Who is better F16 maneuverability vs F18 maneuverability? Who is better suited for air supremacy?

F16, because the F16 is better than the F18's fuselage light maneuverability, the F16A B is a combat type, the F16C D is a trainer model, the F18 can't beat the J-10 at all in Battlefield 2, F18 is a carrier-based aircraft, and the F16A B combat type in Battlefield 2, 1 missile will bomb the J-10.

There is one model of the F-16 that is little known, and that is the F-16XL, of which only 2 were produced. One was tested by NASA, and the other was mothballed by the U.S. military. Do technical reserves, its maneuverability far exceeds the US military's active fighters of all shapes, but the survivability is not strong, at the beginning and F-15B competed with the US army's attack fighters, and later F-15B won, that is, later F-15E, maneuverability F-16 is the best, but it is difficult to say air supremacy, both are multi-role fighters, but the design standards are different, I personally think that F-16C Dblock50 52 is more suitable for air dominance, F-18 is suitable for suppressing air defense.

The F-18 was not originally developed as an air supremacy fighter, the advantage of twin engines is that the remaining one can land safely if one engine fails, and the F-18 as an air interdiction mission needs two engines to obtain a larger bomb load.

Of course, a combat aircraft must first be able to fly faster and better than other aircraft, and the aerodynamic layout is a very important point.

The aerodynamic layout of the two gives it excellent air mobility capabilities, but as a supplement to the F-15, the F-16 has an incomparable advantage over the F-18 in fly-by-wire capabilities.

Studying the writings of the 'Fighter ** Party' will be of great help to your cognition.

The F16 is light and maneuverable better than the F18, and the F18 should have an advantage after all.

Absolutely improved F16 Bull X, air dominance.

In terms of mobility alone, it is F16 strong.

F-16 and F A-18 are carrier-based aircraft, which can be used for both combat and bombing, each with its own advantages.

The F-15 is the strongest, followed by the F-16, and the F-15 Eagle (F-15 Eagle), which is an all-weather, highly maneuverable tactical fighter, is designed to obtain and maintain air superiority, and is one of the main fighters in the U.S. Air Force. The maximum combat radius is 1800 km.

F-16 Fighting Falcon light fighter. The single-engine, single-seat light fighter developed by General Dynamics for the US Air Force is mainly used in air combat and can also be used for close air support, and is one of the main aircraft of the US Air Force. After the Cold War, the demand for military aircraft in the U.S. Air Force declined, and General Dynamics announced in December 1992 that it had sold the F-16 production line to Lockheed.

The combat radius when performing volley missions can exceed 900 km; The combat radius when patrolling in the air is about 700 km; When carrying out ground attack missions, the combat radius is about 440-1,400 kilometers depending on the external and flight profiles.

F-18 is a carrier-based fighter, A-18 is a carrier-based attack aircraft Because the two are developed on the basis of the same prototype, that is, one aircraft and two types, the body is exactly the same, but there are differences in equipment, so they are collectively referred to as F A-1B, and the nickname is also called "Hornet" In 1974, when the U.S. Air Force put forward the "light fighter" program and began to develop prototypes, the U.S. Navy also put forward a request for the development of a multi-role fighter At that time, it was called the VFAX program. Later renamed the Naval Air Combat Fighter Program In 1974, Northrop's YF-17 failed in the competition for the prototype of the YF-16, fortunately Northrop's work was not done in vain, and in 1975 their YF-17 was selected by the Navy, which was the prototype of the F A-18 The combat radius is 740 kilometers (air combat kilometers (ground attack), and the transfer range is 3700 kilometers (without aerial refueling).

The F-15 Eagle fighter has the largest combat radius.

There is an essential difference between the three.

The F-15 is a heavy fighter, and the technology itself uses is more demanding than that of light fighters such as the F-16; The F-16 and F-A-18 are light fighters and have slightly lower technical requirements than the F-15. In addition, South Korea is the first country after Iran (Iran is equipped with the F-14 "Tomcat", which was originally also a U.S. carrier aircraft) to use the original naval fighter as an army aviation, and it is equipped with the F A-18.

