Quote:
Originally Posted by Big K
is this fair? i mean a single engine vs twin engine?
are they comparable?
|
That really doesn't matter all that much. The mission profile is more important. You can have a single engine fighter with more power than a twin engine fighter simply because the single engine is way bigger and more powerful.
A good example would be the F-16 vs. Ching-Kuo (IDF) from Taiwan.
Air Force Technology - Ching-Kuo (IDF) Indigenous Defence Fighter, Taiwan
Taiwan could not get access to F100 engine used in the F-16 so it developed a fighter that closely resembles the F-16, but with 2 smaller engines. Both these fighters perform similar roles in air superiority and interception for Taiwan (Taiwan eventually bought F-16s, but IDF remained in service). These early F-16s and the IDFs have comparable performance. But we all know later F-16s evolved into a very capable attack bomber. The IDF, due to lighter construction, has yet to evolve outside its original specification.
I voted for Eurofighter here because the question was about A2A performance. F-35 will be a very capable fighter. But that was not the original design intention. It will be an attack bomber first. The Eurofighter was designed to be a fighter first. Both have comparable avionics but Eurofighter has more power, more range, probably not as stealthy, but most likely more speed and manuverability.