JA Boomer

The F-22A is obviously the best air-to-air fighter in the world right now. The F-16, Rafale, Grippen, F/A-18E/F all come up short (and they should, as they aren't pure air-to-air fighter designs). The Su-30 and F-15 (either the upgraded F-15C within the USAF or the newer F-15K and F-15SG) are probably regarded as being the in the 3-4 positions. So that leaves us with the F-35 Lightning II and the Eurofighter Typhoon. Thoughts?

Inst

how about best non-american fighter? F-35 lightning 2 is clearly a generation above the Typhoon, and it's really damn cheap to boot.

JA Boomer

Yes, but the F-35 makes no excuses for being a primary air-to-ground aircraft, with a seconday air-to-air capability. The Typhoon was developed with more emphasis on the air role. So although the F-35 is a 5th gen, does the 4.5 Typhoon match it in the air?

The best non-US fighter? Well that should come down to the Eurofighter Typhoon vs the Su-30, depending on the mission profile. The Rafale and Grippen may steal a few of the profiles, but not many in my estimation.

Just how cheap are you expecting to be able to buy a F-35 for Inst?

GAU-8

What is the second best air-to-air fighter in the world?

The one trailing parts, fire and smoke as it plummets to the ground.

(Humor)


--------------------------------------------------------------------

__________________
When a prang seems inevitable, endeavor to strike the softest, cheapest object in the vicinity, as slowly as possible. --WW II RAF Instructor Pilot

IDonT

Is the F-15's 4.5 generation upgrade not in contention, the one's South Korea is getting.

F-15K has many advanced features not found on F-15E, such as an AAS-42 IRST (Infrared Search and Track), JHMCS (Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System), and advanced AN/APG-63(V)1 MSA radar. AESA Radar (Active Electronically Scanned Array) is also available as an option. In addition, the F-15K can launch many advanced weapons such as AGM-84K SLAM-ER ATA and AGM-84H Harpoon. Two General Electric F110-GE-129 29,400 lbf (131 kN) thrust engines power the F-15K, representing an increase from that of the baseline F-15E.

Singapore is getting the AESA version. Unit cost $100 million a piece.

IDonT

If India can upgrade the MKI with APG-79 AESA or something with similar capabilities, it is way up there. The SU-30 with Russian avionics alone is not even, IMO, in the top five.

Gun Grape

I voted for the Typhoon.

Its in production and in service. The F-35 isn't.

One in the hand beats 2 in the bush

Bella

I voted for the Euro-fighter..... The F-35 has not been proven, and is still in development.
Does the F-35 have the potential of being better!?.....Yes! The F-35 has stealth capabilities. And Yes, stealth has been proven!
When it comes to manuvers....I don't know.....we're just going to have to wait and see.

tankie

__________________
TANKIE , WITHOUT WAX

JA Boomer

Yes, I think this is quite a formidable aircraft, so much so that I think the USAF should order some because they will never get the number of F-22A's needed, and so they need this cheaper fighter to fill out the air wings.

I would put it at number 4, as the reduced-radar-return designed Eurofighter probably has it beat. Maybe closer than I thought however, and it probably should have had a place in the vote

Are you sure that isn't the price of the whole package deal; airplanes, weapons, training priced over the number of aircraft they are receiving?

I am not sure of that, but if Boeing is willing to offer the USAF a F-15+ which is better than the F-15SG for $60 mil, I would be rather surprised if the airframe cost of a F-15SG was $100 mil, I bet Singapore would be too


The real reason I created this forum, although I do consider the Typhoon and the F-35 to be the 2-3 best air-to-air fighter around (or soon to come around) was that I've been reading some thoughts lately about how Canada might be better off trading in its CF-18 for Eurofighter rather than F-35's. This intrigued me, and as the primary CF-18 mission is defense of Canadian aerospace, and the F-35 is designed to be a strike fighter with secondary air-to-air capability, I was wondering how these two ranked next to each other. If the Eurofighter really is better in an air engagement than the F-35 will be, perhaps there is merit to this argument.

Big K

is this fair? i mean a single engine vs twin engine?

are they comparable?

__________________
When i say, there will be no effect but i am not willing to remain silent.
-Fuzuli

gunnut

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.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

IDonT

The F-15K is about $100 mil a piece but may include a package.

Singapore deal is worth $1 billion for 12 with an option for 8.

ShawnG

I Vote for the Saab Gripen. Not because I think it's the best, but because I drive an '07 Saab 9-3 and I have to be loyal to family.

__________________
"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime." -Adlai E. Stevenson

IDonT

I chose the F-35 for the simple reason of stealth. Though the Eurofighter may have the more suited airframe, it is a evolutionary improvement to the aircombat design of high thrust to weight ratio and low wing loading. Stealth, on the other hand will change air combat.

The USAF did a study of all air to air kills from WWI to Vietnam and determined that 95 percent of all air to air victories occured when the opponent did not even know the enemy was there until it was too late. The key is to shoot down your enemy before they even know you are in the area. In effect, a dogfight occurs when the attacker has messed up his attack plan.

The stealth gives the F-35 this advantage. That is why the F-22 is so deadly and can rack up massive amounts of kills against overwhelming opponents (in wargames). The enemy never knows where it is so air combat is at a time and place of their choosing. In effect stealth takes away their advantage. The F-35 has a much better chance of achieving the stealth kills than the Eurofighter, thus making it a deadlier opponent in air combat. Though the Eurofighter may have an edge in a dogfight, off boresight AIM-9X will more than compensate for this disadvantage.