Your view of agility is very narrow minded . COBRA is not the only indicator for agility , the F-16 gives awsome Sustained turning and has excellent Acceleration . You have to look at the 3 stages of flight performance to begin with in Subsonic ,transonic and supersonic then look at other parameters such as sustained turning , wing optimization etc etc , being able to hold and transient AOA is just one aspect while there are many other aspects ( Jockyiing for position in BVR demands better supersonic or transonic manuverability rather then AOA pointing for example) . Moreover the 5th gen. manuverability requirment was nothing that was going to trump everything else – Infact how would the PAKFA be significantly more manuverable then the Su-35 ?? What would it do ? do 20G manuvers?? Sustain 300 degrees AOA ?? There is a limit to where you can take manuverability and this is G limited however there is nothing stopping you for optimizing sub,trans and supersonic manuverability and then the MAIN CHALLENGE FOR THE F-22 was not to do back flips all day but to be able to match competition in all aspects of manuverability however pocess in addition to all that Stealth and supercruise ( clean and drag reduced frame) with minimal compromise and so far there is atleast no indications to the pilots that manuverability has been compromised or stealth for that matter as they are completing All challenging missions just fine !

I do not deny the F-22 is an agile fighter, it has to be because it has Thrust Vectoring nozzles, this allowes the F-16 which can not do niether the Helicopter or cobra with pure aerodynamic controls even do them thanks too to 3D thrust vectoring nozzles.

As firebar once said and you mock him or considered a loon, no aerodynamic aircraft configuration is perfect, it means any aerodynamic configuration is more less good for some flight regimes but not good for others

The F-22, MiG-29, Su-27 or any aircraft for that matter will not be good for all altitudes and speeds, stealth also impacts on the F-22 design, that is the reason the F-22 uses too much excess power and thrust vectoring, to reduced the airframe aerodynamic limits.

Example well know, th MiG-29 has better corner speed and sustained turn rates than the F-16 however, at some speeds the F-16 is better in turn rate than the MiG-29.

Variable geometry tried to be the jack of all trades but as a fighter with good transonic speed and agility well LERXed aircraft can do the trick even better, but in speed and acceleration with low thrust to weight ratio Variable geometry is enough, proof well the F-111 and MiG-23 exhibit superb acceleration and speed better than the F-16 and F-18 coupled with Terrain following radars and you can fly low and make even a MiG-29 crash on the ground if it dares to chase the F-111 as it once happened during gulf war I in 1991.

So then why the F-22 is so good? simply because the F-22 is the combination of several novel technologies combined in an airframe

Many here claim the F-22 can do the Cobra, yes can do a controlled flat spin (helicopter) can do very likely the Chakra therefore it is the best airframe designed without considering the F-16 is uncapable of doing the Cobra with pure aerodynamic controls and can do it only with thrust vectoring nozzles and very likely the F-22 also shows is aided by thrust vectoring nozzles.

The F-22 follows a philosophy very similar to the F-15, the F-15 was designed to be fast and agile in fact a MiG-25 with excelent agility and all around vision, so they fitted big wings and excellent thrust to weight ratio.
However the F-15 is a design that has been designed with more speed in mind than agility and the proof is the MiG-29 is slower but more agile, same is the Su-27 and F-16, what has kept the F-15 as a good fighter is basicly it has been operated with superiority in numbers, it has been upgraded constantly and has many times faced third or second generation fighters.

The F-22 is the same that is the reason it has thrust vectoring and AIM-9X missiles, the design is more a stealth faceted design rather than a super agile airframe as in the MiG 1.44 or Eurofighter.

Why being offensive it was meant as a joke to show how far we have drifted from the topic

I am just kidding you can see me too
😮
[http://www.komar.org/faq/churchill_polar_bear_tours/churchill_polar_bear_tours.jpg 😀

Nice how you avoided the comments on the Raptor.

You avoid dates.

MiG-29 and Su-27 first flight year:1977 Both the MiG-29 and Su-27 can do the Cobra without thurst vectoring, the F-15 and F-16 need thrust vectoring to do the Cobra
First flight Su-35:1990 First flight YF-22:1990

First flight F-22 Raptor A, September 1997 almost twenty years after the Su-27, and still the Americans say the Su-30MKI and MiG-29OVT are as good as the F-22 😉 in what respects maneouvrability
First flight Su-37 1996
By the way the Russians are going to re engine their Su-27s with newer Al-31 of 13.5 tonns of thrust each engine

Yet, the SM upgrade does not involve the R-37…and the open press has never been an infallible source of material at any rate. How many books claim that the Su-27 uses the R-60? How many photos of Su-27s carrying R-73 acquisition rounds have them labeles as R-60 acq. rounds?

One thing I’ve wondered about that’s never been clarified is how many R-37s the MiG-31BM will carry. You’ve got four underfuselage stations, so do they add R-37 carriage capability to the inboard wing pylons as well? Or when they say 6 simultaneous engagements do they mean with multiple systems, like four R-37s and two R-77s?

How many does it say that they’ve upgraded so far?

Глава РСК “МИГ” Алексей Федоров заявил недавно, что модернизация МиГ-31 идет давно. По его словам, это одна из немногих программ, которая стабильно, пунктуально финансируется Минобороны. В 2005 году модернизированный МиГ-31 будет передан на госиспытания, после чего на вооружение ВВС поступят истребители МиГ-31БМ

According to this paragraph, the MiG-31BM modernization started long time ago this is according Alexei Fedorov who is General director of MiG.

Up to what i have read the MiG-31BM can carry six R-37

The MiG-31BM program is advertised, if it’s ever actually put into effect (it hasn’t actually been fielded yet, it’s one of the programs they keep mentioning though so I’d assume it’s still on the table), as incorporating some Zaslon-M technology and allowing R-37 carriage. When the MiG-31M program self-detonated due to the post-USSR funding problems, the R-37 was either just certified or was very nearly certified, so it should be a viable system if they’ve finished the development work. miG-31Ms are still at Akhtubinsk, after all, so they’re likely still supporting Zaslon-M and R-37 trials if they’re active.

That may be true, but does the Su-35’s radar even have the required range to support the R-37? In theory it should given that it was compatible with the KS-172, but the R-37 was never even mentioned by Sukhoi. I think R-37 compatibility stems from the erroneous Western press notion that the Su-27 was R-33 compatible, so logically the next gen FLANKER should have the next gen AAM, right? Actually, given that the R-37 and KS-172 were competing designs at one point (or perhaps in spite of the fact), it’d seem that MiG latched onto the R-37 and Sukhoi the KS-172.

As for the Lenta article…it’s far more likely that the R-37 is merely R-73 but transposed in a typo. The baseline Su-27 only wishes it had the necessary range to support an R-37 launch anyway.

Up to what i have read Russia was upgrading their MiG-31s to MiG-31BM, those aircraft can carry the R-37 and can detect targets at 320km of distance can fire 6 misiles at six different targets simultaneously.

Originally Mikoyan’s firm because of small chances to receive orders for this plane from own Air Forces has offered its(his) export variant – МиГ-31ФЭ – to China and India. But now, according to the Commander-in-chief of the Air Forces, in variant МиГ-31БМ will be practically finished all Russian МиГ-31. The fighters of this type possessing unique fighting opportunity, it is planned to keep in fighting I build, at least, till 2010th years.
The first modernized МиГ-31 already is on letnoj stations in ZHukovskom where it is equipped with the new equipment. Joint-stock company « Russian avionics » essentially new configuration of both cabins is developed for it(him). The basic lack of former configuration was absence at the pilot of the information on tactical conditions: the commander did not know, that the navigator does(makes). Now in a forward cabin from the right party(side) of a control panel the multipurpose ª¬-indicator in the size 6х8 inches (similar used on МиГ-29СМТ) is established(installed). The cabin of the navigator-operator has undergone to More essential changes, in which is located such three indicators, on which diversified information (tactical can be deduced(removed), navigating, radar-tracking, “pictures” of television gauges of operated means of defeat and t. Item). The plane has received also the indicator on a windshield, replaced former PPI.
The navigating complex with which it is equipped modernized МиГ-31, is substantially unified with МиГ-29СМТ (enters into its(his) structure the receiver of satellite navigation). As a result of completion of park of fighters МиГ-31 at participation of ” Russian avionics » the domestic Air Forces should receive practically new plane having a wide spectrum of fighting application.

The description

The developer OKB it(him). A.I.Mikoyana
Designation МиГ-31БМ
Type Multi-purpose fighter
Crew, chel. 2
Geometrical and mass characteristics
Length of the plane, m 22,688
Height of the plane, m 6,15
Scope of a wing, m 13,464
The area covered, м2 61,6
The maximal take-off weight, kg 50000
The maximal fighting loading, kg 9000
Power-plant
Number of engines 2
The engine DTRD Д30Ф-6
Draft (forcing), kgs 15500
Letnye data
The maximal speed, km/h (M =) At height 3000 (2,83)
At the ground 1500
The maximal operational overload 5
Practical range of flight, m 2500
Arms
UR “air-air” Р-33С 6
Р-37 6
rvv-áÑ 4
Р-40ТД 2
UR “air-surface” Х-31П,-31А 6
Х-25МП,-25МПУ 6
Х-59, Х-29Т 3
Х-59М 2
Bombs INCORPORATED BANK-1500 6
INCORPORATED BANK-500 8

http://www.testpilot.ru/russia/mikoyan/mig/31/bm/mig31bm.htm
It is possible the article has a mistake however it is also possible the SU-27s can carry R-37 why? modern aircraft are basicly upgraded through their avionics. Second many articles about the Su-27 crash repeated the news so it is likely that it is not as wrong as you think

This article claims the MiG-31BM already has entered service:
Многофункциональный истребитель МиГ-31БМ
Год принятия на вооружение: 1999

http://www.army.lv/?s=502&id=336

At this time no aircraft actively carries the KS-172, although it has in fact been mentioned as a weapon for the Su-35BM (and was even exhibited with the Su-35 and Su-37 at airshows), and only the MiG-31M carries the R-37, which is specifically mated to the Zaslon-M radar set. The R-37M has been mentioned by MiG as a MiG-29SMT-III weapon and a weapon for the upgraded FOXHOUND, but no FLANKER has ever been conceived with the R-37 or R-37M in mind, despite what some website says. I can find you a website that claims the Earth is flat. That does not make it so.

Has Russia upgraded the MiG-31? what russian government statement do you have? up to my knowledge Russia has upgraded it`s fleet of MiG-31 and the R-37 can be adapted to the Su-35 just modifying the aircraft software.

This Lenta Articule about a Su-27 that crashed in Lithuania claims the Su-27 that crashed was carrying R-27 and R-37 and Russia and Lithuania were in negociations for the return of the air to air missiles and the rest of the fragments from the Su-27 wreckage

Литва начала передачу обломков Су-27 России. Первый грузовик с обломками российского военного истребителя, разбившегося 15 сентября, выехал из Каунаса в Калининград, сообщает ИТАР-ТАСС

Об этом заявил в интервью агентству представитель литовского военного ведомства. “В ходе первого этапа России передаются самые опасные материалы”, – заявил он, и добавил, что речь идет о четырех уцелевших ракетах класса “воздух-воздух” Р-37 и Р-27.

Представители Министерства обороны Литвы заявили, что, отправка фрагментов истребителя в Россию будет продолжена, однако о сроках доставки обломков ничего не сообщается.

Напомним, решение о передаче обломков в Россию было принятьо после того, как Москва согласилась компенсировать ущерб от аварии в размере 67 тысяч литов (почти 20 тысяч долларов). Из них 41,7 тысяч литов составляет ущерб сельскохозяйственной общине, на поле которой упал самолет, а 25,3 тысяч литов – ущерб, который в результате аварии был нанесен природе республики.

http://lenta.ru/news/2005/10/26/debris/

I gotta better idea. Why don’t they have a REAL showdown? Afterall fighters are made to fight correct? Or is the best your Flanker and Fulcrum can do is look pretty at airshows? We could put 1 Flanker with 8 AAMs in the air vs 1 Raptor with 8 AAMs. We’ll start them off 200 miles apart and give both of them AWACS support and say “go”. Still want to play or do you just want to hang out in the sandbox with the kiddies?

Why we do not do something better a F-15E armed with AIM-9X versus a Su-30BM armed with R-37, AA-12 and the Latest AA-11 models; and I-21 versus an F-22 you are saying why not a F-4 versus an MiG-29