Replies

Duh! The F-16 was supposed to be a fighter but was so poor in that role the only thing to do with it was make it a tactical bomber, something the A-7, a much older aircraft was much better at. It's essentially a plane without a mission, an ill conceived throwback to the time of WWII when the concept of a fighter was one man, one cockpit, one engine, duking it out mano a mano with some other fighter pilot. It's an idea that passed with the advent of advanced radar and missile systems. The F-16 was a bad idea when it was conceived and hasn't proved its worth since. The F-15 is superior in the air to air role and the F-15 Strike Eagle is a far more effective bomber.

F-15's, way more expensive per unit, to maintain, to man and to fly, even for America to afford. You don't need F-15's to shoot down transports, helicopters, strafe truck convoys and massed third world land units, regular costal shipping and a variety of hum drum targets that bulk out an enemy's war making abilities. Using, wearing out and losing high cost, sophisticated assets on low value targets shouldn’t, and isn’t done.

"There is a quality to quantity, all it's own" Stalin. Along your line of thinking, such that it is, we should have an entire army of multi lingual Special Forces. Nice wet dream. Not now, not ever going to happen. All services have their elites, until attrition wears down their small numbers. The Nazis loved the super weapons, but never produced enough of the next tier below them, the “good enough” weapons. For instance, German tanks were very much better, when they ran, and were available on the field. However the Shermans, were plentiful, affordable, reliable and with greater numbers and flexible tactics ate the superior German tanks up.

Anyways, the topic isn’t an aircraft; it is about Boyd and his thoughts.

True, the F-15E is a better plane. BUT, the F-16 is just as lethal. Low cost, multi-role, fast, maneuverable (the plane can shoot itself) and hard to see.

From what I understand, the Airforce operatres more F-16's than F-15s, which give you greater mobilty. Not all F-15c's have been configured for Air-to-ground combat either, thus the E (Strike Eagle) designation.

The USAF is improving upon the Falcons design. An example of this would be the "Super Falcon", which incorporates thrust vectoring into the design.

F-16, a piece of crap? The F-16 is the plane of choice for the Israelis, whom sent MANY F-15's to their graves in air-to-air (dog fighting) combat simulations against U.S. pilots. Israeli pilots are the best in the world, mainly because they are always in action. The weapon of choice? The F-16.

Japan also operates the F-16 J, upgraded variant of the Falcon.

NASA &Drayden have been working on the F-15 ACTIVE, which in my opinion, is just plain awesome. High altitude canards and thrust vectoring, pfew. One crazy ride.