[Cardinal]

Given all the new military harware out there in the aviation field I was wondering what aircraft would win the title of best current all-rounder (multi-role). Criteria such as performance, maintenance, durability, cost should all be considered.

I would particularly like to ask experts like FVD to give their opinion on what it is they would most like to fly in a conflict situation.

(I know that this is in many ways akin to comparing apples with oranges but thought that it may be interesting on a number of levels .)

[FormerViperDriver]

Cardinal,

This is a tough one to answer, but only because I'd like you to tell me what you mean by "current," and "all-around." That sounds like a silly question, but what I'm driving at is can we count the F-22 even though we only have two operational squadrons of them (third one is building up), and it has a limited (bu very useful) air-to-ground capability at this time (soon to be expended considerably with the Small Diameter Bomb, GBU-39). Also can I consider foreign equipment (I'm guessing yes)?

If the F-22 is in contention, that would esily be my choice to go into combat. That airplane is expensive, but at no time in the history of aviation has any aircraft been so dominant over the competition. This is the very first plane I know of which utterly crushes the opposition in exercises, to the point that even super-experienced adversary pilots get killed by F-22 guys with less than 100 hours on type before they know what hit them. Even in the early days of the F-15 and F-16, superb as they are, they would get killed by F-4s and F-5s on a regular basis (although the exchange ratio was overwhelmingly in the new aircraft's favor). The F-22 presents a different case entirely. F-15 and F-16 pilots who have flown against it come back utterly dismayed and shaking their heads. They are helpless. It's so unfair it's not funny. And future improvements will make it even more lethal, in very innovative ways I might add.

The F-22 is also capable of dropping 1000 lbs JDAMs (GBU-38s), and soon will be qualified for the SDB (GBU-39) of which it can carry 8. This is still not a true all-around air-to-ground capability, but it does qualify it as multi-role.

If we discount the F-22 (perhaps because of price, but then 1 F-22 can defeat 5 or 6 fourth-generation fighters easily), then it gets a lot more complex, with the contenders being the F-16 of course (in the UAE-acquired "E" version a truly awesome all-aroung fighter, it's just missing the stealth), the F-15E and derivatives (superb range-payload capability), the Su-30 in its various forms, the Eurofighter, and the Rafale. I do believe that for the price, the F-16E is the best, although the Su-30MKK (many variants) are potentially excellent as well (and thus have enjoyed export success).

I discounted the Swedish Gippen because of its very short range and limited weapons carriage (in quantity, not quality), and the F-35 because it's not nearly operational yet.

So bottom line, assuming I applied your criteria correctly: F-22 hands down, or F-16E if the F-22 is not allowed in this comparisson. F-15E is third on sheer capability, but Su-30MKK may beat the F-15 if price is factored in.

I should note that at the present time, neither the Rafale nor the Eurofighter are truly air-to-ground capable. The Rafale is deployed to Afghanistan right now in the F-2 standard, but still needs a Mirage 2000D to laser-designate for it when dropping LGBs, and it cannot drop JDAMs. That's unacceptable in modern combat. Eventually, both these aircraft will gain a true air-to-ground capability, but that's still down the road.

Hope this helps.

FVD

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

Cardinal,

This is a tough one to answer, but only because I'd like you to tell me what you mean by "current," and "all-around." That sounds like a silly question, but what I'm driving at is can we count the F-22 even though we only have two operational squadrons of them (third one is building up), and it has a limited (bu very useful) air-to-ground capability at this time (soon to be expended considerably with the Small Diameter Bomb, GBU-39). Also can I consider foreign equipment (I'm guessing yes)?

If the F-22 is in contention, that would esily be my choice to go into combat. That airplane is expensive, but at no time in the history of aviation has any aircraft been so dominant over the competition. This is the very first plane I know of which utterly crushes the opposition in exercises, to the point that even super-experienced adversary pilots get killed by F-22 guys with less than 100 hours on type before they know what hit them. Even in the early days of the F-15 and F-16, superb as they are, they would get killed by F-4s and F-5s on a regular basis (although the exchange ratio was overwhelmingly in the new aircraft's favor). The F-22 presents a different case entirely. F-15 and F-16 pilots who have flown against it come back utterly dismayed and shaking their heads. They are helpless. It's so unfair it's not funny. And future improvements will make it even more lethal, in very innovative ways I might add.

