I think he is being sarcastic

Well, you never know around aviation forums. :p I tend to forget which side of the fence people are on and slip into taking everything at face value. 🙂

I think the engagements between modern 4th gen fighters come down to who suprises the other with his pants down first.

Assuming you mean a head-on BVR engagement, I think it’d be a close call either way, at least by what is publicly known about the different aircraft.

In terms of aerodynamic/kinetic performance the Su-35BM and at least the Typhoon seem to be on a reasonable parity, AIM-120B/C5 vs R-77 or METEOR vs R-77M seem close to parity and going by their radars none of them is stealthy enough to not be detected outside of MRM employment parameters by the respective other.
It might indeed come down to the EWS and how long the shot can be denied.
WVR, between the AIM-9X, ASRAAM-132, IRIS-T and R-73, there probably is preciously little difference as well.

Going down to guns, I’d hand it to the Su-35BM though. But then again, how likely is that to happen?

Also, the top speed on that graph is incorrect if Paul Metz is to be believed. Should go up to at least Mach 2.4

It looks like Mach 2 is an imposed hard limit on the graph. From the general shape one could speculate what speed the F-22 terminally reaches, but it seems like either the exact figure is supposed to be classified or perhaps the FLCS limits the F-22 to Mach 2 for some technical reason, like preserving the RAM coating, saving the engine or whatever else can crop up.

Where is that info regarding the TVC not being used from?

Could be “with equal loads” ie. 8 AAMs full internal fuel? :confused:

And three drop tanks, at least on the F-15 to “equalize” fuel loads. 😀

What is the big deal? He made a mistake, $hit happens. The diagram above should say “F-15C non-Afterburning envelope”.
It just shows that very few people understand what he is talking about or the level of analysis in his articles. 🙂

I don’t think so. Using consistent nomenclature, he would have called it “Dry Thrust”, just like he did for the F-22 (which is still called the F/A-22 in the diagram by the way). And you honestly think he wouldn’t have corrected the mistake you claim in all those years?

Just like others here, I assume he used some heavy and draggy combat load for the F-15C.

What’s the supposed/planned/rumoured spec for the F4 standard? Is there anything out on that yet?

Well given what you wrote – dignity is the last word I’d use for your post, frankly – because it came across as really weird and I am not even Israeli (or horror of horrors, right wing US neocon republican etc etc)! And yes, cognitive dissonance – since you latched on to semantics to whitewash Irans rather odious record in supporting Pal militias – which are as adept at brutalizing their own people as attacking Israel and then ended with a plaintive oh i want everyone to live with peace & dignity ..etc! Oh well!!

I’m under the impression that you misread what I wrote because you wanted to see the post in a specific light.
Please note that I used words like:

“I wonder”
“from what I could get”
“I’ve heard several Iranian voices”
“from what I have read”
“I have read of”

That’s not semantics, that’s relating the fact that I have no first-hand knowledge of the situation and what I have is fragmentary. This should also have revealed the nature of my post as not claiming objective truth and general veracity, but just pitching in one more potential aspect of the debate.

I don’t actually know what’s really happening in Iran and I’m not planning to whitewash anything. I don’t have a personal believe of what’s really happening there. If the things related are factually wrong, please just point out why and how they are wrong and refrain from attacking me personally.

Wouldnt that..errmmm…require the Iranians to first realise that the state of Israel has a right to exist and stop sponsoring attacks on the same?

Yes, they should acknowledge Israel and respect the nation’s and its inhabitants’ rights. I never claimed anything else. What I tried to point out was that some Iranians seemingly are opposed to the state Israel as a national structure, not the people living there or the Jewish religion. Whether that’s actually true is open to debate.

(On a side note: The last paragraph of my post was a call for all of them to acknowledge each other and get along. I’m in favour of all of them dropping the religious and nationalist BS and finally treating each other as human beings and equals.)

Contradictory things, hmm?

To quote Merriam Webster on cognitive dissonance:
“psychological conflict resulting from incongruous beliefs and attitudes held simultaneously”

The thing is: I don’t have any particular belief on what’s going in Iran. Iranian plans for maximum possible hostility (perhaps also of the nuclear kind) seem as possible to me as the whole stance being governmental posturing to distract people away from inner-Iranian issues and problems. I don’t have nearly enough information to quantify their respective likelihoods, so I don’t. Which is also why I opened my post with “I wonder…”.

I don’t have a lot of beliefs or opinions.

Your post was a masterpiece in semantics!

You are giving me too much credit. At most it was uninformed and only introducing a very specific aspect of the debate. I would still like to know how any part of my post exploited semantics in your reasoning.

I mean, Israel just had a brutal war recently with the Pal militias, backed by Iran. Several scores of people died, and you have the cheek or naivete (I dont know which, which is why I said cognitive dissonance!) to suggest that its not the Israelis the Iranians dislike but the state of Israel which they dont seek to destroy but abolish etc etc.

Again, you read my post on the wrong premise. (And still, your grasp on cognitive dissonance is slippery.)
I don’t know anything about Pal militias (neither do Google or Wikipedia it seems, unless they usually go by another name) and I only know the whole ME conflict by its broadest strokes. The words I used should have made it clear that I was relating a possible, particular stance associated with some Iranians.

By jove, I read that stuff three times over – AND it still sounds as weird as the first time I read it!! How exactly do you think the Iranians plan to “abolish” the state of Israel? By giving them the Comfy Chair treatment from Monty Python?? Or stuffed teddy bears signed by Ahm. himself?

The same way most politicians go about demanded reforms: Shouting loudly and not doing anything. Politicians call for a lot of things all the time without ever acting upon them.
Also, people are free to have their opinions and don’t necessarily have to act upon them. Somebody who thinks gun ownership should be banned might never even do a single thing to actually get it banned while still demanding the ban when the issue comes up in discussion. Actually most people never do a single thing about anything, no matter how much it supposedly peeves them.

Or could it be that they have put their money where their mouth is, by repeatedly sponsoring groups that attack Israel, and are now working towards a nuclear weapon exactly because it will give them full deterrence against israeli retaliation!

Could be. I don’t know. You have reliable data on that?