I guess you’re talking about the first deployment for rafales who went there more on “check rides” than any combat (F1 Rafales were only air-air equipped, and pretty lightly to be more precise)… and still managed to do quite well against USN in ACM training

and it has red painted parts to be more visible… 😀

one things still amazes me: how people can consider the beginning of “operational service” for the F-35 in 2012 while as of 2010 it has barely scratched the surface of what has to be tested? the flight tests are still in the beginning, ans it seems quite unlikely they can manage to do all the tests (with analysis and defects correcetion, of course) in the next 2 years..

of course, one can always put untested aircraft into service, and let the operators discover the eventual problems… but that wouldn’t seem very logical (and may be quite dangerous for the pilots and people who may happen to be beneath them at the wrong moment)

gotta love that quote:

The LM people know full well that the ‘range’ of the F-35 is significantly greater than 1200nm & if any where reading this they would probably laugh themselves to death at how duped you (& others are) are.

I also find it particularly revealing how you completely dismiss anything/everything positive LM (or anyone else) has to say about the F-35 but suddenly believe they are telling the truth when you are able to spin it into a negative light.

so they are selling a product, and, on their own official website, where everybody can see it, they intentionally stated lesser than real specs to dupe people on internet?

man…

kid…

I don’t know how to call you, seriously…

do you ever think before posting?

The F-15 does not generate less drag for the following reason, at sea level, the F-15 won`t reach Mach one at military power alone, to reach its max speed of 1.2 will need afterburner, for crusing speed using the Max military power the F-15 will fly in a range of 800km/h, to fly at around 1300km will already use afterburner; the F-22 will pass mach 1 without the use of afterburner and the F-22 will lit the afterburner just when is very close to its max speed at sea level.

Who do you think is more efficient at 1200km/h?
F-15 using almost the max setting of its afterburner or F-22 still at not of its max of military power?

Now apply that to dogfights, the F-15 will need to use afterburner to be in the range of its most agile envelopes of Mach Mach 0.8 where most of of doghfights will take place the F-22 won`t and still won`t be in its max of military power now you can undertand why the F-22 has almost 70% better STR

you don’t seem to get the point:

with or without AB the F-15 has much less thrust available with same power setting than the F-22 They don’t use the same engines. if you want to compare aerodynamics, you need to put other parameters at the same level: -> same amount of thrust for both aircraft. how to do that? The only other option would be to put F-22s engines into the F-15, but we all know it won’t happen.. so what do we have left?

F-15 in AB reaches the thrust the F-22 has dry: so to compare the two airframes from the aerodynamic point of view you have to use the figures where the F-22 flies dry and f-15 in AB.

will the f-15 burn more fuel? yes, but it’s irrelevant from aerodynamic POV.

What does count in this comparison is that the f-15 reaches higher speed with the same amount of thrust available (little over 20t of thrust). That means that it produces less drag, plain and simple.

Basically, if the US put raptor’s engines in the f-15, eventually some electronics from it too, the F-15 would probably fly circles around the raptor. The only thing where the raptor would be better would be LO level… otherwise, it would get eaten alive

actually, a simple way to compare the two would be to give them the same amount of thrust and see what it gives (talking airframes as such).

if the F-22 is more efficient aerodynamically (less draggy), it should be ahead..

the f-15, with PW F100-220 turbofans, in full Ab has about 22t of thrust overall

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-15_Eagle

the f-22 has about 21t of thrust dry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22_Raptor

from there on, it’s quite simple: the F-22 at max military power and the F-15 at max AB thrust generate the more or less the same thrust (less than 5% difference).

The F-22 goes up to something like M1.8 in such conditions. The F-15 reaches around M2.5.

from these numbers it seems quite obvious that the f-15 aircrame generates less drag at supersonic speeds

What you’re not taking into consideration is that the maximum straight line range is not combat radius X 2. You’re not taking into account station time, or % reserves on the back end of the flight. Secondly the F-35’s combat radius is higher than what’s in those brochures too, so why is it so hard to accept the fact that the range given therein, is very conservative too?

you should tell that to LM people who presented their document.

I don’t have to take anything into account, I don’t calculate anything, open the link and read by yourself: it’s the range stated by LM today, not me. I can’t say it more clearly:

LM SAYS: MAX RANGE = 1200nm

now if that isn’t clear enough, maybe you don’t understand english? if that’s the problem I can’t help you