尽管F-15在各方面都更好，为什么还要引进F-16（二）

Chris Morehouse
Is an F-22 Raptor better than the F-35?
I am going to make a very direct statement, because this comes up in a lot of different questions I see on Quora regarding fighter aircraft.
As of today, the F-22A Raptor is the absolute best at what it does. Hunting and killing other aircraft.
There is no better Air Dominance fighter in service today by any military force. None. Zero. The Raptor stands alone as the top dog. This is not a biased statement from American pride or some defense industry propaganda. The F-22 has flaws, has aspects that could be better, and places that can (and will) be improved. But there is simply nothing in the sky today better at hunting and killing other aircraft than the Raptor. That includes the F-35.
Now, that being said, is the F-22 “better” than the F-35? As a blanket statement? No. No it is not. There are plenty of great things about the F-35 that the F-22 can’t match. And full disclosure, I have been a frequent and vocal critic of the JSF program since, well, forever I guess. Plenty of mistakes to be found there. Plenty of bad calls, and just straight up ignorance when it came to the planning and execution of this ambitious effort. All that aside, the F-35 is an impressive aircraft.

F-22"猛禽"比F-35更好吗？
我要做一个非常直接的声明，因为我在Quora上看到很多关于战斗机的不同问题都有涉及这个问题。
截至今天，F-22A猛禽绝对是最好的战斗机——猎杀其他飞机。
当今，任何军事力量都没有比这更好的空中优势战斗机了。一架也没有，猛禽是狗斗方面最厉害的。这不是出于美国人的自尊或国防工业的宣传而发表的有偏见的言论。F-22有缺陷，有一些方面可以改进，还有一些地方可以（也将）改进。但在今天的天空中，没有什么比猛禽更擅长猎杀其他飞机（其中包括F-35）了。
话虽如此，F-22是否比F-35“更好”？作为一个笼统的声明——不，不会。F-35有很多伟大之处是F-22无法比拟的。坦白地说，从那时起，我就一直是 联合攻击战斗机（JSF）项目的直言不讳的批评者，好吧，我永远都是。这里有很多错误。很多错误的决定，当涉及到这个雄心勃勃的努力的计划和执行时，完全是无知。撇开这些不谈，F-35是一架令人印象深刻的飞机。

It is not an air dominance fighter in the weight class of the F-22, but it can operate in an Air to Air role. But it can also operate as a strike aircraft, and ISR asset, suppression of enemy air defense aircraft, penetrating ground attack, you name it. It has a CTOL variant, a STOVL variant, and a CATOBAR variant. It is less expensive, and has a smaller logistical footprint than the F-22.
It can do a lot of things the F-22 can not do, such as share targeting data with other aircraft (as of today the F-22 can only share targeting data with other F-22s, though they can receive data from other aircraft). Other things it can do that the Raptor can’t is track and target ground targets with a whole bunch of nifty sensors, including its main radar. The Raptor radar, even though the 35’s radar was derived from it, is not set up to target and track ground targets like this.

它不是F-22那样重量级的空中优势战斗机，但它可以发挥空对空的作用。但它也可以作为攻击机，监视与侦察用途，压制敌人的防空飞机，渗透地面攻击，你能想到的都没问题。它有常规起降型（CTOL）变体、短距离起飞和垂直降落（STOV)变体和弹射辅助起飞拦阻回收(CATOBAR)变体。它比F-22更便宜，后勤占用空间也更小。
它可以做很多F-22做不到的事情，比如与其他飞机共享目标数据（截至今天，F-22只能与其他F-22共享目标数据，不过他们可以接收其他飞机的数据）。它能做的其他事情是猛禽不能做的，就是用一大堆出色的传感器跟踪和瞄准地面目标，包括它的主雷达。尽管35的雷达是由猛禽雷达衍生的，但并不是为了瞄准和跟踪这样的地面目标而设置的。

