>>27800284 I'm so tired of people comparing military aircraft as if it were a dick measuring contest. Bigger, stronger, faster? Who CARES!
These are machines that are part of *systems*. Doctrine, strategy, tactics... I'm so tired of raw analysis of the individual plane's characteristics at the expense of ignoring *everything* else.
Want to know the *real* secret of American air hegemony? Look at the humble AWACS and JSTAR. Look at the thousands of satellites overhead, including the GPS ones that allow the use of JDAMs... finally look at the actual air-planes.
Neither the PAK FA or the J-20 ever had pretensions of being the Russian F-22 or F-35 regardless what the hype or even the Russian propaganda may tell you. These planes are direct descendants of the Su-27 and Mig-29, airplanes that were envisioned as "dumb" (or a lot dumber than NATO counterparts) and (relatively) cheap platforms relying on a strong GCI network.
Even though their avionics has advanced by leaps and bounds compared to the cold war, the primary role for Russian aircraft is still very much air-defense.
>>27801831 J-20 that manages to be a ripoff from MiG-1.44, F-22 and F-35 simultaneously? Astonishing aircraft indeed, truly a peak of gook traditions. I bet in another 20 years they will even manage to build their very own AL-31.
>>27802946 >Dreaming of what? It is already out of production. But this will really totally never ever happen to F-35 indeed. >Out of production >LRIP 9 just got approval You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?
>>27805177 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA >The T-50 makes extensive use of composites, comprising 25% of the structural weight and almost 70% of the outer surface. At least read the wikipedia article before making asinine comments.
>>27806368 >If your going to use wikipedia. State the source if the information.
South Korea's defence procurement agency confirmed that the Sukhoi PAK FA was a candidate for the Republic of Korea Air Force's next-generation fighter (F-X Phase 3) aircraft -its janes but link is dead. jesus fcking christ how do you manage through your life without someone holding your fkcing hand?
>Korea does not want the pakfa. nah-uh they considered it so on some level they wanted it. doesnt matter really since everyone and their dog knows its a us plane they will choose anyway- 30k murican troops on one's soil does that.
>>27806368 http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2012/01/113_103661.html >The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) listed Sukhoi’s T-50 PAK-FA in July last year as one of the four contenders to have expressed an interest in joining the open bidding worth 8.29 trillion won ($7.3 billion) along with Boeing, Lockheed Martin and the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS). Sukhoi expressed interest and then dropped it
I ripped the T-50 for it's supposed "stealth", but the J-20 is just comical
> moving control canards > bumps and gaps along leading edges > lack of parallel edge alignment
And let's not forget the front of the J-20 and the entire J-31 are hilarious F-35 ripoffs while the cockpit of the J-20, including it's HUD, and the shaping of it's lower fuselage, is a blatant attempt to copy the F-22.
Oh, and the Chinese can't even build a working jet engine.
Anyways frontal RCS for "stealth aircraft" is in roughly this hierarchy in terms of order of magnitude:
F-22/B-2: 0.0001 m2 (insect-steel marble) F-35/F-117: 0.001-0.005 m2 (golf ball-small bird) Pak Fa/T50: 0.1-1m2 Super hornet, Rafael Typhoon (in clean configuration): 1 m^2 J-20/J-31: 1m^2 at best
>>27805151 >Weapons are carried internally in weapons bays within the airframe, and antennas are recessed from the surface of the skin to preserve the aircraft's stealthy shape. The IRST housing is turned backwards when not in use, and its rear is treated with RAM to reduce its radar return. To mask the significant RCS contribution of the engine face, the partial serpentine inlet obscures most, but not all, of the engine's fan and inlet guide-vanes (IGV). >wikipedia
>>27811063 Not "right around the corner"; but definitely within the next 20 years. It is definitely being studied as we speak/ I admitted i was wrong about the ducts, but it seems that they have a partial s-duct.
>>27810862 Well if the f-15 still didnt shit on everything it could potentially face in combat I'm sure we would produce a lot more f22's I think people forget how incredibly ahead of its time the f15 was.
>>27811437 It was designed from the ground up. Because it's vaguely reminiscent of the Flanker dosen't mean it's a Flanker. It is the first Russian warplane to be entirely designed from scratch (after the USSR collapse) using CAD and CFD technology.
>>27811460 >To reduce the PAK FA's developmental risk and spread out associated costs, as well as to bridge the gap between it and older previous generation fighters, some of its technology and features, such as propulsion and avionics, were implemented in the Sukhoi Su-35S fighter, an advanced variant of the Su-27.[
>>27811460 See, I can forgive having straight intakes if it was another prettied up Su-27, but not implementing S-intakes in a clean sheet design? It's not like Russia COULDN'T do it since they have plenty of planes with curved intakes. So either they just don't give a shit or they have a very poor understanding of how stealth actually works.
