Quite hilarious how you sneakily try to push those agenda despite being schooled so many time and didnt have a single word back
Fact 1: the test with F-16 was a high AoA test , to test the FBW not to see which aircraft is better in dogfight. The F-16 was used as a references point for F-35 high AoA control law
Once the pilot get used to the aircraft and the FCS was fixed , it is a completely different story
https://theaviationist.com/2016/03/...g-in-the-f-35-a-jsf-pilot-first-hand-account/
Fact 2 : It actually very common for a more modern aircraft to lose to a legacy fighter in dogfight, the reason being that pilot skill also play very important role here
For example : F-22 has lost to T-38 ( basically an F-5)
http://jalopnik.com/5221219/f22-raptor-gets-fragged-by-t-38-training-jet
Rafale has lost to F-4E
Fact 3 : aircraft top speed is decided mostly by intake ability to recover pressure so just because an aircraft has slower top speed than another, doesnot mean it will be slower at all altitude. For example: top speed of Mig-25 is Mach 2.8 , top speed of F-16 with CFT is Mach 1.9. Base on that simple information , most people would think that it would be very simple for Mig-25 to out run F-16 at any altitude. They couldn't be more wrong. At low and medium altitude, an F-16 block 50+ in clean or in A2A configuration (with CFT in both case ) will be able to out accelerate and out run Mig-25 all day everyday. At sea level , Mig-25 will be struggled to reach Mach 0.8 but the F-16 can go over Mach 1.2. At altitude of 5km ( about 16k feet) , Mig-25 will just cross over Mach 1.2 while F-16 can go near Mach 1.5 . At altitude of 10 km ( or about 32k feet ) Mig-25 will top out at about Mach 1.7 , but an F-16 with CFT and 2 AAM can still reach Mach 1.8. When they start to go higher , the variable intake of Mig-25 along its turbojet engine will give it higher excess thrust than F-16 => higher speed.