Would it be possible to end that greek/turkish sh!t chat and return to topic!?:mad:

No idea where it originally comes from, but I find it funny.

AIM-9L vs. IRIS-T with helmet mounted sight?

Seriously if they would have had AIM-9X vs. AIM-9X / IRIS-T / ASRAAM and both with helmet mounted sights, this is simply impossible. Because both sides would just have to look at the other to kill him. (or kill him after he killed you)

Certainly no helmet for the Typhoon as it isn’t yet available and likely IRIS-T for the Phoons and AIM-9X for the Cs. We should search for images from this exercise which might unveil what weapons the aircraft were carrying. But even if the 15 used AIM-9X it doesn’t mean they were using them to full extend and it is not as easy as simply look and kill. Most current AAMs lack a LOAL capability and you have still to manoeuver the aircraft into position. The engagement envelope is certainly larger, but not allround and you still need to see the enemy to cue a weapon as well.

The exercise was purely WVR according to the article so neither RCS, radar nor AMRAAMs or ECM really matters. Who knows what happened. An imaginable scenario could be that the Typhoons were guided by AWACS or a GCI controller approaching passive from an unfavourable angle and attacking without being noticed. There could be many reasons so who knows.

I got it : when Sweetman say something negative in Aveek about the F 35 that’s gospel; when something positive is mentioned there, you’ll believe it when you see it…

Have I mentioned Bill Sweetman? No! The next time you complain about Carlo Kopp, while no one talks about him.
The point is the F-22 is capable to sustain such high AoA due TVC, the F-35 is based on a similar aerodynamic concept, but lacks TVC. That’s why I’m curious about this claim. The soft limits I mentioned for a couple of fighters can be achieved without risk of departure during a manoeuvering fight. The 55° is unlikely to be achieved on all conditions. It’s apples with oranges.

of course i get it and you’re misquoting me
love the skewing of data for you list, who did it ?

You are slowley overstretching my patience mr. I have a tried to explain you the difference between those AoAs, you still don’t get, wether this is pure fanboyism, stupidy or ignorance I don’t know. And where am I misquoting you huh? Weren’t it you who came up with “the teens are aprox 50 and deltas are 30”? Consider ignored if you come up with the next idiotic claim.

you arent really silly are you ?
i showed you a f-18 that does 70
would you like me to show you the inproduction one that does 55
then i’ll show the the deltas that do about 30

who the F said f-35 does 70, it does 55, its the f-22 that does 70

You don’t get the point do you? The F/A-18 HARV used TVC to achieve such AoAs and remain controlable, the F-22 uses TVC to achieve a similar performance. The F-35 lacks TVC and the control surfaces being smaller means less control authority. In other words you have no idea what you are talking about. The soft limits on the deltas as you call them are similar or superior to that of the teens.
To your plebish information:
F-16 = ~25°
F/A-18A-D = 29.5°
MiG-29 = 26°-28°
Su-27 = 26°-27.5°
JAS 39 = 28°
Rafale = 29°

These are soft limits and those are quite similar. You can control either of these aircraft beyond that…

@ scorp, links please and then i’ll show you why its skewed, i reckon

>3123 km for the F-22 according LM and the link Sintra provided says that this range is achieved with 2 ETs (2270 l!). 2600 km for the Typhoon according Flug Revue and Bundeswehr magazine Aktuell.