F-15EX Goes Mach 3! (Or Does it? 

Things get warm when you go really fast. As an F111 EW tech at Lakenheath I remember a radome from an ALQ119 pod being fully delaminated and burned dark brown in places. The story was something about a pilot who was having a bit of fun and found himself facing some disciplinary consequences. We were told that a lot of the airplane was damaged. Unfortunately there was always a disconnect between operations and in-shop people so we never got the full story and we were just asked to evaluate the radome - not much we could add to the narrative or really evaluate - yup, the radome was toasted. No one really knows how fast an F111F could go but we do know that it can go fast enough to peel the paint and rubber coatings from radomes.

Wombat's dry humor is the best!

Top speed for the F-111 was based on skin temperature. It was limited to 300 seconds above 165 C. We had a gage to show time remaining. On FCFs, we would see the gage to start the countdown about 2.1 Mach (660 IAS) going through 50,000 ft.

As the jet accelerates to higher and higher mach numbers there's a component, somewhere, that's going to be the first to fail. If that component is the canopy you're going to find out very quickly what the limiting mach number of your face is.

"We got Mach 3! Well, it was more like Mach 2.497 if You really want to nitpick, but we instructed our quality control that that is good enough, so it is practically Mach 3! Good job everyone!" "Ouch! What's this... Who left these bolts here?"

It's still going to say, with nothing to go on, that turbine temperature and intake geometry are the engine limitations while the canopy and composite structures are the airframe limitations. IAS is generally going to be the airframe limits whilst mach is going to be the engine limits; at lower altitudes the engines can operspeed the airframe but at extreme altitudes the engines won't be able to chew through the thin, cold air fast enough to burn up the airframe. I'm going to assume that the Boeing guy took the 800 knot IAS airframe limit, plugged it into a speed-mach chart and at the F15s service ceiling, 800 knots is basically mach 2.9 or so.

This is where yall need to get Hoover on with yall. F15 pilot who also flew the F18

I got 2.25M in the F-111 flying an FCF out of the depot at Bristol UK. It could have gone a bit quicker, I had 1500+ KGS with a 100 kt tailwind at FL 390, ramping down. I also had a jet with a new paint job that I had for an FCF. We bubbled all the paint off the leading edges, the crew chief was beside himself when he saw the jet.

Things start getting real hot around mach 2.7 doesnt it?

They’ve gone to Plaid! 😂

That's the thing. Even the SR-71 was stated as having a Mach 3.0 "cruising speed". Top speed of the SR-71 I believe is still classified, even though it's been retired for a very long time.

I love the story of the only supersonic picture ever taken of Concorde. The fighter (I believe a British Tornado) was able to keep up for like 30 seconds before they ran out of fuel. Concorde continued to New York at the same speed...

There was a supervisor who called a marketing/sales meeting to say " THEY ALREADY PLACED THE ORDER!!!"

When I was stationed at RAF Lakenheath as a Strike Eagle crew dawg I did an inspection after a Depot acceptance flight. (The jet was completely clean no CFTs, pylons, pods, NOTHING) They took it so fast several antennas around the jet started to melt. Kinda wild

The original B-1 was a Mach 2.5 bird. So was the F-111. And the F-4 could haul ass. And don’t forget the Valkyrie. It’s getting crazy. Love it.

Heat is the biggest enemy at above M2.5

door on or door off, hahahaha😂

Think about what it took to get the sr 71 to mach 3. The titanium airframe, the special fuel, the engine inlets. I don't think that it would be wise to push an aluminum airframe powered by jp5 to those speeds.

Operation Top Flight: On 6 December 1959, the second XF4H-1 performed a zoom climb to a world record 98,557 ft (30,040 m). Commander Lawrence E. Flint Jr., USN accelerated his aircraft to Mach 2.5 (2,660 km/h; 1,650 mph) at 47,000 ft (14,330 m) and climbed to 90,000 ft (27,430 m) at a 45° angle. He then shut down the engines and glided to the peak altitude. As the aircraft fell through 70,000 ft (21,300 m), Flint restarted the engines and resumed normal flight. ------------------------------ the 50's ha 🙂 old VMFA-333 MOS-6657

Why does anyone even care about top speeds that can only be reached when flying clean, unarmed, and over a dry lake bed so that it can burn through all of its fuel in a few minutes and get towed back to base? Any fighter, with the exception of the F-22, and only in a limited way at that, would be lucky to get to Mach 1.3 in combat, ever, and only for a short dash, at least based on all of the accounts I've read of aerial combat from Vietnam to the present. Can it do Mach 1.6, 2.5, or 3.0? It doesn't matter, because it's a fighter with limited fuel, draggy external stores, and a crew who want to actually get home if possible instead of bailing out over enemy territory.

