not so true, sometimes the thrust increase dont have influence in the max/top performances of the aircraft, for example the increase of the thrust in the f15a to c didnt increase the max speed

The F-15A/C didnt see any thrust increase, rather a decline of a few hundred lb to make the engine more reliable.

I said, more than 2 Mach speed means better supersonic acceleration.
That, on the other hand, means less time to some intercepting distance.

The F-15 has 50 % better time to 2 Mach than F-16.

Above 1,5 Mach, the F-16 is straggling for every knot.

Thats because the F-16 intake is designed to work ok up to Mach 1.5 (optimised for subsonic cruise) whereas the F-15 has movable intakes. The F-22 on the other hand has its intakes optimised for 1.5 i.e. supersonic. So you can bet the F-22 has pretty good supersonic acceleration, better than F-15.

The span is increased about a half of meter, and sweep is decreased from 48 to 42 degrees.
Both these figures has high influence on drag.
Sorry, these are basics of aerodynamics.

Sure these have influence. But increased thrust and less drag from other areas have influence too.

Both of these are important.
As for Mig-25, it has extremely high T/W ratio at supersonic speeds, especially above 2 Mach.
Do not be eluded with its static T/W ratio.

Weight is much less important. It affects acceleration. MiG-25 thrust increases with altitude and speed, ok. Another example is B-1A which is good for more than M2, but has much worse TWR than F-15 but comparable engines (even higher bypass on F100 i think).

China has no quarrel with S. Korea these days, & it’s an important trade partner. The Chinese are trying to enlist S. Korean support in their dispute with Japan over the Senkaku islands, & back S. Korea over the Dokdo/Takeshima issue.

I see, but still they wanted 120 F-15E with SLAM-ER…

That is the inherent fault of comparing a EF to a F-22 as we are comparing a AD fighter with a swing role one. The raptor wasnt designed to be an a2g fighter and what it provides is just an extra bonus. It would be a cakewalk for the USAF to upgrade their raptors to higher standards of PGM’s however with the no sticking at 183 it would be uneconomical . They simply dont want to put in 5-6 billion dollars to upgrade with EOTS/DAS etc etc when they can for that money go and buy close to 60-80 F-35’s solely designed for this purpose.

Remember the EF was designed as a pure fighter too. If you wanted, you could easily turn the F-22 into a better bomber than the EF is.
Comparing the F-22 to EF T2/T3 is like comparing F-15C to F/A-18C. The Hornet is a better striker, but then theres the F-15E 😉

The vertical tails on the F-22 are WAY smaller than the YF-22 (thank god because those were ugly as hell) and if you compare the rear fuselages of the two the F-22 is considerably slimmer which is going to help the drag situation. They really did a lot of fine tuning on it.

Are you sure? I thought they increased everything (wing and all tails).
Im looking for a site that compares the YF-22 to the F-22 but cant find it…

Lets not forget that the F-22 was designed as the high part of a hi/low mix. So other a/c make up the numbers. If that wasnt so, and the USAF would only buy a single type, a completely other fighter than either the F-22 or the F-35 would be the result.

Looks very good, even with this unusual paint job.
But Lightning II sounds strange. F-35 Lightning just doesnt fit together imho.

PS: where are the high res pics? 🙂

Did you ever ask yourself why its max speed is kept secret ?

Regarding its dry speed, we can read 10 different figures in 10 different sources !!!

The fact is that during testing the F-22 never achieved more than 1,5 Mach, and that was without operational equipment, with smaller wing span and with greater wing sweep than operational version has.

The YF-23 has been faster, in dry power, than YF-22.

I dont know why. Max speed is not that important. If its more than 1.8 its enough and the F-22 certainly does more than 1.8.

I didnt read 10 different figures. Its either more than 1.7, 1.72 without 100% and i’ve seen 1.8 too. Thats it, 1.5 is only mentioned in outdated sources.

During testing with the YF-22, it achieved 1.43 with F119 and 1.58 with F120 engines. That doesnt mean the F-22 has the same limits. Im pretty sure the engines have seen some improvements during the last decade which made the Raptor faster despite the aerodynamic changes. You also forgot the canopy, which is much flatter than with the YF-22.
And weight of the missing operational equipment is negligible because the drag/thrust ratio is important.