how does /k/ feel toward the t-50
/k/ doesn't know anything about planes that weren't made in the USA
>>30305967
True
>>30305898
>>30305967
Very hard to care much about low production Russian technology demonstrators that are displaying outdated technology.
looks cool
still shit tier russian tec.
Oh, another one of this threads... Keep them coming, I love reading the senseless shitposting.
The truth is noone knows much. Pak-Fa program is not transparent and in very early stage.
![PAK_FA_T_50_compressor_stall_on_MAKS_2011[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/vhPBztJ.jpg "PAK_FA_T_50_compressor_stall_on_MAKS_2011[1].jpg")
>>30306962
>>30305967
We do know
>same radar as the Su-35
>same engines as the Su-35
>largely the same avionics as the Su-35
>RCS signature 300-500x that of the F-35 (3000-5000x that of the F-22)
>Currently only 55 are scheduled to be built (when the PAK-FA end production in 2020 there are scheduled to be over 500 F-35s in service, plus 187 F-22s)
Which overall makes her look very poor in comparison to the fifth gen fighters, more like the F-15SE than the F-22. The Indians may yet save her, but so far the PAK FA is in really bad shape.
>>30305967
NOBODY public knows a thing about the pak-fa (or the j-20) for that matter because the respective goverments dont release a damn thing about them.
Meanwhile, for american procurement projects, we get a YEARLY list of "things to be fixed", and the projects in general are much more transparent.*
>* this excludes black projects because fuck you
>>30307068
>same radar as the Su-35
You didn't even try. Next time at least try.
>>30307107
>already bringing shitpost images into the thread.
Wew lad. Lets get started then.
Good solid jet, definitely in the running for best 4th gen fighter in the world
>>30307068
[Citation Needed]
>>30307121
>shitposts
>complains about shitposting
>>30307068
>source: my ass
kek
>>30307175
Im not complaining, im joining the party.
![obama[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ygN1N9Y.jpg "obama[1].jpg")
>>30307107
>>30307144
>>30307181
http://www.janes.com/article/58166/singapore-airshow-2016-analysis-pak-fa-s-asian-export-hopes-stymied-by-lack-of-fifth-generation-qualities
>Both the T-50's NIIP Irbis radar and the NPO Saturn 117S engine that are two of the major subsystems of the T-50 are the same as those installed in the Su-35. Also, a number of the avionics on-board the T-50 and Su-35 are common.
http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-the-f-35-really-stacks-up-against-russias-su-35-2015-11
>Indian and Russian press reports are consistently attributing a 0.5 square meter RCS to both versions of the PAK FA.
>A report in Combat Aircraft by Russian journalist Piotr Butoswki from the 2011 Moscow Air Show said, “Based on scant Russian data the T-50 has a radar cross section lower than 0.5m2, which is 25 times less than that of a Su-27.” In 2013, Russia behind the Headlines, which is a state-owned publication, said that the PAK FA RCS was 5.3 square feet, which is almost exactly 0.5 square meters.
>In 2014 and 2015, two Russian reports said its RCS was “0.1 to 1 square meter,” which implies a central value of about 0.5 square meters.
>By way of comparison Aviation Week reported the F-22 achieved more stealth than was required and, “Pentagon officials have said privately that the desired signature from certain critical angles was -40 dBsm [0.0001 square meters], the equivalent radar reflection of a steel ‘marble.’
>"By comparison, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has a signature of -30 dBsm. [0.001 square meters], about the size of a golf ball.” The allusions to steel marbles and golf balls represent the official Air Force unclassified descriptions of the stealth level of these aircraft.
With both hands.
For aviation buffs, vatniks, Slavaboos, and fans of military vaporware, the option to proceed with one hand (while the other commences vigorous masturbation) is also available.
>>30307253
>I always keep the bait pasta at hand, you never know when are you going to need it
>>30307253
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byelka_(radar)
Imbecile.
>Designated metal gold ball units
What kind of a commie are you? Everybody knows F-22 RCS is 0.000000000000000001 square meters.
