how do you know the Su-35 is any more combat capable, compared to the F-35? Do you really think the F-35 couldn’t carry out any kind of combat sortie – accurately drop a bomb, shoot down a plane with a BVR missile?

Yeah, it was very strange that the USN and US military in general discontinued deployment of such helmet mounted sights – especially when you consider the success of the Soviet system on the Mig-29 and Su-27.

No, you misunderstood: in not any point I have said 10 years late. Check it.
I have said instead that it’s the double of the envisaged time to reach IOC: 2006 to 2010/2011 is 4/5 years, 2006 to 2015/2016 9 to 10 yen years.

4,5 x 2= 9 10/2=10 Double of the time for passing from an intermediate point to another more advanced but still intermediate point of the whole development process,…

Taking about the same time as it took the Typhoon and Rafale to enter full service then. The very first Typhoon flew in 1994 if I recall, didn’t really enter IOC till 2005 or so?
BTW, PAK FA will have been flying for 7 years in 2 weeks time – its progress doesn’t seem much faster.

All big ticket contracts including F-35 contracts include infrastructure and spares. Does the 43 billion figure quoted above include airfield infrastructure upgrades and spares?

Eyewitnesses claim that the only example of the Su-47 has a folding wing.

There is almost zero evidence to suggest that the S-47 has folding wings. Why would it need folding wings?

you can get F-35 to 800 km radius, but you cant get it to 800 nm like gripen E does,
no matter how hard you try, its roughly twice as much,
(or more specifically as the technical specification on gripen E states:

you can push F-35 out to 760 nm with drop tanks without weapons load…and thats the end of it.

what is known concerning speed is that gripen E is touted as a supercruiser, while F-35 isnt,
IIRC F-35 max speed is mach 1.6 while gripen E is a mach 2 machine

now off you go google specification on F-35 made by L.M and try find an argument

You are the one making the brave statements about the NG’s performance – it is you who need to provide the verifiable sources. 800 nm indeed – carrying what munitions exactly?

As it happens here is a link: https://fas.org/man/eprint/F35-sar-2016.pdf#page=16

690 nm with With four 1000 Ib JDAMs and two internal AIM-120s

And your figures with the same warload on the Gripen NG?

That’s not fuel fraction.
With just the underwing tanks: let’s say 8.4 + 3.4 + 2.72 = 14.62 tons. Total fuel 6.12 tons, fuel fraction 0.42.

Drag does not affect fuel fraction.

That’s an awful lot of drag induced by all those external tanks – and that’s before we even mention the drag created by the weapons load. Does the Gripen NG still have the combat radius of the F-35 when both are carrying a pair of 2000 Ib bombs and 2 AMRAAMs?