For those who actually work in the industry, there was no egotistic feeling of superiority. America chose to integrate stealth into its airplanes to compensate for Russia’s superior IADS. Russia didn’t need stealth because there wasn’t much IADS in Europe or America that couldn’t be overcome by numerical superiority. Each side had equal ability to hurt the other. That parity means deterrence.

The use of steath in naval architecture showed the roles to be reversed. NATO had numerical superiority, so the Russians were first to add stealth design to their ships to improve survivability.

Stealth, like any other design attribute, has to buy its way onto a design.

Well, I was thinkig how to answer to some post few pages before…
But you’ve done it perfectly.

Some people here seems to be blind to real demands and request set upon airplane designers. Demand dictated by one land infrastructure, size, their opponents…

Those kind demands dictate direction in which some new project will develop.

For eg. USAF in modern age did not have one conflict, nor it will have, where they are not in superior numbers and technology to their opponent.
When you roll out conflicts with nuclear powers you get:
Conflict where you have 100:1 or 100:0 advantage in the sky, you’ll worry more about cheaper ground SAM. And being detected. So Stelth is a good choice.
You will not worry much about dog fight or maneuverability, when your going to crunch them with superior tech and numbers.

Again Russians because their wast land rely much on SAMs, and usage of airplanes in close combat, and not having large number advantage in the sky.

Hello, and best regards.

I’ll be short and excuse my bad English.

Every real conflict situation is different, every conflict outcome will depend on many variables. Every discussed airplane has it’s own pilots with specific training, weapons, avionics, attack and defense tactics, strategies, ground support, air support, conflict topology, geography… And it all counts. Judging who is better using scarce data is a beer talk – fun only.

But let me join, I would choose JAS 39 Gripen in front of Jian-10. As I’m familiar with it’s proven propulsion, aerodynamics, weapons and avionics.

Regarding your maneuverability discussion. JAS 39 is a direct response to Russian fighter jet technology. And it’s carefully designed airplane to address issue of Russian invasion of Swedish territory. What you see is a response to Mig29 and Su27 family fighters invading Sweden.
Similar goes for other modern European fighters that originate form French school of aerodynamic design, Rafal, Eurofighter Typhoon.

With specific aerodynamic features, control canards, more powerful engines, they accent one thing. increased maneuverability. From that kind of trend in fighter design you can deduce something about Russian fighters.

Counting seconds for 360 turn made in front of public audience at altitudes of few hundred feet means almost nothing.
For example, here you can see Mig29 doing 360 turn starting form it’s minimal flying speed ~140 miles/h.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7IXgtw75rM
All those planes can make stepper and faster turns. But no one will put plane and pilot to limits on low altitudes in public shows. Limits are achieved in real conflict, realistic exercises and classified testing.

My opinion is based on few friendly conversations with pilots who flew on or against F15, F16, Jas 39, Mig 29 on training or in real conflict. And seeing these planes in action.
First of all every problem has it’s solution, and in close air combat you can develop specific tactics to address specific aggressor plane. Mig 29 is old and well known platform, with outdated avionics (except newest revisions such as smt, mig35, but low in numbers). But speaking with pilots based at Kecskemét who had flown numerous missions with their Gripen vs. Mig 29; in close range Mig29 is still darn good, although beatable. And “mig29’s maneuverability is darn good” stood not only in comparison to Gripen but to F16 and F15 they flew against in exercises. I heard similar opinion from F16 pilots…
In conclusion whatever is precise turn rate of Mig 29 and Su27 family it’s their last worry in a hypothetical conflict with modern fighters.