The angle from the tip of the nose to the wing tips from down the centerline on this plane is 23 degrees. The Mach number where the shock cone from the nose hits the wingtips can be calculated from the following formula: Mach# = 1/sine(shock angle) = 1/sine(23) Mach = 2.56 I highly doubt this plane can function properly with the shock cone hitting the wingtips so I'm calling Mach 2.56 it's top speed. There is also a limit on the engine air intakes where the shocks will interfere with air intake for the engines as well as thermal and structural limits as well but Mach 2.56 IMO is where you will lose control of that aircraft from the shock cones.

I would expect there’s a difference between top speed in service, and top speed where things begin to fail. It would make sense for a test pilot to have a different experience.

Pratt & Whitney also had to walk back an early claim, on their website, that the F-35 engine puts out 44,000 pounds of thrust. A few days later it had been restated as "40,000 pound thrust class". This way back in the early days of the F-35 program and the engine was still under development and testing.,

Man, we get the first batch next year! Can't wait

I feel that Mover nailed it. Someone at Boeing slipped up and revealed a bit too much. Hell, we don’t even know the undisclosed top speed of the SR-71 yet.

I talked to a B-52 pilot once at an air show who told me the B-52 has the engine power to go supersonic but they have governors to keep below because the aircraft couldn’t take that speed.

Lots of "things" can go faster than the manufacturer data claims... once. There are plenty of Navy stories about ships doing +20kts over their published vmax on their final return to port for decom. Most military jets have some reserves in their specs. Some have more than "some"...

The odd thing about speed and altitude are the EM charts...seem to cutoff right short- Like, the A 12 has a ceiling of 95,000, and for the SR 71 it's only 85- it's been hinted at ,but the EM charts have it the blackbird can't fly level at 100k even, only about 87 k, at 3.2, give or take.... - So, for the EX doing mach 2.9....(Foxbat and Foxhound territory)- ... At the same time, several articles with Eagle pilots have come out saying they used hit the vmax switch in the Eagle....so it almost seems like no fighter pilots would bother trying for VMAX- i mean, Foxbats only hit 3.2 when in extreme danger- and it didn't happen often It's a shame- a Mach 3 jet or near- would be able to chase down enemy aircraft with ease(like foxbats and foxhounds)- launch weapons with more starting energy and be extremely hard to shoot down Pius they'd be able to fly extremely high and engaging something at 70k, 80k, or beyond at 2.5 onwards- is difficult for SAMs and AAMs alike- far more than any other environment. From their reaction time being cut short to having to lead and get to where the aircraft it. Low observable is crucial, but there is still a place for speed if you can reach levels beyond where we are now- even incrementally- but no one cares about this it seems

There are stories about an F-111 exceeding Mach 3. FWIW, I have an old book about the F-15 that said that it was limited to Mach 2.7 due to canopy heating. Not sure if canopy tech has improved since those days.

Should just be called F-1 5EX instead. It's a sexy jet either way!

Awesome Eagle Jet…but if that thing makes 3 Mach then Mover’s ZR-1 will go 0-200 mph in 6.9 seconds. 😊

It definitely felt like it was a, don’t say too much, moment.

Sandboxx did a good cover of this retraction basically stating the aircraft is a 9G plane but can go to 12G due to the beefed up structure. Has the equivalent thrust of a 3rd engine from the legacy fighters and they could do mach 2.5 so read between the lines on it

We can discuss that ol mach meter later.........but who was the best pilot you ever saw? 😁

But does the canopy stay put when it is shut and locked? For the hypersonic missile question? That's a great job for the B1-R that we'll never see unfortunately.

A bit ago they were talking about them getting up to the speeds where the paint comes orf 😂

wake up babe a new mover & gnnky show vid just dropped

Listen, 2.4 normally rounds down to 2, but if you round the 5 on the end up, you get to 2.5 and if you round that up, you get 3 #science

Surely max sprint speed is not as relevant as sustained? The unmatched capability of the SR71 is that it could cruise at Mach 3 due to the unique engine and airframe design? Can the F15EX sustain Mach 2.4? That is a great feat if so.

