I’ve read the same about the 1500l tanks. What about the integration of 2000l tanks? Are the Tornados big tanks supersonic capable?
Just two 1000l bags is not impressive when compared for example to the Rafale.

I think Austria would not wait, i.e. EF consortium would have to pay penalties for delayed delivery…
And Austrian Typhoons are being assembled in Manching if i remember correctly.

Unfortunately, there are many deceiving sources which are of little value.
Look at F-14. All of old sources state that it can manage 2,34 Mach, which is ridiculous.
Only in recent years we can read that it has about 1,9 M max speed. And that is in a good accord with characteristics of its high by-pass turbofans.

In fact, it is true that in test the F-14A managed 2,34 Mach, but that was achieved in a slight dive. That is its airframe limit.

2.34M is not ridiculos. F-14 has movable intake ramps after all. Take a look at F-111 speed. There is a pilot report on the net in which he claims 2.6M…
Later, the F-14s intake ramps were locked resulting in top speed of 1.88M.

The same we can read about F-16A. It can attain 2 Mach, but not in a level flight.
The F-16/79 was much faster, with 8,5 T thrust turbojet.

The clue is exhaust gas velocity.

The MiG-23 with R-35 is a perfect combination. A very powerful engine with no vices, and with excellent high altitude performance.

But you can not have everything. The SFC is higher than that of F-16.

I’ve never read the F-16 achieves 2M only in a dive. All F-16 fly about 2M. I’ve seen 1.9M with one centerline tank. The F-16/79 had better supersonic acceleration and twr at altitude, but was not faster.
Its limited by other factors, not engine.

The only way to affset the high drag of production F-22 is to use much more powerful engines.
But it has about the same engines power as prototype, 35.000 lb each.

You dont know that. The engines are listed as “35’000lb class”. Doesnt say much. I’ve read 39’000lb.

For difference YF-22/F-22 look here: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=60213&highlight=yf-22
esp. “a lower sweep, higher span wing with a thinner section improved maneuverability without diminishing supercruise capability”

It was much faster.
2,1 against 1,75 Mach.

F-16 top speed is about Mach 2 for all variants.
I have never seen 1.75M.

It is a big mistake to fix intake to be optimised to 1,5 Mach.
That means that it is not optimised subsonicaly.
One fighter can not fly at only one speed !!

I didnt say its optimised for 1.5M, rather than it works OK up to 1.5M.

Wing sweep and span have the greatest influence on drag.

That may be true, but other factors combined obviously had greater influence because the speed increased.

Last time Pakistan got F16s from USA ( at the time they were the latest models too ) specifically and maliciously usa had engineered them so they could not carry certian munitions i.e. the product was not exactly what it said on the label.

You mean like nuclear weapons :rolleyes:
Apart from that, the old F-16 couldnt carry much more than Sidewinders and dumb bombs.

The top speed of various F-16 Blocks actually differ a little.
But i think speed is generally limited by airframe design, even F-16/79 had better supersonic capability but didn’t go faster.