E.R. Campbell said:
Don't bother, the
National Post gave us a "ready reckoner:"
The F-35 outclasses the CF-105 in pretty much everything except speed, for which, as
Journeyman
said, it was specifically designed as an interceptor.
no, really I don't mind.
As representative; a thrust to weight ratio comparison.
Lockheed F-12B 48,000lbs dry thrust, 64,000lbs with afterburners, .69-1 thrust to weight ratio
North American F-108 Rapier same thrust, .8-1 thrust to weight
Arrow Mk 3 (the globe needs to distinguish mark and engines, those are Mk1, pre-porduction stats with American pratt and whitney engines) 39,700lbs dry, 53,300lbs with AB, .81-1
Arrow Mk 4 as above with 118,156lbs with AB and ramjets.
Mk2 arrow; mach 2.3 in tests
E-Model F-4 (mid-60s) mach 2.25, approx 24,000lbs thrust.
Again; comparison is off; the F-4E is a mid-60s bird, while by that time, the Mk3 and 4 arrows could have been flying. But also; role, the F-4 was developed into a multirole craft, the arrow had a more limited scope; interceptor, recce, strike.
Info from the afore mentioned book, as well as The Encyclopedia of World Aircraft.
I am not arguing for a new arrow, i'd be shocked if you told me our gelded aerospace industry could produce such a thing in anything like a useful time frame. But better aircraft in more appropriate roles could be had in greater numbers for our money, but we'd have to divorce politics from procurement first.