J-XY/J-35 carrier-borne fighter thread

Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Alfa_Particle said:
Damn... Decided to take a break from Weibo scavenging and they immediately decided to post something new lol. Allegedly J-35 prototype 350003 taking off from 2 years ago.
View attachment 129360

Interestingly, the image source said this particular prototype should have a new designation of '3503' by now, and prototype '3505' (the one seen recently without the pitot tube) isn't even the newest.

Source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...


And another one from the same series ...

J-35 allegedly 350003 now 3503 older - Captain小潇 - 1+.jpg
 
by78

by78

General
Self-explanatory.

53720385876_f3bceacffe_o.jpg
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Alfa_Particle said:
I mean, it helps if you actually know what a J-35's tail looks like. I suggest Google.

The arrow also should make it easier to spot :)
Click to expand...

My question is, why is this photo of note?

If we do assume that it is a tail of J-35, why is that notable? It's not like we haven't gotten years of clear images of the entirety of J-35 from multiple different angles, so does this picture offer anything new?

Or is it the background (which is also very unclear) which is significant?
 
Alfa_Particle

Alfa_Particle

Junior Member
Registered Member
Blitzo said:
My question is, why is this photo of note?

If we do assume that it is a tail of J-35, why is that notable? It's not like we haven't gotten years of clear images of the entirety of J-35 from multiple different angles, so does this picture offer anything new?

Or is it the background (which is also very unclear) which is significant?
Click to expand...
Merely for the record. Hence the "it's not much."

Also, since only the rear portion of the tail is actuated, plus the trimmed corner, we can be fairly sure that it's a J-35.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top