How do Slavboos feel about the fact that T-50 will be inferior not only to American planes but also to J-20?
>>27800284
based on what?
We don't need to be superior, we need everyone to think we are superior
>>27800357
Nobody does
>>27800284
But it is much more beautiful then ugly J-20. Also engines and shitlike Chinese quality.
>>27800623
>beautiful
>it's fat as fuck and has stubby little wings
>>27800623
Russian aircrafts crashed more than Chinese in the last couple of years. And that was before the Syria and Ukraine war.
Tells you something about quality.
>>27800357
Truer words have never been spoken
>>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.
>>27801617
Let me know when China can make an airframe that it didn't blatantly rip off from somebody else.
>>27800727
>it's fat as fuck and has stubby little wings
Gee... there's no such thing as a blended wing or a lifting body.
>>27801781
Such as the J-20?
>>27801831
>J-20
>homebrewed tech
>not the result of massive amounts of industrial espionage and reverse engineering
k
>>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.
>>27800284
Let me know when the F-35 gets canceled for that next top of the line state of the art bullshit thats going to also get canceled for the same reason.
>>27802800
>F-35
>Canceled
Not going to happen.
>>27802824
>F-22
>Canceled
>Not going to happen
>>27802877
Keep dreaming, despite the dickheadedness of the detractors it's a significantly better plane than those it relieves at a pretty reasonable unit price.
>>27802933
Dreaming of what? It is already out of production. But this will really totally never ever happen to F-35 indeed.
>>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?
>>27803202
He was clearly talking about the 22 being out of production.
>>27803229
And using it as an example of why he thinks the 35 will be cancelled. Do keep up.
Got me worried, haven't seen multiple lockshill damage control threads on the front page for like day or so. What's the latest fatal flaw, lethal ejection seats?
>>27800284
Feels like about how the US feels about Crimea.
>>27803525
Do keep up, moron. The minimum weight limit is similar to that on all fighters. It just gets blown out of proportion because you haters can't find any real flaws.
>>27801831
J-20 is a ripped off MiG-1.44
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/i6wn1koksjosajbh4fmq.jpg
> exposed turbine blades
> exposed IRST sensor
> exposed pilot tube
> rivets everywhere
It has the frontal RCS of a super hornet at best.
>>27805086
Bra-fucking-vo China.
>>27805151
Don't forget that it makes very little use of composite materials, instead using titanium.
This is all we need to make Americans have nightmares at night. Everything else is irrelevant.
Impressive
But the j-20 being superior than the american planes is already an established fact.
>>27801780
What the fuck do you expect, you are on /k/.
Most of the people here act as they are kids fighting over whose dad is cooler.
>>27801796
>b-b-b-but its supposed to be ugly!
Don't call it beautiful when it's not.
>>27805599
>But the j-20 being superior than the american planes is already an established fact.
>>27805883
>hahaa lets point at russia and laugh
<usa also a shit
>WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY!??!?
>>27800284
Oh look it's the F-35 Thread: Slavshit edition. Kill yourself.
>>27805923
The Party telling you the J-series is better than capitalist planes doesn't make it true.
>>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.
>>27806170
Holy shit, the delusion in this image. I almost feel bad for Sukhoi.
>>27806170
Why do people still post this image?
>>27806170
South Korea was considering the T-50?
>>27806271
The fucktard who made the image thought the T-50 golden eagle was the same thing as the PAK FA.
>>27806271
>>27806285
Read the wikipedia article
>>27806333
>Wikipedia
If your going to use wikipedia. State the source if the information.
Korea does not want the pakfa.
>>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
>>27800284
Those engines are such a boner killer
It's amazing how advanced America's propulsion tech is compared to anything else.
>>27806489
>Sukhoi expressed interest and then dropped it
Probably kinda realized that the moment the South Koreans receive them at least 1 is going to get taken apart by American engineers.
>>27800623
No it totally is not. The J-20 is pure sex.
>>27805599
>But the j-20 being superior than the american planes is already an established fact
>>27800284
Sure, a Chinese aircraft using Russian engines will be better than Russian aircraft themselves. That makes sense.
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
>>27800284
Well, it may be a shitty, inferior plane, but at least they won't make very many of them 'cause they're broke.
Glass half full, I'd say.
Bump for interest
>>27802800
If they cancel the F-35 today, there will still be more F-35s built than SU-35s and T-50s built. Combined.
When will Russia and Chine stop coping US designs?
>>27802877
Well they did plan to build 500; 180 planes is not enough for US needs.
>>27805151
That is a flight prototype, not the final product. Everyone should keep that in mind. Even the first production version will be significantly upgraded as years and experience goes by.
>>27810873
No.
You do not have a flight prototype with straight ducts and it suddenly transform into a fighter with S-ducts when it is in production.
It is fundamentally flawed without significant changes to the airframe, changes which would invalidate that 'flight prototype' as actually being useful for such a purpose.
