Aerospacetech is correct thermodynamics is the speed-limiting factor, on the F-22, and the F-23. Much as it was in the B-58 and the SR-71 family.

IIRC the SR-71’s planform worked out at around Mach 3.4 or so, NASA did look at increasing the top speed of the Blackbird, but decided the costs were not worth the hassle [which would indicate it wasn’t planform limited].

[And no, I’m not getting confused with thrust improvement studies for piggy-backing experimental drones]

But anywayz – there is a big big difference from Mach 2ish to Mach 3.2ish!

We know the Concorde can do Mach 2.2 on an aluminium airframe, and neither YF-22 nor YF-23 approached that.

4) The design speed of the YF-23 for minimum drag is therefore just under Mach 2.0.

That makes perfect sense, for a design supercruise of about Mach 1.8. It doesn’t mean it can’t go above Mach 2.0, with some penalty in additional drag due to the shockwave hitting the outer wing. Your calculation doesn’t really prove anything. Materials and airframe heating will be the limiting factor in reality.

First part fair enough, I had assumed the photo was from above 😮 .

Anyway, why (planform) design it to go Mach 2, if it can actually go Mach 2.2 – if it had been designed correct, it might actually go Mach 2.3 or more without the drag rise. It would be a very silly design choice at best – and pure negligence at worst.

I know the (Y)F-22 uses fuel to cool the leading edges of the wings (for IR purposes), I assume there is nothing to stop the YF-23 doing the same…

Also, its not like we’re dealing with an aluminium aircraft like concorde here. 🙂

F-22 – the world’s most advanced and capable fighter…..?

Think these gentlemen would respectfully disagree:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMqAQTd_-cE

It was faster than the YF-22 yes.

However, you go and look up Mach cone, and measure out the YF-23, and you’ll see its aero planform design top speed is around Mach 1.8 (which funnily enough were the ATF requirements).

The BS you hear about Mach 2.5+ etc etc is just that… BS.

Hey, I am German. I am supposed to be overly positive towards German design, but the truth is:

• German scientists had discovered the advantages of the wing sweep, but it wasn’t applied to anything than paper projects (the Me-262 does have this “sweep” for other reasons)
• German engine technology sucked, and not only due to lack of material and trained labor. Some more steps to go, and the real innovation on designs like the F-4 were the engines, which the Sovjets did not possess in similar quality at that time.
• Guided weapons, ya, kind of. Electronics were, however, not exactly the best in Germany
• The “aerodynamics” were very basic. Transonic phenomea haven’t been described in depth by German scientists.

So, did Germany build the first jetfighter? Obviously yes.
Was German technology “decades ahead of its time”? No, 3-5 years in some areas, but equally some years behind on other fields.

I had this row earlier in the thread.

The Me163 did have wing sweep for transonic drag/buffet reasons. It wasn’t perfected, and they did have problems with high speed tuck.

Agree with the engines. But, I do think I remember reading high level (i.e. Hitler) interference fooked up with the development of the engines in the late 30s.

They understood that transonic drag was greatly reduced by sweeping the wings – while the original hypothesis was simplistic, it was accurate enough.

It is true that in terms of pure performances, the F 16 is under the F 15/Su 30, but it still has some advantages: a superb digital FCS that allow an average pilot to fly the plane very agresively, without bothering with limmitation (AoA and G), good aerodynamics (relaxed stability, the extra lift from the strakes an the body, the leading edge flap system adds a lot to performance by reducing drag at high alpha and buffet).

Don’t forget the F-16 has a better roll rate and roll acceleration than the F-15… and the F-22.

It still has clear advantages over the others – its a case of whether the pilot can bring these to bear on the fight.

Quite possibly..considering the impact air combat had on the outcome of World War I.😀

The war (like many since) sped the development of aviation technologies, but aviation didn’t contribute much to the war itself.

True in that the close air support role (which would have had a major impact IMO) wasn’t fully developed until the Nazis came along.

Although it cannot be denied that artillery spotting and recon were both important roles carried out by aircraft in WWI, without the camel, the Germans would have had an advantage in these areas.

But, the F-22 has already had a bigger impact on the world than the Camel? :confused:

Simply,

How can you say that the F-22 is better than the F-15 only in theory?

Very very simply.

Would you not expect a Boeing 777 to perform better than a Boeing 727?

How old is the F-15 and how old is the F-22?

The F-22 has not downed any of its same gen fighters in real combat, hell, its same gen fighters do not yet exist in my opinion.

You are not comparing like with like when you compare the F-22 to the F-15. When the PAK-FA (eventually) does come along, compare the F-22 to that, and see if it has the same superiority the F-15 had over the MiG-23 and MiG-25.