Remember when multiple people argued with me in this thread about air superiority? So about that:
Yes, and the SAM made air power obsolete, and after that the latest Soviet Superplane meant that American/NATO aircraft would be swept from the skies, and after
that Iraq's massive grid of soviet AA hardware would sweep coalition aircraft from the skies if they tried to invade, and after
that the Chinese J-20 was going to outcompete the F-35, pay no attention to the chronic engine problems, or the cracks in the flight decks of their aircraft carriers...
The doomsayers about western military technology and power have been wrong
literally every single time.
I get that you have warped your ability to perceive reality to the point that only things that agree with your prejudices are relevant, but you're just continuing to embarrass yourself.
So at this stage is the F-15 still "old but good" or just "old"?
Old but good. It has never been defeated in air-to-air combat, and Soviet stuff from similar area has been showing a consistently dismal comparative performance during the War in Ukraine. Odds are that the Chinese J-20 is actually better than the F-15 at least, but it's no longer a 'front-line' combat aircraft.
These days, the F-22 and F-35 will be used for air supremacy and SEAD, then once the space is clear, the F-15's F-16's, and F-15's will be trucking bombs into the combat area in bulk. All three of the 'teen' fighters still in service are good enough that they have reasonable chances of surviving against a SAM from a launcher that hid itself until after the front-line fighters have finished their sweep, but if someone fights smart, odds are we'd lose at least a few.
As always, the competence of the people using the hardware is just as important as the hardware itself, and while politicization has been hurting our military edge of late, our potential enemies are
made of politicized incompetence.