@ab that's a cool username!

poor eagle, I think it's cute

@FartResidue said the residue from a fart

@bouncydogfuneral it's Jerry

@bouncydogfuneral if you want to see something you can't unsee look up bald eagle front view

Many people make fun of the "eagle" for its "dumb looks" however others may claim that its about function, not form, and that the eagle is secretly the best fighter jet of its generation. I am here to tell you that those others are dead wrong.

This aircraft, marketed as the "eagle" (not to be confused with the McDonnell-Douglas f-15 "eagle") is claimed to be a supermaneuverable, lightweight, carrier capable "5th gen" fighter. However while it may appear like a cutting-edge combat aircraft it is, in reality nothing but a hoax.
The most important advantages of a modern 5th generation platform are sensor fusion and network warfare. Despite this the eagles designers seem to have completely neglected to install even a basic data-link. This problem becomes even worse when you consider the fact that the eagle has limited situational awareness to begin with, being equipped with only 2 IRST systems nicknamed EYES (Electro-optical Yield Estimation Sensor). This gives the eagle an undeniable disadvantage in BVR combat. Without a radar, datalink, or RWR, pilots will essentially be flying blind with their ears plugged.
In addition, while its flying wing design may allow for some stealth benefits, its radar absorbent coating is fairly primitive, utilizing compound organic geometry known as "feathers". Feather technology is well known to be inferior to modern di-electric silica composite or "iron ball" coatings. Therefore this aircraft can not be considered truly "fith-gen".
Additionally In terms of conventional "4th gen" performance, while this fighter jet has good stol capabilities, it does not have any arrestor gear installed yet and so, it cannot currently operate off of a aircraft carrier. When it comes to "super maneuverability" the airframe does appear to be capable of post stall maneuvers, due to its low wing loading, however, post stall maneuvers alone cannot win a dogfight. Energy retention, and power to weight are arguably more important than PSM capabilities, and in these categories, the eagle suffers drastically, with its awful energy retention it is not capable of sustaining a turn for long, and its weak engine means its cannot re-gain energy lost during PSM maneuvers.
but wait there's more, because the eagle is designed as a "light fighter" it has a extremely limited payload and range. What you end up with is a plane with the capabilities of a T-38 or a L-39, but for the cost of a F-22. Some fighters like the SAAB J-39 Gripen have a similar issue, but

-the Gripen makes up for this by offering a suite of sensors and weapons that other aircraft do not. However, as you can see above, the eagle does not have even the most basic systems one would expect from a fighter of its cost.

2/10, my disappointment is immeasurable, and my day is ruined.

I mean, yeah, its good.
(No time to download at the moment.)

@SamTheUncle
do you like it?