You are forgetting drag. A Rafale with two 1,000kg bombs and a fuel tank hanging out in the wind isn’t going to be able to come close to the performance or efficiency of an F-35 with an all internal load.
Testimony from pilots that have flown the F-35 have already confirmed that even with a full internal load it flies almost identically to a clean F-35.
In general when comparing the F-35 to 4th generation aircraft the F-35 will look the worst when the aircraft are compared absolutely clean, and will look its best when the F-35 is carrying its maximum internal load. (and so your comparison comes close to that optimal scenario for the F-35)
I did not forget drag, i mentioned it. And i doubt a 2 tons heavier F35 will react like without. Weight means lift aka drag. And initial formula of F35 is draggier than so called “4th gen”. I still agree there would be more drag on Rafale, but clean differences are so huge that i’m not sure in this very config F35 will have superior kinematics.
at hops :
with a clean Rafale, using afterburner, you can enter a turn at 500 kt. and 10,000 ft., pull the maximum 9g and still accelerate
(from AWST ref i gave you)
about the sustained G you were right, not exactly sustaine and in full AB (i tend to foget the exact content of 14 years old article) but… I doubt in a similar configuration (which F35 cant reach anyway as far as talking about fuel fraction) F35 can do that
For the next maneuver, I selected afterburner, banked some 75 deg. and pulled to the maximum allowable gs of 5.5, in the heavy configuration. Starting at 420 kt., the speed was 330 kt. after completing a 360-deg. turn.
Again from DAvid M North flight test.
Sign In
