I’d say if you want to know see how it is done on the vertical as well.

Rafale à Red Flag 08
envoyé par armee-de-l_air. – Les derniers test hi-tech en vidéo.

After all it is Rafale programe, see it in action vs F-16, gun only…

Well, let’s see:

-F 16 operational: 1979;
-Rafale operational: 2004.

One would certainly expect the Rafale> F 16

Funny that you leave out the fact that Typhoon supercruises for 250 nm, LOITERS for 30 min and then return subsonic.

It loiters in subsonic. And the combat radius is calculated without the time spent on combat zone for all the fighters.

Also funny you leave out that the Typhoon does so on internal fuel (~5t) and with 8 AAMs!

Of course it does on internal fuel, as it can’t supercruise with EFTs!

That’s not the point. The point is that F 35 can do the same (250 Nmiles in supersonic + much more than 250 nmiles in subsonic). So, where is the advantage of the EF ???????????

Yeah sure. 😀

Supercruise means military power in supersonic not “in the sense as the F22 does”.

Reality:

Does the F-35 supercruise?
http://www.jsf.mil/contact/con_faqs.htm

No, neither the F135 or F136 engines were designed to supercruise.

Neither the GE 129/P&W 229 or GE 404 are not designed to suprecruise, but the plane that use hem can supercruise at ~ 1.2 M when clean…

Here’s an article that needs to be red to understand F35’s construction and aerodynamics.

Interesting part:

LOL, what more needs to be said???
F16 accelarates M.8-M1.2 in 44 sec. and sustains, at least, 7g at the same altitude at which F35 sustains 5g.
So, how is F35 more maneuverable than F16 in any regime???
LOL, it’s so plain obvious…

A Clean F 16 would accelerate in 44 sec and sustain 7 G…An combat loaded F 16 (or even EF/Rafale/whatever) wouldn’t…And do you realize that AA1 is not the definitive configuration? Guess not…

What, don’t you believe that the NG is a true 5.5 gen a/c!!???

It will be a fantastic 4.5 gen fighter jet, but it will not be a VLO plane. And it will not have the EO-DAS system.

It will have: 1000-element AESA in design stage, if ever fielded , dramatic increase in range still needing EFTs for anything but point defence , 20% increase in thrust badly needed for any decent load , supercruise in a2a config to quote a SAAB offical in a cold day:diablo: , reduced RCS a guess to stay polite…, reduced IR signature idem, improved MMI, MAWS, a very good IRST could you name it 😀 ?, increased payload, more pylons, satellite comms, and one thing that has not been discussed much; some very interesting EW capabilities… but that’s rather hush-hush. At the same time it will keep it’s fantastic low-drag and highly manouvrable airframe, with a minimum of weight added

I think this is pretty good. But is it a “5. gen plane”? I would say No. However I think that it can hold it’s own against most 4.5 gen jets out there, and do pretty well in a2g missions. Can it carry as much as the Rafale on long-range missions? Perhaps not, but by sending 4 NG instead of 2 Rafale and spreading the a2g munitions on more a/c that can actually also be addressed.

It will beat any teen and compare well to Rafale, Typhoon and SH.

I’m sure it will be some orders for the terrible Swedish fighter… Some 6-12 of them for 1th class AFs such as Hungary, Czech Rep or Thailand…

Dare2;1483728 Maximum speed of Mach 1.67 is a simulated flight-test, eyeballs-out figure which would translate to and validate the actual Maximum Mach 1.6 figure.

The 1.67 M was in real flights not simulated tests…How fast was the Rafale when less then the 10 % of the test programe was ready ? The first F 35 definitive version, the AF 1 will fly in a few weeks. How fast do you think it will fly? 1,6 M ? 😀

Something else:

This quote also casts doubts as to the real requiered specs, why mentioning “no external fuel tanks” if not making the diuference between F-35 and the rest?

The other fighters would have been in overspeed above M 1.6 with these tanks, so the value given for M 1.8 is more than doubtful, even more so that the link to the article doesn’t allow for a full view of it. 😀

One last thing, in A2A F/A-18 is outclassed by Rafale Typhoon and Gripen.

Bad news for you; the F 35 will outclass at least the Rafale and the Gripen, even if those ones will drop EFTs. The EF OTOH, might still have an edge (but only without EFTs)

Look at the graphs (green is without EFTs) : http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:a42185b9-b38e-407c-b03e-29f5cd97a5b5

Enjoy :diablo::D:p

So you believe that Maximum machs are KPP still? 😀

Problem for you you still fail to demonstrate it the same because it isn’t, everyone can READ Maximum Mach and this isn’t partof the KPP which aren’t given in the same page of the docs. Cheers.

Davis may quote the KPP because it’s a firm number. F 35 isn’t operational, yet, so no one knows what’s the top speed when declared operational. It coud be 1.75M :p