The F-22 is also capable of dropping 1000 lbs JDAMs (GBU-38s), and soon will be qualified for the SDB (GBU-39) of which it can carry 8. This is still not a true all-around air-to-ground capability, but it does qualify it as multi-role.

If we discount the F-22 (perhaps because of price, but then 1 F-22 can defeat 5 or 6 fourth-generation fighters easily), then it gets a lot more complex, with the contenders being the F-16 of course (in the UAE-acquired "E" version a truly awesome all-aroung fighter, it's just missing the stealth), the F-15E and derivatives (superb range-payload capability), the Su-30 in its various forms, the Eurofighter, and the Rafale. I do believe that for the price, the F-16E is the best, although the Su-30MKK (many variants) are potentially excellent as well (and thus have enjoyed export success).

I discounted the Swedish Gippen because of its very short range and limited weapons carriage (in quantity, not quality), and the F-35 because it's not nearly operational yet.

So bottom line, assuming I applied your criteria correctly: F-22 hands down, or F-16E if the F-22 is not allowed in this comparisson. F-15E is third on sheer capability, but Su-30MKK may beat the F-15 if price is factored in.

I should note that at the present time, neither the Rafale nor the Eurofighter are truly air-to-ground capable. The Rafale is deployed to Afghanistan right now in the F-2 standard, but still needs a Mirage 2000D to laser-designate for it when dropping LGBs, and it cannot drop JDAMs. That's unacceptable in modern combat. Eventually, both these aircraft will gain a true air-to-ground capability, but that's still down the road.

Hope this helps.

FVD

Thanks FVD, your comments are both interesting and insightful as usual. If the F22 is indeed the 'best of the best', of which I have little, if any, doubt, do you think it may ever run the risk of the fate of the Me262 insofar being too few in number to alter the course of a major conflict? Also, even with its technical superiority and ability to engage multiple targets could it be overwhelmed by inferior aircraft that had far greater superiority in numbers? Lastly, in a prolonged conflict could the technical superiority and maintenance requirements be a liability when compared with, for example, more rugged Soviet aircraft?

(A decade or two ago I read an academic, well detailed, text on the maintenance requirements of aircraft of the time and I remember being astounded by the incredibly high cost of maintenance of the F14 especially as regards the required number of maintenance hours necessary for each flight hour.)

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

Thanks FVD, your comments are both interesting and insightful as usual. If the F22 is indeed the 'best of the best', of which I have little, if any, doubt, do you think it may ever run the risk of the fate of the Me262 insofar being too few in number to alter the course of a major conflict? Also, even with its technical superiority and ability to engage multiple targets could it be overwhelmed by inferior aircraft that had far greater superiority in numbers? Lastly, in a prolonged conflict could the technical superiority and maintenance requirements be a liability when compared with, for example, more rugged Soviet aircraft?

(A decade or two ago I read an academic, well detailed, text on the maintenance requirements of aircraft of the time and I remember being astounded by the incredibly high cost of maintenance of the F14 especially as regards the required number of maintenance hours necessary for each flight hour.)

Cardinal,

As far as maintenance, so much progress has been made in the past 30 years that as complex as the F-22 is, it's easier to maintain than the F-15 or F-16 (no comparisson possible to the F-14 which was designed under the old "we'll figure out how to maintain this thing later" philosophy pre-dating the 1980s. The F-14 ranks as one of the worst fighter aircraft to maintain of all times, as great as it was in other ways). The progress in terms of engine and avionics reliability is just phenomenal. Plus now you have self-diagnostics systems that figure out not only what's wrong, but what looks like it will go bad in the near future. The only aspect that is harder to maintain, of course, is the stealth, but again, not comparisson to what was required for the F-117 or B-2.