>The first J-10B production batch will be powered by Russian Saturn AL-31FN turbofans. Though an example powered by a Shenyang-Liming WS-10A turbofan emerged in July 2011, there is speculation that either insufficient performance or production may be delaying its adoption.
>>27812034 Okay. Well I was wrong as of Dec 2014 when that articles info came out. Who knows where the Chinese are in November?
I assume the J-10B will be using WS-10's once the WS-10 becomes better than the AL.
Chinese got a lot of problems with engines simply because they are trying to go from, nothing to better than what they can import, in a decade.
Based upon the chatter I hear in china and on Weibo, my bet is the first J-10b's are being fitted with the Ws-10 right about now. Doesn't mean the ws-10 is better, just that it is at least as reliable.
(The chinese hate having planes crash because of unreliable engines for propaganda reasons)
>>27812076 The Chinese are 40 years behind the west in engine tech, despite having soviet engines to copy. It's going to take them a long time just to develop the machines to build the parts to make a reliable engine.
>>27801780 Are you seriously retarded? What the fuck does JSTARS (There's an S, by the way) have to do with air combat? COMM/DLX for air-to-air is handled by AEW&C, and JSTARS only has an SAR, with no air-to-air modes. What exactly do "thousands" (Protip: You're off by an order of magnitude) have to do with air combat besides GPS (Which most other nations have as well #GLONASS/BeiDou)
The actual fighter aircraft and their armaments are still primary. Stealth is unbelievably huge, as are things like MAWS, AESA, and DRFMJ. That's before we even talk about modern missiles with DLX/re-attack. Kindly don't talk out of your ass.
>>27811463 haha its actually the opposite. s-ducts make your plane fatter and therefore draggier- you need to compensate on the engines just to compete aerodynamically, now radar blockers are a smarter man's way of negating fan blades returns- its only real tricky to pull off and only with new tech now can be as effective as s-ducts.
>>27811520 >>27811862 jesus fcking christ learn to read- it basically means the su-35s serves also as testbed for pak-fa technologies, not other way around.
also s-ducts are not the only way to hide fan blade returns. check out keypubs joasakura dude post of russian patents and basically explained how radar blockers could be as good if not better than s-ducts
>>27816324 Had an unclassified brief from F-22 pilots today. Something they noted is how unbelievable for them it was when they were at 10k feet and their jet was accelerating at 9.5Gs... so they had to pull the throttle back. Not only do they have insane nose-pointing capability due to thrust vectoring in the post-stall environment but their dogfighting capabilities are also unrivaled. Not that they need any of that shit, since they will pick off 8 jets a piece without being detected from BVR
>>27807531 > moving control canards Just because they CAN move doesn't mean they HAVE to move. The Eurofighter already implements a fixed, low-RCS canard position for cruise, and only deflects the canards during maneuvering or landing. The rest is done with elevons. (note, in your photo the J-20 is in landing configuration.) > bumps and gaps along leading edges Again, the J-20 is in landing configuration. Slats are deployed, and both flaps and canards are deflected for additional lift. None of this would be the case in cruise.
Honestly, if I had to choose something to pick on about the J-20, it'd be the nozzles. But whatever.
Having "only" 187 F-22s seems disappointing but at the same time the F-15C/D can still wipe the floor with virtually any aircraft in existence. The F-22 is like the icing on the cake, really.
Also, the notion that russia will "mass produce" the T-50 is pretty laughable. Russia was supposed to build 52 of them by 2020 but the order got slashed to 12 because the Russian economy is pretty terrible and the Russian government is prioritizing upgrading its 4th gen fighters rather than making new ones. I think someone already mentioned that there are more F-35's in existence than T-50's and Su-35's combined.
Assuming the T-50 doesn't get cancelled after it's first production run, which is quite possible, the earliest it's going to enter widespread service and be available for export is the late 2020's or 2030's. By that time the USAF's F-X (F-22 replacement) and USN's FA-XX (F-18 replacement) will likely already be in service. So instead of competing against the f-22, which the T-50 is inferior to by a wide margin, the T-50 will have to compete against it's replacement. It would be like an M46 Patton trying to compete with a T-72.
Consider this: The F-22 first flew 18 years ago. The YF-22 first flew 25 years ago. The T-50 prototype first flew in 2010, only 5 years ago. So Russian fighter tech at best is 20 years behind.
Thread replies: 147 Thread images: 19
Thread DB ID: 76117
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.