do you believe Sukhoi reps?

It’s not about believing. It’s about numbers that can be compared. That means they were derived using the same exact (or near exact) method.

Comprende?

According to who?

according to boeing saleman 🙂

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2009/03/boeing-unveils-the-stealthy-f-.html

Quite the opposite. I have stated MANY TIMES that the production/service T-50/PAK FA will utilize radar blockers.

Removed by moderator

I have said, that the T-50 does not have a “full D duct” to conceal the engine.

It uses slight angling to REDUCE the engine visibility from FULL HEAD ON aspect.

THE REST is taken care of by the radar blocker.

Original text deleted by moderator

Right, only a full S-bend hides the engine 100%. You are right.

A “half S-bend” can hide some of the engine.

A “slight S-bend” can hide some of the engine.

Get the point?! Obviously not. Sigh…

Original text deleted by moderator

2 pics show the engine, supposedly, from a SIDE ANGLE. NO 100% FRONT ANGLE SHOT SHOWS HOW MUCH OF THE ENGINE IS VISIBLE. GET THAT?

Tell that to the people who continue to disbelieve the reality that the T-50/PAK FA does not have any s-ducts. I have stated MANY TIMES that the production/service T-50/PAK FA will utilize radar blockers.

It had “slight bends” which are “LIKE S-ducts” — but not quite.

They SLIGHTLY reduce engine signature, but not fully.

Too much to take in, I know. Read 100 times over. Maybe 500 if necessary. You’ll get it eventually.

See, exactly my point!:cool: What chance has a Su-34 got when it gets pumped by 50 rounds from the Pantsir’s 30mm?
Personally, I’d say the Su-34’s armour is a holdover remaining from a 1980s very ‘old school’ Soviet AF cold war requirement. Tell me, how much armour do the Su-30, Su-35 or MiG-35 carry?:rolleyes:

I have no idea what you’re talking about…. I can’t read through it, whether it’s sarcasm or serious talk, or whatever.

From the gist of it, you think the armor is useless?

I think that you’d be pleasantly surprised that the the armor does save pilots. Even if it’s 50% success rate, that’s very good. Su-25 pilots in the 08 08 08 war, I believe, made it out alive in several occasions.

The Su-34 should be even better in this regard.

It’s not too difficult for them to fire at SAM-derived drones. It is misleading to call these drones as SAMs, considering they aren’t actively guided missiles that are aiming for the missile shot at them. (What’s the point of shooting SAMs at each other?) No, these are SAMs converted into decoys and equipped with new command modules and homing beacons. What would be interesting if they could hit these missiles without their special emitters to simulate larger aircraft. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel. The tests in this manner are to measure reliability, not about raw performance.

You could be right. Details would need to be provided though.

——-

As a side note, look at this badass machine 😉

I would bet if you RAM up the intakes and main reflector parts, you could get the RCS down even further. Rumor is, that the Su-34 has a “cruise missile” RCS. Has been mentioned a few times in some sources. The former might have been done already, though.

What do you suppose the PK is against a large number of incoming SDBs? 100%, 75%, 50%, etc…..? At some point in time, SAM sites will have to reload, move, etc…, and how effectively can the SAM be fired while moving(or can it).

That’s unknown at this point.

But here’s the catch! They test the TOR and Pantsyr against OTHER SAMS! That’s not some glide bomb, that’s a Mach 2+ flying object. And they practice firing at salvos. At last MAKS, it was 100% success.

It doesn’t have anything comparable to SDBs, JSOW, or JASSM, and I’d be curious to see the CEP comparisons between Russian PGMs and their US counterparts. Also, how many types of GPS/Glonass guided PGMs are currently fielded?

Good job dodging most of my lengthy weapons post. SDB doesn’t make the F-15E arsenal automatically better. That’s your last straw isn’t it.

THe JSOW/JASSM are easily “substituted” by the Kh-59Mxxx new series weapons for stand-off strike. That’s 285KM range, at the moment, I would bet it could easily go up.

Anything with longer range is covered by the Tu-95MS and Tu-160 squadrons with Kh-555 and Kh-101 missiles. This is a Russian jet (Su-34, and its weapons), built for the Russian Armed Forces.

CEP wise:

3-10m KAB-250L

4-7m for KAB-500/KAB-1500Kr

4-12m KAB-500S

7-10m for KAB-1500L

That was a disaster. This was just a small operation, but the amount of friendly fire was huge.

Nice try. :rolleyes: That was paranoia and confusion from the ground force shooting the Su-25s down as they could have been Georgian.

There was little civilian collateral damage to speak of. Unless you talk about the Georgian missile spraying of Tshkinvali!

Want to know irony? I wake up and find this on Yahoo!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100707/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan

NATO airstrike accidentally kills 5 Afghan troops

Oops, smart weapons not so smart anymore. :rolleyes:

Each SDB can INDIVIDUALLY hit a target from 100+ km away and penetrate 6ft of reinforced concrete, point detonate, or execute an areal burst to inflict the most damage to soft targets over an area.

How many FAB-anythings would it take to do the same from 100+ km away?

The days of fighters performing dumb-bomb carpet-bomb runs are over, welcome to the twenty-first century.

Yeah! Welcome to the 21st century! F-15E taken down by decent long range SAM system. Or SDB shot down by point-defense missile system! :rolleyes:

Or wait wait! Some true US style, bankruptcy inducing maneuver like:

Using SDBs to take out an insurgent camp when much cheaper, precision-dropped unguided weapons would do (something the Su-34 specializes in – highly precise use of unguided weapons).