The problem about mil hardware, is not like the good old days when a P51 was a P51 was a P51.
We have to much proprietary avionics stuff on American birds, a Belgian F16 might not do as well, or maybe better than his American counterpart in the same block F16.
Eurofighter Typhoon and Rafale (not sure if that’s a 4th gen though)has sex appeal for sure. Somewhere deep down I have a pic of some lost Brits in Erbil. Probably had tanking issues and needed a splash of the ground based F24.
Now this, is the opinion of a guy who has never flown a fighter, but may know a thing or two about capabilities, maybe.
Just F’ing with you dude. There are no shortage of F-whatever vs X threads on forums across the Internet. The simple answer is there is no good answer because there is no single job/condition and on top of that too much of the information would be classified to really have a discussion about it in detail.
As far as “fear” that’s really not subjective and easily distorted. I mean the Iraqis supposedly “feared” the Tomcat from their Iran experience, but it was the Eagles that were eating their lunch in Desert Storm.
Way too many other variables beyond the basic airframe to make that call. Weapon load out, radar/avionics installed, pilot training, all make a huge difference.
Japan has F-15s but they have very old electronics and are shooting AIM-7 Sparrows, and their training budget is much smaller, vs an Israeli F-16 carrying AMRAMs and with the most modern radar and highly trained pilots.
Then apply basic skill and tactics. I believe MikeD told a story about how a F-22 was pitted against an A-10 with altitude restrictions creating a low flat turning dogfight that heavily favored the Warthog which got a few Raptor kills.