It’s not a problem per se.
But I repeat: the F-35 has a greater part of its reference wing area buried in the fuselage because its fuselage is wider than the F-16s. The actual F-35A/B wing area is only ~25% bigger. Hence wingloading comparisons are somewhat misleading.

Wing loading comparison is always misleading without respective lift coefficients, if we was to compare actual wing area only ( no body and engine) then PAK-FA wing is even smaller than Mirage 2000 wing

No, in this case allow me to correct you : you cannot say this about russian ones as they are blended wing bodies with podded engines, meaning that there is not any real fuselage there, just the so called stinger acting like the spinal cord in a vertebrate and that generate a lot of lift anyway.

F-35 is a blended wing body too

you have to give it to warisboring: first they revealed F-35 cant keep up with an old F-16D,

we been over this already

I believe the USAF is lying through their teeth because they know the jet is worthless as a ranged platform and they are so bad at it that they cannot even keep their falsehoods straight:

>
Niemi explained the range advantage that sets the Lightning II apart from previous fighter designs. “One of the things I really like about the F-35 is the amount of fuel we carry, and with 18,000 pounds that is a lot of fuel. F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s don’t have those kinds of legs. The F-35 can get you to places they can’t because of its one engine versus the two engines of the other jet fighters.”

For the quick two hour, ten minute jaunt from Florida to AirVenture, each fighter jet burned about 5,000 pounds of fuel at 270 knots. Niemi said typical approach speeds are 150 knots and strictly by a 13-degree angle of attack all the way to the ground. “It’s a real easy plane to fly and it has good powerful [air] brakes. At 100 knots it will sit down pretty good,” he said.
>

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2015/august/04/f35-lightning-public-debut-shows-the-right-stuff

>>>
First off, they don’t say what the distance is but they do say what the airspeed was. Two hundred seventy nautical miles per hour X2.15hrs is about 580 nautical miles.

It is 1,087 statute or 945 nautical miles from Eglin AFB, Florida to Oshkosh, Wisconsin where the EAA airshow is always held.

RIGHT THERE, you have to instantly dismiss anything the USAF says as bogus because they have just lied to you about something as simple as linear distance which is _crucial_ to any figure regarding fuel consumption.

This assumption is hilarious because you dont know when he said 270 knots , is he referring to indicated airspeed or calibrated airspeed, or equivalent airspeed or true airspeed , it will make some big different there

since that is bizjet (if not cruise missile) arena of about .30pph, it is NOT correct for a jet which, at flight idle, is producing some 16,200lbf.

This assumption will only be true if you took the F-135 outside of F-35 , and put it on a stationary platform ( pole ) on ground , going higher in term of speed or altitude and everything change.We dont have the fuel flow for F-35 , but we can easily see how much fuel flow of F-16 changes with altitude

You people are led by the nose into prevaricative assumptions that are based on propagandist misdirection and you suck it up like it was mana from heaven without a moment’s contemplation of alternative source refutation. Let me help educate you.

If you want to educate anyone here, you need to learn elementary knowledge first.Your tactic of mixing a bunch of military terms to sound like “someone in the know” then mix it up with facts and factoids both real and imagined may fool people on Breaking Defense, but here, that simply doesn’t cut it.

It seems I did not make it clear the reference to the clean PAK FA with a load out of internal weapons (and performance advantage) was in reference to the SU-27 family of fighters with an external load out of weapons only as the post I was responding to mentioned the need to double engine efficiency & I was pointing out there are other things involved.
.

The maximum ferry range of Su-27 isn’t with weapons

I did not produce that range figure. remember it has twice the supersonic range of Flanker. so subsonic range of 1.5 times of Flanker will bring it at about 5400km is very reasonable.

TWICE THESUPERSONC RANGE IS NOT MENTIONED IN ANY OFFICIAL SOURCE ( AND SINCE ONE OF THEM SUPERCRUISE , THE OTHER DOESNOT, SO EVEN IF IT WAS TRUE IT DOESNT TRANSLATE TO 5400 KM RANGE )

just 25% aerodynamic efficiency over Flanker bring its range above 5000km.

25% AERODYNAMIC EFFICIENCY ISNOT THAT SIMPLE TO GET

I have read it thoroughly.. You are obsessed with “winning” the argument by asking totally impossible-to-get nonsense which you know no one will provide..

So it isn’t impossible-to-get nonsense when Scar demand to see classified experiments? it isn’t impossible-to-get nonsense when he demanded to see F-35, F-22, B-2 RAS, RAM composition and absorbing capabilities?

Weaker/stronger doesn’t mean squat. What matters is whether you can reach your [political, commercial, strategic…] goals..

Too bad, we are discussing capabilities of weapons system here so all others factors that affect the out come of the war such as human, environment, politics are irrelevant, if let say Japan has a war with China, and their F-35 shoot down a bunch of J-10 with kill ratio of 100-0 but at the end they still cant reach their objective because of their citizen want the war stop, does that mean F-35 is less capable than J-10 in a war? obviously not

I’m not gonna provide anything before you.

Because you have nothing other than strawman argument

Mathmatical, sSimulation without concrete output numbers – is just a funny picture. It’s not like your comics, you know…

Actually there is number on graph ,and your RCS simulation lacking most important information regarding RAM and RAS , it is a funny picture too

And another one strawman – 8th or 9th in this discussion?! May be it’s time for you to stop lying?

That one was a fact actually not intended as an argument

Only after you show me something serious, instead of cool pictures.

So where is your solid data to prove the Russian radar can perform as advertised?
where is your solid data to show that continues curve doesn’t contribute much to B-2 stealthy characteristics at low frequency?
Where is your solid data to prove that F-22, F-35 doesn’t have RCS as claimed by LM?
Where is your solid data to prove that the Ukraine group have access to US government top secret information ?
Where is your solid data to show that F-22, F-35 RAM is the same as B-2 with no improvement ?
There is even a pattern published by Lockheed Martin for RAM that can absorb radiowave between 0.1GHz and 60 Ghz, where is your evidence that US stealth aircraft dont use it or it isnot enough to deal with low frequency radar?

What’s wrong is that your naive childish belief in wonder-waffe.

Hahahaha , childish ? look at yourself and your nationalistic bias

More than thousand of aircrafts lost from SAMs is pretty good, for SAMs, result.

Actually , most got shotdown by AA gun , not SAM

And finally, it doesn’t change the main fact – US losses were insasnely huge, for such a war in some tiny poor Asian country. “Self-confidence – mother of all defeats.” (c)

That Asian country was supported by China and Russia , and if we actually take kill-death ratio into account , US didn’t really lose

Looks like someone confused strategic ABM shield with a Patriot tactical SAM.

PAC-3 is part of US ballistic missiles defense system along with THAAD and Aegis system

So, i think i wouldn’t be upset with some useless SAMs if i have such a wonder-waffe as super-duper stealth. Or, in other words – if stealth really was a wonder-waffe as you see it.

Even an AK , a T-80 , a IED can be a threat

Now you see?! Hundreds of stealth fighters and bombers in service don’t change the fact that in reality, behind its bravade and fairy-tales about 0,000001sqm, USAF still sees these SAMs as a real threat.

US don’t just operate only stealth aircraft and it is just the same case when Russia moaning every time US improve their missiles defense system

May be some fanboys should learn to not to confuse advertising with reality?

You should take your own advice first