See, you suppose ≠ God suppose

Yeah, maybe there is no any distortion in transmission but the resource is false, ergo there is no truth still.

The words you wasted were too many.:diablo::diablo:

I swear you’re trying to say something but for the life of me I don’t get it… :confused:
What if there is no “distortion” in “transmission” but no “distortion” in “resource” instead?

Well, maybe they are talking about 80s level Al-31, not all that impressive or incredible to improve on that in some way.

I do find it a little humorous though that the posters here were adamant how unlikely it was any more engines would be ordered from Russia and suddenly…boom. An order for 123 Al-31s from Russia.

I found it even more amusing right after that order was announced… we saw a J-10B with WS-10A o.O
Part of the thinking behind that was most people expected production of J-10s to go to the B version which would use WS-10A, so the recent order means either they will be building As for a while yet, and/or they are there to replace engines on existing J-10s. The fact new J-11B/BS/15 since last year have been using WS-10A is encouraging.

still seeing the tree but not the forest?

I’d like to see a counter to those numbers myself, actually, preferably with a source. Clearly those claims (from wiki) are way outdated and we’ve heard clarifications in previous years indicating WS-10A as a good deal more capable than Al-31 but never a solid source.

what was the point of the competition?

Foster some competitiveness between universities and institutes? Stoke up a bit of innovation that could be used for future projects?

They haven’t all produced flying designs, everything is essentially a model aircraft and the flight control is completly different to test aircraft….

I’m not even sure its at the petit duc stage. So was it just a RC model competition with an exciting contemporary twist?

Looks like it.
As I said before I wouldn’t use this compeition or any participating uavs to gauge the development of any possible ongoing advanced ucav projects…

I like how there were two or three flying wing models just casually there. Makes me wonder how far along the bigger institutes and corporations are with their real ucavs and bomber studies.

if you can find an online copy if this book, i’ll make an effort to read it 🙂

How is that a reply to my post? :confused:

“Oh it’s a huge 23 meters long, 70,000lb behemont bomber/striker !!!11!! Oh it’s a MiG-31 style interceptor, fast , but not much else, it’s underpowered and un-maneouverable!!!!111!!!”

I wonder if those who keep to the above nonsense will retract their words, ESPECIALLY the so called western press “experts”.( why on earth are they get the huge amount of money they obviously get for the rubbish they come out with?)

On another theme, obviously i’m no expert, but J-20 seems to be quite light on it’s feet, is it ?

Bit early to garner evidence against that… we might have to wait until zhuhai 2018 or 2020 until we see J-20 actually pushed a little. And even then they might keep it conservative as they always do.

… And even if we do see it fly or outfly aircraft of the same generation I doubt most diehard “experts” will exactly admit their wrongs.

—

I doubt we can garner anything significant about J-20s aerodynamics and manouverability from these pics and videos which we haven’t already ascertained or agreed is un-ascertainable.

If it’s real… Either a testbed for a larger ucav or its a UAV like sentinel.

Wish we had a sense of scale for this thing… It could be a meter long for all we know.

canard and delta lay out of that CAC CG model, intakes, and engine are more similar to the MiG 1.44 than the Mirage 4000. Could be coincidence, could be that there was some links.. but it certainly does look remarkably similar save for the tail.

Zzz I think he meant the cac twin engine j-10 was to be to j-10 what the mirage 4000 was to be to mirage 2000; similar in concept rather than specific design.
I thought it was pretty obvious that is what he meant…

Imagine a twin engined j-10 with v tails. That is basically what you get with the cg. Or you get an aircraft looking like mfi. Superficial similarities.

Hello my fellow keypublishing stalker.
I can read, but are you blind?
maybe you should take a good look at the aircraft I posted a picture of versus the one you posted. Are you saying they are the same aircraft?

I don’t know why you immediately assume a connection with MFI from that picture, wouldn’t it be more logical to believe CAC could have looked at different configurations of the aircraft now known as J-20?

To answer your original question then — yes they do look similar.
To the rest — no, or at least there’s nothing to suggest that beyond superficial similarities.

—

But re that picture, if it is genuinely from AVIC/CAC then it could either have been early studies on J-XX or the twin engined J-10 project which didn’t seem to progress very far.

You really do seem to choose the most controversial and one of the least likely possibilities forward before others, is it simply that you didn’t consider them? :confused: (to put it more simply, are you trying to troll? Cause you really have a knack for it, so much that I’m not sure if it’s intentional) :diablo: