I wanted to point to uselessness of most of data that are circulating.

First graph is known from many books and it is on internet. I don’t know real source, but I can see that F-4 can sustain 4.5 g best subsonic and 5.5 at supersonic speeds. Totally wrong.
Second is from quoted book F-4 vs 21, graph is in line with manuals.
Third is product of US Foreign Technology Division, Have Doughnut program who supposedly tested both. The 21 is always better here ?!? with almost symmetrical acceleration contours for both planes?! It can be seen that it’s somebody’s computer graph with false inputs.
Fourth is famous USAF official training diagram. Data, where F-4 has greater SEP above M 1.5 at high altitude, are fundamentally wrong ?!?

Here is one graph of 21-F13 depicting Excess Thrust at unspecified weight and temperature, for enthusiasts.

Exactly, thats the reason why F-22 Craptor graphs were not published yet. :diablo:

It is hard not to rank F-22 best by far all-around, but everything has limitations. It was interesting to me how designers widened wingspan by 0.5 meters compared to YF for fear of discovered lower sustained turn performance. Also I couldn’t believe that it rolls-off (without help from motion sensors and FCC) at about 30+ deg alpha with it’s all computational fluid aerodynamics.

I remember when F-14 was credited with 77 deg angle of attack when it was entering service. Best looking fighter with best capabilities. Latter, it was said that trimmed alpha is 35-38 deg. And now, they concluded that in combat, operational reason limits it to 15 deg.

Time will show.

I saw these graphs put in one for easier comparison, in this book, but I’d like to see graphs of MiG-19 and F-14 also…
Does anybody have ?