Don’t get me wrong, the F-22 can engage ground targets. It can perform penetrating strike missions. It inherited that role when the F-117s were retired, before the F-35s came into service. But the F-22 ground attack capabilities are very modest when compared to those of the Lightnings. Keep in mind, The F-117 could only carry two weapons, and relied on laser guided munitions. The F-22 could take that mission easily, and could do so with the same radar penetrating capability. The F-35s now, they have taken this mission . The weapons that can be used are more diverse, and there are more options for targeting. Also, F-35s can strike moving targets (with the addition of the SDB II) something the F-22 and F-117s could not do.
So, is the Raptor better than the F-35? No. Is the F-35 better than the Raptor? No.
The Raptor is the absolute king of the sky. The F-35 is the absolute best multi-role fighter in service today. So one is not better than the other, but they are both the best at what they do.

不要误会我，F-22可以攻击地面目标。它可以执行 渗透打击任务。当F-117退役时，在F-35服役之前，它继承了这一角色。但是F-22的对地攻击能力与“闪电”相比是非常有限的。请记住，F-117只能携带两种武器，并且依靠激光制导弹药。但是F-22的对地攻击能力与“闪电”相比是非常有限的。现在，F-35承担了这项任务。可以使用的武器更加多样化，瞄准目标的选择也更多。此外，F-35可以打击移动目标（搭载“小直径炸弹”(SDB-II)），这是F-22和F-117无法做到的。
那么，“猛禽”比F-35更好吗？不，F-35比猛禽更好吗？也不
猛禽是绝对的天空之王。F-35是目前服役的最好的多用途战斗机。所以一架并不会比另一架好，但他们都是各自领域的佼佼者。

Steven Kam
What is the difference between an F-16 and F-15?
The F-15 was originally designed as a pure air-superiority fighter with no compromises made for other missions, i.e. the original design philosophy was "not a pound for air to ground", so the F-15 was NOT created with air-to-ground strikes as being a major requirement. The F-15 is and was, a big, expensive fighter built to excel in a single role. The F-16 was designed to be a relatively low-cost multirole fighter, and the two together formed the backbone of USAF TAC (Tactical Air Command) from the 1970s to whenever it was that the USAF was reorganized. They were originally designed and built by two completely different defense contractors - McDonnell Douglas designed the F-15, and General Dynamics designed the F-16. These names are perhaps less familiar today (I don't know the history of all the corporate restructuring that goes on with defense contractors). But now, Boeing is responsible for later F-15 variants, and I think Lockheed Martin now handles contracts for the F-16.
As originally built, the F-15 is a larger and faster aircraft with a higher performance ceiling (meaning it can fly and fight at higher altitudes) than the F-16. It had/has 1 seat (F-15A, F-15C), and 2 seat (F-15B, F-15D) variants.

F-16和F-15有什么区别？
F-15最初是作为一种纯空中优势战斗机设计的，没有为其他任务做出任何妥协，即最初的设计理念是“无需用于空对地”，因此F-15并不是以实施空对地的打击为主要目的而设计的。F-15并不是将空对地打击作为主要需求而制造的。不管过去还是现在，F-15都是一种大型、昂贵的战斗机，专为单一角色而设计。F-16被设计成一种相对低成本的多用途战斗机，从20世纪70年代到美国空军重组期间，这两种战斗机共同构成了美国空军战术司令部(TAC)的骨干。它们最初是由两个完全不同的国防承包商设计和建造的——麦克唐纳·道格拉斯设计了F-15，通用动力设计了F-16。这些名字今天可能不太熟悉了(我不知道国防承包商的所有公司重组的历史)。但是现在，波音公司负责后来的F-15改型，我认为洛克希德·马丁公司现在处理F-16的合同。
正如最初建造的那样，正如最初建造的那样，F-15是一种比F-16更大更快的飞机，具有更高的性能上限(意味着它可以在更高的高度飞行和战斗)，它有/有1座(F-15A, F-15C)和双座(F-15B, F-15D)改型版本。

