The Kfir was a stable design and had unmoving canards.

The Viggen too, stable and non maneuvering Canard.

The T-50 uses LERXes see

right above the inlets

Sure a moveable moustache or a very close coupled Canard.:diablo: But this is more a moveable differter the sweep angle is not great enough to produce a usefull leading-edge vortex.;)

One benefit obtainable from a control-canard is avoidance of pitch-up. An all-moving canard capable of a significant nose-down deflection will protect against pitch-up. As a result, the aspect ratio and wing-sweep of the main wing can be optimized without having to guard against pitchup.

Daniel P. Raymer, Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, Section 4.5 – Tail geometry and arrangement.

No – the F-22 pumps out 37klb of thrust in peace time – they announce that at airshow demonstations. There are youtube videos of that. Bill Sweetman estimated the total thrust – presumably in wartime – at 39klb-40klb per engine.

So in the current peace time setting the F-22s max TWR is 1.70. While it suffers lower thrust drop off at supersonic speeds/high altitudes compared to higher bypass ratio engines found in the other new designs.

Max TWR mean TWR at empty weigth not a really usefull combat configuration.;)

So, perhaps the combination of instability and canards allows for similar or better sustained turn rates with a lower TWR? It does seem to be the case.

The TWR for a F-22 is 1.08 (1.62) and for a Typhoon 1.18 (1.65 max). Where please is 1,08 more as 1,18 or 1.62 more as 1.65?

The Delta wing has its regimes where is more efficient but at low speeds it is not as efficent as a straight wing.

A straight wing is inefficient at high speed and not transonic, supersonic capable and really not a good choice for area ruling! It’s bad for a low RCS. :diablo:The delta wing works on subsonic, supersonic and hypersonic–> Space Shuttle. :rolleyes:

My whole point was there is no reason to consider an airplane with canards superior to one with tailplanes or a tailess delta, the F-15 has a higher TWR than the AJ-37 and a big wing giving it the edge over the Kfir and Viggen.

But the AJ-37 can thing do that a F-15 can’t do. The AJ-37 lands on small ordinary highways whit carrier like rates of descent. A big wing alone make not a good fighter or a B747 would be the master of dog fight. The JA-37 intercepts the SR-71 routinely. ;)The Saab Viggen (Thunderbolt) is a short coupled fixed Canard. The flaps on the Viggen Canard is used for STOL purposes only and not for steering input.:diablo:

Canards are used to improve the AoA mostly of delta wings in modern fighters, this is because the delta wing main trade offs is low AoA handling and flow separation relatively at low AoA, this is partially compensated by the fact it has low drag and a big wing area.

Is the angle of attack increases the leading edge of the delta-wing generates a vortex which remains attached to the upper surface of the wing, giving the delta a very high stall angle. A normal wing built for high speed use is typically dangerous at low speeds, but in this regime the delta changes over to a mode of lift based on the vortex it generates.

The Mirage 2000 prototyp without Canards achieve easily a AoA of 26° at 110 knots and outclassed the F-16 at the Farnborough Airshow 1978.
At higher AoA inertia coupling can appears a F-16 problem and less steering autority can caused a super stall.

What happens on a conventional wing at higher AoA without LERX?
Pitch-Up (Sabre Dance).

The phenomenon of pitch-up is directly related to inherent properties of all swept wings. The wingtips of a swept wing aircraft operate at a higher local lift coefficient than inboard sections of the wing so the wingtips are more heavily loaded than inboard sections. In addition, swept wings tend to generate spanwise flow of the boundary layer (along the length of the wing from root to tip rather than across the wing from front to back). The combination of these factors means that at a high angle of attack the wingtips stall before the rest of the wing.

That is planform aligment and the inlets do have the same angle with respect the vertical

But planeform should point in the same direction, you should only have one peak and not multiple peaks or near indefinitely peaks caused by twisting. This contradicts planeform.;)

Maybe look again on a Typhoon inlet and you see no 90°, the same at a Rafale.
A Typhoon and a Rafale are not copareable whit a vintage F-15.:rolleyes: