F-14 took off at full afterburner. F414 does approach the benchmarks of TF30, but benchmarks are just that. As F-14 grew in size it needed F110’s potential to keep up. The non-afterburning F135 is comparable to dual F414, but half the parts and builds on the F-35 program. In all reality you don’t even need a fighter engine if it’s utility work, you could go with something cots.

If it was F-14 size then it would need two F110’s or F100’s. Current plans publicized to date involve no more than a twin F404 powered version. If its all automated I don’t know why you wouldn’t go single engined with F135.

LOL

I shouldn’t drink when reading some posts. Eruption is a real danger.

BK27 relies on the airframe for support. The pair in the Tornado were not small nor would it be trivial to install one let alone two in your mini-fighter.

AESA also requires cooling akin to radiators on the exterior. The more compact electronic equipment becomes the hotter the hotspot. You have to disperse the heat across a 2-dimensional plane.

From the wiki:

Here’s the crux with going four engines. You need electronic controls to maximize life and minimize maintenance, plus they have to be pod-encapsulated to create quick swaps that allow minimal down time. You have to make a pair of J85’s less cost and maintenance than a single F125. At current market rates the engines are substantially cheaper, but the life expectancy of J85 is a fraction of F125 and fuel costs are favorable to the F125 when you consider the big picture. Your main advantage of J85 is cost to buy so you have to figure out how to make a pair justified over a single, twice. The J85 in quads will be cheaper than a single F404, M88, or EJ200. The four engines will never have the efficiency performance-wise so it’s all about the justification.

I think Yak-130 could be more easily made stealth than a JF-17. JF-10/L-15 the same. Twin engine J-7/MiG-21 is pretty heavy and anything but cheap. J-8II requires a similar crew size to an Su-27.