>>30307253
Slavs. When will they learn.
The biggest question for me is this:
Will T-50 be finally equipped with active missiles or will russian still rely on semi-active R-27 variants?
>>30307478
>What the fuck is R-77?
Pls.
>>30307253
I saved some pasta that no one will read:the post
>>30307253
Slavaboos BTFO
Gets killed by an F-22 BVR, T-50 never knows the F-22 was even there.
>>30307253
Slavs BTFO once again
>>30307469
>>30307497
>>30307500
Hello, samefag.
>>30307253
It's clear for multiple reasons that the T-50 wasn't going to achieve as good stealth as the F-22 and F-35, because not only is it obvious Russia can't just magically catch up just like that, but also because of a simple look at the aircraft. The T-50 has many non-stealth features (not just S-ducts you faggots), like a completely lacking geometry, probes and shit sticking out here and there and so on.
But I disagree about the determination of the RCS by just one number other than using it for a very loose sense of scale. RCS varies on many parameters, and I bet the yanks know the RCS of the F-22 and F-35 from all angles and with all wavelengths. They'll just give one number and we have no idea what it's based on exactly. It could be a top bracket, average, worst case and so on.
At least the vatniks are butthurt so you did your job well.
>>30307512
>>30307517
>one or two "haha no I'm not" screenshot replies
>reply quoting all of THOSE replies with an edited screenshot with all (You) replies, with the additional rebuff of the ease with which one can edit said screenshots
There. I just saved you all ten minutes of stupid fuckery.
You're samefag. I'm samefag. We're ALL fucking samefag.
>>30307253
>janes
yeah no
>>30307522
>probes and shit sticking out here and there
It's a prototype, imbecile.
>>30307539
>discrediting the most well sourced and accurate, (as in, there is no better source in all the world) military reporting institution.
WEW LAD
E
W
L
A
D
>>30307563
>the most well sourced and accurate, (as in, there is no better source in all the world) military reporting institution
>What the fuck is Belka radar?
I thought I told you to try. You didn't even try.
>>30307553
And obviously you know exactly what's going to be kept on the end result and what isn't. Are they also planning to fully change the geometry ?
>>30307579
If i knew what the fuck you were referring to, it still would not matter.
One, if they did get something wrong for whatever reason (lack of public information, mistake in deduction, etc) that does not mean they are not a vaild source.
Two, (and this one is more simple), there is no better source on military matters. None. If you wish to argue this, then name a better one.
>Russians still don't have operational AESA
>nips had operational AESA in the 90's
At this point even Indians are losing interest in T-50.
>>30307582
>Test probes will be kept on production aircraft because reasons
Listen to yourself, anon? Is the need to be retarded really this desperate?
>>30307592
>What the fuck is Belka radar?
I thought I told you to try twice. You still didn't even try.
>>30307538
>edited screenshot with all (You) replies
>You're samefag. I'm samefag. We're ALL fucking samefag.
speak for yourself
>>30307579
Are you really arguing that Jane's isn't the #1 military source on the planet? Really?
What's better? RTB?
>>30307633
>What the fuck is Belka radar?
Anon, it's like you are not even trying. Could you please at least try?
>>30307633
Yes, yes he is.
Without a proper response to my simple, logical questions im more than happy to let him wollow in his own ignorance.
>>30307648
>What the fuck is Belka radar?
You could at least try, anon. But you did not.
>>30307620
I'm just fuckin' tired of it. Every other thread. Like goddamn clockwork.
>AAAAH MORE THAN ONE POST WITH AN OPINION I DON'T LIKE, BETTER QUOTE THEM ALL AND DOUBLE DOWN ON MY FUCKING UNERRING STUPIDITY
>HAHA, BUT YOU SEE, THERE IS MORE THAN ONE OF US! SURELY THIS CONVERSATION WILL GO DIFFERENTLY THIS TIME!
