Simply comparing rate/radius/g/SEP graphs works for 2v2/many v many as well as it does for 1v1 - your coordination, tactics and ability become much bigger factors as the numbers grow.
yes, the chart doesn't change
in bold is what I've read f-15 pilots saying... it's a dumb idea to get into a turning fight and it's up to your wingman/others to save your arse
Do remember, though, that HMS, off-boresight weapons, AIM9-X/ASRAAM and lock-after-launch aren't exclusive to F-35. We could even do off-boresight in the old F4!
agreed and is why it's said it's a dumb idea since the '80's, it's just with HMD asraam and 9xblk2 [and allowing the opposition a similar weapon] it's even dumber now
F-18E: 11.1
F35A: 11.3
Mirage 2000: 11.5
F-18C: 12.5
F-15C 13.7
F-16A: 14.3
do you have the link please, I'd like to read it for my interest
I'm happy to continue with the 4.6g f-35a but the f-35c has 5g sus turn
for an apple apple, lets use the f-35a strike mission with 50/60% fuel fraction left for a2a and add the targeting pod etc
it was f18c and f-16/50 but no matter, I though the f-15 would of been the match but its 28/32k empty / 13k fuel
when you add the extra fuel/pod for a 590nm strike, I think even that would come back to the sus of a f-35...I don't have the knowledge to do the drag maths of 2x2000. 2xaim120 and flir pod. ingress alt
if you could be bother to do it..it would add to the debate
just for interest..the original f-35a was going to be 450+nm 25k empty and 13k fuel, till they wanted to extend mission, being able to weapon load 18k day 2 didn't help either