So you don’t think that 1 static tester, 1 ground lab, 4 SSD prototypes and 13 pre-production models by 2016 can compete with the F-35 flight test programme? The latter most recently described by Sen. John McCain of SASC as “incredibly troubled”, “a train wreck” and accused LM of doing an “abysmal job”.

Shouldn’t be too difficult, huh?

That’s by 2016. By the end of this year 15 production F-35s will be delivered whereas PAK FA will be getting around that number five years after… so yeah VVS will definitely not be getting PAK FA in the same time frame as F-35.

Unless the scale is decade rather than year.

Its time to have another good laugh over the jokes come regularly from russia::diablo:

Source: http://en.rian.ru/world/20110620/164727664.html

The most priceless part is this is actually come from the mouth of the top techinical officer in russia aero-industry, not the average annoying russian/indian su-27 fanboys.

And you still wonder why the best they manage to deliever, after all these years’s entertaining and endless brags, merely looks like a su-27 get rolled? :diablo:

Careful, a few people here might be offended :p

I wonder if that article is a case of purposeful misreporting or if it was the guy’s real opinion. If the latter… then he’s either real jelly and trollin’ or just ignorant on this matter. Really, how do you call something just a “demonstration”… :/

This is IMO most likely a PS-composition of the other two photos … by using the new one, which IMO was taken a bit earlier than the one already posted a few days earlier. As such IMO in the first photo – the one now found – one is sitting in the hangar and the other one is on the taxiway on the left … rolling from left to right in front of the hangar.

So Deino, what do you think of the authenticity of the first picture with two J-20s? Do you think any of the pictures show two?

Of course not, besides it’s nice to see the evolution of the respective air forces main fighters over time.

O.K let us concede the PAK-FA is Flankerized. So what? There is something bad on this? Sukhoi selected that configuration for some reason.

The only “bad” aspect is possibly the rear and underside stealth, where smoother flat surfaces are considered better (I believe). Sukhoi would have chosen their current configuration for a reason and maybe it isn’t even their final one.
I only mentioned the flanker look because griffon asked a page back whether the PAK FA’s underside was optimized for VLO, and I answered within my knowledge that it wasn’t, and that it could’ve gone for the YF-23’s config rather than the more flanker-esque underside.

There was never any anti PAK FA sentiments from me, no need for people to overreact.

(And whatever, you can call the PAK FA “Mig-29 esque” or even “F-14 esque,” if somehow comparing it to a flanker is considered degrading in any way)

Boeing FXX designers would’ve realised immediately what Sukhoi were up to regarding the intake/nacelle/engine placement (unlike some members here- whether for lack of understanding/knowledge, patisan reasons or other).

So why don’t you change the record and give credit where credit’s due?

The truth will out @ MAKS.

Yeah I was only talking about the looks of it. Before when I was talking about the VLO aspect with regards to bumps and uneven surfaces, yes I thought the flanker-esque engine placement could compromise stealth. I always thought, that in layman, the smoother a surface was the better?

I’m sure T-50 will put up a great show at MAKS, but I never really challenged that. Unless we think Sukhoi might reveal some info about its VLO aspect that is.

I don’t quite know where the FA-XX/NGAD reference is coming from though, models of that particular project shows more similarities in engine placement to YF-23 than the T-50, the latter itself having a similar look to the flanker imho.

Are flat nozzles confirmed to be on the final product? :O

Could you provide a source or even an official/sanctioned drawing?

Beautiful shots emile. Good work!
But your secon pic /here we can see the bellyside of the aircraft) kinda made me wonder.. Why didnt Sukhoi chose the “flat fuselage” the Amris and Chicoms saw as mandadory on a 5:th gen fighter design? What pros and cons does the T-50 approach have?

Internet rumours state a perfect flat bottom fuselage is one of the most fundamental parts on an LO/VLO desig. Is that so? And if so, how does it work? No incomming radar waves bunching around between the airintakes and/or engine nacells?

I’m not sure exactly but it should have to do with radar waves scattering all over the place due to bumps or uneven surfaces, I presume?

I mean there must’ve been a reason most stealthy aircraft in past present and future all tried to have very smooth surfaces. One of the reasons carlo kopp was spazzing over the F-35 cause it had a few bumps on its underside compared to the X-35 prototype, and that will somehow make it impossible to penetrate enemy air defences.

The PAK FA has sort of a similar blended wing body with the YF-23, it’s a good looking aircraft. Hopefully in future they can make the underside and rear less flankeresque and more smooth.