The F-15 is a MUCH LARGER aircraft than the F-16. Underscoring the point is the fact that the two fighters (as originally designed) used basically the same engine (Pratt & Whitney F100 turbofan), but the F-15 has two, while the F-16 is a single-engine fighter (one of the main reasons the USN opted for the F-18 instead; the Navy didn't favor the use of a single-engine fighter over water). Being much larger, the F-15 also carries a lot more fuel and has a much longer operational range - it has perhaps twice the combat radius of the F-16 (so, as a VERY rough approximation, an F-15 can cover missions ranging over four times the combat area and airspace than can an F-16 operating from the same airfield)
The Air Force used both to enhance flexibility on a given defense budget. (Yes, even though the US spends incredible amounts of money on defense, it's still not an unlimited budget). F-15s were the dedicated/specialized air intercept and superiority fighters, tasked with shooting down any and all enemy aircraft at all ranges, from dogfight (gun and Sidewinder range) to BVR (beyond visual range, Sparrow and/or AMRAAM range). The F-16 is a fantastically capable light fighter that performs both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions very effectively, but originally it lacked any medium-to-long range AAM capability . So the F-15s would mostly be tasked with air superiority, with the F-16s performing all other types of missions and supplementing with air-to-air where needed.

F-15是一架比F-16大得多的飞机。强调这一点的事实是，这两架战斗机(按照最初的设计)基本上使用相同的发动机（ 美国普惠公司研制的F100军用涡扇发动机），但F-15采用双引擎，而F-16是一款单引擎战斗机（美国海军选择F-18的主要原因之一；海军不赞成在水上使用单引擎战斗机）。F-15体积更大，携带的燃料也更多，作战范围也更长——它的作战半径可能是F-16的两倍（因此，粗略地估计，F-15可以覆盖的作战区域和空域是F-16的四倍以上。）
空军使用这两种方法来提高给定国防预算的灵活性。（是的，尽管美国在国防上花了大量的钱，但它仍然不是无限的预算）。F-15是专用/专业的空中拦截和优势战斗机，任务是在作战范围内击落所有敌机——从狗斗（机炮和响尾蛇导弹射程）到超视距作战（麻雀空对空导弹和/或先进中程空对空导弹的射程）。F-16是一种能力非凡的轻型战斗机，可以非常有效地执行空对空和空对地任务，但最初它缺乏中远程空对空能力因此，f -15将主要承担空中优势的任务，f -16将执行所有其他类型的任务，必要时辅以空对空作战。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Lots of things change over the years, however, and the roles have changed considerably as the two aircraft continued to evolve and receive upgrades. Although the F-15 was originally designed as a specialist air-superiority fighter, its design and airfrx turned out to be very adaptable to certain types of ground-attack missions, and the F-15E (Strike Eagle) performs mostly air-to-ground missions, although since it retains a significant portion the Eagle's air combat maneuverability and air-to-air suite, it's very capable of defending itself in aerial combat. (It does lose some of its intercept capability, however; the conformal fuel packs may be low-drag, but it does make the aircraft less capable as an interceptor). It's a primary candidate, where available, for missions where enemy fighters may be a problem.
Meanwhile, the F-16 received improved radar and avionics over the years and thereafter cleared AMRAAM trials, and so these upgraded F-16s can also conduct BVR engagements against hostile air assets. The USAF was no longer limited to using F-15s for that kind of duty.
So in the present day, the F-15 remains bigger, faster, much longer-ranged and somewhat more survivable due to its twin-engine design, but both fighters are (or have variants) able to perform air-to-air and air-to-ground missions.

