What fighter jet gives the F-16 the most trouble?

[Dragon1-1]

3 minutes ago, Aquorys said:

It seems that you are still misunderstanding what I said. The initial question was "what fighter jet gives the F-16 the most trouble", not "can a very elite pilot in an F-5 beat an F-22 flown by a fighter pilot trainee in a simulated dogfight over the home base".

And I'm answering that question. There's no doubt that the Viper is no longer the top dog in air combat. However, you're trying to imply it's useless and has no chance whatsoever against other, newer 4th gens. Which is a ridiculous position, because it isn't. It's going to have to get creative in BVR (which is less skill-dependent), and it's at a disadvantage in WVR, but hardly the overwhelming inferiority that you claim. 

4 minutes ago, Aquorys said:

But okay, let's say all the aircraft just met around the corner of some huge mountain, so we really want to know about dogfight performance rather than BVR performance. Each of the Eurofighter/Rafale/Gripen trio has significantly better maneuverability than the F-16, especially at low speed. All of them have either the same or better dogfight missiles. All of them have a radar with superior off-boresight ability. The Eurofighter and Rafale have an IRST sensor. The Eurofighter also has significantly more power.

All the aircraft you listed can pull up to 9G outside brief (and highly energy-depleting) excursions. So no, they're not actually more maneuverable if they all stay at corner. Sure, if the fight gets slow the newer fighters have massive advantages, but an F-5 can kill the Viper if it can get it slow, good Viper drivers know better than to let that happen. Radar and IRST don't really matter in WVR (if you don't suck at keeping tally, that is). They're all most likely to be using the same AIM-9X with their respective HMCS. Yes, all those fighters have tricks to use that the Viper can't quite follow, have more gas, and a little more TWR to play with. None of that will enable the Viper to be beaten with 95% success rate, even if the pilots are all professionals with a more or less equally good BFM game.

Your comparison between a 1995 rally car and a 2015 track car is BS. It's more like 1995 Escort RS Cosworth vs. a 2005 Lancer Evo VIII RS, and put them on a rallycross track, two laps, full contact. Dunno about you, I'm not making bets on that one, I'd bet on the Lancer if I had to, it's got some 50hp on the Ford, but I'd make my peace with potentially losing my wager if it driver messes up a single corner more than the Ford.

Seriously, just read what an actual Rafale pilot says about the matter. Viper is a difficult opponent.

[Aquorys]

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

It's going to have to get creative in BVR (which is less skill-dependent)

Which is possible if you have supports, but hardly if you don't have them and you have no idea where the opponent is, or even that there is an opponent, until you are already at a tactical disadvantage - the key here being the ability to detect and track.

What is your estimate of the range an F-16 can detect and engage another F-16? Now divide the opponent's radar cross section by 4 at least, and try that again.

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

All the aircraft you listed can pull up to 9G outside brief (and highly energy-depleting) excursions. So no, they're not actually more maneuverable if they all stay at corner.

Except they reach those 9Gs at a lower airspeed, which makes them more maneuverable, because it results in a smaller turn radius, and they can keep pulling whatever Gs they are pulling longer, because they do not lose as much energy, and if they do, they are able to regain it faster.

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

but an F-5 can kill the Viper if it can get it slow, good Viper drivers know better than to let that happen

You can't just keep flying giant circles when your opponent sits inside your circle with the nose pointed at you. You could go vertical, but so can your opponent.

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

They're all most likely to be using the same AIM-9X with their respective HMCS.

The UK, Qatar and Oman use the ASRAAM. Germany, Austria, Italy and Spain use the IRIS-T.

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

it's more like 1995 Escort RS Cosworth vs. a 2005 Lancer Evo VIII RS
...
I'd bet on the Lancer if I had to, it's got some 50hp on the Ford

I guess you are underestimating the performance gap between the F-16 and aircraft like the Eurofighter (which has the most thrust out of the EF/Rafale/Gripen trio). It is certainly bigger than just "a few hp more".
I vaguely remember a pilot saying that it will accelerate out of less than 200 kt with the nose pointed 60 degrees up. I cannot imagine how the F-16 would counter that level of performance with regards to retaining and regaining energy, especially considering that the F-16's bad performance at low speed is quite well documented.

