Well, I guess maybe the Americans figured that agility doesnt
count as much as it did in air combat today. Most engagements are
BVR, so really tight turning dogfighters aren't as useful anymore.
It has always been a weight issue.
More high tech gizmos the aircraft its carrying, its heavier and
cant turn as tight. But if those hi tech gizmos are worth their
weight, then i guess its okay to forfeit a bit of
manueverability.
True enough, the flankers are more agile in the air than the
SuperBugs, but the Superbugs pack more sophisticated ECM, AESA
Radars etc etc.
Besides, the sheer amount of Superbugs required to replace the
tomcats... thats a lot of jobs! In the end, I figured they'd rather
give their own people more jobs than to give it to the
Russians.
Superbugs aren't as manueverable, but, they retain energy better.
In a typical F-16 vs Superbug scenario, the F-16s' manueverability
advantage will only last for a while. While the Superbug can hold
its energy, wait for the F-16 to quickly bleed off his in hope for
quick kill. Once its energy its bled off, the superbug can then
finally out turn its adversary to set up for the kill.
Good luck against flankers and fulcrums tho... those bastards can
tolerate extremely high AOA, can with their brute force AL-31s,
they'll still be able to bring their nose to close enuff to
shoot.
I believe the Americans bought quite a few Flankers and Fulcrums.
One of those many black projects to dissect Eastern Bloc aircraft
to study. I used to have this rare pic of a flanker that carried US
NAVY markings... awesome sight.