然而，这些年来发生了很多变化，随着两架飞机的不断发展和升级，角色也发生了很大变化。尽管F-15最初是作为一种专业的空中优势战斗机设计的，但其设计和机身非常适合某些类型的对地攻击任务，F-15E（攻击鹰）主要执行空对地任务，不过它保留了“鹰“式战斗机的大部分空战机动性和空对空套件，它在空战中自卫能力很强。（然而，它确实失去了一些拦截能力；保形燃料包可能是低阻力的，但它确实使飞机的拦截能力降低）。在可行的情况下，它是一个主要的候选者，用于执行敌人战斗机可能成为问题的任务。
与此同时，F-16多年来接受了改进的雷达和航空电子设备，此后通过了先进中程空对空导弹（AMRAAM）试验，因此这些升级的F-16也可以对敌方空中战斗机在超视距场景下进行交战。美国空军不再局限于使用F -15来执行这种任务。
因此，在今天，由于其双发动机设计，F-15仍然更大、更快、射程更远，生存能力更强，但这两种战斗机都能够（或有变种）执行空对空和空对地任务。

Adam Zenith
The F-16 wasnt as agile as the F-15, which had a larger wingspan (more lift), a higher thrust-to-weight ratio (better propulsion), and two vertical stabilizers instead of one (the tails at the back of an aircraft. They provide maneuverability). However, the F-16 was cheaper, which was the main reason for its procurement.
During the Vietnam war era, the US Air Force realized that the production cost of the F-15 would not allow it to provide enough next-gen aircraft for future conflicts, so they decided to commission the development of a cheaper aircraft that could operate at speeds of Mach 0.6–1.6 (750 to 1950 km/h) and altitudes of 9,100–12,000m, where it was predicted most air combat would take place. After about 8 years of development and testing of various prototypes, the YF-16 was chosen as the new next-gen multirole fighter of the US Air Force, which came to be known by the code F-16.
Today, the F-16 is no longer being purchased by the US Air Force, but it is still being used and regularly upgraded. During the Obama administration, the US Air Force allocated about $3 billion to upgrade it’s fleet of F-16s. The newest variant, the F16V, which has a new radar, computer hardware and electronic warfare kit, is still being built for export to countries like Taiwan or Israel, where military conflicts are a possibility.

F-16不如F-15敏捷，后者有更大的翼展（更大的升力）、更高的推重比（更好的推进力）和两个垂直稳定器，而不是一个（飞机后部的尾翼，它们提供了机动性）。然而，F-16更便宜，这是采购它的主要原因。
在越南战争时期，美国空军意识到F-15的生产成本不足以为未来的冲突提供足够多的下一代飞机，因此他们决定委托开发一种更便宜的飞机，这种飞机可以在0.6–1.6马赫（750至1950公里/小时）的速度和9100–12000米的高度下运行，预计大多数空战都将在那里进行。经过大约8年的各种原型机的开发和测试，YF-16被选为美国空军新的下一代多用途战斗机，代号为F-16。
如今，美国空军不再购买F-16，但它仍在使用并定期进行升级。在奥巴马政府时期，美国空军拨款约30亿美元升级其F-16机队。最新的变种F16V拥有新的雷达、计算机硬件和电子战套件，目前仍在制造中，用于出口到台湾或以色列等可能发生军事冲突的国家（或地区）。

Stefan Gebhardt
An F-16 cost less to buy and is $5,000 per hour cheaper to operate, compared to an F-15. An F-16 cost around 3 million dollars, while an F-15 cost 7.5 million. And thats just the plane alone, not counting parts, weaponry, and service cost over a year.
There are 500 F-15 in 6 countries vs 3,000 F-16 in 25 countries.

与F-15相比，F-16的购买成本更低，每小时飞行成本低于5000美元。一架F-16的造价约为300万美元，而一架F-15的造价为750万美元。这只是一架飞机，还不包括一年多的零件、武器和服务成本。
6个国家有500架F-15，而25个国家有3000架F-16。

