The US had long range AG guided weapons at least a decades before Europeans (SLAM ER-250 km, JASSM-370km, JASSM ER 900 km); yet they still invest in F 35. It shoud tell you something: maybe, just maybe, the they know better…better than you…

SLAM-ER, JASSM & JASSM-ER decades before Europeans? 😀 In what universe?

Storm Shadow/SCALP was first used in combat (with great success, BTW), six years before JASSM was introduced into service. By the time JASSM was declared ready to use, Taurus had been in service for a few years, & was operational with an export customer.

JASSM-ER is not yet in service.

SLAM-ER beat Storm Shadow/SCALP into service – by less than TWO years. Not “at least a decades (sic)”.

A better example would have been AGM-86 B or C/D which were in USAF service from the early 1980s, or the 200km ranged AGM-69 from the 1960s.

Acceleration from transonic on is relevant in A2A configuration,
and F-35 don’t keep up with others here, lest you compare with F-18E

I suspect F-35 performance data is highly classified at the moment.

We have difference in altitude but still, acceleration time difference is huge!

But isn’t this the key line: “The exact performance of the current F-35A configuration — also known as the 240-4 — are classified.” As for earlier standards, weren’t they classified also? If not, why use such a vague and ill defined term like “was credited with”? What stage in the development cycle was this at, and what testing was performed using that build standard: avionics integration, perhaps?

“was credited with”: someone plucked a number, and presented it without explanation or context?

IS is not even a contemporary of the T-34, the KV is.

IS-1 to IS-3, built from 1942 onwards, were developed in response to deficiencies in KV. T-34 was produced 1940 onwards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iosif_Stalin_tank

Can this be said with any certainty? :confused:

Can anything be said with certainty in relation to PAK-FA?

Have a look at Russian and US GDP figures:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_between_U.S._states_and_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

I seriously believe that the F-35a has more technology than the PAK-FA and more mobility. Check out this though http://www.phlydaily.com/2012/08/f-35-vs-pak-fa.html

I don’t think it’s as simple as the author makes out in parts. The F-35 is much further along it’s development path than the PAK-FA, so it’s development and production costs are more of a known quantity for instance. As for supercruise, isn’t the Lock-Mart criteria more stringent than simply the ability go supersonic without afterburner?

I would love to hear the outcome of an A2A engagement between the 27’s and the hornets.

Su-27 vs F-18F would be a more interesting matchup than vs the classic F-18s.

But its hard to imagine TNI Flankers and ADF F-18s engaging on terms that are even close to equal. Even if the Indonesians have AWAC support for this exercise, for example, do their pilots have the training to work in that type of environment?

on cost, as mentioned above, when the program started at the end of the 90’s, a unit cost of US$65 million was envisioned, were halfway 2012 now, and the unit cost is now roughly US$ 197 million, almost tripple the envisioned price.

Why is the cost of an initial LRIP batch F-35 paid by the US DoD in 2012 relevant? By the time large scale dliveries of F-35 to European nations are underway, the quoted unit cost will be a lot lower. Have a look the cost history of programs like C-17 for example.