Vietnam only had 20 M48 tanks when they were conquered by North Vietnam. And with both the US refusing to sell them any replacement parts and the Soviets offering them the best export tanks at the time, it made no sense to keep them. So they were sold off to other countries.

Same with their 100 or so surviving F-5 aircraft. With the pick of Soviet fighters to chose from, why keep them?

Now the M113 was a bit different, as South Vietnam had over 600 of them at the time they fell. And the ones that remained in service were the more specialized ones. Not true "M113 APCs", but the many variants of the base model.

Like the M106 (106mm) and M1064 (120mm) mortar carriers. The M132 Armored Flamethrower. The M577 Command Post variant. Or the M113 "Greyhound". Literally an M113, with the turreted main gun of an M8 Greyhound fitted to the roof. And the now unified Vietnam has also converted some of the APC models into armored ambulances.

But what remains in their service is not the standard"M113" that most people would think of. Once the country unified, those were all put into storage as spare parts, to keep the 200 or so that they did want to retain in service operating. The specialized vehicles that they got from South Vietnam simply did not exist as such in the Soviet inventory. Just as the US Army still has the M113 in active service to this day, but none of the old "Grunt Carriers" of decades ago. Those are all long retired, and the ones that are left are ones that are specialized, and they have not seen any reason to replace them.

Much like how the M60 Patton was retired by the US decades ago. But the M60 AVLB (bridge laying) version is still in use to this day. As is the M88 Armored Recovery Vehicle and the M728 Combat Engineer Vehicle. All made from the M60, but only in recent years has the Army and Marines finally gotten around to replacing them as there are surplus M1 hulls in inventory to be converted into those variants.

Like many, you are overlooking the "ForgottenWar" starting in 1979 between Vietnam and China. The F-5s and A-37s were seriously used along with Soviet Fighters. After that year, the Soviets started to channel in Military equipment to combat China.

 

[Mushroom]

Like many, you are overlooking the "ForgottenWar" starting in 1979 between Vietnam and China. The F-5s and A-37s were seriously used along with Soviet Fighters. After that year, the Soviets started to channel in Military equipment to combat China.

Yes, I am well aware of the Sino-Vietnamese War. Where China basically invaded, slapped them around for a bit, then returned home. Basically the last time China was really in combat.

And they had 10 of each, that and a few MiG-17 and MiG-21 was the entirety of the Vietnamese Oar Force. At that point they felt no need to update or replace anything, as the war with the US was over and they felt safe.

After that little tantrum the Soviets started pumping in lots of equipment. And it really showed both the Vietnamese and Soviets that the US has been fighting that entire war pretty much with one hand tied behind their back.