S. Patrick Maiorca
Why did the USAF develop both the F-15 and F-16?
The F-111, F-14, F-15 F-16 and F-18 all exist to replace one plane- the F-4 Phantom II. The F-4 Phantom II was originally developed for the navy as a fleet defense fighter with a secondary air to ground role. The plane was soon adopted by the United States Air Force- making it the original joint strike fighter. In the Air to Air role it was armed with 4 AIM-7 Sparrow missiles and 4 AIM-9 Sidewinders and an optional gun pod through the Air Force’s E and the German F model had a gun under nose.
The F-4 was designed for beyond visual range combat- but the avionics were not sophisticated enough to reliably tell if a target was friend or foe. So the F-4s had to dog fight in visual range where they were at a disadvantage to the nimble MiG-21s.
About the time all of that was going on a team lead by Colonel John Boyd developed a formula called the energy maneuver theory which enabled you write a program where entering a few parameters of a plane would allow you to calculate the flight envelope . Combine that with the discovery of the MiG-25 and the stage for the 4th generation fighter is set.
The Navy started the 4th generation with the F-14. The first attempt to replace the F-4 was the F-111. The F-111 was designed to be an air force strike plane
It had swing wings so it could fly low and fast bellow the enemy’s radar then pop up bomb a target then dive down and escape. There was originally to be a Navy version the F-111B.
It would carry up to 6 long range missiles
which would enable it to shoot down a bomber or cruise missile over 100 miles away. Needless to say the Navy part of the program died but they took all the systems and designed a new airfrx that would outturn most planes in the air.

为什么美国空军同时研发了F-15和F-16？
F-111、F-14、F-15、F-16和F-18的存在都是为了取代一架飞机——F-4幻影II。F-4幻影II最初是为海军开发的，作为舰队防御战斗机——在空对地时发挥次要作用。这架飞机很快被美国空军采用，成为最初的联合打击战斗机。在空对空的角色中，它搭载了4枚AIM-7麻雀导弹和4枚AIM-9侧风机，以及空军的E型和德国的F型都有一个可选的炮舱，机头下有一个机炮。
F-4是为超视距作战而设计的，但航空电子设备不够先进，无法可靠地判断目标是朋友还是敌人。因此，F-4不得不在可视范围内进行混战，在敏捷的米格-21面前处于劣势。
大约在那个时候，一个由约翰·博伊德上校领导的团队开发了一个叫做能量机动理论的公式，这个公式可以让你编写一个程序，输入飞机的一些参数，就可以计算出飞行包线。结合米格-25的发现，第四代战斗机可以说就已经被确定了。
海军从F-14开始了第四代战斗机。第一次尝试取代F-4的是F-111，F-111被设计成空军攻击机。
它有摆动的翅膀，所以它可以在敌人的雷达下飞得又低又快，然后突然发射炸弹轰炸目标，再俯冲逃跑，最初有一种海军版本的F-111B。
它将携带多达6枚远程导弹。
这将使它能够击落100英里外的轰炸机或巡航导弹。不用说，这个项目的海军部分夭折了，但他们采用了所有系统，设计了一种新的机身，这种机身将在空中压倒大多数飞机。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Now the F-15.
The F-15 was designed for the air force’s needs.
The F-15 was designed to carry 4 AIM-7s, 4 AIM-9s and a gun similar to the F-4
like the F-14 the radar was way more advanced and powerful than the one carried by the F-4 Phantom II the F-15 was designed to reach Mach 2.5 based on assessment about the MiG-25
The Air Force made some mistakes about the MiG-25’s weight which through off the calculations for the aircraft. So instead of seeing the MiG-25 as a fast heavy fighter which couldn’t turn it was perceived as being able to fly rings around just about anything.
The F-14 and F-15 were going to be mega expensive to the U.S. military opted to make them air to air only and opt for smaller cheaper multi-role planes to supplement them. The Air force started their light weight fighter contest. The requirements were for a fighter that cost about 1/2 as much as the F-15. It would be limited to visual range combat armed with sidewinders and a gun and it would be capable of air to ground missions. The competitors were the YF-16 and YF-17
The YF-16 won because it used the same engine as the F-15 which enabled the costs to be kept down. The YF-17 was later developed into the F-18 for the navy and Marine Corps.

