• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

F-35B/C Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter)

Treetop Flyer said:
Do you think they don't know people are taking pictures?
Click to expand...

That was the roundabout point of my question. Considering nearly every picture has tree branches creeping in, perhaps they weren't specifically aware of these. Of course was it their intention to have someone take pictures and "leak" them? That would certainly seem likely.
 
Flying Toaster said:
33xesk4.jpg
Click to expand...

I'd say the solution is obvious...recall Major Gant.

Clint-Eastwood-Firefox.jpg
 
The chinese must have had a spy in the Boeing "Phantom Works" when Boeing proposed the YF-23. This a/c looks like a stretched version of the Boeing a/c (probably for more internal fuel/weapons). This is probably not a coincidence. JMHO.
 
Fog said:
The chinese must have had a spy in the Boeing "Phantom Works" when Boeing proposed the YF-23. This a/c looks like a stretched version of the Boeing a/c (probably for more internal fuel/weapons). This is probably not a coincidence. JMHO.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing.
 
I'd say it looks more like an F-22. Or a stealthy MiG-31. The Russian design looks a lot more like the YF-23 to me.

YF-23:
yf23roll.jpg


J-20
j20_2.jpg

PAK-FA / T-50
Sukhoi-T-50-PAK-FA-KnAAPO-5AS.jpg
 
Though I'm not an aerospace engineer, or an aerodynamics specialist, I would offer the suggestion that it may be a case of form following function.
 
From the Australian article: "Any notion that an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or F/A-18E/F Super Hornet will be capable of competing against this Chengdu design in air combat, let alone penetrate airspace defended by this fighter, would be simply absurd." They go on to say that it will be a direct one to one equivalent to the F-22. All this despite the fact that they don't know what kind of engines it has or will have, what kind of radar, or any other avionics, and it hasn't even flown yet. They pulled that article right out of their ass.
 
Not to mention the fact that the assessment does not account for training, ordnance carried, or the support given the aircraft, such as AEW, tankers, and the like.

Sort of reminds me how if you were to just flip open Jane's and compare basic stats, you would think an F-4 would easily take a F/A-18E/F. Lots of what goes on happens under the skin of the aircraft.
 
I look at all these "OMG the Russians/Chinese/Martians/Whoever are building ____ we need more F-22's with AIM120D's and blahh" hysteria articles with the same big grain of salt.

Seriously, remember all the stink of "Oh No the Americans will never win a dogfight again" when they Russians did that aerobatic display with the SU-35. You couldnt watch a documentary on fighter planes without hearing about how the Russians had perfected Dogfighting. Or my personal favorite... all the crazies that came out of the woodwork when this started making photo appearances....
1279092572sukhoi_s47_berkut_r1_c1.jpg


The Air Force Museum in Dayton is full of 1 off aircraft that were built, flown for the better part of several years, tested, and put in.. you guessed it a Museum. Just because the Chinese built something that looks eerily like something we built almost 25 years ago is no reason to go off the deep end like some of these people would believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top