Look at that little thing, what would you even call it, a mini-fighter? If you joined the Air Force and beame a fighter pilot and got assigned one of these, wouldn't you feel like a bit of a second-stringer? Like why not a nice stealth plane? Oh that's for ELITE pilots eh?
>>537806616American's can refuel in air russians can't.That SU is all fuel tank.
Simplcity for production and maintenance and some advantages with aerodynamics with low weight. Lessons kind of learned from the F-4 vs Mig duels in the nam
>>537806616I'm glad that I'm not OP because I will never know the feeling of an anal fissure caused by homosex.
>>537806616it's not the size that matters. it's how you use it
Stupid comparison SU-27 and F-16 were not designed to serve the same role. The MIG-29 was and that is about F-16 size.
>>537806616It isn't tiny. Su-27's behind it are xbox huge, because Soviets at the time couldn't make good radars that aren't xbox huge. Once you make one thing big, it starts a cascade of making things bigger.
>>537806616Because the Russians can't build efficient jet engines under a certain size. They can only build larger engines, hence the larger airframes to accommodate them.
Also noteworthy that they were designed with the cold war creeps and designed to be hidden in barns and take off from short, improvised eastern european runways. Hey just like Iran!
>>537806616>Why's the F-16 so tiny?maneuverability and ease of maintenance and manufacturing.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUjX1RntqVw
>>537807581This.Big stupid engines glowing like tiny suns on IR cameras.
>>537806616Because it was designed, to be the ultimate dogfighter. At the time, beyond-visual-range weaponry wqs still happening close enough that a dogfight was still a high likelihood. So, this plane was built for a competition, that the F18 also participated in as the YF17, to make the best dogfighter possible for the time. That meant the plane had to be as small and lightweight as possible. It's still, to this day, one of the most maneuverable aircraft. There are plenty of great documentaries about its design philosophy
>>537807625Taking off from improvised airbases with those big downwards inlets sucking up all the gravel is a really stupid idea.
>>537807917At that point our airbases would have been nuked.
>>537807811>Big stupid engines glowing like tiny suns on IR cameras.are we talking about the F-35 over Iran or something "less advanced"?
>>537807917Russian aircraft, because of shitty maintenance and airbase standards, usually have grates in the inlets designed to deflect incoming debris. Some even have a "mudflap" on the front gear to stop it from kicking up debris that could get sucked into the engines
>>537807676https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhhOin2p5Qs
>>537808004That would be effective if you could jettison them after take off but would cause some payload issues. When your talking a post nuclear battlefield like these 20th century birds were built for there was always the worst case scenario in mind for keeping the fight going no matter what
>>537806616Most modern fighters are just stupid big. Those flankers are about the same size as a B-17.
>>537806616>/pol/ showing its low-IQ yet again
>>537807676>>537808420tl:drThe f-16 is better in a turning fight.which is better in guns and missile acquisition battles.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUevXzx-kvcan elegant weapon, for a more civilized time.
>>537808469That's just the Russian solution. The inlet grates fold away once in the air, and the landing gear parts just tuck away with the gear. As far as the American way of dealing with it, logistics and supply chains is likely the answer. Look into the Berlin airlift for how organized it can get
>>537806616doesn’t the f-16 have like twice the range and much longer lasting engines?russian planes are designed like the engineers just wanted to get it over with and go home to get drunk, the jets look the part and do the bare minimum to work but they’re shit.
you don't have a god, you have gaslighting as a religion.
>>537806616F16 is the only fighter designed by actual pilots not DoD committees trying to create jobs. Pilots love it, you're a faggot
>>537806616It's just more efficient.Russian engines produce less than half the power of a similar sized western engine.So they need to use bigger engines to produce the same thrusts which means a bigger plane which means more thrust is required which means even bigger engines and even bigger planes.
>>537806616>Oh that's for ELITE pilots eh?Can you stop talking about topics you know nothing about?
>>537808797thisthe f-16 has long been a venerable workhorse filling a multitude of roles with efficiency that is unmatched in throughout several generations of airframesone of the few success stories for american military industry, albeit for demonic jewish purposes
>>537806828>American's can refuel in air russians can't.I don't know how much you will kvetch when you had to deal with real AA capability
>>537807231Mig 29 is the size and role of F-15F-16 is tiny because it is well designed. Increases in weight on aircraft drive increasing the size of wings which increase the size of the tail which increases the weight and is recoursive so keeping the plane compact has exponential effects on size>>537810127The russian engines on their 4th gen in particular suck ass compaired to the F100, so the engines have to be made bigger with more turbines which causes the planes to go through that recoursion of size.
>>537806616F16>Every other piece of garbage builtNo i will not elaborate.
>>537806616>Oh that's for ELITE pilots eh?lmao
>>537811100all humans do.
>>537806616The story of the F-16 is kind of fascinating. The Air Force needed a cheap but competent replacement for the F4 phantom while it was working on the F15 eagle. It wasn't meant to be anything special. But they accidentally built a really badass fighter they now can't do without.
>>537812495Yes, and if anyone is interested picrel is an excellent book about John Boyd and the Fighter Mafia at the Pentagon who ran the Lightweight Fighter program that created the F-16 and F/A-18.Boyd is also the guy who came up with the idea of OODA loop. They realized that the ideal fighter jet would be lightweight, fast, and maneuverable. They ended up creating jets that were perfect for close range dogfighting, that also ended up being extremely useful as the cheaper, lighter, mass produced, more utilitarian component in the high-low mix with the F-15s.
4,600 F-16s built vs 600 SU-27s
>>537812495I know dude, my uncle who works for Nintendo was a Program Manager on the F-15 program after a previous program that's like a turbo and larger version was canceled.
>>537806616smaller hitbox
>>537816662Not to mention the foreign authorized copies.
>>537814846>muh ooda loop
>>537807486>xbox hugeoldfag detected
>>537806616That's forced perspective
>>537806616Because it is small and Flankers are enormous.
>>537806616OP pic is just the perspective, the size differences is not that massive.
>>537806616It Is said they could beat an f-35Reminder that the f-35 was born malformed and has been improved many times
>>537806616My brother in Christ, the F-16 was designed in the early 70s.
>>537806616You seem like one of those people that takes everything as personal slight.
>>537818962that's not an F-16.
>>537817933There's been some talk about putting the F-16 XL into production as a supplement to existing fighter stocks.
>>537806616It's a multirole fighter, they're not that big.F16s are built for saturation. They're supposed to take off from shorter runways too.
>>537819139>hey there lil buddy
>>537819615That would be based, what they really need is a stealthy but short range thinger. Like a Stealth Falcon. I know I know the EUrops have tried but all they have is "active" stealth and that's already busted. It's why they won't give any new European fighters to the Ukrainians, not even Typhoons or Harriers which can take pods which upgrade them to current euro-standard.