>>27810873
LOL When has Russia ever had a major design change after a prototype was built. That's it buddy, it's a piece of shit that is probably less stealthy than a Rafale.
>>27803525
I also haven't seen much Lockmart-posting lately, I'm thinking that Sprey being right about Canada really rustled their jimmies.
Also haven't seen a damage control thread regarding this
http://russia-insider.com/en/business/russia-close-massive-deal-supply-5th-generation-fighters-india/ri10943
I'm worried about you /k. You patriots didn't get cancer from all that Kool-Aid did you?
>>27810909
You're right. It could be a stopgap; knowing 6th gen is coming up soon. Russia has little need for offensive aerial supremacy fighters; they have mostly been centered around air defence.
>>27811000
Now you, you're just retarded.
>>27811023
>Also haven't seen a damage control thread regarding this
Regarding India buying a plane they were a partner in producing?
"in early 2007 India and Russia agreed to jointly develop a fifth generation fighter jet. Unfortunately, the program has been plagued by delays, cost overruns, and unsteady technology"
Whats to damage control?
>>27811049
>It'll get better
>It won't
>Yeah but its okay that its shit, 6th Gen is only round the corner! Russia doesn't need AS fighters anyway!
not likely.
>>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.
>>27811023
Lockmart doesn't give a shit about 4chan/k.
Everyone knows the F-35 is the best 5th gen fighter you can buy.
The real question, why is a Kremlin propaghanda source reporting on a deal that isn't signed yet? Are they still worried about the PAK-FA being cancelled outright?
>>27811071
>the partial serpentine inlet obscures most, but not all, of the engine's fan and inlet guide-vanes (IGV).
Totally.
As long as you're blind and have your radar off, of course.
>>27811049
How am I retarded? I didn't expose fanblades on my 4.5 gen fighter like Russia did.
>>27811112
>le eternal meme picture
It's a prototype airframe. Retard.
>>27811139
So you are telling me that Russia will completely redesign the airframe to include s-ducts for it's production model?
>>27811139
>It's a prototype airframe. Retard.
Refer to
>>27810909
>>27811120
>4.5gen
>s-ducts
Yes, yes you are retarded.
>>27811163
Are you still pretending that the PAK-FA is 5th gen? Because last I checked it's fairly obvious it's probably on par with a silent eagle, at best.
>>27811163
The PAK-FA is as 4.5 gen as the Silent Eagle is.
>>27810394
A Y Y L M A O
Y
Y
L
M
A
O
Fucking BTFO. Who else even has a stealth plane that's seen combat? Something that the US first did almost 25 years ago..
>>27811172
Rule 1 of 5th gen: Designed from page 1 to have stealth
It has RCS management, RAM, blended edges, parallel edge alignment, internal weapons bay.
It is 5th gen.
>>27811209
That's literally things a Silent Eagle has. So you are telling me it's a 5 gen plane too?
>>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.
>>27811248
The eagle was designed in the late 1960ies; you absolute autist.
>>27811142
>>27811143
It will use a thing called radar blocker.
>>27811172
>>27811185
5th-gen is nothing but a buzzword invented by Lockheed Martin.
>>27811282
>It will use a thing called radar blocker.
Except radar blockers severely limit the aircraft's performance. They're poor stopgaps to make up for the fact the plane doesn't have S-intakes.
>>27811209
>m-muh gen 5
gen 5 is sales buzz word. doesn't mean shit in real life.
>>27811266
So was the PAK-FA. It's a SU-27 with a body kit and some new features. Just like the F-15 Silent Eagle.
>>27811282
Wait, they are testing it's performance without a radar blocker and without the final engines? What the fuck is the point of even making this prototype to begin with?
>>27811282
5th-gen is nothing but a buzzword invented by Lockheed Martin is nothing but a vatnik meme.
>>27811416
>It's a SU-27 with a body kit and some new features.
Oh no. He's retarded.
>>27811431
You are denying that the PAK-FA didn't start off life as an SU-27 and was then heavily modified?
>>27806285
>It's an image made by Sukhoi
>IT'S JUST MADE BY SOME FUCKTARD
>>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.
>>27811282
Radar blockers are shit-tier comprimises that are worse for performance than S-ducts, and do less to prevent detection.
>>27811460
That's some bullshit if you believe it was designed from the ground up.
>>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.
>>27811528
OR, it wasn't a clean sheet design. Which is much more likely. To cut costs they used the base of the SU-27.
>>27811540
Is of Su-27++++, torvich)))
>>27800284
We've got the same thread on russsian /wm/. Resual was mass of butthurt and anger.
>>27811641
Result*
>>27800284
It's sad, but CY doesn't build good fighters, the Flanker is massively overstated.
Russia should have just had MiG build a 5th gen, they're far better at fighters.
>>27811483
So where's your proof, genius?