That was said in some publicly available interview with a pilot on some YouTube channel, if I am able to find the source, I will post a link.

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Seriously, just read what an actual Rafale pilot says about the matter. Viper is a difficult opponent.

He said, "F-16 actually was a good surprise actually [sic], I found it to be a pretty good aircraft. I think the most challenging was the F-16, it’s a pretty small jet so it’s easy to lose sight of it."

Not sure who flew his Eurofighter (aka Typhoon) aggressor if he thinks it's a joke, because pretty much everyone else is saying the exact opposite. The Rafale and Eurofighter have similar performance. As far as I know, the Rafale has a somewhat better instantaneous turn rate, the Eurofighter has a better sustained turn rate and more power. The Gripen has a better instantaneous turn rate than both of them, but cannot keep up with the other two in the vertical plane.

Edited February 18 by Aquorys

[Dragon1-1]

7 hours ago, Aquorys said:

Which is possible if you have supports, but hardly if you don't have them and you have no idea where the opponent is, or even that there is an opponent, until you are already at a tactical disadvantage - the key here being the ability to detect and track.

None of those fly with an AESA radar, so you don't need a radar lock to know that there is an opponent, you'll see him on RWR. He needs to find you, too, and you'll know when he sees you. Most of the time, both sides will have an AWACS, rendering that part moot. If both sides have an AWACS and AIM-120D, they can both shoot at datalink tracks. 

7 hours ago, Aquorys said:

He said, "F-16 actually was a good surprise actually [sic], I found it to be a pretty good aircraft. I think the most challenging was the F-16, it’s a pretty small jet so it’s easy to lose sight of it."

The point is, the Rafale guy thinks it's challenging. Don't you figure that this implies the fight could have gone the other way, had he not had his WVR game up to 100%? That's what I'm saying. If this was a turkey shoot, he wouldn't have been saying that. 

Also, it's worth noting the difference between that and Eurofighter. It's possible he ran into a particularly bad pilot, of course, or the pilot had a bad day, but nobody gets to fly an Eurofighter without a lot of learning and training. All the pilots involved here are highly trained professionals. So you can see how much skill influences a dogfight.

7 hours ago, Aquorys said:

You can't just keep flying giant circles when your opponent sits inside your circle with the nose pointed at you. You could go vertical, but so can your opponent.

...or, if you can get around that big circle faster than he can around his small one, you can try to force a two circle fight. In fact, going one circle against an F-5 is exactly how you end up on the wrong end of his guns.

Anyway, in case of the F-5, he's not really capable of doing much in the vertical, it's actually a great way of dealing with it for fighters that can. The more advanced fighters can match the Viper up there, which is another thing that makes that fight more interesting than a race.

7 hours ago, Aquorys said:

I vaguely remember a pilot saying that it will accelerate out of less than 200 kt with the nose pointed 60 degrees up. I cannot imagine how the F-16 would counter that level of performance with regards to retaining and regaining energy, especially considering that the F-16's bad performance at low speed is quite well documented.

The Viper's plan here is not to end up at less than 200kt. Which, should, TBH, always be part of the Viper's plan, because it hates being slow. What matters is how they perform at speed. Besides, we don't even know the fuel state of the Eurofighter at which it can do that. Full tanks, or half-empty? Incidentally, the Viper's thirsty engine means it'll lighten up rapidly, something that DCS pilots sometimes exploit in MP (of course, it is a gamble, you need to be able to at least get to tanker afterwards).

Do you have the actual charts for how fast each of those airframes must go to generate 9G? Because this is quite specific info, and often not all that easy to come by. Also, it's worth noting that generating 9G is not necessarily the same as sustaining 9G (which, as per Mover and the charts, the Viper has no problem doing at a proper speed and altitude). So you either have some otherwise hard to get EM charts, or you're making claims solely based on ballpark TWR figures and guesswork.

