The related g claim is questionable. It is just a warranty given for a specific flight-weight and a related number of g-loads. For a typical interception mission or CAS it is no issue. Just two values are intresting, what time will a F-35A, F-35C, SH or Typhoon need to reach a given height of ~40 kft in military or in max. AB. All the contenders will be subsonic when doing so at all.
The F-35C without the naval related equipment will be ~0,5 tons lighter at least and it is about the warranty at first if the allowed (not the possible!) g-load is kept at 7,5 g.

That’s right…
it matters what gs you are pulling at what speed at what loading.

go beyond XX deg of aoa means little on the pure performance side.
if you have enough elevator power, your control system can let you ride the alpha curve, go beyond the inflection point on the pitching moment curve and stay on the reverse side of the curve.
how much speed you shed while you are there is another question.

Given that the F-35 is a 9g airframe, (which the F-18 is not even close to with a 7.6g limit) and the F-35 is faster than the F-18 with weapons, I think it’s pretty accurate.

If I would to choose I would take a lightened 35C in this case.
bigger wing bigger range bigger payload for little loss in top speed.

then again I would prefer japan to design and build its own. may be finally it can throw off the crutches.

Thanks, so where is the operations capability comparison ? And relations with US as a parameter ? surely this can’t be an official comparison ?

what is “operations capability”? you have to define a set of tasks (mission profile and availability etc) and measure each airplane’s performance accordingly. with out knowing their metric to guess those ratings is almost useless.

and Yes, I am not surprised that relation with US is used as metric semi-officially. Nikkie has alot of links with the conservative bureaucratic elite that runs that country.
unfortunately Japan has lost its own ways, and since 1945 with the brief exception in 80s, the general masses and all the way upto the political elite can not take a leak with out US.
they think Americans as their father. sign…I wish Japan could think for itself little bit more. and have little more self confidence and self-respect and figure out its own future in East Asia. US is really treating Japan like their own slave vassal.

Shock Japan buys American. Scared of china and it’s power in the region buy from the only country able to check any Chinese aggression.

way out of topic. but since the moderator obviously allows for above highly political commentary then may I indulge.

Really, what’s japan scared of?
big bad china still has a smaller navy than JMSDF. and its ADIZ is right up china’s nose…

a) China doesn’t need the J-10 to have a standoff missile capability they have other types that perform the role. But there is no reason why the capability couldn’t be introduced in the future, the J-10 a multirole type has an open architecture weapons bus.
.

On a complete tangent,

the initial export customer for J-10 did ask for integrating standoff weapons capability in their aircraft. so in next couple of month there might be photos surfacing of J-10s flying around chengdu with pods and weapons strapped on them.

Sorry .. even I would like to agree with You, I think this is only some “blurr” around the tip and not the tip alone. Especially since the radome looks still black …. 🙁 (most of all in the yellow one far left in front of the blue door!)

… and I also can’t see the huge UAV ?!!! 🙁

Deino

Q:
How many yellow primer J-10s do you see?
A: Three

Q:
How many of them have the round tips and how many have square tips
A: 2 & 1. 2 on the right, 1 on the left.

safe to say we need clearer photos…

yep, you can see the dielectric tip right there. and couple of more in hangar.

all flight test articles are accounted for and in flight test center.
for a mode like this the ones that we seen already flying can finish the flight test program.

Its prob the pre-production in-service trial production block, for the first user regiment.