Yes, for the flanker, the nose and tail give it a lot of its additional length.
But still, against say the F-22 it is 10 feet longer! That's a lot.
Last edited:
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
- Status
But still, against say the F-22 it is 10 feet longer! That's a lot.
Honestly, for me not exactly since it is proof how b787 argues: first he makes an unclear comment - most likely hinting that it is completely wrong and that the J-20 must be a F-111-like mega-monster bigger than a Flanker ... surely since Russian sources say so.
And then he claims the F-14 is not a big aircraft since he has models ...
And that's the way we are discussing here ?? ... even if the length of a J-20 esp. exactly side-by-side to a Flanker is known since ages ?
So much on reliability and credibility.
Anyway ... now back to the J-20.
Deino
Honestly, for me not exactly since it is proof how b787 argues: first he makes an unclear comment - most likely hinting that it is completely wrong and that the J-20 must be a F-111-like mega-monster bigger than a Flanker ... surely since Russian sources say so.
And then he claims the F-14 is not a big aircraft since he has models ...
And that's the way we are discussing here ?? ... even if the length of a J-20 esp. exactly side-by-side to a Flanker is known since ages ?
So much on reliability and credibility.
Anyway ... now back to the J-20.
Deino
Haha
but maybe coz some say with her very long range J-20 can be mainly a fighter-bomber so maybe why he mean F-111 for F-14 What you mean exactly ?
Last edited:
I really hope that the J-20 makes it to Zhuhai this year. Will probably put five-year long debates to rest if they showcase some of the stats.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
The F14 is quite large... I've seen a few in person. ... And they do drop bombs. We call them bombcats. Initial design though was for fleet air defense and was paired with the Phoenix which was paired to the crazy range radar to take out cruise missile carriers or bogeys at extreme ranges before they pose a significant threat to the carrier. At that time the swing wing was chosen because it allows the f14s to be both fast and maneuverable.
The design goal was for the alert fighters to reach max Mach to target then engage them using either the phoenix or if that fails revert to shorter range AAMs. The primary goal was to protect the carriers at all cost from air threats and keep the action as far away as possible that's why it had to be big to achieve those goals.
The design goal was for the alert fighters to reach max Mach to target then engage them using either the phoenix or if that fails revert to shorter range AAMs. The primary goal was to protect the carriers at all cost from air threats and keep the action as far away as possible that's why it had to be big to achieve those goals.
We had this model "EOTS-86" from the company Beijing A-star come out about a year ago with this exact same product, and it is almost certain that J-20's EOIRST system is not from Beijing A-star.
They have many products including targeting pods, and other EOIR systems, some of which are advertised for J-20, others depicting FC-31, and Flankers and even freaking Tu-160 and PAK FA, and it's obvious that they are merely displaying those aircraft as "potential platforms" for their systems.
So it's obvious that they're almost certainly using deceptive marketing, because the PLA would almost definitely not allow one of their real suppliers for such an important subsystem to flaunt themselves like this.
I made an album of some of Beijing A-Star's pamphlets from last year at a trade show, where one can see their convincing but misleading marketing:
Lol just did a search and this showed up.
- Status