F18 Super hornets and in deed F15 EAGLES are twin engined Fighters.
They carry bigger radars bigger Arms payload and over longer distances.
They also carry more jammers and can survive a direct hit in some cases having 2 engines.
But single engines means
Cheaper to buy and maintain.
Quicker sortie rates
one pilot
LOWER RCS some times.
Having said this the worlds best ranked fighters are all twin engines.
F22
Typhoon/Rafale
SU35/SU30MKI
F18S/H F15S
I don't want to get into an argument with you. Here are some links you could look at. These are all posts by professionals who would know what they are talking about (excluding me, of course).
http://www.defence.pk/forums/474299-post31.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/474364-post35.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/474493-post37.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/474873-post42.html
F/A-18 for an Air Force, one with the needs of the PAF or IAF, is an inferior deal to the F-16, be it old or new. A fact my friend
Sapper failed to assess before posting the list. It is also quite simplistic to compare platform to platform, one must always have a context. But then again,
Sapper's list was expressed as an opinion, not fact, so it can't be judged.
Dear ... i know VERY well what is meant by 4Gen and 4.5Gen, so on and so forth. I was just trying to make a guy understand why we need to CLASSIFY aircraft into generations to quickly access how it is made, how advanced it is, what capablities it carries in its design etc etc ... my using very basic examples was to make him understand a complex concept in baby steps.
Didn't mean any disrespect. You may know about the differences, but you didn't show it well with the grades comparison. That comparison was just too simplistic, to put it politely, so I just thought I'd clear it up. Also, you don't have to break things down into "baby steps" for
muse, he's shown the capability to understand quite complex issues far beyond most of our understanding.
Its funny how he argues the JF-17 is useless because it is "one generation behind", he completely ignores the facts that I have pointed out to him again and again (with sources): it will be armed with missiles just as advanced and backed up by infrastructure just as comprehensive as any fighter opposing it (in PAF service at least), and that's in its most basic configuration. Basically, all he can come up with is "its a 3rd generation fighter so the poor pilots don't stand a chance", meanwhile the reality is even the old USAF legacy fighters mop up the big bad flanker-H in exercises, without a HMS/D system.
It's because you can only teach somebody something if they are willing to learn. If he enters debates with a closed mind, unwilling to accept any credible arguments, then all your efforts will be to no avail. Trust me,
hj786, I've seen you do your thing here for a while now, and it's rock solid most of the time. So, it's time for you to move up a weight class and engage in more productive discussions.