Basically what the charts show is a comparison based on weighing certain technical parameters such as aerodynamics and TWR, that indicates that the JF-17 is better in WVR than the baseline Su-27 by 16%. The corresponding figures for the Hornet – 8% better and SH – 41% better.

i don’t get this analysis so are you saying the SH is 41% better in WVR from the Flanker series?

In the next column it indicates the JF-17 is 7% worse than the Su-27 baseline in BVR and the Hornet is 9% worse. While the SH is 37% better.

i say the sh is 100% better facing the JF-17 in BVR 😉

Thread should be more like F-16 vs JF-17 :dev2:

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Growler seriously? Too funny

:o:applause::highly_amused::rolleyes::stupid::D

The Exorcist

Pretty scary but can’t face me into fearing me. But still creeped me watching it again and again.

I still enjoy some luaghters in the movie like the crucifix scene 🙂

So how’s the Gripen NG going?

, the F-18 is well able to defeat this plane in any areas except the JF-17 is more better at acceleration. But leave it to the planes if they meat in combat.

What a stupid link anyway. The Flanker can outrun the Rhino. Not out turn since its a capable WVR fighter. Really one old post. Should find a recent one. It’s still agile in subsonic speeds, i don’t get why is it not agile in transonic. Very stupid story.

Chill out dude, the Rhino can handle a engagment so chill out. It’s a old post, so? It’s not referred recently. Just take a chill

Yea F-16 AOA limit is 25°. Even if you get to 50° or 60° that’s the F-16’s deep stall limit. But still the F-16 can do a high alpha heh? I remember the F-16 VISTA with testbed aircraft incorporated a VISTA nozzle that provides for more active control of the aircraft in a post-stall situation. The resulting aircraft is supermaneuverable, retaining pitch and yaw control at angles of attack beyond which the traditional control surfaces cannot change attitude. The F-16 VISTA if i remember had a 70° 80° or 180° limit by going high alpha?

50° and 60° is far from a stall position. If you go more than 25° your in big trouble. There’s no possibility of an F-16 reaching 50° or 60° to go into a stall limit. Reaching 26-30° is a deep stall position. So are you saying it can reach 40° of AOA then when it reaches 50-60° it makes a deep stall?

Really stupid, if i should say. F-16 is limited to 25° and if it reaches more its going to + stall. The F-16 VISTA was about the F-16 reciving positive thrust Vectoring, improving maneuverability, and more controll for post stall purposes. It wasn’t approved, so it was just a VISTA test when it was denied. It reached 86° the first time then the second time it went testing went to 180° of AOA. It did do the cobra manuver while testing the VISTA examination.

The F-18 HARV, F-16 VISTA, X-31, F-15 MATV were all aircraft having the chance of receiving Thrust Vectoring but improving stall or aerodynamics. But it didn’t make the approval.
I liked the X-31 that was a wing and tail only plane. It reached 70° of AOA. It was about EFM