>FUCK YOU, HAVE AN EDITED SCREENSHOT
>cue the chain of good on-topic conversation being derailed at Mach Shitpost with a string of edited screenshots
Although given how it's yet another Gen-5 plane shitposting thread, I should know better than to expect more than that by now.
>>30307665
Meh, to me its a simple fix, screenshot, wait for the inevitable transparent as fuck asshurt damage control reply, and then move on.
What derails threads is engagement of trolls. Give them a post or two, give them the time of day, then if they insist upon trolling, just move right on.
Im a little oldschool though. Back in the day "dont feed the trolls" was what was done. Now its just a meme.
>>30307538
>>30307517
>>30307512
Have you ever thought, that we are all just multiple personalities of this one crazy guy and we keep just arguing amongst ourselves.
>>30307253
T-50 does not use Irbis, T-50 does not use 117S
They use closely related systems but not 'the same as those installed in the Su-35'.
>Also, a number of the avionics on-board the T-50 and Su-35 are common.
If he means the IFF L-Bands then yes, but that doesn't mean its 'a number of the avionics'
Jane's is just a propaganda piece nowadays.
>>30307687
That's what it feels like sometimes. Can we just collectively decide to get our shit together or off ourselves for the betterment of the human race? Or maybe just consult >>30307678 as the last voice of reason? This whole psychosis thing isn't really working out.
>>30307563
Well, apparently they aren't.
>>30307665
>MORE THAN ONE POST WITH AN OPINION I DON'T LIKE
Except those weren't opinions, they were blatant shitposts,
>>30307705
It does use a 117, which is a 117S with FADEC (which the prototypes are not useing/did not use if the compressor stall is anything to go by). Pretty minor differences, its pretty much the same damn engine.
>T-50 does not use Irbis
Byelka is just Irbis without the PPA, instead with solid state trasmittors.
Saying Byelka is not like lrbis is like saying the an/apg-81 is not just a 77 with HRM and other improvements.
To note, the bird at the Malaysian airshow was an export bird, and very well might have been stated with actual 117 and lrbis as the export option.
>Jane's is just a propaganda piece nowadays.
I would love to hear your reasoning behind such an opinon.
>>30307774
Then who is?
>>30307820
To clarify, im saying byelka is not a clean sheet design anymore than the 81 is.
>>30307512
You caught me
>>30307845
Ebin
>>30307481
What is "Not in widespread service"
>>30307820
>>30307826
Both radar and the engine are based on previous models, true, but that doesn't mean they are the same, which was what Jane's implied.
>>30307845
What's with the sideways pic.
>>30307068
>>RCS signature 300-500x that of the F-35 (3000-5000x that of the F-22)
But the F-35 has a lower RCS than the F-22.
>>30307481
A missile Russia has yet to procure many of?
>>30307986
It is what the material provided for the expo by the manufacturer claimed, not what Janes claimed.
Did someone say Belka?
>you will never see crazy Belkan superweapons IRL
Did someone say T50?
>>30308141
Nope.
>Slavs trying to put down fucking Janes
l e l
>>30308307
Supposedly someone from the USAF said it, attributing better RAM and manufacturing.
>>30307820
>117 is a 117S with FADEC
Lol.
>Byelka is just Irbis
Double lol.
>I would love to hear your reasoning behind such an opinon.
See above.
>Then who is?
Irrelevant. Jane's posted bullshit and it doesn't become any less bullshit just because it is posted by Jane's. Like that time they confused fucking smoke grenades on T-14 for APS.
>>30305898
>how does /k/ feel toward the t-50
Its my favourite plane.
>>30307820
The AL-41F1 also has 500+ KG more afterburning thrust and is even lighter then the AL-41F1S. But yeah, both engines are pretty much alike but theres a bigger difference then you think.
Oh and the N036 Byelka is an AESA, not a PESA that the N035 Irbis is.
>>30309372
>500+ KG more afterburning thrust
2500. Also new compressors, less weight and better fuel consumption. Only thing 117 an 117S have in common is the same root. An even then 117 is also to some extent a derivative of AL-41.
