Thanks for the link and Tom stats JC :-)

--



Curiosity killed the cat, and I'm gonna find out why!
"Kurt R. Todoroff" wrote in message
...
How relevant is Mach 2+ performance these days - how relevant was it at
all
? BRBR

This is the same pedantic question that I've heard for twenty-nine years.

These velocities are a consequence of meeting specific excess power
requirements (P_s). A positive P_s allows an aircraft to accelerate (gain
velocity), sustain G, or climb in altitude, or any of these three. P_s
does
not come free. P_s is computed as:

(Thrust - Drag) * Velocity / Weight

A natural consequence of a fighter's design is speed. The design is a
result
of tradeoffs. The fact that fighters rarely exercise their supersonic
capabilities is not relevent. By reducing the thrust of the engines to
limit
the aircraft speed to M-1.5 or M-1.0, the aircraft's performance is other
realms is sharply limited as well.

Since high speed is a natural consequence of a fighter's design, the USAF
and
USN have taken advantage of it.




Kurt Todoroff


Markets, not mandates and mob rule.
Consent, not compulsion.