F-15是为空军的需要而设计的。
F-15被设计为携带4枚AIM-7空空导弹、4枚AIM-9和一门类似于F-4的机炮
与F-14一样，该雷达比F-4幻影II携带的雷达更先进、更强大。根据对米格-25的评估，F-15被设计为达到2.5马赫
空军在米格-25的重量计算上犯了一些错误。因此，米格-25不再被认为是一种不能转弯的快速重型战斗机，而是被认为能够绕任何东西飞行。
F-14和F-15对美国军方来说将是非常昂贵的，他们选择让它们只执行空对空任务，并选择更便宜的小型多用途飞机来对它们进行补充。空军开始了他们的轻型战斗机比赛。这些要求是为了获得一架成本只有F-15一半的战斗机，但是它将局限于视距作战，配备响尾蛇导弹和一门机炮，它将能够执行空对地任务，最终YF-16和YF-17互为竞争对手。
YF-16之所以获胜，是因为它使用了与F-15相同的发动机，从而降低了成本。YF-17后来被开发成F-18，用于海军和海军陆战队。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Patrick Bindner
Using John Boyd's EM theory how does the F-35 compare against the F-16, F-15 and F-18?
It is an interesting question, T/W is a variable that is dependent upon fuel load , weapons load & mission parameters -- all of which directly affect T/W. As an example, we can examine the acceleration of the F-35A vs the F-16. One of the F-35's acceleration targets was to match the F-16C-50 in acceleration time from 0.6M to M1.2 in level flight @ 35000 ft. It missed the target by 8 sec & was roundly criticized in the public press for, yet again, missing a performance target. What was not published were the actual test parameters regarding the relative loads borne by each aircraft. In the test, the F-16 was carrying 3250 lbs of fuel (50% internal fuel) & two AIM 9 missiles. The F-35A was carrying 9,500 lbs of fuel (50% internal fuel) & 4,000 lbs of dummy bombs. The F-35A when fueled to the F-16's combat radius, but still carrying the 4,000 lb bomb load, out-accelerated the lightly loaded F-16. EM theory looks rather silly in that case, as does the value of public press reporting.

使用约翰·博伊德的能量机动理论，F-35与F-16、F-15和F-18相比如何？
这是一个有趣的问题，T/W是一个变量，取决于燃料负荷、武器负荷和任务参数——所有这些都直接影响T/W。作为一个例子，我们可以检查F-35A与F-16的加速度。F-35的加速目标之一是在35000英尺的水平飞行中匹配F-16C Block 50批次战机——在加速时间内其速度从0.6马赫增加到1.2马赫。它比目标差8秒，并因再一次未能达到性能目标而受到公众媒体的严厉批评。没有公布的是每架飞机所承受的相对载荷的实际测试参数。在测试中，F-16携带3250磅燃料(50%内部燃料)和两枚AIM 9导弹。F-35A携带9500磅燃料(50%内部燃料)和4000磅假炸弹。当F-35A加满燃料达到F-16的作战半径时，但仍然携带4000磅的炸弹载荷，加速速度超过了轻载的F-16。在这种情况下，能量机动理论看起来相当愚蠢，公共新闻报道的价值也是如此。

There is more. What is wing-loading? It isn't anything like a simple (& dumb?) question. The F-35's wing area (used to calculate wing-loading) is not relevant to the application of EM theory. Here's another example -- the F-35A, with substantially less wing area than the F-18E, & with fractionally less thrust, out-lifts the F-18E by 4,000 lbs, & carries that weight 50% farther & helluva lot faster!! How is this possible? The F-35 (all versions) has a highly effective lift-body fuselage design & a substantial chunk of the total load is carried internally, unlike the F-18E. What does that do to EM theory?
EM theory also ignores lifting surface aspect ratio. The F-35A can pull 9G software-limited instantaneous turns & has been tested to 9.9G. However , when it comes to sustained turns it can only pull 4.7G!! What gives?? The reason is that interesting lift-body again. The effective aspect ratio of the F-35A's lifting surfaces is considerably less than the aspect ratio of its wings -- because of the low aspect ratio of the lift body component. Where is EM theory now?

