What would be the most accurate power ranking concerning fighter jets, /k/?
American>French>Euro (Sweden and Germany)>Chinese=Russian
>>30353356
>Chinese & Russian last
Why
>>30354223
That they make up for shitness with numbers
eh, isn't whats getting fired more important than what's doing the firing?
best A2A missile > best air superiority fighter
>>30353356
In what fucking regard?
A2A?
A2G?
Sensors?
Stealthyness?
They give different answers.
Northrop Grumman Sukhoi and Dassault will never team up to build the best fighter jet ever anyway.
Why live ?
>>30354271
>Dassault
Leave project halfway, gg no re
>>30354241
>>30354245
Dogfight, obviously.
>>30354229
at the very least they don't have to cannibalize museums and boneyards to get in the air
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACx_d5eMAFE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii1xKfExFA8
>>30354294
Man, all those air force soldiers take themselves so fucking seriously, it's astonishing.
>>30354229
>That they make up for shitness with numbers
No, they don't. They can't even come close to matching fleet size.
>>30354294
>Boneyards are because we built way too many to begin with
Why not pull spares that way, cheaper than building new ones.
>>30354294
Laugh all you like, but no other country in the world has anything close to the logistical complexity or efficiency of AMARG. US military aviation is DESIGNED to subsist partially on parts harvested from retired airframes. Also remember that most of those stories are tailored to provoke a response: increased military funding. O&M funding is actually proportionally high compared to what it was in, for instance, the late 70's. Yes, it could be higher, and yes the military probably needs a little more funding all around to meet current commitments. However, when congress insists on funding things that everyone in the relevant branch is telling them they don't want/don't need while cutting funding from projects that they rate as a priority, the very people allocating the funding become part of the problem, not the solution. See the interminable political football known as the A-10 for an example.
>>30355779
>Also remember that most of those stories are tailored to provoke a response: increased military funding.
And also imply that the political party in control of funding currently is somehow letting all our servicemen down by forcing them to improvise aviation repair with rocks and coconuts.
It's all about political capital, and very often bears little relationship to actual specific needs. If you really want to know what needs funding, where things are falling short (and there's always more than a few things in an organization as huge as the US military) you have to actually dig into publicly available GAO, DOT&E, military and SecDef reports, then take a weighted average from the available sources as no single one of these will even give you an accurate picture.
>>30353356
You can put them in rough tiers of mission effectiveness and sophistication. They roughly correspond to generational lines. Remember, however, that supporting sensor platforms (AWACS, etc), platform sensor/targeting/comms coordination and local numbers superiority probably matter a lot more, and the US is king in these respects by a large margin.
Top
>F-22, F-35 - different missions but both probably the respective best in the world at their intended roles
>Rafale, Typhoon, J-20, maybe J-31, PAK-FA probably goes here if it's ever finished, maybe one tier up if the Russians actually accomplish what they claim
>Super Hornet (maybe belongs one tier up though most data points to it being a slight step behind the Rafale and Typhoon), Grippen
>F-15E, Su-30/34/35/J-11 etc (these would both be a tier up with equivalent VLO features)
>the rest of gen 4 here: F-16, F-15C, Su-27, MiG-29, J-17, Tornado, etc.
This is a rough list. Everyone will argue slight adjustment up or down for for their favorite platform, but this is a pretty close capability ballpark distribution. Remember that raw performance matters a lot less today than PGM compatibility, sensors, the munitions themselves, VLO features (especially LPI/passive sensors and LPI comms), etc. If you really want to know who would win in a fight, look at who has the most airborne tankers, AWACS equivalents, best comms/sensor networks in robustness and numbers, and best ability to achieve local numbers superiority (get the jets to the fight and operate them there).
>>30353356
IMHO, the top ten best fighter planes in service right now:
1: F-22A.
2: F-35B.
3: Su-35S.
4: EuroFighter (Tranche 3).
5: F/A-18E Super Hornet.
6: J-11B.
7: Su-30SM
8: F-15J Kai.
9: Rafale-C.
10: J-10B.
>>30354276
>>30354271
Dassault Sukhoï would be pretty cool desu
Fromage du gopnik / 10
> Leave project halfway,
To do a better plane, and one that actually fills the French requirements.
>>30356056
>chinese plane being anywhere near this list
ew