>>30309451
I think you are confusing the Type-30 engines with the AL-41F1 (117A) or you are looking at the original AL-41F.
117S has an AB thrust of 14.5 tons while the 117A has 15 tons. The Type-30 (I dont know if they are going to call it the AL-51F or something like that) is projected to have 17-18 tons. Similar to the original AL-41F which has 18 tons of AB.
What's happening in this Pak-Fail thread?
Vatniks aren't banned anymore??
- RCS of a Super Hornet
- BOLTS
- No S-Ducts
- Costs soaring
- Already doing modernization programs for the rest of the air fleet because the PAK-FA will not work
- More prototypes made with still ZERO fixes to the inlets, BOLTS, RCS or anything else
- Only buying 12 by 2020
- India pulling out
>5th gen
It have two options :
1- Even it's a fail, complete the project in 2025 and build 24 for Russia and 18 for India
2- Have the same ending as the SU-47 project.
>>30309621
Russian ones were banned but you have your occasional non-Russian Vatniks to help fill the hole.
>>30309657
This, it'll most likely be another SU47.
The Russians should have just let MiG build a 5th gen.
>>30309672
You mean Poos in loos and South Americans, they exist in /pol/ so they probably read 2 sputnik articles about T-50 and came in here to shitpost
>>30309692
There's a lot of vatnik sympathisers in bongland as well
Why would anyone buy a T-50 when it's basically a Su-35? Not saying that the Su-35 is bad.
>>30308307
>The F-35’s cross section is much smaller than the F-22’s, but that does not mean, Hostage concedes, that the F-35 is necessarily superior to the F-22 when we go to war.
http://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/gen-mike-hostage-on-the-f-35-no-growlers-needed-when-war-starts/3/
>"I would say that General Hostage … is accurate in his statement about the simple stealthiness of the F-35 [with regard] to other airplanes," Bogdan said in the interview. The statement was accurate for radar cross section, as measured in decibels, and range of detectability, he said, and he scoffed at the notion that anyone can tell how stealthy an aircraft is just by looking at it.
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2014/December%202014/The-F-35-on-Final-Approach.aspx
>During a flight debriefing, Col. Chris Niemi and Maj. Nash Vickers both said a comparison of the radar-absorbing F-35 to its nimble but less stealthy twin-engine F-22 cousin might not reveal the whole story.
>Niemi has eight years in the cockpit of an F-22 and is one of the few Air Force pilots who is qualified in both the Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II. He said he wanted to set the record straight on the Lightning II, once and for all. “Many have compared the F-22 to the F-35 but that comparison is unfair. With the F-35 Lightning, this fighter sees better, has more range, and is stealthier than any of its predecessors. This airplane, with its fly by wire technology, is super easy to fly and it has a very linear response.”
www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2015/August/06/F35-Lightning-public-debut-shows-the-right-stuff
>>30309657
Wonderful memes.
>>30309860
I'm really not expecting a reply with arguments from you, dumb fuckers.
You have the Internet, so try to deny any thing I said
>>30309851
>he scoffed at the notion that anyone can tell how stealthy an aircraft is just by looking at it
>Whole /k is guessing T-50's RCS by photos
Keks were had.
>>30309892
>Replying with arguments to a bait
Well, in order to receive a proper reply you first have to stop shitposting memes.
>>30309899
Keks at you, maybe.
>>30307253
Furthermore, even that airpoweraus russian shill thinks its mediocre, and he did a proper study.
>>30309986
"proper"
>>30310349
Feel free to refute it
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2012-03.html
>>30310369
>Importantly, even were the simulator capable of modelling shallow angle specular and non-specular RCS contributors, the Russian MoD would not permit sufficiently detailed disclosures on the RCS reduction treatments applied to the airframe design, as a result of which reasonable assumed parameters would have to be applied instead of actual values.