还有更多方面，什么是机翼装载?这可不是一个简单(或者说愚蠢)的问题。F-35的机翼面积（用于计算机翼载荷）与能量机动理论的应用无关。这里还有另一个例子——F-35A的机翼面积比F-18E小得多，推力也比F-18E小得多，但它的重量比F-18E高出4000磅，携带重量高出50%，速度也快得多!这怎么可能呢?F-35（所有版本）具有高效的升力体机身设计，与F-18E不同，总载荷的很大一部分是内部承载的，这对能量机动理论有什么影响?
能量机动理论也忽略了升力面的纵横比。软件限制下F-35A能做9G大过载机动，并已测试过能做到9.9G大过载机动。然而，当涉及到持续转弯时，它只能做到4.7G大过载机动！怎么回事？原因还是那个有趣的升力体。F-35A升力面的有效纵横比远小于机翼的纵横比，因为升力体部件的纵横比较低，能量机动理论怎能解释这一点？

Tony Carr
Well, much as I love the F-15 down to my very bones … it wasn’t “better” in every possible way. The F-15 was a purpose-built air superiority fighter with exceptional range, speed, payload, radar, and sensor capability. It was designed to simultaneously engage and attack multiple enemies beyond visual range, killing them before they could get anywhere near us,With a perfect air-to-air record of 104–0, it has been mercilessly effective at this core mission.
But while the F-15 was later modified to be capable of attack and close air support functions (the F-15E Strike Eagle), the F-16 was built from the ground up as a multi-role fighter. It sacrificed the 2-engine top speed and durability of the F-15 for the reduced cost and lighter weight of a single-engine design. It took advantage of technological advances in airfrx and flight control design making it slightly more maneuverable in a visual range dogfight, and its sensors and avionics were a leap forward permitting a single pilot to deliver combat effects previously requiring multi-seat aircraft. It did all of this at a dramatically lower cost, both up-front and across its life cycle, which allowed procurement of a massive number of airfrxs. The USAF eventually bought more than 2,200 F-16s — about double the number of air superiority F-15s it acquired.
The F-15 is a hunting knife while the F-16 is a Swiss Army knife. As the core of the USAF’s tactical armory, the F-16 has given commanders extraordinary flexibility. They can send F-16s against ground targets knowing they can fight their way in and out if necessary. They can use the same squadron for ground attack missions one day and air missions the next. And because the F-16 is available in massive numbers, it can stretch across different missions at different phases of a campaign, reducing the necessity for other airfrxs to be available and therefore allowing commanders to keep combat power in reserve or deterrent positions while fighting a war.

好吧，尽管我非常喜欢F-15，但它并不是在每个方面都“更好”。F-15是一款专门制造的空中优势战斗机，具有卓越的航程、速度、有效载荷、雷达和传感器能力。它的设计目的是在视线范围外同时与多个敌人交战并攻击它们，在它们靠近我们之前击落他们；凭借104胜0负的完美空对空战绩，它在这一核心任务中表现得非常有效。
但是，尽管F-15后来被改装为能够攻击和具备近距离空中支援功能（F-15E攻击鹰），但F-16是作为一种多用途战斗机从头开始建造的。它牺牲了F-15的双引擎最高速度和耐用性，以降低成本和减轻重量（单引擎设计）。它利用了机身和飞行控制设计方面的技术进步，使其在视距内狗斗中的机动性略高，其传感器和航空电子设备是一个飞跃，允许一名飞行员执行以前需要多座版本战机才执行的战斗任务。它以极低的成本完成了所有这些工作，无论是前期成本还是整个生命周期成本，这使得它被大量采购。美国空军最终购买了2200多架F-16，大约是其购买的空中优势战机F-15的两倍数量。
若F-15是一把猎刀，而F-16就是一把瑞士军刀。作为美国空军战术武器库的核心，F-16给了指挥官非凡的灵活性。他们可以派出F-16战斗机对抗地面目标，因为他们知道，如果必要的话，他们可以杀入杀出。他们可以派出同一个中队执行地面攻击任务，第二天再执行空中任务。而且由于F-16的数量庞大，它可以在战役的不同阶段执行不同的任务，减少对其他飞机可用的必要性，因此允许指挥官在作战时保持战斗力储备或威慑地位。