As far as sheer numbers, of course I'd like to see us buy a lot more than the currently authorized 183. It looks pretty good that this will happen now that Rumsfeld is gone. He was one of the worst things that ever happened to the Air Force.

It's tough to figure out how many is enough. It really depends on the possible scenarios. The F-22 can dissengage at will from any other fighter, even after it has run out of missiles and gun ammo. Also, it will not fight by itself. In the recent Northern Edge exercise in Alaska, and Red Flag, they were fighting alongside F-15s and other legacy fighters, and they were making those a lot more effective (using their incredible radar and passive electronic sensors). In any event, most of us in the Air Force think not using the huge R&D investment this nation has made in developping this superb fighter is just bizarre. We shouldn't take chances with air superiority, no matter how much some people in the armed forces (and outside) take it for granted. The Air Force has said we need 381 F-22s, and I believe that's probably about right. That's a lot fewer than the number of F-15s we had at one point, but the threat is different and the airplane is so superior that we can do the mission with fewer airframes. But up to a point. And eventually it will be complemented by the F-35 which is a fine aircraft as well (but not as capable in air-to-air).

Anyway, that's my opinion, but it is pretty informed. I notice that the F-22 critics, who used to be very vocal, have been very quiet lately. There are good reason for that.

FVD

[jim]

FVD, I would like to hear your thoughts on the Typhoon, as a Brit its an interesting subject well vital really because it will be all we have and a lot is expected of this plane. What do you think of its potential? We have to hope it does not fly around with lumps of concrete in the front instead of the equipment it was designed to carry, we had that problem with the Tornado. Every time we needed planes there was a mad rush to fit the necessary gear before they could go on Ops. (re Gulf and smart bombs).
A good example is that the cannon has not yet been fitted to the Typhoon!!!!
Its been hailed as the best dogfighter in the world today but I wont hold my breath over that statement. I have seen one doing its crowd pleasing stuff but what do you think the reality is?
Some insider info I heard last year was that the plane is superb and the pilots that have flown it say its a winner,but very underfunded and as yet is without its much needed kit.
All this sounds typical of the British MOD attitude to defense. They just never learn.Sometimes I wonder which side they are on!.

[Shawn 507]

The plane is only as good as the pilot. A great pilot in a F-14, 15, 16, 18 can smoke a marginal pilot in a F-22. Its the man not the machine. Take the Isrealis using modernized Sherman whipping the Egyptians and Syrians with thier latest and greatest Soviet armor.
- Shawn

[ZS-VAN]

Very interesting insights FVD. I'd be interested in your answer to Jim's question regarding the Typhoon. I was surprised by your comment on the Gripen which South Africa has recently adopted in terms of limited weapons carriage. It does have 8 pylons but granted it does fall into the lightweight catagory I guess. That said how different is that compared to the F16? More insights on the Rafale would also be interesting. The Su-30 also is very capable and I read an article a while back where it gave a good account of itself in Indian hands against US forces.

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by Shawn 507

The plane is only as good as the pilot. A great pilot in a F-14, 15, 16, 18 can smoke a marginal pilot in a F-22. Its the man not the machine. Take the Isrealis using modernized Sherman whipping the Egyptians and Syrians with thier latest and greatest Soviet armor.
- Shawn

Read again what I wrote. An average (or even below average) pilot in the F-22 will kill any othe rpilot in any other aircraft, no matter how good he (or she) is. Forget all the past paradigms you are attched to. This is different. In this case, it is notthe man, it is the machine. It's that good.

Tell me, Shawn, how many hours of fighter time do you have exactly?

FVD

[mustangdriver]

I have trouble saying that the F-22 is the best fighter ever, since it hasn't done anything yet. I think that it will be a great airplane as I have seen what it is capable of. I don't think that it is correct to say that the F-22 is better than anything else no matter who is the pilot. Like I said before the F-22 was shot down by an F-18 pilot in a mach dogfight. I think that it is going to be a great plane, but best ever? I think we need to wait and see how it performs in combat.

[ZS-VAN]

How come no mention of the F18E/F? Being touted as the best conventional fighter aircraft in service on the History and Discovery Channels here.