Wouldn't surprise me if a sort of 'streak eagle' configured EX could theoretically push M2.9 under perfect conditions. Is a squadron pilot going to war ever going to see M2.9? Highly unlikely. In any case the limiting factor is probably canopy heating.

I think some aircraft can do something more than we, the public, usually knows, or needs to know. I am sure this applies to the F-15. Recently we have seen some more agility in F-18 displays than we used to see. Going back a long way, the Saab Draken did some high alpha things we never heard about then. Very recently we are seeing the super agility the Su27s and 35s display in airshows, does not save it from A2A missiles, but perhaps this is more down to lack of pilot training.

High Mach fighter airplanes have an inlet and duct system that is designed for the max speed. Many use fixed or movable inlet ramps to efficiently reduce the flow to subsonic prior to entering the inlet duct. The compressor has to have subsonic flow. The ramps might have one or more angles to produce a series of weaker shocks and then there is usually a final terminal normal shock perpendicular to the flow direction. Ideally the final normal shock would sit just outside of the cowl lip. If the engine doesn't need as much airflow, the excess air spills out of the inlet and pushes the shock out which causes drag. Try to pull too much air and it might tend to pull in the normal shock which causes inlet instability and air flow distortions that can lead to compressor stalls or inlet buzz (resonance). Lower speed planes like the F-16 and F-18 use fixed geometry normal shock inlets. They were optimized for lower speed operation and a complex heavy inlet wasn't required. The ramps you see on those are primarily for boundary layer control. Adding more power to those might get a bit more speed but but there will be a limit. Planes like the Super Hornet and F-22 have fixed geometry inlets but appear to have angled ramps designed for higher speeds or to get better efficiency at higher speeds. The F-15 has variable geometry inlets with movable ramps. If you know the angles and geometry, you can determine the max Mach number. Air also heats up across shock waves so there may also be temperature limits in the engine that limit the speed. Others have mentioned structural limits which are real. Plus, just about all of the major defense companies could build a Mach 3 plane if required. It's a matter of cost, maintenance, and need. I doubt you will ever see a Mach 3 stealth plane because you give up IR stealth at Mach 3 and it's likely that all future planes will be designed to have stealth features.

I agree, M2.5 is plenty fast, and feul/Range becomes an issue.

It would be cool to check the maximum speed of an unmanned Eagle in control of it from the Mig-25pu/Mig-31

You should see what the C-130 can do when we push all 4 throttles up to stage 5 afterprop. 😎

What's more important, ultimate speed or agility?

my eyes nearly teared up in horror at the time when i heard the news，which got taken back by he who said it

Jeez - at _THAT_ speed, the F-15'd end up behind a bookcase!!! ('Interstellar' movie reference)

I think a lot of jets can exceed manufacturers stated performance, but the issue is it does hurt the plane in the long run in terms of damage or potential damage, engine and heat damage or airframe failure or stress and reduced airframe life. The Russians destroyed a lot engines in the Mig 25 chasing the SR71 it could reach Mach three and a little beyond but you toast the engines everytime, so they limited it to Mach 2.8 in the end speed is great but there are lots of other more important performance attributes that are are desirable.

Typically top speed is limited by intake air temperature. Going faster will evetually remive the turbine blade protection and the turbine blade will starting to eat them self. Eventually going mach 3 you will have no turbine blades left. Its barley ever a power issue. Just ad more fuel and it goes faster. Now next gen engine have a core bypass feature. This makes it so the turbine can have higher compression at low speed, subsonic, hence more fuel efficent. But at the same time have lower presure, hence temperature, at high speed. Alowing basically any fighter that use that kind of engine to hit mach 3 or there abouts. That engine exist in bench but as far as i know in mo airplane of yet. Ngad will probobly have a engine like that.

Look at the flight envelope for the F-15. That upper right quadrant doesn’t have straight lines for aerodynamic reasons. Those are from structural and thermal limits.

