12 Jul 2021, 16:48
Nice paper, and I haven't had the time to read it comprehensively. But this part seems incorrect as attested to by Johnwil, and JBGator.
"A.2 F-15/F-16 EXPERIENCE
The F-15 and F-16 represent contrasting design solutions to the problem of air superiority.
The F-15 is stable in pitch, while the F-16 is unstable with a deep stall. Because of the
F-15's stability, pilots can maneuver it without regard for loss of control. However, the aircraft
is easy to 'over-g' and a voice warning system has been Installed to help prevent structural damage
due to vigorous maneuvering. The F-16, on the other hand, Is statically unstable with a deep stall
and weak directional stability at high angles of attack. Consequently, the F-16 is equipped with an
angle-of-attack limiter and a load factor limiter. The limiters, however, are functionally reliable
enough to allow rapid, full-deflection commands by the pilot, in contrast to the move tentative
commands required In the F-15. Paradoxically, this piloting experience has given the F-16, in spite
of its high-angle-of-attack aerodynamics problems, a reputation for desirable carefree handling
compared with the F-15. An interesting side effect of the F-16 absolute limiter in combination with
a small-amplitude force sidestick is that the incidence of g-induced loss of consciousness is higher
in the F-16 than in the F-15, which can actually produce theoretically much faster load factor onset
rates."
The F-16 AOA limiter was set before the discovery of the deep stall issue. Not the other way around. The AOA limiter in the F-16 is there, just as it is in the Saab Gripen, EF, and Rafale to provide the pilot with carefree handling and to preserve specific excess power. Another words, the pilot of these jets can pull full aft stick and not have to worry about departing the aircraft in heavy maneuvering (as opposed to traditional aircraft with buffet to stall). So they never reach their maximum lift. Maximum lift on the F-16 is near 35AOA, and the jet remains controllable at 30AOA. This is even proved by wind tunnel tests. They probably could have added a few more degrees of AOA before buffet, but for the sake of preserving Ps they did not. And that is the big trade off, more AOA means more drag and negative Ps, but it also means greater nose authority. The Rafale has a AOA limter to 29.9 degrees, the Gripen to 26 degrees, Typhoon is slightly less than F-16's. But they are bracketed differently; for example F-16 is 9G at 15.5AOA, Rafale I think is 9G at around 18-19AOA.
In Lavi testing, the Israeli's concluded that it was around half a second quicker than the F-16 in pitch . (I'm not sure if the source of this was Golan) But it basically matches the theme of the above paper, that canard jets generally are more unstable.
Getting back to that dailycaller chart. I'd be willing to bet the Rafale has the best Instantaneous turn rate out of the three eurocanards because of its compression wedge, wing lerx, and canard fuselage blending. It also has more AOA than EF or Gripen. But I'd say that the Raptor beats all of them because of TVC and total lift.
