I know the guy who posted the picture you use and i can tell you for a FACT that he doesn't comprehend the subject the slightest, this might explain why you got mislead so badly.

  For example he REVERSED the angle used to calculate the sweep angles, that of F-22 is 42*, that of F-35 is 35*, that of F-16 is 40*.
 
  The leading edge sweep determines the critical Mach, weither the Mach lines you describes with the help of this picture have insignificant effects of aircrafts performances and negligible on their handling (which would be the issue if ever).
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/His...
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/... wave

  Here are a couple of article from a proper source for you to read in order to start to comprehend the issue.

  Rough explaination:

. The Critical mach is the point at which the effects of compressibility will start to be felt in terms of transonic DRAG.

. F-35 is designed as a transonic/low supersonic airframe, with a LOWER critical mach than even F-16, all these aircrafts have a similar wing thicknes ratios so values are equal in scale.

. The higher the sweep angle, the later in the Mach scale these effect will be felt, the lower the transonic and supersonic drag pic value will be, the lower their mpact on performances.

. The difference comes from their wing profiles and in this respect the F-22 and F-35 drag slightly more in supersonic due to the use of a supercritic profile as opposed to laminar profiles for others.

. F-22 CAN handle it with a very High TWR and a delta wing (YES the Raport lift is vortex lift like a croped delta), the F-35 canot and is limited to M 1.6 with NO supercruise capabilties.

  Now regarding YF-22, the leading edge sweep angle was 48* as is the case for Rafale.

  This was reduced to 42* and dont tell me the document disclosed by Dryden in behalf of Lockheed Martin isn't accurate, it is L-M own figures, as for Dryden, they know what they're talking about, they halpt L-M with the design and aerodynamics.

  Now with regard to the question of EM return it is obvious that the closest to the ideal 45* angle are the sweep angles of F-22 and Rafale, NOT that of F-35, even F-16 design is more suited to EM return from front and sides.

 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Rufus:
 Now now... I have already had to cautioned more than a couple fanboys about making things up on this message board.
 

  You might be interested to know that RAND sees things differently, L.O ands V.L.O are clearly different levels of Low Obsevability, as for "making things up", how about your collegue above who rewrite all known aerodynamic books?

   Both F/A-18 were in the R.O category because of the characteristic of their airframe designs and radars, they already were above the MIN category by a fair margin.

    With the use of more discreet sensors in the A2A role, IRST and AESA LPI radars, they are now L.O. as opposed to V.L.O which involves the use of internal weapon storage and more developed RAM.

  In some aspcect, Rafale have more discreet features then even F-35 and F/A18,  its IR signature is particularly low and its leading edge sweep angle is closer to the ideal 45*.


Rufus: 
It is becoming obvious that while you might have an interest in fighters, you have no actual experience with them or the technologies involved.