Is it just distortion or is something interesting going on at the tip of the radome?
Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
However, it does resemble some representations of the MiG LFI layout.
One minor downside with this intake scheme is that the radome-size appears small for an aircraft of this size. This may be a problem if they intend to use it primarily for BVR role.
I’d previously commented on the limited radome capacity.
Skywatcher
Captain
It looks like a mockup, but will need higher resolution pictures to tell for certain (the canopy looks painted, judging from what seems to be rather smudged "sawtooth" boundaries between the canopy and its frame).
To be fair, it isn't that small.
May very well be bigger than Rafale and Gripen radomes. +Being sneaky helps.
My wild speculation of the day is this thing has a hyper IRST sensor in the tip of its radome.
Sorry, this is what happens with blurry pics of shiny new things!
Sorry, this is what happens with blurry pics of shiny new things!
All the prototype/demonstrator 5th gens we’ve seen have used nose pitot during the test flight process. The sole exception may be the KF-21, but it is strangely already a prototype despite not having flown yet.
I think we should be able to tell if it is actually flyable once we see the engine nozzles.
This picture is stitched together and upscaled using AI - plenty of opportunity for one or the other or both algorithms to mess up tricky detail geometry.
While it dates back to the mid-1950s, new MiG-21 production variants (as opposed to upgrades or conversions of existing airframes, as with the F-4) were being introduced right up to the early 1970s. So it continued to play a role and it most certainly was the light-weight component in combination with initially the Su-9/11 and later the Su-15/MiG-25. MiG's single RD-33 spiritual ancestor of the JF-17 came close to creating a successor, probably running afoul of the USSR collapsing.
Also, thanks to its cumbersome design, the MiG-29 was actually a light-weight fighter in terms of capability if not size - no need to dwell on how short-legged it is. It might actually have been more successful if it had been single-engined and thus smaller (with costs more in keeping with its performance)!
Due to the requirement of carrying at least a minimum useful weapons load internally and having a viable combat radius even without drop tanks, there is a certain minimum size for stealthy fighters. You are never going to get one down to the size of a Gripen or JF-17 while still satisfying these demands. With the aforementioned example of the MiG-29 showing how NOT to do a light-weight fighter and the F-16 as an indication of a better way, I expect Sukhoi will avoid the pitfalls and ensure a decent fuel fraction.
I think many people wrongly assume the F-35 represents a lower bound on useful capability for a modern fighter - its huge popularity with Western-aligned air forces may well reflect a lack of a lighter option, however. Certainly, studies for a single-service (rather than joint) USAF low-cost fighter (Boeing MRF-24X, Northrop MRF-54E) were A LOT closer to Checkmate than what the F-35 eventually turned out to be!
Ultimately the fate of this project will likely hinge on whether Sukhoi manages to find enough export customers to get it into production with (next to) no Russian military funding. If that succeeds, expect the VKS to take advantage.