A pitching moment is a pitching moment. If the applied pitching torque is the same, the plane will pitch up at the same rate regardless if that moment is ahead of the CG or behind it. Basic physics.

Some error in reasoning, we speak about planes and not cars.
We should not forget when we turn then we bank then a change in the the axes appears.
The Canard acts then with positive force and a tail produce then negativ force. This lead to more bleeded engergy for a tail and tailless fighter (static stabil Mirage 3, F-106) and lead to a lower energy loss for a Canard (static instable or static stable). A Canard must not always counter the the pitch up moment that can do the Elevon and the Elevon produce then lift.
When we bank then the the Canard is only used and produce positve force and a tail produce negativ force.
The needed AoA is then lower as for a tail fighter in a banked turn.
The Canard enhanced the inflow on the fin no additional auxiliary crutches for high AoA needed like ventral fins (F-16 etc) or two fins (more drag and RCS penalty more weathered skin and a leading edge more).
The FCS for a Canard fighter (static instable) is more complex as for a tail fighter.

In war the Raptor wouldn’t been in the situation presented in the first place. In training there are rules for a reason. You don’t risk 2 aircraft/aircrews to try and prove a theory.

I think when a F-22 pilot forced to WVR then has he made somewhat wrong.;)

I’d be interested in seeing that quote.

I’d be interested in seeing that too. And please don’t trot out that ancient picture of a Super Hornet getting a fleeting glimps of a Raptor in it HUD by busitng the rules of engagement (yeah, that’s well known too).

You think on war time snipes no one under 300ft? Some gun kills happen just under 100 feet distance. Some Kamikaze make 0 feet kills.;)

I see that you continue to compare the F 35 with a clean Rafale/Gripen. Yes, those little planes offer a superb performance… in an airshow. 😀
Load them with even a moderate combat load and see what hapens.

BTW, the max. speed of the production F 35 will be 1.8M.

Maybe, not yet achieved. But Mach 1.67 is production standard 240-3.:rolleyes:

considering the “front section”, according to these drawings, simply through a area measurement in photoshop it comes out that:

Typhoon has 11% less frontal surface
Rafale has 7% less frontal surface
Super Hornet has 25% more frontal surface.

however, if you’re to measure the frontal surface of an aircraft for what counts (transonic area rule), I doubt that the F-35 will be very happy with that.. it’s easy to see that there’s no section reduction at the wings section, which means it has a pretty nasty “peak” that will increase its drag in transonic.. it will overcome that drag through high thrust, but that means it will gulp fuel as if there was no tomorrow…

basically, it has to stay subsonic

But in fact since Jones supersonic area rule use nobody the Frenzel-Junkers transonic area rule. The sweep angle of the Mach cone is used for make the cross section distribution. This shift the wing aftwards and the wesp tail frontwards. 😉

Yes, but the 777 comes with multiple engine options, I’d guess that the 380 only has one gear supplier.:D (Also, if it were engine problems, how much of that can you lay at Boeings feet?).

Because of its size, the A380 will attract media attention (because of its potential for a large loss of life should there be a serious mishap) a minor fault/occurence that would go unreported on another type will make the news.

It was like that in the early days of the 747 and Concorde.
And any new aircraft in the future will also face media scrutiny.

What will be only once when a Chinese rice bag falls over in a B787.

A lot of the EM radiation – relative to other stealth designs will not be scattered but rather absorbed.

RAM works on specific frequencies and tends to by heavy and tick as lower the frequencies is and is useless below 2GHz. In the F-117 was the RAM task more simply. MTI use not the real doppler shift but the doppler phase shift and the most to counter Radar used anlog computers. But how Fansong was feared, we see it on the Marines comando raids prior to the F-117 flights or the need of Grumman A-6 Prowlers and wild weasels. MTI has another weak point it’s can’t detect target flying on the radial, but more and more MTD are used. No blindspeed, real Doppler, no radial hole.