Nonpilot,
I never took pilot skill out of the equation. You're right about that part. I always mentioned pilots being equal in other areas of this forum. True, the F-16 may be able to take on the F-15, given the circumstances. After all, the F-16 was the USAF's first fly-by-wire fighter mass produced, so in that respect, I don't see why it would not be able to tangle with an Eagle. The electronics give the Falcon (or Viper, depending on the nation, I believe) a much better response than the Eagle's hydraulics, but still, the Eagle set many standards as the air superiority fighter that all others are measured by.
Concerning the Eagle vs.Flanker variant Su-30MK, US pilots, as I have mentioned, are under strict orders not to reveal their tactics against the Flankers. I am not discrediting the Flanker, on the contrary, I think it is an outstanding aircraft, by Russian design as well as Western. It is a fighter greatly respected by other nations. But on the same token, we cannot count the Eagle out in a dogfight w/the Flanker. Again, pilot skills and tactics play an important role. At the same time, although respected by others, the Flanker has been outclassed by fighters such as the Typhoon, the Gripen and the Raptor.
I have reason to believe the US Air Force has a Flanker and they are using it to compare against the Eagle. I have a feeling this is where they have created tactics against it.
In my opinion, the USAF doesn't need to spend billions on the Raptor...I believe evolving the Eagle to the next level would have been better and cheaper. Fly-by-wire technology, improved avionics and radar would have given the Eagle much better response to its already outstanding maneuverability, performance and lethality. Even new airframes w/larger wings for more fuel and weapons payload would increase the Eagle's effectiveness.
Ah, but alas, politics would win...all the time.