>The latter underscores, as was the case with previous effort on the J-20 prototype, the difficulty in attempting to perform highly accurate numerical RCS modelling of foreign airframe designs, where access to high fidelity shaping data, surface feature data, and materials type and application is actively denied.
>>30305967
>/k/ doesn't know anything about planes that weren't made in the USA
this thread confirms it.
>>30305898
About 180 F22s built. About 170 F35s built. While the T50 isn't even out of prototyping.
>>30311062
>While the T50 isn't even out of prototyping.
neither is F-35. and it's already being deployed. sucks to be a pilots in that deathtrap
>pls don't shoot my radar just crashed
>>30309657
>- RCS of a Super Hornet
comparing average frontal RCS against a best-case value.
try again. planes are not steel balls.
>- BOLTS
they're rivets. f-22 has hex bolts. both are inconsequential for RCS.
>- No S-Ducts
solved by RAM and radar blockers.
>- Costs soaring
see: every fighter program ever
>- Already doing modernization programs for the rest of the air fleet because the PAK-FA will not work
temporary measure, because interim engines are weaker than expected.
>- More prototypes made with still ZERO fixes to the inlets, BOLTS, RCS or anything else
fortunately sukhoi engineers don't take advice from random internet posters
>- Only buying 12 by 2020
production will ramp up once the plane gest sorted out
>- India pulling out
DESIGNATED
>>30307253
>T-50's NIIP Irbis radar
post discarded. PAK-FA has a new AESA radar. this is something you can verify by spending 5 seconds on google.
for extra points, try counting the T/R elements.
btw, T-50 has two additional side-looking AESA arrays. this is a first fighter with such a feature.
>>30307616
>trying your best to really find the most minute badly interpreted detail to shitpost
Are you really that desperate ? Not all probes and sensors are test probes. I obviously wasn't talking about the test probes, but you know, for example that large IRST bubble sticking out. But hey, since you really, really want to shitpost, suit yourself.
>>30311309
>IRST is a probe
Seriously, anon. You didn't need to backpedal this hard.
>>30311305
>- No S-Ducts
>solved by RAM and radar blockers.
Ram doesn't do shit for compressor blades, which is the entire point of S ducts.
>>30307107
>>30307121
:-(
>>30311408
>and radar blockers
>>30311089
The F-35's prototype was the X-35, the jets built today are (limited rate initial) production aircraft. Also, the radar resets was fixed a month or two ago.
>>30311370
>trying your best to really find the most minute badly interpreted detail to shitpost
You started correcting someone over a specific term used right next to "and shit". That's just desperation.
>>30311516
No, anon. Desperation is trying to justify saying "probes and shit are sticking out" by resorting to IRST from the original "y-you don't know exactly what's going to be kept on the end result and what isn't" point.
IRST ball has a tiny contribution to overall RCS.
>>30311708
a ~6" radius sphere still has an RCS around 10-100x larger than that of an F-35 or F-22 though.
>>30311829
Communist propaganda, it's 100000-1000000x larger than that of an F-35 or F-22.
>>30311829
shows how unrealistic RCS quotes for american aircraft are
>>30309621
They just switched to using their botnets to evade the ban.
>>30307522
The RCS numbers given are specifically in the 30% +/- of the nose of the aircraft in the X(Horizontal plane). This means if an adversary aircraft was within that range it would have a certain percentage of a chance per second of detecting it.
>>30307458
kek of the week!
>>30307085
Underrated
I was a "believer" but so much time with nothing to show for it... it's dead.
>>30309237
>t. ridf
at last you tried
No countermeasures
No AESA
Lost to an F4 Phantom in a live simulation
There's a reason why only shit tier 3rd world countries buy russian planes.
>>30315197
0/10
>>30311043
So you don't know anything about the PAK FA?
>>30311866
How so? There are no spheres on the F-22 or F-35 for that reason.
>>30311408
>Ram doesn't do shit for compressor blades
What if you put RAM on the first row of fan or compressor blades?
>>30307464
>Vatnik spotted.
