Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
5,927
11,530
New Delhi
In reality we see your aircraft operating with 3 external tanks to carry 4x125kg bombs + 2 SRAAMs. An F-35 can carry 8x250lb SDBs internally + 2 MRAAMs, or even LRAAMs in the case of Meteor. Plus every time you add weight the fuel fraction goes down.
with three drop tanks attached, Rafale cant carry 2000 pound bomb as all its heavy pylons get occupied.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,456
2,878
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
And what a beacon it will be for IADS which means it will have to fly below radar line of sight cutting its combat radius drastically. Remember those supposed maximum combat radius numbers are done at optimum altitude.
It seems that an F-35 can drop its tanks in Iraq during an attack on Iran from Israel, but that a Rafale in the same situation could not. It will fly at low altitude only during the last 300 km and without drop tank. All the return will be without drop tank. This has not been taken into account in my calculations and more than compensates for the low altitude constraint in the case of an IADS attack.
 

WHOHE

Active member
Jun 23, 2021
285
151
California
No, they don't.
Ya they do. They have access to them just like Turkey has access to their (Block 30s) F-16 source codes and Belgium. Belgium needed them because instead of buying American they bought French CARAPACE system instead of the American Rapport III (ALQ-178) system.

Without access Israel and Turkey would not be able to use "indigenous" weapon systems, EW/ECM and radar.
That's peanuts compared to the F-35 business. It's more beneficial for businesses in Israel to earn from the F-35 than the F-15 now.

Once again, no, they want capability, not prop someone's business, doen't matter who's it is. This is the Israeli Air Force we are talking about, not the Israeli MIC. The IAF is making this decision.
Peanuts? Israeli F-15 avionics line has been around for a while now when it comes to the F-35 they need uncle Sams permission and it's barely in its infancy.
You argue for the sake of arguing, not because it makes sense.
That's what someone says when they can't argue anymore. I showed you that the F-15I in any strike on Iran will need aerial refueling killing your claim the reason they are buying more F-15's is because of range. Btw they are only buying a few more while they are buying more F-35's and will soon have more F-35's than F-15I's. Once Israeli F-35's get their drop tanks they won't need tankers to strike Iran. Using F-15I's and F-35's right now to strike Iran is a big deal and is very hard to hide from spies and other nations ISR when you have your strike fighters and big support aircraft taking off. Iran will see F-15's coming but won't see F-35's that is why they are making F-35 drop tanks.
Too old to consider the Block III with new engines. 2007. :rolleyes:
Please tell me what engines are the F-18E block 3 using?

-If the Navy now determines that the CFTs are more trouble than they're worth, its future Block III F/A-18E/Fs will be stuck with the same range and stores capacity limitations as its existing Super Hornets.
Navy Considers Axing Conformal Fuel Tanks From Its Block III Super Hornet Upgrade Plan (thedrive.com)

You're not good at arguing fighter combat radius are you? You keep making up claims US and Israel are buying 4th gen fighter because of range issues of the F-35 and I just keep shooting down your claims... pun intended. 🥱

It doesn't matter which one is superior. They want their own stuff. Your entire argument is centered around how they want to make money, how ridiculous.
So now it doesn't matter even though you said Israeli EW on F-35 is superior than US? Lol.
 

Bon Plan

Well-Known member
Dec 1, 2017
2,012
879
France
“When folks talk about 4th and 5th gen fighters, it’s important to zero out the ambiguity of exactly ‘what’ they are referring to,” Kelly said. “Are we talking signature, avionics, sensors/sensor fusion, and weapons? Because there is absolutely zero doubt that 4th gen aircraft equipped with 5th gen sensors, avionics, and weapons bring disruptive and decisive effects to a peer fight.”

ACC Commander completes F-15EX Eagle II qualification
So it was not until the birth of the F-15EX that the "Gen 4+" could become "Gen 5-" on paper...

Before it was invented by the Americans, it didn't exist (in fact if it wasn't invented by americans, it was just impossible).

It is just said by Dassault for years...
 
