I'm sure somebody does, but nobody willing to post information on a forum though...

Well, many look at what appears to be a bulky aircraft and assume that it is not very aerodynamic???

I'll give you a Cd right now, 0.0178. Of course, I can't tell you at what mach number, angle of attack, sideslip angle, throttle setting, or cg it refers to, because I don't know. Forgive the smart @ss answer, the point is, there is a different Cd for every flight condition I mentioned. So you have to specify what condition you're talking about.

Well, maybe I should put it this way............What is the Cd of the F-35 vs the F-16 at a given altitude in level flight??? If, you can't provide that maybe you could just summarize how the F-35 compares in very general terms??? Really, many just make huge assumption by purely appearance???

(1) You won't get a Cd number here. Even if you do, it'll apply to one specific flight condition (speed, load, etc).

(2) Cd is not a good indicator of how aerodynamic an aircraft is. In fact, it is NOT indicative at all. The reason is that for aircrafts the reference area with which Cd has to be applied with is usually the wing area. In otherwords, two aircrafts with the same exact drag in flight can have vastly different Cds depending on size of the aircraft's wing!

I'm guessing its aerodynamics (at least with respect to drag) are similar to that of a clean F/A-18E... probably a bit better. As far as thrust goes, the F-35 produces more than the F/A-18E, correct? Then again, isn't the Super Hornet scheduled to get some upgraded engines in the future? Perhaps when that happens, the F/A-18E (clean config) and the F-35 (internal stores only) will have similar performance. This is a big guestimate on my part, but all you can really do is compare the F-35 to similar-looking aircraft. The closest thing shape-wise seems to be the Super Hornet.

Actually, the F-18 has a little more thrust (44,000 lbs) compared to the F-35A (43,000 lbs), although the differences are immaterial. But the Superbug is also a little over a ton heavier so it has worse P/W ratios despite carrying 2 tons less fuel and missing internal ordnance accommodations. Wing loading is about the same based on textbook wing area, but the F-35A probably has higher total lift due to its broad, flat, fuselage's huge body lift contribution. Aerodynamics wise, an F-35 is a cleaner and sleeker shape than a clean F-18E/F. The Lightning also has a an overall geometry that appears to be shaped for a higher speed than the F-18 -- higher leading edge sweeps for instance. But, it is hard to definitively gauge aerodynamics from casual appearance alone.

As a conservative estimate, I think we can expect the flight performance of the F-35A with internal weapons to be equal to or better than an F-18E/F with no weapons and all external pylons (which are rather draggy given their outward cant) removed. If I have to put some numbers on it, I'll say the cruise speed should be in the Mach 1.2~1.4 bracket on dry, about Mach 1.8~2.0 maxed out on full burners at high altitudes (>40,000 ft). Turning performance should be slightly better than the F-16 and the F-18, with roll rates significantly better. Operational ceiling should be somewhat higher given the huge control surfaces. Thrust specific fuel consumption should be better with the F135/136 engines. Combined with 8.4 tons of fuel and the ability to not drag along pylons or external ordnance on most missions, endurance and practical operational range should be about twice to 2.5 times longer.

I'm guessing its aerodynamics (at least with respect to drag) are similar to that of a clean F/A-18E... probably a bit better. As far as thrust goes, the F-35 produces more than the F/A-18E, correct? Then again, isn't the Super Hornet scheduled to get some upgraded engines in the future? Perhaps when that happens, the F/A-18E (clean config) and the F-35 (internal stores only) will have similar performance. This is a big guestimate on my part, but all you can really do is compare the F-35 to similar-looking aircraft. The closest thing shape-wise seems to be the Super Hornet.

The F-414 (EDE) makes ~26,000lbs of thrust vs the baseline F-414-400 22,000 lbs. I believe its nearing the end of developement? Yet, I don't believe the USN has placed any firm orders for the type. Personally, I wonder if it was offered to Australia in its recent order of F/A-18F's or to India for its MMRCA Fighter Contract????