[Aquorys]

6 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

None of those fly with an AESA radar

There are currently at least 16 operational Eurofighters with an AESA radar, and the first Rafale with an AESA radar was operational in 2013, so there are probably more Rafale with an AESA radar than Eurofighters, and it seems that there are at least 12 operational Gripen with an AESA radar.

6 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Don't you figure that this implies the fight could have gone the other way, had he not had his WVR game up to 100%? That's what I'm saying.

It was also you who said that you don't need IRST in a dogfight, unless you lose visual contact, and only one of the two opponents has it. Anything can go one way or another, but the question is one of probability, and the odds are stacked against the F-16.

6 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

...or, if you can get around that big circle faster than he can around his small one, you can try to force a two circle fight. In fact, going one circle against an F-5 is exactly how you end up on the wrong end of his guns.

That is not possible with only speed, you need a higher sustained turn rate to do that, and all of the opponents have a higher sustained turn rate than the F-16.

6 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The Viper's plan here is not to end up at less than 200kt. Which, should, TBH, always be part of the Viper's plan, because it hates being slow.

Which is a disadvantage that gives your opponent more options

6 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Besides, we don't even know the fuel state of the Eurofighter at which it can do that. Full tanks, or half-empty?

Well, could the F-16 do it with empty tanks at least? If not, we don't even have to ask about the Eurofighter.

6 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Also, it's worth noting that generating 9G is not necessarily the same as sustaining 9G (which, as per Mover and the charts, the Viper has no problem doing at a proper speed and altitude).

...if you are flying either an unarmed F-16 with no tanks and no ECM, or you're doing 600+ kt. The actual combat loadout, even just air-to-air, has quite a severe impact on the F-16's performance, and as I said before, the impact for the same mission set is less severe for opponents like the Rafale and Eurofighter. I am a bit less confident about the Gripen, since it is a lighter one-engine aircraft like the F-16, and therefore, adding weight has a bigger impact on the thrust/weight ratio, AoA, etc. than with the other two aircraft.

[Dragon1-1]

2 hours ago, Aquorys said:

...if you are flying either an unarmed F-16 with no tanks and no ECM, or you're doing 600+ kt. 

No. Again, check Mover's videos, and the charts. He's done it. Not sure with what, but he mentioned having to throttle down in order to stay at corner.

2 hours ago, Aquorys said:

Well, could the F-16 do it with empty tanks at least? If not, we don't even have to ask about the Eurofighter.

With 50% fuel and an AA loadout, the Block 52 gets TWR of 1.24 or so. If you unload the jet, you should be able to accelerate straight up, at least at sea level, no matter the speed you're going at. That said, the Viper is a pig at 200kts and you know it. A competent Viper driver will not be at 200kts. Yes, this can be used against it, but in general, in a dogfight getting slow is only use if your opponent is also slow.

2 hours ago, Aquorys said:

It was also you who said that you don't need IRST in a dogfight, unless you lose visual contact, and only one of the two opponents has it. Anything can go one way or another, but the question is one of probability, and the odds are stacked against the F-16.

If you lose tally, you're dead either way, IRST or not. The time it'll take you to use IRST to cue you back onto the Viper (assuming it's even within its FOV) is the time he'll use to get on your tail. Sure, you can improve your tally-keeping ability in first place, but real pilots generally are able to keep their eyes on the bandit.

Small size does enhance the Viper's ability to turn the radar off and bushwhack from down low, like MiG-17s used to do to Phantoms. This will probably come up on DCS servers more than in actual Red Flag, but it's something.

2 hours ago, Aquorys said:

There are currently at least 16 operational Eurofighters with an AESA radar, and the first Rafale with an AESA radar was operational in 2013, so there are probably more Rafale with an AESA radar than Eurofighters, and it seems that there are at least 12 operational Gripen with an AESA radar.

