In article ,
"Kyle Boatright" wrote:

"john smith" wrote in message
...
I have been downloading Col. John Boyd's works to study and stumbled
upon this...

http://www.pogo.org/p/defense/da-050301-fa22.html

I haven't read it yet, but plan to later tonight.

Remember that if Riccione and Boyd had their way, the F-15 wouldn't have
been built, and the F-16 would have had even more limited radar, bomb
aiming, and avionics suites. Those guys wanted the F-16 to be essentially
an F-86 with a far better power to weight ratio.

Now, they are proposing further upgrades to the fighter (the F-15) they
railed against and the fighter they wanted to be a minimalist dogfighter.

Kyle, you need to dig into the information available.
Boyd actually saved the F-15 program. The original design was to be a
swing wing like the F-14. Boyd's work showed the deficiencies in that
design and the improvements resulting in the final design.
You can also read aabout the F-14's design deficiencies.
The F-14 and F-15 were designed around the big radar for long range
detection.
The F-16 was designed to be a lightweight, close-in, air-superiority
fighter, it didn't need the big radar.
GOOGLE "John Boyd" and wade through the material. You will find much
that counters what you have been mislead to believe.