In general, the F-15 has an advantage over the F-16 and F A-18 in range, number of equipment, and maneuverability, which is an absolute advantage over heavy fighters. F-16 was originally developed as a light air superiority fighter with F-15 (this model is like Russia's MiG-29 with Su-30, China's J-10 with Su-30, Israel's F-16I with F-15I, Japan's F-2 with F-15J, etc.), with the new era of U.S. military combat needs, its continuous improvement, its versatility is stronger than F A-18; F A-18 is a light fighter specially developed by the US military for the Navy, compared with land-based aircraft, the range is not long, and the number of ** that can be carried is not much, which is limited by the needs of the combat environment.

Therefore, the F-15 is the strongest, the F-16 is the second, and the F-A-18 is the second. We hope you are satisfied.

The F15 and F16 levels are about the same as the F18, otherwise the United States only needs to equip 1.

It is because they have their own advantages and can complement each other that they are equipped at the same time.

I don't believe it if it is said that the F18 is weaker than the F15, because now there are Super Hornets F18F and Growlers and the latest F18 names forgot, especially the Growlers have a record of shooting down F22, but the latest F18 is heard to be stronger than the Growler, then do you dare to say that F16 and F15 are stronger than F18? But now the F15 and F16 have also been upgraded, after all, each has its own advantages and disadvantages, and it is not good to compare at all, and then do you ask whether it is better than air combat or ground or sea?

The F-15 and F-16 are the main fighters of the US Air Force, one heavy and one light, high and low, so the F-15 is more powerful, but the F-16 is also very good. The F-18 is a sea-based aircraft, and the use environment and combat missions of the first two are different. Personally, I think that the F A-18E F is the best carrier-based aircraft in service today, more powerful than the Su-33!

What are you talking about? F15 The F16 is for the Army, and the F16 itself was developed to support the F15. The F18 is a naval one.

That large aircraft, it seems, has a wider radar range than 16.

Can this be compared, the F-15 is a heavy fighter, and the F-16 is a light fighter. In the same generation, heavy fighters have always been better than light fighters. The F-18 is a fighter aircraft equipped with the US Navy.

The uses are not the same at all. If you really compare it, I think the F-15 is very good. Because he is the aircraft that seems to be able to continue to improve on the comparison with the F-22.

Because the F-15SE has achieved very good reviews internationally.

If you talk about combat power, there is no doubt that the F-15 is the strongest (in fact, the strongest is the F-22, but you are asking about the F-15, F-16, and F-18). Because the F-15 is a heavy fighter with air combat priority, it is mainly used for long-distance air combat and air supremacy. The F-16 is only a light fighter, mainly used for close combat, ground attack and with the F-15 fighter to form a combination of high and low.

The F-18 is a fighter that gives priority to ground and sea attacks, and is not as heavy fighter as the F-15 in terms of air combat.

The F-15, with the largest power and the most models, has the largest amount of equipment and the highest combat effectiveness in the US Air Force.

。。Someone actually said that the F15 was retired, and that the F22 was not in service?. The F16 is a light fighter and the F15 F18 cannot be compared.

The main difference between F15 and F18 is that F15 is an air supremacy type fighter, while F18 is multi-purpose, although F15 also has E and G models to enhance attack capabilities, but F15E and F15G are thin compared to Super Hornet F A18-E F in terms of air supremacy. So, in general, the F15 is more used for air supremacy. As for which of them is the most advanced, it's hard to say, the level of electronic systems, power, mobility and attack power are all about the same, but the F15 is heavy and has a certain advantage over the Hornet in terms of combat effectiveness.

The F 16 has the best mobility, the F 18 has the best ground attack capability, the F 15 is slightly inferior to the F 16 in maneuverability, but it is superior in terms of ** configuration, over-the-horizon attack capability and combat radius, and the F 15E is a multi-purpose type with strong attack power, but the maintainability is not as good as the F 18.

