Fighter is fine. This thing is kinematically superior to what came before it, which is the entire point of a fighter. It just doesn’t optimize its kinematic performance for lower speed lower altitude regimes because it doesn’t have to. A Spitfire or Zero is probably doing tighter turns than an F-15 below 300 km/h too.
Kinematics mean different things; 300 kmh is just one aspect (not
the most important one, nowhere near irrelevant one, either). Ultimately, everything happens, and we always remember that we don't live in 40k universe - most encounters are
not weapons free.
In BVR, launching weapons without going into enemy NEZ, avoiding weapons and so on involves hard maneuvers - in fact, much harder to achieve. Can you pull 8-9g at M=2? And can you do it without losing 100 knots for every second of pull?
Because ultimately traditional fighter does it all; you don't win by omitting slinging capability. Just as there's no difference in off board platforms for either fighter - in fact, the further our aircraft operates, the more independent it's going to be.
Best horse archer isn't one on the largest horse with a baddest bow.
ChAD clearly tries to keep as much of it as possible, but how much can be achieved without vertical surfaces is yet to be seen.
One may omit manoeuver, but you'll use larger and more complex weapons to achieve the same effect, and in direct confrontation bvr agility won't help.
That's why I now see j-20 and potentially ShAD based air combat systems as frontline aircraft.
ChAD seems to be on top.
not too bad for guessing eh?
