From the bottom it looks more like the F-22 than the F-23, but even more like the F-15.

 

Form follows function.  I expect it will prove to be formidable dog-fighter with moderate stealth, reasonable electronics, and an average weapons load.

Snetinel 28

FS, I admit that I don't see things through your Gallic prism, but while I can see and agree that the Concorde was superior to the Tu-144, they were both delta-winged supersonic transports.  The Mirage III and the F-106 were high-speed interceptors which could dogfight if necessary.  The Mirage was smaller and shorter-ranged (being developed for fighting over Europe), whereas the Six was for long-range intercepts over Canada, and the Mirage had guns (which the Six lacked until the early 1970s)...but otherwise I can't see much of a difference between the two.

 

I never see things through a Gallic prism, but only through and engineer and scientist prism (even I defend sometime French product or army against unfounded critics )

Concorde used an ogival wing  quite efficient for supersonic speed, engines largely separated and neutral fly by wire.

 

TU 144 used a cranked arrow wing with engine almost below fuselage, plus canards and was more adapted to short distance and shorter take off.Engines almost below fuselage give a supplementary lift at high speed, plus canard giving a shorter take off distance and better low speed manoeuvrability so more adapted to an average airports and different flight regimes.

It was more similar to US XB 70 Valkyrie bomber.

 

TU 144 was not inferior to Concorde aerondynamically and has its strong points.It aerodynamic formula was more elaborated than Concord but Russian did not have fly by wire like Concord to compensate.

Inferiority of TU 144 was mainly in its engine compared to superior British DESIGNED RollRoyce engine (plus some US technology in materials).

France was good in designing FBW for Concord.We had responsability of airframe and British for engines.

 

Concord and TU 144 are as much different than F22 and T 50.

 

MIII and F-106  are also different while less than Concord and TU144.

So you would see I don't see things through a French prism.

 

 

 

 

 

It was originally BRISTOL engines when it was fitted to the test Canberra bomber, but why quibble  

 

One of the many reasons their engine division folded, (RR bought them out) was the superb series of Olympus engines. They screwed the 593 redesign up when they tried to increase thrust by a staggering 80%. 

 

Flight Global....

 

SNECMA was instrumental in aiding them in screwing that engine redesign up (shock ramps and afterheat among other things). Rolls Royce fixed it.