PAK FA isn't 5th Gen
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
http://www.businessinsider.com/russias-newest-fighter-jet-is-fifth-generation-in-name-only-2016-2
Every day until it's cancelled.
>>29069299
Bingo!
Guys, we already know this. stop these threads already
>>29069664
no, we like to take a shit on the slavboo hype
>>29069299
>Currently, Russia is planning on purchasing 12 PAK FA, down from an initial order of 52
>12
twelve.
ha
this thing is nothing but an su27 with a bodyit
>>29069366
Whatever in Pootin land SU27 is still cutting edge.
>>29069299
Who cares, it is beautiful.
>>29070307
It's ass looks fucked up with those engines. Like it's taking two shits at the same time.
im looking forward to 300 replies of civil discussion.....
This isn't true at all. Simulation battles were run between the PAK-FA and the F22 in Ace Combat: Assault Horizon and the PAK-FA was virtually indestructible.
>>29071796
>Markov's PAK FA can take 6 AMRAAMs at once
>mfw the F-22 can't even hold 6 AMRAAMs
>mfw it out dogfights an F-22 despite carrying fuel tanks and a FUCKING CRUISE MISSILE
>mfw no face
>>29069299
>businessinsider
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-giraffes-fight-2016-2
Yup, it's terrible.
We all pretty much knew it already.
>>29069299
Why would it be cancelled. The T-50 still one of the greatest aircraft on earth. Better than anything Asians and Europeans will ever produce.
In the 50's Americans used to say Russian rockets were never going to lift off the ground, but we all remember what happened in 1961.
>>29073256
Had to play game in French, dialogue too cringy, gameplay too cringy already. Assault Horizon
>Ace combat in name only
>>29071796
AI is a fucking cheater. Not even mobius fucking one in AC Zero was as fucking cheater.
>>29069299
>NOW WATCH: The US Navy's last line of defense is this ultimate gun
Mark of expert military and technical observers Business Insider has.
>>29069299
m-muh thrust vectoring
>>29069664
Not until I see a slavaboo break down in tears and accept the F-35, THAAD and the Abrams as his lord and saviour, renouncing the false prophets Armata, S-400 and PAK FA
Will it still be better than Typhoons, Rafales, or commie jets though?
Not everyone can be the number one aircraft designer after all :^)
>>29074563
Well I can pretty confidently say that it'll be worse than the J-20.
I'm less confident at how the Rafale and the Eurofighter stack up to it, but the fact that you're even asking how it will stack up to aircraft that first flew 20 or 30 years ago is pretty worrying.
>>29074632
I'm not too confident about the jet myself. Many top scientists and engineers left after the USSR collapsed, and I don't know if the institutional aircraft design knowledge remains. AFAIK this is the first new fighter that is not a Fulcrum or Flanker that they have designed. The US has the experience of the F-22 and unmatched technology and budget, I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up inferior to the F-35.
Still, it's all speculation till the first one enters service. For international customers who are not too friendly to the U.S., its either this or the J-20.
Why do you think the J-20 will be better by the way? I'm not really knowledgeable in both programs but last I heard the Chinese still had to import Russian jet engines. And I'm not sure if their R&D has outpaced the Russians yet (though I wouldn't be too surprised).
>>29073579
Still more fun than Sulejmani.
>>29074632
>Well I can pretty confidently say that it'll be worse than the J-20.
No Bao Shu. No one buys Chinese aircraft because they're junk. J-20 is not even considered 5th-gen nor anybody cares about it. Chinese government keeps pretending to leak those pictures to show their secret superproject, but it's not scary or secret. Chinese don't even know what they're doing.
>>29075018
>Why do you think the J-20 will be better by the way?
It's all speculation at this point, since so little is known about both projects (and especially the J-20, chinks keep that shit under wraps).
But I'm mostly basing this on the fact that the airframe just kinda looks like it has more of the VLO features on it than the PAK-fa, with jaggy edges on weapons bays like the American 5th gens have and particularity S-ducts, which it very clearly has.
The other thing is radar, the Chinese have AESA radars on a number of different platforms, their IL-76 AEWAC has one, some of their home-grown flankers have them.
The Russians by contrast, have never had an AESA on an airborne system that is in service, they've teased prototypes but never put one into service. Add that to the claims coming out of the Indian media that the PAK-FA has massive reliability problems with its radar makes me think the russkies are just plain incapable of building an AESA that's compact and reliable enough to put into service aboard an airborne platform.
The J-20s engines are shit, but that wouldn't help the PAK FA if it gets skewered from BVR by an opponent it never saw, and on top of that the PAK-FAs engines aren't exactly great itself.
I'll say J-20 > PAK-FA, but I'll qualify that by adding that given how much secrecy surrounds both projects, I could be wrong.
>>29074632
>J-20
>Fullmetal railway carriage with imported Russian engines
>Better than anything
Gook shill, PLEASE.
>>29069366
>>29076714
Chinkshits should trade AESA technology for jet engines with the Russians.
>>29069299
OP, don't forget to take your medications.
Every day until you're cured.
Is Business Insider a reputable source for anything? I have read one or two articles and it sounds like sensationalism bs.
>>29078971
I don't know why OP didn't just link the original Jane's article.
http://www.janes.com/article/58166/singapore-airshow-2016-analysis-pak-fa-s-asian-export-hopes-stymied-by-lack-of-fifth-generation-qualities
>>29079157
The claim that it uses the same radar and engine as the Su-35 is wrong though.
Also the line of logic is quite flawed. Is the F-35 EODAS not good because it's a version of the Sniper pod which can be used by basically everything?
>>29079157
>, said Lockheed Martin representatives.
nuff said
>>29076714
>Mfw this will carries less than a Blk5-F F-35
ayylmao
>>29079157
>said Lockheed Martin representatives.
>meanwhile, the opinion of F-16's father about the F-35 considered shitposting
>>29080993
>sprey
>meaningful contribution to society
>>29080993
>F-16's father
>implying
>>29080993
>meanwhile, the opinion of F-16's father about the F-35 considered shitposting
>Sprey
>F-16's father
Lolno. He was in the group of miscreant Critics with no real combat or aviation engineering experience who came up with the Red Bird proposal as a contrarian attack on the Blue Bird>F-X>F-15 program. They weren't even involved in the LightWeight Fighter program that very loosely used the Red Bird theories, and loathed the changes that turned the YF-16 minimalist dogfighter into the bigger, heavier high tech multi-role it became in the F-16A that has proven to be one of the most successful fighters in the world, right behind the F-15 and its stunning 105.5:0 air to air record.
>>29079169
The FLIR is based on sniper, EODAS has no analogues because it's an extension of the missile warning system that got a major upgrade.
>>29081641
Most IRSTs are camera-track units focused on air to air threat detection and targeting. EODAS is an electro-optical imaging array that creates a single big 360x360 spherical view that the fighter's computer can analyze for potential ground targets, ID aircraft and correlate that with the Barracuda and radar's information, get higher res looks using the EOTS if in its arc, etc., it's a massive change from IRST systems.
>>29080759
If anything, it's in lockheed's best interest to convince people (especially) congress of how good Russia's new fighter is.
>Congress, gives more money, or else the PAK FA will FAck all our F-22s and F-35s!!"
>>29080759
>>29080993
>What qualifies a fighter aircraft as being a next-generation design is more than just having a stealthy-looking shape, said Lockheed Martin representatives.
This is incontrovertibly true though.