My guess is that the high Mach number reported is just the result of a flight envelope expansion hop, with Test Pilot flying a clean airplane and it's probably not very useful tactically. I wonder if it had the conformal tanks installed? Hang a boat-load of missiles, tanks or other stuff on the airplane as one would do in a real shooting war, and I am guessing it won't go quite that fast. I always get a kick out of the top speeds that the Pentagon advertises for any of our top tactical jets. They sound super-impressive when repeated at airshows for public consumption, but I will bet that most line pilots would rarely, if ever, hit those speeds, because almost no one flies completely clean airplanes except the demo teams and perhaps FCFs after major maintenance. They make great sportscars, but that's not how they're meant to be used.

I wonder what's the mystery or debate? Just ask the Singapore, Saudi and Qatar Air Forces.... the F110-229 engine has powered their F-15 variants for years, since Singapore became the first to opt for this engine.

F-15 was always a mach 2.5 plane. they basically keep the speed all while making a heavier aircraft.

The + following publicly published speeds on aircraft and naval vessels always makes me think the classified speeds are around 10-15% faster

I'm pretty sure the F-15C can reach mach 3, so long as you don't plan on using the engines ever again.

Hmm. Aluminium starts to soften (atleast fiaf museum "mach3 internet symposium" told so) after ~ 2,6 mach. Look how Mig-31 is built (welded hard nickeled steel) vs. sr-71 and other "really fast" planes. Is f-15 somekind of composite or what is the material - about..?

I was thinking maybe it will go M.3 but they weren't supposed to advertise that fact. Kinda like -- oops. my bad, actually it is around there. This is something like the Foxbat, they had engines that could get them going very fast, but they could only do it once, and then they had to change out the engines.

I would say ... do another Streak Eagle to show what she does really clean.

Launch a 120D at 2.5... nothing gonna dodge that!

Love wombat Doors on or Off!!!!!

What did you mean by doors on or off?

Might be at V-max.

Top speeds are always military vague....

SR-F-15EX-71.

They've gone to plad

Even if it had the power and the aerodynamics, it doesn't have the thermal protection, for the engines, airframe or the crew compartment.

Perhaps it would be worth noting, that mach at altitude is different than mach at sea level. A jet that goes mach 1.0 at FL300 is what? Half the speed that a jet going mach 1 just above sea level…..?

Just wonder what's gonna fall off.

Full throttle go F-15EX speed?

Your talking about heat load and at mach 3 it 600 to 900 F . But aluminum melts at only about 1,260 degrees, so it loses about half of its strength by the time it reaches 600 degrees. so no not M3.

Well, you may reach march2 when ur wing was rapid off😂

I am wondering if the DOD made Boeing pull back that claim for national security reasons. It reminds of an old cartoon back in the 1980s where the government was being rather coy about an aviation accident around Area 51. It had a gate guard admitting to the press that they were admitting it was an experimental stealth aircraft that crashed (which was the media speculation), and in the background you see the NCC-1701 TOS Enterprise crashed in the background.

Well the airlines have been hitting mach 1.2 with the jet stream pushing them across the Atlantic recently, so anythings possible.

Definitely heard from old F-111 pilots and Mirage pilots some pretty ludicrous Mach numbers going beyond spec. Take it with a grain of salt when you hear anecdotes but in all likelihood it *can*.

From the Wayback Bag: In 1971-72, the USSR sent 4 Mig-25s with crews to Egypt to fly photo recce over Israel. The IDF F-4s couldn't get close to them as they mostly flew at Mach 2.5 to 2.6 above 70,000' over Israel. The F-4s with Aim-7s had no chance to get into Aim-7 shot parameters before the Mig-25 were out of range. The Foxbats flew above the Israeli Hawk's upper alt limit, their most capable SAM at the time. The 25's reportedly could reach Mach Mach 2.83, but it destroyed/damaged the engines. The USSR stopped flying them in Egypt in 1972. But in 1981, the Syrian AF force had two Mig-25's shot down by Israeli's new F-15's over Lebanon. The arrival of the F-15 ended the untouchable nature of the Mig-25.

Mach 3... Pass everything but a gas station. 😁

SR 71 sometimes pushed mach 4 but that was not verified as unless you set out to do just that only then it can be verified but pilots of the sr 71 reached very comfortably flew at mach 3.5 regularly while top speed officially was mach 3.2

Ludicrous speed

(X) Doubt

I bet if you talk to the pilots flying chase in the F15 C are you having trouble keeping up with the F15EX at max speed? The answer is probably a big yes

I thought the F-15 was always a mach 2+ jet, no?

You could cross the little country of Turkey in 1 min at Mach 3.