Last edited:

Bon Plan

Well-Known member
Dec 1, 2017
2,012
879
France
In reality we see your aircraft operating with 3 external tanks to carry 4x125kg bombs + 2 SRAAMs. An F-35 can carry 8x250lb SDBs internally + 2 MRAAMs, or even LRAAMs in the case of Meteor. Plus every time you add weight the fuel fraction goes down.
It's 4 x 340kg bombs (AASM : 250kg core bomb + powder engine + seeker...). And 4 WVR & BVR missiles (MICA IR on wing tips and MICA EM on each side of the frame)
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,456
2,878
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
with three drop tanks attached, Rafale cant carry 2000 pound bomb as all its heavy pylons get occupied.
Rafale have 5 heavy pylons....For exemple with 3 drop tanks attached it can carry 2 Scalp and 6 AA Missile.

 
Last edited:

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,552
8,790
India
Ya they do. They have access to them just like Turkey has access to their (Block 30s) F-16 source codes and Belgium. Belgium needed them because instead of buying American they bought French CARAPACE system instead of the American Rapport III (ALQ-178) system.

Without access Israel and Turkey would not be able to use "indigenous" weapon systems, EW/ECM and radar.

No, they don't. What you are talking about is something else entirely. Even India can do the same sort on American equipment, like the P-8I. You do not need source codes for that, you only need your own hardware.

Peanuts? Israeli F-15 avionics line has been around for a while now when it comes to the F-35 they need uncle Sams permission and it's barely in its infancy.

That's what someone says when they can't argue anymore. I showed you that the F-15I in any strike on Iran will need aerial refueling killing your claim the reason they are buying more F-15's is because of range. Btw they are only buying a few more while they are buying more F-35's and will soon have more F-35's than F-15I's. Once Israeli F-35's get their drop tanks they won't need tankers to strike Iran. Using F-15I's and F-35's right now to strike Iran is a big deal and is very hard to hide from spies and other nations ISR when you have your strike fighters and big support aircraft taking off. Iran will see F-15's coming but won't see F-35's that is why they are making F-35 drop tanks.

Nah, both F-35 and F-15 needs tankers depending on the type of mission being performed. Even India needs tankers even though our enemies are right next door. Iran is not very far, but that doesn't mean the F-35 will forgo the use of tankers permanently.

Please tell me what engines are the F-18E block 3 using?

F414-EDE.

-If the Navy now determines that the CFTs are more trouble than they're worth, its future Block III F/A-18E/Fs will be stuck with the same range and stores capacity limitations as its existing Super Hornets.
Navy Considers Axing Conformal Fuel Tanks From Its Block III Super Hornet Upgrade Plan (thedrive.com)

So you're saying the US modernised an engine after nearly 15 years, but can't improve the SFC of the engine. It's obvious you haven't understood what the article is talking about.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-from-its-block-iii-super-hornet-upgrade-plan
You're not good at arguing fighter combat radius are you? You keep making up claims US and Israel are buying 4th gen fighter because of range issues of the F-35 and I just keep shooting down your claims... pun intended. 🥱

Considering your argument is the Israelis want the inferior F-15s so they can pour less money into their defence industry than buying more of the superior F-35s, I wouldn't say you have any ground to stand on. At least you have to admit the Israelis are a whole lot smarter than you are.

The USN want a 1000nm fighter; the F-15E does 1050nm, the Su-35S is a 1200nm fighter. The Su-30MK should manage 1000nm too once plumbed for 2 tanks. Obviously the F-35A is going to do lesser than that, ie, 770nm. In order to match the F-15E, the F-35A's going to need enough external fuel that will help it add 280nm to its combat radius. In order to do that, with a 50% reduction in efficiency for drop tanks, the F-35A will need 5-6T of external fuel. It's impossible for the F-35A to match the F-15E's range with just 2 drop tanks.

The efficiency of the airframe matters a lot. Which is also why at 2900 Km the Typhoon with a mere fuel fraction of 0.31 compared to the F-35A's nearly 0.39 matches or exceeds its basic range.

I am not saying the F-35 is a bad aircraft for its range-payload performance, neither are the Israelis. But you can bet the Israelis know what they are doing when they decided to choose the F-15 over the F-35. Just because it goes against what you believe doesn't mean you need to make dumb excuses to make yourself feel better.

While French fanboys have overestimated the Rafale, the American fanboys are clearly overestimating the F-35 as well.

