z

i think its the su-33 flanker

or the f22

F-22, F-16, Su-35/37......

The flanker is the Su-27.............the Su-33 is the Su-27K and it was built for the Russian Navy..............so considering it would probably have added weight it wouldn't be as maneuverable as some of the other aircraft out their.

Along with that, please keep in mind that it doesn't matter how maneuverable an aircraft is, only how many G's the pilot can take.

The F-22, F-18, MiG-31, SU-27, F-16C, F-15 in decending order of maneuverability, but as firstsgt_cap did state, the aircraft is limited by the amount of g's the pilot can withstand. If you wanted to, you could increase the rate at which a pilot could turn by decreasing the speed of the aircraft while banking.

You've got your list wrong there............the Mig-31 is not ment for any type of heavy maneuvering..........it was designed as a high speed, high altitude interceptor. It has no capability as an acrobatic aircraft.

If anything it would go like this F-22, F-35, EF2000, A-10, Su-35/37, Su-27, F-16, F-15, Jas-39, Rafale, F-18, Mirage 2000, Mig-29. The only two Mig's relevant to the modern era that would be anywhere close to the list would be the M-29 and the Mig-1.44/1.42.

Aircraft type and design are key factors. Also, if you look at the list you will see the newest most advanced fighters at the top of the list. You still see aging aircraft such as the 16 and 15, however age can determine maneuverability as well.

The biggest thing I dislike about comparing fighters and their maneuverability because if you have an F-22 piloted by a complete idiot and a F-4 piloted by a skilled ace, who do you think will come out on top? Obviously, the expierence pilot knows more about every aspect of aerial combat and will blow the other pilot out of the sky.

My point is, not only does the G limit of a pilot effect the ability of one plane outmaneuvering another, but so does the pilot's skill, the load out at that given time, the temperature, how well maintained the aircraft is, how well trained the pilot is, the altitude, the speed, ect ect ect.

An F-22 can surely out maneuver an A-10 at high speed, but in a very low speed engagement, the F-22 will be getting less lift and will have to increase its speed to compensate while the 10 is optimized for low speed.

Too many factors come into play to truly know what aircraft is more maneuverable than the other. Just like a sniper taking a shot, flying a combat aircraft takes so much skill and so much consideration for every little thing that we have to develop computers to do a large portion of it, and at the same time, it still takes immense training.

I would say eurofighter after all it was built to be agile and highly manouvarble.

---

'The distant flash of lightning howling through the thunder' ex RAF ligthning pilot recalling lightning of 1973 through thunder

I would think it would be a civilian plane not a fighter thats actually designed for it like the Extra 350 or the Pitts 2

---

There are no strangers here. Just friends you haven't met yet!
-Irish Proverb

Hard to say, but aircraft such as the F-16 and F-18 are both used for performance, granted they are stripped down to the point were they are very light and agile.

However, aircraft such as the EF2000, F-15, and F-22 are all very acrobatic fighters.

Civilian planes can go only so far, yeah they can with stand the G forces pretty damn well, but they don't have the same power as a fighter aircraft.

Probably an extra. they use those things alot for proforming and they are used in those races on television. you know those air races that are on a course and you have to get the quickest time... I added a link to a YouTube video about the race if you wanna see it.

---

If you are going thru hell, keep going.
-Winston Churchill