My grandfather told a story about popping rivets at speed in his P-38

People sometimes talk trash about how overrated the Mig 25 was but it’s still the only warplane to withstand mach 3 .

Sensing click bait I threw the BS flag and almost didn't click on this. A few of the F-15 challenges would be inlet design, airframe materials, powerplant/inlet integration. The half smile of the gent in the navy blue shirt says it all.

I used to live near a SAC base in the 80s and they had F-111s there. Don't know if it's true but I was told that after seeing the Firefox movie that an F-111 pilot coming back from England tried/recreated the rooster tail effect in the movie. Like 50 foot off the water wide open. I was told that he ripped 5 feet off the tail section. Again, urban legend, or real???

I used to work with a guy that told me that he flew in the back seat of a F-15E at Mach 9+ while chasing a UFO.

Wombat 🤣😂😂😂😂😂🤣😂

They’ve gone to plaid.

The C model is 2.5…based upon a number of changes notably the large increase in thrust of the new EX likely gets close to 3 and considering the normal 110% over speed design and some structural enhancements to the EX I think close to 3 is likely…SR71 is known to have likely gotten to 3.5+ but not officially verified

Namaste All, If Boeing’s F-15 EX Eagle airframe or engines can push Mach 2.4 / 2.5, let alone reaching close to Mach 3 (2,223.2910 Miles Per Hour) could even possible too? Maybe then the RAF and British Mod / UK Government, should think of buying a couple Squadrons of the Boeing’s F-15 EX Eagle tandem two-set multi-role fighter-bomber, say 30 F-15EX Eagles to start with? Or the RAF buy’s upto 60 F-15EX Eagles, to make up a Strike (with both Conventional and/or Nuclear capabilities, carrying and firing stealth cruise attack missiles) Wing, of 5 Squadrons (10 aircraft per squadron) of F-15EX aircraft? As what the Russians and Chinese Military and Governments, or the Iranians and North Koreans Regimes too, all have to worry about? Was this a press release mistake and breach of security too, over the F-15 EX Eagle really capabilities and the F-15EX can fly at Mach 3 or near Mach 3 speed at medium to high attitudes? Especially if carrying fuselage flush fitting conformal aerodynamic high-speed weapon's compartments, carrying long range air to air or air to surface weapons. Equally with carrying fuselage flush fitting conformal aerodynamic high-speed extra fuel tanks too, giving the F-15 EX Eage greater strike operational range at high Mach Speed too. Let alone if the F-15EX Eagle single or tandem two-seat versions, are capable of Mach 2.5 to 2.7 when loaded with streamline high-speed wing and fuselage mounted pylons. Carrying similarly aerodynamic high-speed weapon's and ordnance dispensing pods, or mounting aerodynamic high-speed external fuel tanks as well. Then the likes of Chinese Military, Air Force and the Chinese Navy, could be in real trouble, from what is after all a 4th generation 1970's fighter or fighter bomber, that been upgrade to a new 5th generation fighter or fighter-bomber. Which can out run the F-35 Stealth Fighter, plus give the F-22 stealth fighter a good run for it money too, while the F-15EX improved Eagle can still delivering a great ordnance payload onto the enemy, then either the F-22 or the F-35 in the process too. Lastly how many western operators of the F-15, either in single seat multi-role fighter version, or the tandem two seat multi-role fighter-bomber version, are there around the World too. Which Boeing would be only to happy to sale the Super F-15EX Eagle aircraft to, at less cost than buying the Lockheed Martin F-35 which ever version F-35A, or F-35C let alone the F-35B the most costly too. There is one other point here, if Boeing can get an F-15EX Eagle upto say Mach 2.8 or Mach 2.9, let alone over Mach 3, even for high-speed dash for a few minutes allowing for fuel burn rate, which could be the biggest deciding factor here too. What has Boeing or Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman all there classified projects team, are working on and developing for a new 6th or 7th generation manned or unmanned air superiority fighters or fighter-bombers. Maybe Mach 4 or Mach 5 capable 6th or 7th generation manned or unmanned air superiority fighters or fighter-bombers. Or has one of them actually got a real Tom Cruise “Maverick” Mach 10.1 to Mach 10.2 maybe Mach 10.3 “Darkstar” Hypersonic Stealth Air Superiority Reconnaissance Fighters or Stealth Strike Reconnaissance Fighter-bomber. With this Mach-10 Hypersonic Stealth Aircraft, in a hangar at Area 51 and undergoing research evaluation and development flight testing the Chinese and Russians really need to worry about? With the Tom Cruise “Maverick” Mach 10.3 “Darkstar” Hypersonic Stealth Aircraft, was a double bluff so the Russians and Chinese think it’s just a very large Hollywood mockup of a possible US Hypersonic Stealth Aircraft, you never know do you?

