As far as I know, US/NATO has always had superiority in number of planes and, in certain conditions, also in quality of planes.
Actually, the only category in which NATO had superior numbers was in helicopters. In fighters, the WP had a 3:1 numerical advantage. Unfortunately for them, the bulk were MiG-21s and MiG-23s. The MiG-29 did not see first service in the USSR until 1986 and the Su-27 in 1988 for V-VS.
At that time neither F-16s nor F-15s had any significant combat winning advantage over MiG-29s, yes they were superior but not to an extent where they could just take the sky and the Warsaw Pact had a whole lot more planes and pilots.
The F-15s and F-16s had a significant advantage in aerial combat over MiG-21s and MiG-23s. Remember the F-15s and F-16s were designed after the Viet Nam War to correct air combat problems of previous American fighters. Among the design features were that the American jets had to be able to handle MiG-21s, 23s, and, 25s effectively.
In order to prevent going nuclear NATO needed the F-15 to have at least a 6:1 kill ratio and the F-16 in air to air and air to ground have at least a 3:1 kill ratio. In a conflict between NATO and the WP, there would have been some horrible surprises on both sides.
BAD SURPRISES FOR THE WP INCLUDE;
The F-117 was as good as the KGB/GRU said it was, the Soviet commanders did not believe it.
Soviet air combat tactics were further behind NATOs than the WP realized. The WP would push for the 'furball' (many versus many fighters) while NATO would work to get air battles of 4V4 or less.
The radar warning receiver (RWR) on the MiG-29s could not detect lock-ons of the F-16s. Signal strength was lower than the WP had estimated.
The Alamo Missile was less effective than anticipated! About one-half the Sparrow's success rate.
Economic problems in the USSR were beginning to be felt early in the 1980s. By 1984, the Soviet AF reduced the flying time of combat pilots due to budget cuts. The excuse given was that simulators were good enough to keep up the pilot's proficient.
BAD SURPRISES FOR NATO INCLUDE;
The HMDS on the MiG-29 would have been a horrible surprise.
The 105mm cannons on most NATO tanks would not penetrate the frontal armor on the 'Soviet' T-72s. The other T-72s of the WP did not have armor as thick.
There are many other surprises for each side but, I can't think of them right now. The PGW#1 in 1991 showed former members of the WP what an around the clock allied air offensive would have been like, it surprised many.