So now it doesn't matter even though you said Israeli EW on F-35 is superior than US? Lol.

You have comprehension issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bon Plan

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,007
1,719
It's 4 x 340kg bombs (AASM : 250kg core bomb + powder engine + seeker...). And 4 WVR & BVR missiles (MICA IR on wing tips and MICA EM on each side of the frame)
The F-35 can carry 2x2000lb bombs internally with 4 AMRAAMs (longer range than MICA). A Rafale would be a sitting duck with that load and a huge RCS.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,007
1,719
Rafale have 5 heavy pylons....For exemple with 3 drop tanks attached it can carry 2 Scalp and 6 AA Missile.

And an F-35 has 6 heavy pylons, 2 internally, 4 externally and Israel is developing 600 US gal (2400L) drop tanks in addition to the US 480 US gal ones.


JSM and JSOW-ER can be carried internally or externally, so how many tanks does a Rafale need to match the range of an F-35A with 39% internal fuel fraction, 2 JSOW-ER/JSMs and 2 Meteors internally and 2x2400L drop tanks?
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,007
1,719
And what a beacon it will be for IADS which means it will have to fly below radar line of sight cutting its combat radius drastically. Remember those supposed maximum combat radius numbers are done at optimum altitude.
Indeed, a Rafale flying penetration with that much load will have to fly below 200ft, and aside from the fact it will be vulnerable to AAA and undecoyable IIR SAMs at that altitude, the range will be cut by roughly 3-fold relative to altitude flying.
with three drop tanks attached, Rafale cant carry 2000 pound bomb as all its heavy pylons get occupied.
It can but it'll be flying at ground level to avoid radar, so divide range by 3. :ROFLMAO:
 
  • Like
Reactions: WHOHE

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,007
1,719
My point exactly. Combat radius needs to have at least up to 3min of combat and reserves. Maybe even a 30 min loiter time. Manufacturer figures are simply a "divide ferry range by 2", which gives the F-35 the max 1400Km combat radius, ie 2800/2 = 1400Km.

Simply combine the higher advertised max combat radius of 1500Km for Su-30 and its greater airframe efficiency at higher altitudes, you get a much better figure for the Flanker compared to the F-35 when carrying AAMs, even when carrying twice the BVR load of the F-35. Give the Flanker bombs, the efficiency drops, which puts max combat radius below 1300Km, slightly lower than the F-35.



The F15E's fuel fraction on internal fuel is 0.29. It's only 6T of internal carriage. Two seats eliminates a fuel tank.

Even with 3 external tanks and 2 CFTs, the F-15E's range is 3900Km. The MKI with just 2 external tanks will easily match it. The Su-35 manages 4500Km with 2 tanks. There's nothing particularly impressive about the F-15E's range. But the Israelis still think the F-15E significantly surpasses the F-35A's range, which tells you everything you need to know.

If we consider the F-35A's operationally relevant combat radius is actually 1400Km, a match for the Su-35S, means that with the mere addition of CFTs, the F-35A will easily surpass the F-15E in both range and payload. Then the Israelis wouldn't be pushing for the purchase of 25 brand new F-15s over the F-35. So, no, I'm not buying it.

I always prefer to see what air forces do rather than believe in manufacturer claims.
Why so, Flanker carries its load externally and I wouldn't bet on Soviet engines being very efficient.

0.29 with 20-25% reserve. Empty weight of F-15C is 28,000lb, loaded in 45,000lb. That's how we're calculating fuel for the Rafale and Flanker, gross weight - empty weight.


So if full fuel on an F-15C were only 13,000lb, where is the other 4,000lb, or equally the Rafale and Flanker must really have gross weights over that stated or carry less fuel than imagined.
 

Bon Plan

Well-Known member
Dec 1, 2017
2,012
879
France
The F-35 can carry 2x2000lb bombs internally with 4 AMRAAMs (longer range than MICA). A Rafale would be a sitting duck with that load and a huge RCS.
It was just to explain the pic.
With 3 external tanks and 6 Hammer Rafale can be actually fitted with 4 MICA and 2 Meteor (tomorrow 2 and 4).

