这个美国人评价，我认为是比较客观的

From what I have read, in terms of

acceleration, EF-2000> Rafale/the Flanker/F-15/fulcrum> F-16> F-18.
ITRs, Flanker, Fulcrum > Rafale/F-18/EF-2000? > F-16
STRs, Eurocanards > Flanker/f-16> MiG-29 > F-15 > F-18

The flankers are are older versions, and the MiG-29 is a downgraded luftwaffe bird. The viper is an F-16 Blk 50, the hornet is an E/F. The Eagle is C. Rest assured, the later models for the russian birds will be better in most depts. Kind of opposite that of the teens, in that later models esp. the 16 and 18 have sacrificed performance over earlier models. The Eurocanards will be equivalent and even better than late model flanker/fulcrum performance in some areas.

Another important criteria that the Shornet might not fare so well in could be range. Esp. with the drag and outward pointed pylons. The euro designs are known to supercruise with EFTs. And the flanker's range is legendary.

As PFCEM was saying, its the role that the shornet is designed for - a role that can be used to full advantage only by the USN. And there it is excellent. For land based AFs with a solid need for A2A and no need for carrier ops, however, a flanker or rafale or ef-2000 and possibly a Mig-35 might be better choices. Not surprisingly, the RMAF preferred the MKM to the Super Hornet and that is important considering they had previous experience with the Hornet.

Understandably, the Aussies bought the Shornet as an interim measure. fair enough considering it will fit in well with a force that uses similar a/c and weapons. No need here for an EF-2000/Rafale/Flanker, not when the JSF is just around the corner.

USS.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by uss novice; 20th October 2009 at 21:31.From what I have read, in terms of

acceleration, EF-2000> Rafale/the Flanker/F-15/fulcrum> F-16> F-18.
ITRs, Flanker, Fulcrum > Rafale/F-18/EF-2000? > F-16
STRs, Eurocanards > Flanker/f-16> MiG-29 > F-15 > F-18

The flankers are are older versions, and the MiG-29 is a downgraded luftwaffe bird. The viper is an F-16 Blk 50, the hornet is an E/F. The Eagle is C. Rest assured, the later models for the russian birds will be better in most depts. Kind of opposite that of the teens, in that later models esp. the 16 and 18 have sacrificed performance over earlier models. The Eurocanards will be equivalent and even better than late model flanker/fulcrum performance in some areas.

Another important criteria that the Shornet might not fare so well in could be range. Esp. with the drag and outward pointed pylons. The euro designs are known to supercruise with EFTs. And the flanker's range is legendary.

As PFCEM was saying, its the role that the shornet is designed for - a role that can be used to full advantage only by the USN. And there it is excellent. For land based AFs with a solid need for A2A and no need for carrier ops, however, a flanker or rafale or ef-2000 and possibly a Mig-35 might be better choices. Not surprisingly, the RMAF preferred the MKM to the Super Hornet and that is important considering they had previous experience with the Hornet.

Understandably, the Aussies bought the Shornet as an interim measure. fair enough considering it will fit in well with a force that uses similar a/c and weapons. No need here for an EF-2000/Rafale/Flanker, not when the JSF is just around the corner.

USS.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by uss novice; 20th October 2009 at 21:31.