Originally Posted by
Bob Viking
Clearly the SU35 is very manoeuverable and looks great at an air show but which would die first in a fight?
And you know the answer to that question? I don't. On paper and video F-35 looks like an inferior plane. Single-engine design is less reliable in combat that a double-engine. Su-35S is more agile allowing it to evade oncoming missiles. Its electronic suite is unknown. The rest is in the numerous comments sections on numerous websites.
Originally Posted by
Bob Viking
Anyone who judges the F35 by its manoeuverabity immediately demonstrates their own lack of understanding.
Oh, please! A plane that was designed to rely on its electronic toys and long-range missiles hoping it'll never get closer that 100km to the adversaries. Did I get it right enough? The real question is, how long will it last in a real war when mechanics won't be able to use surgical scalpels in dust-free rooms to fine-tune its microchips?
Originally Posted by
Bob Viking
I realise your mind is already made up so I won’t waste my own time arguing.
MY mind... right.
PS For everyone else's info, I don't want to start or join an argument about which plane is better. With so little reliable information it's just silly. I'd much rather prefer a sensible discussion without any symptoms of fanboyism. Yes, I do have my opinions and I'd like to have them tested by counter-arguments. But no, I don't think any plane is inherently "better" than any other.