>>27811520
...and?
>>27805454
Same to you slavboo, go cry more
>>27811719
Why would they not build a clean sheet design without s-ducts? That's a glaring issue right there, and suggests it isn't a clean sheet.
>>27807531
Except Lockheed Martin stated that the 35 has the RCS of a volleyball.
You're picture is a /pol/ tier macro.
>ripoff of the F-35
20 feet longer, has canards, has two engines
>chinese can't produce a working engine
I wonder how the J-10B's are flying then.
>shaping of its lower fuselage is a blatant ripoff of the F-22
>post picture of the lower fuselage that asserts that it is completely different and therefore somehow worse
This is bait.
>>27811873
>Except Lockheed Martin stated that the 35 has the RCS of a volleyball.
lol
>>27811888
>lol
Are you australian?
>>27811873
The J31 is the ripoff F35.
>>27811907
Are you Chinese?
>>27811909
And a bad one at that.
>>27811920
Georgetown University student actually.
Are you going to try refuting my statement or Lol?
>>27811873
>I wonder how the J-10B's are flying then
erm, on AL31s
>>27811909
Agreed. He said the J-20 was.
>>27811942
F-35 has the RCS of a Hydrogen Atom.
>I don't have to back that statement up, because I don't understand how burden of proof works
>>27806170
>Modernazied
>Modernazid
Sukhoi confirmed for Untermenschen.
>>27811873
>>27811951
http://www.janes.com/article/47815/images-suggest-j-10bs-close-to-entering-chinese-service
>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.
>>27811953
I could go get Jane's if you want to be proven more wrong?
>>27811970
Charge your fucking phone first
>>27811968
Chinese excuses. These engines will never be made.
>>27811968
>Though an example powered by a Shenyang-Liming WS-10A turbofan emerged in July 2011
His quote
>While China can't even produce a working engine!
>>27812003
Fair point, but I guess I was replying more to the J-10B remark.
I'm not the guy that posted the /pol/ j20 doodle
>>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.
>>27811873
>Except Lockheed Martin stated that the 35 has the RCS of a volleyball.
Got a source?
>>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.
>>27811873
>>27812284
>Except Lockheed Martin stated that the 35 has the RCS of a volleyball.
No they haven't; someone said that they did on f-16.net once and it became a maymay.
The closest thing we have to an official statement on the RCS of the F-35 is General Mike Hostage suggesting that it's smaller than the F-22's
“The F-35 doesn’t have the altitude, doesn’t have the speed [of the F-22], but it can beat the F-22 in stealth.”
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/07/f-16-vs-f-35-in-a-dogfight-jpo-air-force-weigh-in-on-whos-best/
>>27812349
So he was wrong as well.
I read the volleyball thing somewhere, but it could be biased.
Bump for more slavboo tears
>>27812303
>What the fuck does JSTARS (There's an S, by the way) have to do with air combat?
>Thinking the only measure of a plane's quality is in its air to air ability
>>27807531
>F-22/B-2: 0.0001 m2 (insect-steel marble)
>F-35/F-117: 0.001-0.005 m2 (golf ball-small bird)
Communist lies, it's 0.0000000000001 m2 for F-35.
>hurr durr slavbooo copying design
>hurr its the same look!!! they booth have 2 wings
you know what fuck slavboos and lockheadboos too.
>>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
>>27816221
Not being seen is better than evading better - and the F-22 is still the best maneuver fighter in the world even with those "drawbacks."
>>27810611
Slavs stopped in the 70s although you could call the buran a copy of sorts even if it works completly differently.
>>27811185
Good comparison actually
>>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
I have a friend who flew both F-22 and J-20, he said on paper the F-22 is superior but in reality the J-20 is better. He is also known for giving good information to Dr. Carlo Kopp.
>>27816663
>it was when they were at 10k feet and their jet was accelerating at 9.5Gs
the fucking space shuttle only accelerates at 2gs
>>27816820
And my dad works for Nintendo.
>>27817309
Don't embarrass the military, boyo. They need to believe...
>>27811023
"sprey being right about Canada
Trudeau is going to buy the F35 after it wins the competition.
>>27818033
It's not in the competition any more.
>>27817322
>nintendo
lolol Friendly reminders that Japanese are old, Koreans dominate games today.
Pops banged a SNSD
>>27800357
/thread
>>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.
>>27818078
Until he gets properly briefed and not memesperged.
>>27817309
Accelerating while pulling 9.5Gs you moron. Yes the English wasn't perfect but I would think people aren't retarded and use common sense for what it meant.
>>27818198
not it's underpowered engines?
>>27800357
Russia in a nutshell.
>>27818198
>they CAN move doesn't mean they HAVE to move
I've basically heard the same for the T-50 and it's movable LERX/LEVCONs. Supposedly they could be moved down to further block the engine inlet
>>27811258
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.