The F-15 is mainly a heavy air superiority fighter for the Air Force, and the E model is multi-functional; The F-16 is mainly a light air superiority fighter for the Air Force, which is exactly the same as the F-15; The F18 is mainly a carrier-based air superiority fighter for the Navy, the latest is the F A18E F type, and the F18G electronic warfare type is currently appearing to replace the aging E A6B.

F15, omnipotent, can both dominate the air and attack on the ground with precision.

To fight in the air, the other two are not opponents of the F15 The training subject of the F16 pilots is ground attack The F18 is a carrier-based landing , while the F15 is an air combat.

As far as the battle is concerned, they are all 3 generations, so it's hard to say. The F15 seems to be the oldest, but none have been shot down so far, and it is the most expensive. Likely to be dominant? It depends on the driver's skills.

That's your delusion, heavy aircraft also have more thrust, and light aircraft thrust to weight than necessarily higher than heavy aircraft, and further thrust-to-weight ratio will not directly determine the PS, and the PS is not the same in different flight envelopes between the two aircraft, and the response of roll and flight control, the translation of the maneuvering input has absolutely no less impact on the air combat maneuver than how much lift the wing can generate. Simply saying that mobility is "good" or "bad" is sometimes a one-sided statement. Different aircraft have different maneuverability, and how to take advantage of it is the key.

As for the Pugachev Cobra of the Su-27, it is because the increased angle of attack and the static unstable layout allow the aircraft to tilt up on its own, and in fact, the control of the flat tail is basically ineffective. It's just that the Su-27 does not have significant sideslip in this process, so it does not take much height to recover. An aircraft without thrust deflection goes into a stall in an air battle in any case a suicidal act, because in the case of a wing stall there will be no control.

The Cobra maneuver has no real combat significance, unless the pilot wants to be killed by someone else as a target. To say that the Su27 is flexible, it is a small thing in front of the F16, the inherent advantages of a single-engine fighter are at least obvious in the roll and circle, the roll rate of the F16 is 360 degrees per second, the Su27 is much slower, and if you really roll to this speed, the aircraft will disintegrate. Also in the dog fight, the F16's bubble frameless cockpit can ensure the absolute advantage of any Maozi aircraft in the field of vision, the 30-degree rear tilted seat plus the side stick operation, the F16 can often easily pull out a high overload maneuver in combat, this is the origin of the so-called 9G king, Su27 Although the fuselage is very bulky, but the strength is very limited, so the overload in the maneuver is more limited.

The F16 was originally designed for combat, and even in the eyes of the American fighter party, the F16 radar and missiles are not needed, as long as the cannon goes to the fight. Behind this crazy concept is the F16's powerful fighting ability, and the Su27 is relatively bulky, so it can't take advantage of anything in pure combat. The Su27 can only take advantage of its strengths and avoid its weaknesses, taking advantage of the F16's shortcomings in general maneuverability in the medium and low speed sections, once the speed is pulled to the usual cruising speed, the F16's advantage is obvious.

Finally, the so-called Soviet aircraft have always emphasized that maneuverability is nothing more than YY, and Soviet aircraft have never been far inferior to Western aircraft led by the United States, so ignorant people can only find an excuse for mobility, in fact, Soviet aircraft have always been inferior to Western aircraft led by the United States in terms of mobility. The gap between the Soviet Union in the engine is too great, the gap in materials and technology is even greater, and the aerodynamic design is also backward, and everything is backward, and there is simply no so-called better maneuverability.

Sukhoi's planes have always been known for their maneuverability, and the reason for this is because of the good engines. I've seen them have a fighter with a thrust-to-weight ratio of 18, and it's all about the engine and the pilot's level in close combat. So in the case of the same level of pilots, the Su-27 can still spell out the F16.

Soviet aircraft have always emphasized maneuverability (for approach combat)....Certainly better than F16....And this can also be seen in the T50....Or even sacrificing stealth and supersonic homing....I can't explain the reason for the good maneuverability of the S27 specifically, so I won't say it, so as not to mislead.