Stay mad that your collapsing kleptocracy is a paper tiger.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QrU1hZxSEXQ
![chinese+China+Develops+Minshan+Turbofan+Engine+For+jl-15+k-15+f-15+l-15+89123456789Fighter+Jet+Trainers+5,000+kg+class+export+pakistan++Minshan+ws-12131451461781792+(3)[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/WU4UqhR.jpg "chinese+China+Develops+Minshan+Turbofan+Engine+For+jl-15+k-15+f-15+l-15+89123456789Fighter+Jet+Trainers+5,000+kg+class+export+pakistan++Minshan+ws-12131451461781792+(3)[1].jpg")
>>30315629
For applications where you can only coat something with a few millimeters of RAM, only around 10% of the incoming radar energy is absorbed, the rest reflects.
If you look at an engine like in the pic, there are angles on those fan blades that would cause the radar energy to bounce back out the intake. In addition, complex concave shapes like engine faces generate a fair bit of diffraction, which gives a somewhat omni-direction return of energy.
S-ducts work because the walls of the intakes can be lined with quite a bit of RAM and so to get to the engine face and back out, you have to keep getting reflected, having energy absorbed each time.
Radar blockers work similarly by having simpler fan shapes that reflect energy coming straight down the intake, off against the walls of the intake, but they're limited in that their blocking blades generally don't block complete line of sight; to do so would cause a greater loss of intake pressure, harming engine performance.
>>30305898
looks nice
>>30305898
oh look another SU-35 variant that the Russians will make 6 of how threatening
>>30315817
Says a country that will be Brazil 2.0 in 50 years time.
>>30315853
Even outside that the shaping is just "hey it kinda looks stealth-ish." Like the active wing gloves, the weird full-motion stabilizers, and so on.
It's a smaller, more angular Flanker.
>>30308307
Nigga, the F35 is like 2/3 the size of the F22
has better RAM coatings
top of the line electronics.
it's wayy more stealthy than the F22
>>30315629
it doesn't work,
RAM coatings aren't that consistent and the tolerances on the compressor blades is too tight.
>>30318189
sieze does not matter. it has a shape that does not work well for stealth.
just look at all that crap on the bottom.
>>30318203
the lifting body had to be expanded to fit shit inside yes.
the size of the jet plays a role in cross signature.
plus, the old F22 coatings aren't nearly as good or durable as the F35 coatings are.
>Source, i fucking work with both f22 and F35 RAM coatings.
>>30318217
Proofs?
>>30311305
Is this some imaginary shit?
Wtf are you talking about?
>>30318283
im not >>30318217
but the USAF has a new career field called LO, and they have one job. Paint toxic shit on jets, and monitor the coatings to ensure X amount over X area has not flaked off. Its an enlisted job, so the chances of an enlisted person being on 4chan and shitposting are very high. one might say...guaranteed.
broof?
I worked gathering data for the haveglass program. got to see it grow up past gen 1, 2, and 3/UHG.
unrelated Fun fact, early in the f-35 program <REDACTED> and it came off over the ocean.
>>30318517
yeah, i also faked the photo of the radar just for this thread
>>30318283
I don't want to get arrested for violating ITAR restrictions.
i can't offer any proof without going to jail mate.
i'm not enlisted, Aerospace assembler
>>30305898
I like it. They're not scared to chuck it around a bit. f22 and f35 demos are so boring.
I am surprised that no one has posted this image yet.
>>30305898
The whole project is teetering on the brink, the only thing that keeps it from going over is...
The Indians, which says a lot about the state of the Russian Aerospace industry and the quality of their product. Reading between the lines on some of stuff published in the Indian press, I think the problem is that its "stealth" is shit and its radar doesn't work.
Neither are particularly surprising, in particular AESA radars are hard, and the Russians have never put on on an operational fighter before, they keep teasing theses supposedly in development AESAs, but none of them ever seem to end up on active duty, probably because they've never got them working to a satisfactory level.
