China Flanker Thread II

[Blitzo]

Well the ATD-X is a tech demonstrator, not the prototype for a real fighter. And it's small too, around the size of an F-35 if not smaller I believe.
SAC's "J-16" is a real fighter and it's size ranges anywhere from J-20 ish to larger than J-20. wait and see.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Well the ATD-X is a tech demonstrator, not the prototype for a real fighter. And it's small too, around the size of an F-35 if not smaller I believe.
SAC's "J-16" is a real fighter and it's size ranges anywhere from J-20 ish to larger than J-20. wait and see.

ATD-X demonstrator is a lot lighter and smaller than the F-35. Not even enough space on it for weapons bay.

 

[no_name]

Sorry I mean general layout not its size. If they have a stealthy flanker it might just end up looking very similar.

 

[Blitzo]

Well if it was a stealthy flanker it would look more like the PAK FA I imagine.
But apparently this is a brand new airplane by SAC (I know!) and it resembles more the F-22 than anything (which the ATD-X in turn resembles too). We'll see

 

[siegecrossbow]

Well if it was a stealthy flanker it would look more like the PAK FA I imagine.
But apparently this is a brand new airplane by SAC (I know!) and it resembles more the F-22 than anything (which the ATD-X in turn resembles too). We'll see

Judging from what the big shrimps have been talking about the plane might look like a PAK-FA with conventional vertical stabilizers and no "gap" between the two engines.

 

[no_name]

Do you think it's better to have whole detachable weapon bay box? That way you can customise the internals all you want. And maybe also have the option to fly without them.

So eg without gaps with the box on, and similar to the PAK-FA with it off.

 

[Blitzo]

Conventional vertical stabilizers you say..?

But why wouldn't they put in V tails instead... it's not like SAC's that incompetant. If the aircraft is like a PAK FA without the gap between the nacelles the underside should look kinda like the YF-23. Zzz speculation is fun.

 

[Blitzo]

Do you think it's better to have whole detachable weapon bay box? That way you can customise the internals all you want. And maybe also have the option to fly without them.

So eg without gaps with the box on, and similar to the PAK-FA with it off.

The thing is the PAK FA already has weapon bays between it's nacelles. If you're suggesting adding on additional weapon bays... well it just wouldn't make sense.
If you're going for CFT style weapon bays like the silent eagle, or stealthy hard points that's a different story.

 

[no_name]

I mean assume that the SAC plane without weapon bay looks like PAK-FA with the weapon bays. And SAC plane with weapon bay looking a bit more like F-22 with flat belly.

 

[siegecrossbow]

By conventional I didn't mean that the fins aren't canted. What I meant was they are not all movable like the J-20's tail fins.