China Flanker Thread II

[FirstImpulse]

This "anti-stealth" stuff doesn't exist. The Russians hyped it for awhile before they flew the PAKFA, but it was all smoke and mirrors, just a rather pathetic attempt to "counter" the US. It's about as real as plasma stealth or the F-313.

Let's get back to talking about real things, please.

 

[FirstImpulse]

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet, but here is a CGI of J-15s.

Nice fin flash. I'd love to see real J-15s in real paintwork soon.

 

[Engineer]

your irrelevant is a way to excuse you lack of arguments, basicly a way to avoid realities.

Wrong. I said irrelevant because that is the simple reality. The Su-35 being told where a stealth fighter is does not equate to the Su-35 having the capability to detect a stealth opponent. The issue here is that Russia is behind others in stealth technologies, which is why you desperately want to argue stealth is obsolete. Even Russia believes stealth is important and incorporates related technologies on to the PAKFA. That shows how wrong you are.

As far as J-15 is concerned, the aircraft can take-off and land from an aircraft carrier while Su-35 cannot. So, the Su-35 is also useless for naval aviation.

 

[MiG-29]

Wrong. I said irrelevant because that is the simple reality. The Su-35 being told where a stealth fighter is does not equate to the Su-35 having the capability to detect a stealth opponent. The issue here is that Russia is behind others in stealth technologies, which is why you desperately want to argue stealth is obsolete. Even Russia believes stealth is important and incorporates related technologies on to the PAKFA. That shows how wrong you are.

As far as J-15 is concerned, the aircraft can take-off and land from an aircraft carrier while Su-35 cannot. So, the Su-35 is also useless for naval aviation.

Too much feeling, man, too much feeling.
Relax take it easy.

MiG-29K can take off from aircraft carriers and it does not have canards.

Su-35 can not take off from carriers because it does not have an arresting hook.


But TVC nozzles allow STOL.


about the rest well you can believe what ever.

 

[MiG-29]

This "anti-stealth" stuff doesn't exist. The Russians hyped it for awhile before they flew the PAKFA, but it was all smoke and mirrors, just a rather pathetic attempt to "counter" the US. It's about as real as plasma stealth or the F-313.

Let's get back to talking about real things, please.

Tell that to EADS cassidian and Almaz-Antey and they are more real since they are manufacturers not forumites like me or you who just opine.

 

[Engineer]

Too much feeling, man, too much feeling.
Relax take it easy.

You are

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

again. You need to stop assuming others act the same way as you do.

MiG-29K can take off from aircraft carriers and it does not have canards.

Su-35 can not take off from carriers because it does not have an arresting hook.


But TVC nozzles allow STOL.


about the rest well you can believe what ever.

MiG-29K being able to take off from carriers does not mean Su-35 can take off from carriers. Navalizing an aircraft isn't as simple as adding an arresting hook or thrust-vectoring. As for the rest, I know base on knowledge and facts. Believing is for fairy tales.

 

[T-U-P]

Can we get back to the Chinese flankers?

 

[Jovian]

Amateur shot of J-15...

Can anyone tell from the length of the engine nozzles if this plane is using WS-10A or AL-31 (?)?

 

[Lintuperhonen]

Can anyone tell from the length of the engine nozzles if this plane is using WS-10A or AL-31 (?)?

The engines seem to be Al-31Fs, at least when it comes to their shape. I think that these are photos of the first prototype from August 2009, but I cannot be sure.

 

[Totoro]

i would concur. al31 nozzles end around the line of trailing edge of horizontal stabilizers, or are a few cm longer (which can't be seen in this low res pic). ws10 engine nozzles are shorter and end before that line, there is a visible 5 or so cm difference.