>>30318945
Imo you and most of /k/ are too eager to belittle russian aerospace achievements and have no appreciation for what they've achieved with the worlds biggest bully shitting on them 24/7 for the last 60+ years.
For example the usa are touting interconnectivity between fighters like the f35 as a new revolutionary technology but this has been a feature on the mig 31 since the 1970's iirc.
>>30318993
That was the soviet aerospace industry, the Russian aerospace industry is a wizened decrepit old husk of the former
>>30318999
That decrepit old husk is currently the only organization on earth with the ability to send men into space isn't it?
>>30318882
>Talking about RAM would violate International Traffic in Arms Regulations
riiiiight
>>30319018
Yes, using the remnants of the Soviet aerospace industry.
>>30318901
we never seen that one before.
>>30319037
I'm guessing you have no problem with america using and taking credit for the remnants of the nazi aerospace program though.
>>30319058
and british aerospace program. lot of stuff was handed over to americans for free
>>30319018
X-37 can, usaf
space-x can, an american company.
Also the chinese have a manned research station, albeit small one
>Stealthy
>Intakes clearly visible from the front
>Engine nozzles exposed as fuck
kek
Can Russia even afford the program anymore?
>>30307845
You write dates like a eurocuck
>>30319191
post-1990s Russian programs aren't about mass production, they can't afford it. It's half PR program, half desperate attempt to stop industrial decay.
>>30319164
x-37 is unmanned and tiny.
space-x is not yet ready to carry humans
>>30319191
>Engine nozzles exposed as fuck
show me a single modern fighter where nozzles are not "exposed". the only one i remember is YF-23
>>30319254
Nozzle is the wrong word, but it doesn't look like the engines in the T-50 were design with stealth in mind at all.
>>30319254
>x37 is unmanned and tiny
You say that like it's a bad thing.
I didn't realize BTW that the F35 was even stealthier than the F22. That's gotta fuck with targeting radars bad.
>>30319058
Americans retains the ability to innovate and design new product without hanging on on the coattails of their forebears, Russia only barely does so.
The Soviet Union could consistently roughly match the US in terms of military aircraft and spacecraft throughout most of its life. The Russian Federation can make no such claim, only making minor improvements on Soviet ones.
>>30319018
Literally the only reason the Americans haven't built something to replace the Soyuz after the shuttle got canned is because the low Rouble and generally poor state of the Russian economy make using the Soyuz cheap.
But will it be better than the J-20
>>30319191
Russia has an economy the size of Italy. Of course they can't compete with european or US fighters...
>>30319272
in case he was talking about engine fairings, they are painted now. probably switched from titanium to composites.
>>30319286
>The Soviet Union could consistently roughly match the US in terms of military aircraft and spacecraft throughout most of its life. The Russian Federation can make no such claim
That's partly due to changes in military doctrine. They put more emphasis on missiles and you could argue they're a match for the usa in that area.
>>30319254
>space-x is not yet ready to carry humans
Its perfectly capable.
The only part that has been wonky is the landing of the rocket, the payload has always been successfully put into orbit AFAIK.
>>30307181
>>30307469
>>30307497
>>30307500
Shut the fuck up. I'm so tired of being disrespected on this goddamn website. All I wanted to do was post my opinion. MY OPINION. But no, you little bastards think it's "hilarious" to mock those with good opinions. My opinion. while not absolute, is definitely worth the respect to formulate an ACTUAL FUCKING RESPONSE AND NOT JUST A SHORT MEME OF A REPLY. I've been on this site for 4 years: 4 YEARS and I have never felt this wronged. It boils me up that I could spend so much time thinking and putting effort into things while you shits sit around (probably jerking off to Gardevoir or whatever furbait you like) and make fun of the intellectuals of this world. I've bored you? Good for fucking you. Literally no one cares that your little brain is to underdeveloped and rotted to comprehend my idea...MY GREAT GREAT IDEA. I could sit here all day whining, but I won't. I'm NOT a whiner. I'm a realist and an intellectual. I know when to call it quits and to leave the babybrains to themselves. I'm done with this goddamn site and you goddamn immature children. I have lived my life up until this point having to deal with memesters and idiots like you. I know how you work. I know that you all think you're
"epik trolls" but you're not. You think you baited me? NAH. I've never taken any bait. This is my 100% real opinion divorced from anger. I'm calm, I'm serene. I LAUGH when people imply I'm intellectually low enough to take bait. I always choose to reply just to spite you. I won. I've always won. Losing is not in my skillset. So you're probably gonna reply "lol epik trolled" or "u mad bro" but once you've done that you've shown me I've won. I've tricked the trickster and conquered memery. I live everyday growing stronger to fight you plebs and low level trolls who are probably 11 (baby, you gotta be 18 to use 4chan). But whatever, I digress. It's just fucking annoying that I'm never taken serious on this site, goddamn.