If we're talking such small numbers, and there are now F-16Vs with AESA radars, too. I don't know the parameters, but it's doubtful that variant will have any problems finding anything that isn't a dedicated stealth fighter. 

2 hours ago, Aquorys said:

It was also you who said that you don't need IRST in a dogfight, unless you lose visual contact, and only one of the two opponents has it. Anything can go one way or another, but the question is one of probability, and the odds are stacked against the F-16.

There's no question there odds are stacked against it, the question is whether it's so bad that the Viper has practically no chance of winning. Real results (that you seem so desperate to dismiss) answer that one with pretty resounding "no".

Your advice for a Viper going against, say, the Eurofighter amounts to, "there's no use, eject". This is completely useless. Instead of focusing on how "there's no way for the Viper to win that match", you could try to come up with something useful, like what the Viper could do to win, or at least give the EF a solid fight. The Eurofighter will certainly be the most challenging opponent for the Viper in DCS, in that you'll have to outskill the bandit by a significant margin to win.

[Aquorys]

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

No. Again, check Mover's videos, and the charts. He's done it. Not sure with what, but he mentioned having to throttle down in order to stay at corner.

Feel free to ask him whether he was able to sustain a 9G turn with 4 AMRAAMs and 2 Sidewinders on the wings at corner speed.

There are basically 2 possible outcomes:

1. No, because that's not possible
2. Yes, but the F-16s performance in DCS is very unrealistic, because it bleeds speed like a friggin' parachute (try it yourself)

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

If we're talking such small numbers, and there are now F-16Vs with AESA radars, too.

I just checked, and it seems there are some in service by now in Taiwan, so ok, let's assume the F-16 has an AESA radar too now.

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Real results (that you seem so desperate to dismiss) answer that one with pretty resounding "no".

So to summarize, you are suggesting that real results show that the F-16 can expect to "win quite often" or "has a good chance of winning the fight" against any of the Eurofighter/Rafale/Gripen trio, as opposed to "will probably lose most fights" or "does not have a good chance of winning", which is what I am saying.

But ok, you want real results, how about those for something that is somewhat close to real results:

Gripen pilot:

DACT Gripen vs. F-16 & F/A-18:
https://youtu.be/x31Zjhb2C4Q?t=813

Gripen vs. Eurofighter & Rafale:
https://youtu.be/x31Zjhb2C4Q?t=1451

 

F-22 pilot (flying a Eurofighter in the UK):

Eurofighter performance wrt. acceleration and turn rate:
https://youtu.be/YWhj6cyavUo?t=889

DACT Eurofighter vs. F/A-18:
https://youtu.be/YWhj6cyavUo?t=1634

 

Quick summary for those who want to skip the video watching part:

• The F-16 bleeds off more energy than the Gripen when turning
• The F/A-18's high alpha capabilities are more of a problem for the Gripen than the F-16's high speed/high G/high turn rate
• The Gripen has no problem winning against both in BFM/ACM
• Tactics and systems/sensors/EW are more important than thrust/weight, speed, turn rate, etc.
• High speed is more interesting for BVR & missile ballistics than for dogfighting
• The Eurofighter going 60-70 degrees nose up at 120-130 kt and accelerating is actually a standard "performance takeoff" maneuver, so certainly no empty tanks
• The turn rate of the Eurofighter is similar to the F-22's, except at low speed (where the F-22 is significantly better)
• Radar and low speed maneuverability were the Eurofighter's weaknesses (but this is compared to the F-22, not the F-16)
• Even for the F-22 vs. the Eurofighter the go-to game plan is low speed super-maneuverability, not high speed rate fighting
• The Eurofighter regains speed even faster than the F-22 (you can draw your own conclusions about how that compares to the F-16)
• The Eurofighter won against the F/A-18

Now if you go back to my first couple posts, I'd say, that's pretty close to what I said from the start.

I don't have any sources with regards to the Rafale readily available to quote right now, but it is in the same ball park as the Gripen and Eurofighter, with some strengths and weaknesses compared to the other two, so the results would presumably be similar as well.

Edited February 19 by Aquorys