F35 : 2 x 2000lbs bombs internally? not on the RAF model (the STOVL B).
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,552
8,790
India
Why so, Flanker carries its load externally and I wouldn't bet on Soviet engines being very efficient.

0.29 with 20-25% reserve. Empty weight of F-15C is 28,000lb, loaded in 45,000lb. That's how we're calculating fuel for the Rafale and Flanker, gross weight - empty weight.


So if full fuel on an F-15C were only 13,000lb, where is the other 4,000lb, or equally the Rafale and Flanker must really have gross weights over that stated or carry less fuel than imagined.

Why did F-15C come into the picture? It's a dedicated air superiority fighter. Not a pound for air-to-ground. The heavier two-seat F-15E is the strike version.

Gross weight isn't a fixed figure, so it's best to stick to empty, MTOW and full internal fuel 'cause those are fixed figures.

Isn't it funny? The Typhoon has an FF of 0.31, the Rafale has an FF of 0.35, but the Typhoon practically matches the F-35A's FF in terms of basic range. However at the same time, the Rafale's range is "far too low", even though even the Su-30 with an FF of 0.35 exceeds the F-35A's range. The problem is the F-35, not the other jets, when it comes to range. The F-35 likely faces far too much drag due to the large IWBs, hence the lower range compared to its fuel fraction. Which is evident by the fact that the F-35 failed to meet its acceleration goals while also being G limited for sustained performance.

"The program announced an intention to change performance specifications for the F-35A, reducing turn performance from 5.3 to 4.6 sustained g’s and extending the time for acceleration from 0.8 Mach to 1.2 Mach by eight seconds," Gilmore's report stated. The F-35B and F-35C also had their turn rates and acceleration time eased. The B-model jet's max turn went from 5.0 to 4.5 g's and its acceleration time to Mach 1.2 was extended by 16 seconds. The F-35C lost 0.1 g off its turn spec and added a whopping 43 seconds to its acceleration.

I'm sure one can argue that the F-35 still accelerates faster than the F-16, but that's not the aircraft it's being compared with, nor is it the aircraft that it will eventually fight. So there's no point in getting hung up over the F-35's "amazing" FF, if other features make it irrelevant to the point it can't compare itself with jets designed 20 years before it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bon Plan

WHOHE

Active member
Jun 23, 2021
285
151
California
No, they don't. What you are talking about is something else entirely. Even India can do the same sort on American equipment, like the P-8I. You do not need source codes for that, you only need your own hardware.

Warplanes: Turkey Gets F-16 Source Code​

November 4, 2011: The U.S. has agreed to supply Turkey with source code for F-16 fire control and flight system software, so that Turkey can modify F-16 software to use Turkish made weapons and equipment. This will be part of a Turkish refurbishment of 213 of their F-16s. This will cost about $5.2 million per aircraft, and include a lot of Turkish made equipment. Over the last decade, Turkey has been producing more military gear locally, and now produces over half its military equipment needs.
Warplanes: Turkey Gets F-16 Source Code (strategypage.com)

Like Turkey Israel has access to F-15I source codes which enables them to use Israeli electronics/avionics and weapons which is why they are buying F-15I's which will be their last F-15 purchase as they go all in on the F-35. They don't have access to F-35 codes yet any change requires US personnel to be there but that will change in future. It's not because of range that is a dumb claim on your part and I think you're starting to realize that.

