Maybe you missed that last line. Paul Metz is the chief test pilot, I
think he'd know.

I'd also think that he is not allowed to distribute still unreleased flight
performance data.

Which is why he said the maximum speed is classified. Did you even
read what he said?




oesn't F-22 have fixed intakes? Speeds over mach 2.0 are
pretty much impossible to attain with fixed intakes.

Despite what much of the media would have you believe fixed inlets
mean zippo.

No, they mean very much. It is certainly POSSIBLE to make a mach2+ plane
with fixed intake, but this will do very bad things to inlet performance in
other speeds (which are considerably more important). All your cited
examples are such cases.

Actually the Crusader III was excellent at low speeds as is the F-22.
Optimizing an inlet for subsonic speeds but making it able to reach
supersonic speeds presents one set of problems. Optimizing for
supersonic speeds but making it efficient at low speeds presents a
different set of problems. They are not identical.


See above. It comes down to what is possible and what is sensible. If
solving problems of Mach2+ flight regarding *serviceable combat aircraft*
was so trivial as you make it sound, each and every modern fighter plane
would go Mach3 or more.

Where did I say that or even hint at it?


Engine thrust has not been a limiting factor in
fighter top speed in like 40 years.

Dry thrust certainly has been.


In addition to that, F-22 also has
considerable stealth requirements. Radar-absorbing paints for example may
not be very tolerant to high speeds.

You mean like the stuff that was on the Blackbird?




What I've seen for F-22 speeds as in combat configuration are mach
1.4-1.5
with supercruise,

It's hit 1.7 that they've released.

In what load configuration?

No external stores. They didn't say what they had inside. Could be
they had a full load of fuel and test shapes for missiles or they
could have had minimal fuel and nothing in the missile bays.