This reminds me of the time Russia tried to shoot down the U2 spy plane and pushed everything they had far beyond any design specification :)

Now let red bull get their hands on it and do a nose dive from its max altitude and watch it go Mach 3

the TRUE first comment

This was not a move done by Boeing. This was a move done by the Air Force. Boeing tested the jet without any ordinance on it. Yeah, I would imagine it could go close to Mach 3, because those engines are quite capable and so is the beefed up air frame that is supposed to support these new engines. But everyone knows that the Air Force has a tendency to purposefully keep all the aircraft capabilities a secret because it’s like we know that the F 18 super hornet can make it almost to Mach 2 but the Navy isn’t going to tell us that. We still don’t even know what the top speed of the F-22 is and I am sure it is close to MO3. With all that being said they force basically just had to scramble and hurry up and get that off-line quickly because they didn’t want any sort of classified information getting out among the public but sorry too late the damage has already been done. Sorry Air Force you were just a little too late on this one.

Officially acknowledged top speed for the eagle is 2.5+ which is said by the pilots followed by a solid laugh. “Sure…. That’s all it will do…. lol”

Do you really think they're going to tell us how fast an Eagle 🦅 EX can move? Compare it's speed to the Mach 1.2 the Fat Amy can go.

Yeh it goes mach3....no...wait....no it doesn't...

Boeing F-15 EX Eagle airframe or engines can push Mach 2.4 / 2.5, let alone reaching close to Mach 3 (2,223.2910 Miles Per Hour) could even possible, What the Russians and Chinese Military and Governments, or the Iranians and North Koreans Regimes too, all have to worry about, was this a press release mistake and the F-15 EX Eagle is really capable of Mach 3 or near Mach 3 speed. Especially if carrying fuselage flush fitting conformal aerodynamic high-speed weapon's compartments, carrying long range air to air or air to surface weapons. Equally with carrying fuselage flush fitting conformal aerodynamic high-speed extra fuel tanks too, giving the F-15 EX Eage greater strike operational range at high Mach Speed too. Let alone if the F-15EX Eagle single or tandem two-seat versions, are capable of Mach 2.5 to 2.7 when loaded with streamline high-speed wing and fuselage mounted pylons, carrying similarly aerodynamic high-speed weapon's and ordnance dispensing pods or mounting aerodynamic high-speed external fuel tanks as well. Then the likes of Chines Military, Air Force and the Chinese Navy, could be in real trouble, from what is after all a 4th generation 1970's fighter or fighter bomber, that been upgrade to a new 5th generation fighter or fighter-bomber. Which can out run the F-35 Stealth Fighter, plus give the F-22 stealth fighter a good run for it money too, while the F-15EX improved Eagle can still delivering a great ordnance payload onto the enemy, then either the F-22 or the F-35 in the process too. Lastly how many western operators of the F-15, either in single seat multi-role fighter version, or the tandem two seat multi-role fighter-bomber version, are there around the World too. Which Boeing would be only to happy to sale the Super F-15EX Eagle aircraft to, at less cost than buying the Lockheed Martin F-35 which ever version F-35A, or F-35C let alone the F-35B the most costly too. There is one other point here, if Boeing can get an F-15EX Eagle upto say Mach 2.8 or Mach 2.9, let alone over Mach 3, even for high-speed dash for a few minutes allowing for fuel burn rate, which could be the biggest deciding factor here too. What has Boeing or Lockheed Martin or Northrup Grumman all there classified projects team, are working on and developing for a new 6th or 7th generation manned or unmanned air superiority fighters or fighter-bombers. Maybe Mach 4 or Mach 5 capable 6th or 7th generation manned or unmanned air superiority fighters or fighter-bombers. or has one of them actually got a real Tom Cruise as Maverick Mach 10.1 to Mach 10.2 Darkstar Hypersonic air superiority fighters or fighter-bomber , the Mach-10 Hypersonic in the hanger for the Chinese and Russians to worry about?