People, if we would publish any single RCS feature applied to a legacy platform, ship, plane and land we will never end: about any new ship is designed in such a way, also the oldest plane can sensibly reduce its signature for cheap and any new thing that came out will have some.
So let’s put some limits: I propose aviation, real programs and going for VLO not just post production signature reduction.

Beautiful, amazing, fantastic helo prototypes…said so, what is the utility of a Mi-24 going 500km at hour without carring any payload?

Think that the notation was directed more to the about the general shape (and consequently the overall flight envelope performances of the plane)than to engines or the stealth features.

PAK-FA frame is an evolution of the MiG-29/Su-27 passing trough all successive Flanker models one modified ( “pancaked”) to made it stealth.

So it is a result of a more than thirty years of work on a given general pattern, something not so easy not just to replicate but even further advance, hence the probable shift to a more experimented pattern.

It would work also in reverse, however, in the case russian engineers suddenly went crazy and decides to abandon their actual, well know shapes and try to experiment something, maybe seeemingly even more conventional but in which they have not any experience like, just to say, the tailless delta.

Thank you for your replies.

I was obviously referring to the Atlantic Trident and in an even specific way to the T-38 partecipation in it, not to the whole exercises.
Still in NOT any of such exercises the F-35 has even put against a 4,5 or 5 generation plane, just against legacy one.
The Atlantic Trident itself centered more about the interoperability of actual fighter planes that to evaluation to their performances in a direct confrontation.
So using any of hose exercise to extabilish a difference of values between them has not a sound base.

There would be a moment also to put one against the other but this time is still far IMHO, much more important is to learn to operate them together in the best of way.

People what is happening there? Germany jusk asked some information and you are starting the WWIII about it, calm down a little.
Stay on thye topic and doesn’t try to go on politics please.

On this, the most criticable thing is IMHO that because the Germans are looking for a substitute to their Tornado i.e. a very specialized attack plane, suddenly someone came out with all the 4,5 planes and in the given case the Typhoon i.e. probably the most A2A oriented to the whole lot are suddenly became useless.
Germans are just doing now what Italy and UK (i.e. the first and second main contributors of the project outside USA) planned to do from the beginning of their involvement in the F-35 project: replace an old, very specialized and sophisticated air to ground strike plane with a new one lighter (and in this objective was missed) and way more sophisticated, surely more flexible but still air to ground mission oriented one.
Now, if someone want to insert a political debate there, would better ask himself why the German have not made this choice then, more twenty years ago, and not now.

Boys, now the **** are REALLY to hit the fan: coalition planes have pourposely attacked SAA convoy.

I have to agree with Vnomad there, in the sense that F-35 is the natural substitute for Tornado.
Long range, superb sensor suite, good penetrating capabilities, A2G mission specialized but with an added A2A capability Tornado lack completely, only limitation a.t.m. the inability to carry a SEAD missile but it will be fixed in a second moment.
It would however perform its own mission in a very different way but the same would happen using Typhoon.

Well, what actual possible alternative you have except buying more Typhoons?