Nah, both F-35 and F-15 needs tankers depending on the type of mission being performed. Even India needs tankers even though our enemies are right next door. Iran is not very far, but that doesn't mean the F-35 will forgo the use of tankers permanently.
You purposely don't get it. Once F-35 gets their drop tanks they won't need tankers for a strike on Iran which will reduce Israel's signature making it much harder for Iran to detect an upcoming attack.
F414-EDE.
Those engines don't exist, bud. Try again.
So you're saying the US modernised an engine after nearly 15 years, but can't improve the SFC of the engine. It's obvious you haven't understood what the article is talking about.
Navy Considers Axing Conformal Fuel Tanks From Its Block III Super Hornet Upgrade Plan
I'm pointing out that you think currently block 3 F-18E's fly with EDE engines but they don't. Article points out for you that without CFT the block 3's combat radius is the same as block 2. If block 3 had EDE their radius wouldn't be the same as block 2... You get it now?
Considering your argument is the Israelis want the inferior F-15s so they can pour less money into their defence industry than buying more of the superior F-35s, I wouldn't say you have any ground to stand on. At least you have to admit the Israelis are a whole lot smarter than you are.
Israeli's are already committed to a certain number of F-35's and your argument is that politicians, MIC and special interest are somehow interested in honesty and what is good for the nations defense and not corporate bottom line? Lol. You must live in la la land.
The USN want a 1000nm fighter; the F-15E does 1050nm, the Su-35S is a 1200nm fighter. The Su-30MK should manage 1000nm too once plumbed for 2 tanks. Obviously the F-35A is going to do lesser than that, ie, 770nm. In order to match the F-15E, the F-35A's going to need enough external fuel that will help it add 280nm to its combat radius. In order to do that, with a 50% reduction in efficiency for drop tanks, the F-35A will need 5-6T of external fuel. It's impossible for the F-35A to match the F-15E's range with just 2 drop tanks.
USN has never had a 1000nm fighter not even the F-14 ever came close to those numbers the F-35c will be the Navy's longest combat radius fighter. Btw how quickly you forget that the USN 6th gen fighter will not be used for deep penetration that will be the F-35C's job while USN 6th gen will used standoff weapons.

F-35c can strike deep in China and won't be seen.
F35B versus F35C tactical radii Korean War 1950 to 1953 Copyright tangosix.jpg


Rafail or any flanker will be long dead before reaching its target or forced to egress.
The efficiency of the airframe matters a lot. Which is also why at 2900 Km the Typhoon with a mere fuel fraction of 0.31 compared to the F-35A's nearly 0.39 matches or exceeds its basic range.

I am not saying the F-35 is a bad aircraft for its range-payload performance, neither are the Israelis. But you can bet the Israelis know what they are doing when they decided to choose the F-15 over the F-35. Just because it goes against what you believe doesn't mean you need to make dumb excuses to make yourself feel better.
They didn't choose the F-15 over the F-35 that is your claim done out of stupidity or ignorance which is basically the same. Israel will have more F-35's than F-15I's but you choose to ignore this fact.
While French fanboys have overestimated the Rafale, the American fanboys are clearly overestimating the F-35 as well.
Not according to the 15+ nations. How many nations fly Rafail and what are the names of these nations? Lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMD

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,007
1,719
Why did F-15C come into the picture? It's a dedicated air superiority fighter. Not a pound for air-to-ground. The heavier two-seat F-15E is the strike version.

Gross weight isn't a fixed figure, so it's best to stick to empty, MTOW and full internal fuel 'cause those are fixed figures.

Isn't it funny? The Typhoon has an FF of 0.31, the Rafale has an FF of 0.35, but the Typhoon practically matches the F-35A's FF in terms of basic range. However at the same time, the Rafale's range is "far too low", even though even the Su-30 with an FF of 0.35 exceeds the F-35A's range. The problem is the F-35, not the other jets, when it comes to range. The F-35 likely faces far too much drag due to the large IWBs, hence the lower range compared to its fuel fraction. Which is evident by the fact that the F-35 failed to meet its acceleration goals while also being G limited for sustained performance.

"The program announced an intention to change performance specifications for the F-35A, reducing turn performance from 5.3 to 4.6 sustained g’s and extending the time for acceleration from 0.8 Mach to 1.2 Mach by eight seconds," Gilmore's report stated. The F-35B and F-35C also had their turn rates and acceleration time eased. The B-model jet's max turn went from 5.0 to 4.5 g's and its acceleration time to Mach 1.2 was extended by 16 seconds. The F-35C lost 0.1 g off its turn spec and added a whopping 43 seconds to its acceleration.

I'm sure one can argue that the F-35 still accelerates faster than the F-16, but that's not the aircraft it's being compared with, nor is it the aircraft that it will eventually fight. So there's no point in getting hung up over the F-35's "amazing" FF, if other features make it irrelevant to the point it can't compare itself with jets designed 20 years before it.
Not necessarily, some fuel figures are useable fuel, some aren't. The Rafale does not have 0.35, more like 0.33-0.34, Typhoon about 0.315. All that about F-35 drag is speculative BS, which is completely unfounded. The acceleration goal issues are down to weight, 43,000lbf on a 48,000lb aircraft. But then how fast does a Rafale accelerate with 3x2000L drop tanks adding an extra 11,000lbs, giving 34,000lbf with 44,000lb weight?
 
