• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Fighter aircraft comparisons

Seahawk72s

Seahawk72s

SOH-CM-2023
Can anyone recommend sites where comparison studies have been done pitting one aircraft against another..?
Reports that discuss not only how "Falcons" and "Strike Eagles" and "Hornets" might do say against "Flanker" and "Mig" variants.

But 5th generation comparisons, "F-35" vs "F-22". With price tags almost equal why are more "Raptor"s not being built..?
Or what is driving the development of 5th generation fighters at such a rapid rate that aircraft like the Super Hornet is coming to end of production.?

I would think there must be a report somewhere that discusses say over a 10+ year projection the development of fighter aircraft. :dizzy:
 
F-16.net has a lot of good information in their forums and a lot of it is from the actual pilots.
 
Well, I think you can find a lot of opinion on this fighter vs that, but if you are looking for direct hard analysis, I think you are going to be disappointed.

And even if you could find pure, unvarnished analysis, it would likely not answer the question of why one fighter is chosen over another. That particular decision is seldom purely based on logic.

Deacon
 
Technical comparison is moot. View all arms purchases under the local political, geopolitical and budgetary circumstances at that time and nothing more.
 
What is less relevant in the current & 30 year time frame:
Mach 2+ speeds, ACM with emphasis on nose to tail engagements, Thrust Vectoring/Extreme Maneuverability.

What is more relevant: Stealth(Low RCS and other aspects), Sensor & Data Sharing/Integration, Weapon Capability/Reliability.

In reality, there are significant differences in levels of current Stealth and thus aircraft designed from the outset with such capability will almost always have greater capability in this aspect than any airframe that is a modular conversion to Stealth although the latter is getting better and better at the design & engineering level. The reason I list ACM as being less relevant is that with systems like DAS and AIM-9X(& similar Thrust Vectoring Missiles), such Missiles can easily out turn/pull more G's than any current Fighter being Thrust Vectoring or Conventional plus with DAS and AIM-9X, you can fire Over-the-Shoulder with Lock After Launch with 54nm range(block II/III). The air combat environment is getting super lethal and what enemy aircraft that are not destroying on the ground by strikes won't last long in the air. Bear in mind that such overwhelming capability doesn't rest solely on the fighter but in layers of weapon and sensor/intelligence capabilities.
 
Bjoern said:
Technical comparison is moot. View all arms purchases under the local political, geopolitical and budgetary circumstances at that time and nothing more.
Click to expand...


I agree that political and budgetary influences play a large part in the decision process. What I would like to see are the position papers that list the talking points on justifying a specific aircraft over another and what capabilities are needed for future perceived threats. I would imagine "Proceedings" by the Naval Institute Press would be one resource to look at. What else is out there covering a broader perspective..?
 
Seahawk72s said:
I agree that political and budgetary influences play a large part in the decision process. What I would like to see are the position papers that list the talking points on justifying a specific aircraft over another and what capabilities are needed for future perceived threats. I would imagine "Proceedings" by the Naval Institute Press would be one resource to look at. What else is out there covering a broader perspective..?
Click to expand...

I don't know, but Google might.
On the other hand, I wouldn't want to read these papers as they might induce some hefty fits of forehead slapping. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top