Search results

i guess open source descriptions have to be few at this point of time and IRIS-T doesnt belong to the tendency you described as well. my take is when it comes to manuverbility petals cant be totally replaced by TVC or/and gas-dynamical controls as per you said.....well unless some super TVC...

cant tell which one so i was just guessing. what i do know is when ones nationality cant offer him that much of pride one of the methods he may adopt is probably to go under another banner or apply for mutiple IDs.

looks like our seemingly white guy friend is using more than one ID in this forum and this time he forgot to swap back to one of the IDs so we got these 3 posts look from 2 users done by only 1 ID actually.

he has said.....its PL-10.....R-77 is a medium range AAM....usually not supposed to be put in there......

actually i dont know there will be a real successor of su-25......so may be i was wrong to say that.....but..... 1 my personal understanding (i guess many got the same opinion) is.....to make new generation of attack aircrafts for countries like the us and russia is possible .........but why...

these days a fighter jet is too expensive and time consuming to make......i think there could be pure bomber in the foreseable future but no pure fighter at all......an air superiority fighter is no more there.....or you can say an air superiority fighter also needs the ability of ground attacks...

how this known fact leads to stealth vs marnuverbility?? or can j-20 be more stealthy???

1 every one can guess the figure by comparing j-20 with its surreding references like j-10 j-7 jf-17 other moving veicheles and tech guys there.........but thats a guessing only..... 2 you dont know how tall a man in the picture is unless you know him personally......unless you know it for sure...

thats supposed to answer WHEN you going to use their radars??are you trying to say: NEVER??? theory is always in theory.....if in theory what guidance system do you think your missile will be using?? radar??IR seeker? cant be camare can it?...... then how to hit the stealth target in the first...

when there is no settallite image you surely dont know how big size j-20 is so you can only find some references close to j-20 in some pictures to compare and try to draw some preliminary conclusion and then it turns out to be not that accurate.....this is something probably inevitable...

it was not just him but many tended to think j20 got a similar size of f-111 back then....... no assessment of a weapon can be 100% correct..........and the only way to give an accurate assessment to a weapon may be fightting a real war........ how ever his qualification is important......

1 i am talking about some stealth planes you are saying WW2 history........not that we dont know history but history is history and who is only good at hisotry should go to high school and uni to become a history teacher........ 2 my little suggestion for you in this specific thread is the only...

you better show me a decent reason how this is a copy or stolen tech in j-20...The Aviationist » China’s new stealth fighter’s missile launch rails prove Beijing can improve U.S. technology

1 then when would those expensive and difficultly developed and advanced radars on those stealth fight jets say f-22 be used???? or just cant be used in the senario of j20 vs f35?? 2 i assume your last sentence in your 2nd paragraph implys manuverbility of stealth jet is still important....well...

i think the most funny thing is not about what vs what but when people are talking specific things parts techs details and new developments he just comes out with all the history 14 year old young boys probably have known............history cant prove any thing that is going on in the current...

maybe not a direct answer but a worth reading assesment...... Chengdu J-XX [J-20] Stealth Fighter Prototype / A Preliminary Assessment

1 if j-20 wanted to achieve stealth only it wouldnt be designed that way probably excluding the engine exhaust part (which needs to be improved later on)........canard design is for better manuverbility.....if we didnt need to consider the manuverbility the whole design can be more...

the bottom line is if the jet is not that overwhemingly stealth....then find the reasons behind............because the techs are not advanced enough or if you go too further other aspects may need to be sacrifised.....prc needs to make sure the former factors can be largely reduced........the...

1 how ever the us finally picked f-22 but not f-23......stealth is not the only thing you need.... 2 if you focus merely on stealth you surely lose some other aspects......other wise why not make a smaller and faster B-2 as a fighter jet???very stealth............ 3 different radars to detect...

in general j-20 gives an impression that the whole work is more focused on its manuverbility rather than more stealth techs with the debatable canard design and unstealth engine exhausts (at least so far) and actually the whole rear part of the craft imo..........how ever the new development...