  • Like
Reactions: WHOHE

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,007
1,719
It was just to explain the pic.
With 3 external tanks and 6 Hammer Rafale can be actually fitted with 4 MICA and 2 Meteor (tomorrow 2 and 4).

F35 : 2 x 2000lbs bombs internally? not on the RAF model (the STOVL B).
On A and C it can. A plane isn't going to carry 6 AAMs on a strike mission, especially when it's a stealth aircraft and not a Rafale, which alerts the enemy's entire AF of its presence.

I can also make the point that effective radar coverage areas are smaller with an F-35, so it can take a more direct route, a Rafale with 3 DTs would have to zig-zag over and back at low altitude. So whatever the ideal range, the reality range for the Rafale is far lower.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Bon Plan and WHOHE

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,552
8,790
India

Warplanes: Turkey Gets F-16 Source Code​

November 4, 2011: The U.S. has agreed to supply Turkey with source code for F-16 fire control and flight system software, so that Turkey can modify F-16 software to use Turkish made weapons and equipment. This will be part of a Turkish refurbishment of 213 of their F-16s. This will cost about $5.2 million per aircraft, and include a lot of Turkish made equipment. Over the last decade, Turkey has been producing more military gear locally, and now produces over half its military equipment needs.
Warplanes: Turkey Gets F-16 Source Code (strategypage.com)

Like Turkey Israel has access to F-15I source codes which enables them to use Israeli electronics/avionics and weapons which is why they are buying F-15I's which will be their last F-15 purchase as they go all in on the F-35. They don't have access to F-35 codes yet any change requires US personnel to be there but that will change in future. It's not because of range that is a dumb claim on your part and I think you're starting to realize that.

That's pretty generic amounts of ToT. Pretty much everybody interested in getting their own weapons for the F-35 will get that much as long as they have a license production deal for a large enough number to make it feasible. Like the Japanese.

You purposely don't get it. Once F-35 gets their drop tanks they won't need tankers for a strike on Iran which will reduce Israel's signature making it much harder for Iran to detect an upcoming attack.

That's the case with all aircraft.

Those engines don't exist, bud. Try again.

Google F414 Enhanced Engine.

Israeli's are already committed to a certain number of F-35's and your argument is that politicians, MIC and special interest are somehow interested in honesty and what is good for the nations defense and not corporate bottom line? Lol. You must live in la la land.

I'm sure anybody would rather have 75 F-35s over 50 F-35s + 25 F-15s. Unless...

USN has never had a 1000nm fighter not even the F-14 ever came close to those numbers the F-35c will be the Navy's longest combat radius fighter. Btw how quickly you forget that the USN 6th gen fighter will not be used for deep penetration that will be the F-35C's job while USN 6th gen will used standoff weapons.

Er... no. The USAF is designing the NGAD for deep penetration missions.

The USN is not planning on using either the F-335C or their version of NGAD for deep penetration. They simply want the USAF to take over this domain completely.

F-35c can strike deep in China and won't be seen.
View attachment 20862

That's not deep strike, that's more like the range needed for CAS. Google Chengdu and check if the F-35 can reach that place.

They didn't choose the F-15 over the F-35 that is your claim done out of stupidity or ignorance which is basically the same. Israel will have more F-35's than F-15I's but you choose to ignore this fact.

Actually, the Israelis will end up with pretty much equal numbers. But again, based on what you say, the Israelis should be chosing the F-35 over the F-15. But of course, the IAF wants to make money, right?
Not necessarily, some fuel figures are useable fuel, some aren't. The Rafale does not have 0.35, more like 0.33-0.34, Typhoon about 0.315. All that about F-35 drag is speculative BS, which is completely unfounded. The acceleration goal issues are down to weight, 43,000lbf on a 48,000lb aircraft. But then how fast does a Rafale accelerate with 3x2000L drop tanks adding an extra 11,000lbs, giving 34,000lbf with 44,000lb weight?

That still doesn't explain how the Typhoon matches the range of the F-35A.