If two stealthy aircraft engage with each other (without external support), I would guess the number of BVR kills drops to zero and the kills are necessarily all WVR (fun fact: under that conditions the F-22A can put two AIM-9 and the cannon into the fight, the same like a clean F-16A). The consequence is (and that is the biggest criticism of the F-35 I think), that a stealthy aircraft needs to maintain a performance level comparable to 4th or 4.5th generation aircraft.
That is also the basic point of Stevenson.

And the second stealthy aircraft would be?

I know for a fact that the kills in Allied Force required more than 1 BVR missile fired each too so I’d take the 100% with a very large pinch of salt.

Possibly some vinegar and tabasco too…

You know wrong. The kills might not require more than one BVR missile. The procedures (USAF ones, I don’t know if any other AF enjoy this luxury) impose that two missiles are fired, to be sure than the enemy is shot down.

I think the few times these weapons were used are insufficient to draw any conclusions from it. Tests tell us more, and that all major air forces consider active radar medium range missiles as their primary air defense weapon.

In fact, these never was an all-out war between two major air forces since the end of the Korean War, the 1982 Bekaa Valley episode may be considered an exemption, but here many specialties applied.

It’s the third time that I post it. In the last conflicts, BVR rulez!

Sure. We could always use more LockMart press releases on here. Why not?

Or more Kopp’s articles…:p

There’s also a webpoll on that article and it would seem only about 26% think their sitting socialist gov conducted a fair process.

Something the rest of the world already knew wasnt the case.

No sh*t!

Well you miss-interpreted again! top speed/endurance is not relevant in this issue.

Why does F-22 need 45% more thrust to reach same speed as F-15 ?

I’m not arguing the value of M2.4 vs M2.5, it’s irrelevant in any case. I’m arguing
why F-22 need 45% more thrust to reach same top speed as F-15 while consisting of much more composites and a brand new engine ?

And my conclusion is that F-15 is more aerodynamic.

I see that you have a problem with figures:
“why F-22 need 45% more thrust to reach same top speed as F-15 while consisting of much more composites and a brand new engine”…I wonder if those 19 tons (vs. 12.5 for F 15) would have something to do…:p :diablo: 😀

Then there is something seriously wrong in the layout with F-35A, -simply cause F-15 has both longer range AND far higher speed, while at the same time having less fuel.
How is that even possible ??!!

An F 15 with 3 EFTs has a smaller combat radius than an F 35 with only the internal fuel.

As about max. speed, the 1.8 M should be enough. The guy who used to run the F 35 program until recently (and who was in charge of F 15 before that) told some interesting figures about this. Basically, in 30 years of service (~8000 hours) the average F 15 spent <15 min. in supersonic, rarely exceeding 1.3 M. And we are talking about F 15, a plane that was involved in more combat than any aircraft during its 30 years of service in USAF and IDAF. Sudenly the 2.5 M looks like an overkill…

The whole A2A profile of F-35 is defensive. The EOTS extreme limitations makes it barely worth mentioning in any other context than heads on targeting. And that still with significant limitations. And the full EOTS/DAS system is many years away from service entry.

-In A-A, Sniper (the DAS is based on this one) can detect an plane at > 80 Nmiles:
-the field-of-regard is 160 deg: that’s a limitation for you? Do you know better FOV for other IR sensors?
-of course, the EOTS/DAS is many years away from service, because the platform (F35) is !