Lol^^
That is a paper plane.

If you must compare, then it would be the F-14D, right?
The Flanker and F-14 back in 1991 was world apart in terms of capabilities.

No, in the discussion that i was having with Rii if i have a “paper airplane”, the US Navy americanized “SU-33”, then i have to compare it with another “paper airplane”, the evolved Tomcat variants.

Apart from being a more modern design with many of the same advantages that led to SH being selected over a next-gen Tomcat in the first place, e.g. fly-by-wire.

Tomcat 21 ASF 14, the most advanced proposal by Grumman, would had Fly by Wire, a redesigned fuselage, a great big chunk of it in composites, an entire new avionics suite, severall RCS reduction measures, a pair of thrust vectoring F-119´s, etc, etc, etc… That thing was today´s SU-35 a decade yearlier
The reason why it was droped was cost.

The Tomcat’s ultimate proposed configuration was known as the “ASF-14” would be a new build, highly updated version of the legendary F-14. A true “Super Tomcat” in every sense of the word, the machine would boast an even larger increase in internal fuel over the Super Tomcat 21 via thicker wings, the gutting of bulky older generation sub-systems and the use of carbon fiber structural components to save weight and volume. It would initially utilize the same motors as the Super Tomcat, but there was talk of eventually rolling the F-22 and NATF’s F-119 or F120 engines into the design at a later date. I was told that the Tomcat’s super-cruise ability with these advanced engines would be limited more by heat accumulation than speed itself (think numbers over mach two).

Even without thrust vectoring, the aerodynamic enhancements found on the ASF-14 would allow the jet to reach over 77 degrees of sustained AoA, but thrust vectoring was also to be part of the new design which would have made it the most maneuverable fighter of all time. Additionally, the ASF-14 would have been built with a top of the line self defense and countermeasure suite along with ability to perform “wild weasel” suppression/destruction of enemy air defenses (SEAD/DEAD) missions.

Possibly the best part of about the ASF-14 is that it would be an entirely new aircraft, much along the same lines as the Super Hornet. This means old 1960’s era sub-systems that were heavy and complex would be replaced with modular components. All of the jet’s hydraulic and electrical systems that gave legacy Tomcat maintainers such headaches over the years would have been replaced with greatly simplified systems. Furthermore, many structural components would be made out of carbon fiber instead of aluminum or titanium. This would allow the new Tomcat to be only slightly heavier in gross weight (about 1200 pounds) than its predecessor, while gaining thousands of pounds of fuel. There was even talk that some stealthy characteristics would be applied to the ASF-14, this may have included radar baffles over it engines’ fan faces and “edge-alligned” gear doors and access points.

The cockpit would have featured an all glass design with helmet mounted displays for both the pilot and the RIO/WSO. The most exciting part of the avionics suite would have made use of the Tomcat’s massive radar aperture. A mammoth active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar would have been fitted and provided with immense amounts of power for interlaced air-to-air and air-to-ground operations or even standoff electronic attack. You can see how incredible the ASF-14s AESA capability would have matured into by looking at the current APG-63V3 AESA radar upgrade program for the F-15. The APG-63V3 is actually more capable in some respects than the F-22A’s APG-77 AESA radar because it is larger in diameter, allowing for more transit/receive modules to be utilized, and it is newer in its design. The Tomcat was built originally for the massive Hughes AWG-9 fire control radar, the largest radar ever deployed on a US fighter, so there is a LOT of real estate up front for the mother of all fighter jet AESA radar arrays to have been fitted.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/top-gun-day-special-the-super-tomcat-that-was-never-bu-1575814142

An Americanised Flanker developed as an alternative to Super Hornet would’ve been superior in the air defence role, in the strike role, in the growler role, in the tanker role …. and would have served as a better complement to F-35C over the next two decades to boot.

Of course American pride made this impossible, but let us not pretend that the Flanker had nothing to offer.

The Flanker had absolutely nothing to offer to the US Navy by comparison with the Tomcat21, the end.

The problem with the stealthy plane with Eurofighter components is that China, Russia and the US will be developing sixth generation aircraft around 2030. This will be another European busywork program with limited export appeal except to Middle Eastern countries who cannot buy the F-35 for political reasons (say Israeli objections) and have issues with buying Chinese and Russian designs.

Say France and Germany spend $40 billion on R&D and $150 million for each of 80 airframes (40 for Germany, 40 for France). This is $52 billion total. At roughly $500 million a pop, they could acquire 104 B-21 bombers, 42 each for France and Germany, for this same amount of money. The bombers would be available sooner and have far greater military capability than an F-35 competitor with two seats and a computer system for controlling drones.

And why would Germany and France develop a new manned fighter and build 80 airframes instead of the 400/500´s needed to replace their Rafale/Typhoon fleets in the 2030/40´s?

The original question was “Is the west missing out by not having a flanker size aircraft”?
The obvious answer would be “today, between the Raptor, the Eagle and the Strike Eagle the West fields around ONE THOUSAND fighter jets directly comparable in size with the Flanker Family” and that would be all, topic closed.
Now, does the US Navy needs a “Flanker” for the 21´s Century? Most of us would say that particular boat sailed with the Tomcat, and if the US Navy wants range and persistence, might has well take the pilots out and actually build something like this:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]246656[/ATTACH]

Its called the “Eagle”, the end.

Unless some spectacular event, for now, it appears that the 35 could be that platform.
.

Hmmmm, the German MOD was pretty clear on a “European Solution”, thats written, couple that with this, http://aviationweek.com/defense/industry-ponders-how-keep-tornado-service-until-2040 , and the F-35 starts to look like a “long shot” (unless the Tornado update is not feasable), in the end my bet would be the Luftwaffe to join the RAF and the Adla on whatever cames out of “FCAS”.