Captain Hindsight says:

“The US Navy should have made a big upgrade to the Tomcat rather than go with the A-12.”

“The RAF should have bought modular equipment that would make an A400M perform the MPA role, instead of trying to upgrade a prehistoric airframe.” [despite chronological differences which would have required visionary foresight.]

Canada should have, or should, go for the Super Hornet over the F-35. I see it as a better fit for Canada. Besides stealth, what is the F-35 offering Canada, the Super Hornet cannot provide?

TBH, there are two aircraft on the market (kinda) and one in development that are very well suited to Canada’s needs.

Su-35 and MiG-31BM… along with the PAK-FA.

Long ranged, persistent high speed when needed, designed to operate relatively standalone over large areas with minimal ground support…

Of course, it’d be political dynamite to chose one.

The sensors used to target for your air-to-air missiles are the same sensors used to target for a laser.

Mounting a laser on your Gen 4 jet still doesn’t allow you to engage a stealth jet at a tactically useful distance.

Until you destroy the missiles the stealth jet fires at you… at which point the stealth jet either has to close to use its guns, or withdraw to cede airspace to you.

[Assuming both aircraft are suitably shielded against the low-powered initial versions of airborne lasers.]

http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/rolls-royce-and-airbus-near-accord-over-a380neo

Airbus is accelerating its studies of an upgraded A380 and, after talks held last month with engine makers in Toulouse, appears to be closing on an initial agreement with Rolls-Royce.

The engine manufacturer is strongly supporting plans for both the A380neo and the potential A380-900 stretch. According to industry sources, Rolls-Royce is discussing a variety of all-new engine options ranging from derivatives of the A350’s XWB-84/97 to the future Advance project unveiled earlier this year. Until recently it was widely believed Rolls-Royce may be in pole position for a possible slot on the upgraded A380 because of its victory on the A330neo with the Trent 7000, a similarly-rated engine as the current unit. This engine is due to debut on the Airbus twin in late 2017 and is derived from the ‘TEN’ version of the Trent 1000, now under final development for the Boeing 787. However sources say the proposed A380neo project will require more power than the Trent 7000 which is rated at between 68,000 lb. and 72,000 lb. for the A330-800neo and -900neo.

Interesting. The A380 wing was always designed for the -900.

Obviously, the numbers need to add up, but an A380-900neo could give you over a 20% improvement in seat-mile costs versus todays A380-800 (which may put it between 5-10% better than a 777-9X):

Note: Numbers below are for A380-800 with 11-abreast seating. The -900 is supposedly capable of taking at least 100 more passengers than the baseline -800.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]233960[/ATTACH]
From here

In service timing that`s a different story, conception & execution wise they are not in the same group.

Erm, you don’t win wars by having some “really hot sh_t” back in the R&D labs.

The eagle had a number of contemporaries. In the early and mid 80s, these were the MiG-21 and -23, in which F-15/F-16 superiority were all but assured.

Late in the 80s, the Fulcrum was available in numbers. Given the lessons learned about BVR combat in the 90s, I believe that the Fulcrum/HMS/A-11 weapon system was significantly more pragmatic to the F-15/Sparrow. I therefore think a Fulda gap scenario would have seen the Soviets prevail in that timeframe. But the scenarios envisaged and balance of support systems in this mass confrontation do not exist for most minor states, therefore the Fulcrum found itself at a significant disadvantage in any confrontation vs. the Eagle.

In the 90s, the Flanker was in existence, but the Soviet armed services were in disarray. Any comparison of potential performance is a bit moot.

In the 00s, the Flanker started to (and has since continued to) receive sizeable upgrades whereas the -15C eagle development has been limited to allow for the F-22/F-35.

A single IR sensor on ANY aircraft can’t geolocate Oblig, draw a triangle and think about it.

Instantaneously or over time?

The complexities of detail design (along with the associated knowledgebases in technologies such as metallurgy, avionics, aerodynamics, propulsion) mean that one aircraft can only superficially resemble another – unless the manufacturer of one is involved in the design/build of the other.