Preferring a fighter that doesn't rely on electronics isn't the same as being a luddite. Also, the state of electronics since the early/mid 70s has changed significantly: specifically they have become much lighter, compact, and reliable (none of the three were true when 45 years ago).
The main design driver shaping the F-16 was Boyd's energy–maneuverability theory. A major criticism of Sprey is that the F-15, which was crap according to Boyd's math is undefeated in combat. This is true but it also hasn't gone up against the best opposition in the world either. Boyd, Sprey, and the rest of the Fighter Mafia have been hated for decades in the Pentagon but history is showing that their predictions are accurate. One thing which is too classified to know at the moment is whether advances in missile technology have finally gotten to the point where electronics and firing first matter more than the ACM abilities of the pilot and the airframe to which they are strapped.
Either way, dismissing Spray as a luddite is an incorrect statement.
The main design driver shaping the F-16 was Boyd's energy–maneuverability theory. A major criticism of Sprey is that the F-15, which was crap according to Boyd's math is undefeated in combat. This is true but it also hasn't gone up against the best opposition in the world either. Boyd, Sprey, and the rest of the Fighter Mafia have been hated for decades in the Pentagon but history is showing that their predictions are accurate. One thing which is too classified to know at the moment is whether advances in missile technology have finally gotten to the point where electronics and firing first matter more than the ACM abilities of the pilot and the airframe to which they are strapped.
Either way, dismissing Spray as a luddite is an incorrect statement.