>>30319375
nice pasta
>>30319298
Russia may have a GDP the size of Italy, but they control roughly 1/4 of the worlds supply of raw materials. They don't do any good lying around in the ground, and they can get them far cheaper than (for example) Italy can. Building equipment like this costs a LOT less in Russia than it does in Italy.
>>30319375
>Russiathrowstantrum.pasta
>>30319417
It's true that it's cheaper, and adjusted for GDP (PPP) they're just behind Germany. But not everything is cheaper for them. If you add machining or whatever imported equipment and the prices do increase quite alot. And if they don't import anything, their RnD prices would skyrocket, or the quality drop by a large amount. So it's really hard to say where they stand exactly if you factor in everything. But it's clear beyond any doubt that they are behind the US, because the US holds 5 times the economical power even when adjusted.
Russian vaporware
>>30319302
>they are painted now
>painted
>painting titan
Lol. They are covered now, not painted.
>>30319164
>X-37 can
ROFL, RTFM.
>>30305898
Have we decided what her NATO reporting name will be?
>>30320096
Firefox :^)
F-15 ---------------> Silent Eagle F-15SE
Su-27--------------> Silent Flanker Su-50
>>30320058
as i said. they replaces covers made from unpainted titanium with composite ones.
do you even know what an uncovered engine looks like?
>>30319336
>The only part that has been wonky is the landing of the rocket, the payload has always been successfully put into orbit AFAIK.
The Crew-Dragon has yet to fly, so its still some time before the US can put people into space again, sadly. I think 2017 is the target though. And the Orion, if that ever flies again
>>30320211
>Su-27--------------> Silent Flanker Su-35
Ftfy.
>>30320096
Flounder.
Russians cannot into stealth.
Infact, only the US has the infrastructure to do it.
>>30320096
Plonker
>>30320546
what infrastructure
>>30321154
Resources
>>30320096
Failure
>>30321216
What resources
>>30318993
stage 4
>>30320122
That plane was bitchin though
>>30321660
Engineers, research, the capacity to conduct said research, money and so on.
>>30322352
>Russia doesn't have Engineers
>Russia has no scientists
>Russia has no labs
>Russian economy meme.
Okay that's what i thought, in the real world of course they have all of those things.
>>30305967
>/k/ doesn't know anything about planes that weren't made in the USA
Very sad.
Very true.
>>30320096
My favourites are the Foton or the Fantom.
>>30320695
(Russian) Fighter plane names have to start with an F.
>>30319040
Sarcasm? I cant honestly tell.
>>30323455
Flubber then
>>30323455
>Fighter plane names have to start with an F.
Faliure
>>30322403
You joke, but post-cold-war a lot of engineering talent defected; creating a massive gap in institutional knowledge that has yet to be repaired.
But of course you knew this, you bright spark.
>>30323878
That's reserved for F-35.
>>30324135
Keep dreaming that Lockmart is as incompetent as Sukhoi, Vatnik.
>>30318993
It's not interconnectivity that's being bragged about, NATO also had that ages ago with Link 16. The F-35's advantage is that 4 of them can combine their 16 sensor systems into one, and while remaining stealthy.
