I only question this point of view as if there is some sort of nature law “Russians are always ahead, they can never learn from Chinese!”

This is the problem. You’ve entered a discussion with an agenda, or a chip on your shoulder. To defend your favorite country or aircraft, thats why you’ve became sensitive to any kind of discussion relating to it, whether positive or negative.

I know everyone here has a bias towards something, but that’s not the right direction to go in a discussion. You look like you’re trying to pick fights in the Indian section, Russian section, etc by inviting some kind of comment on China.

The pro-russians here, even if they have some bias, have shown willingness to entertain the idea of cooperation with China.

what happened to the older thread? I remember there was a much longer one

almost all MPA aircraft thus far use a small airliner for the role. P-3 was the 707, P-8 is the 737. Japanese P-1 is 737 sized. the Atlantique is even smaller.

Il-96 based AWACS and Tanker would be more cost efficient than the Il-76 based one in terms of operations.
Since the CR projects will probably take at least another decade. Il-96 could work now.

but a smaller AWACS (like a balanced beam radar used by Australia) and an MPA type aircraft.. the MC-21 could definitely work and is flying now.

I think if it was actually produced. It would have entered service in the late 80s.
it would mostly appeal to countries that need something light, and its short range means useful for countries that have small areas to cover or just need something for air policing at the border.
so then these aircraft only really need like 4 hard points. maybe 2 aams and 2 drop tanks or 4 aams.

Since it will be close range, then the X-29s close in agility would be useful.

I know the X-29 weighed more than the F-20, but it was still lighter than the F-16.

I think it could have found a market in the 1980s or 90s Switzerland, Kenya, Singapore

that said not sure if that planform is still useful for larger planes that want to fly at higher speeds and longer ranges. so I think it might only be useful for a light fighter at best.. or a trainer like what the Russians are doing

It was not a STOL or a VSTOL and it was a quite a big jet, it was the YAK design for the MFI program, the one that Mig took with the 1.42/1.44. The engine was also gigantic, the Sojuz R-179-300 with 200,1 kN of thrust. The aircraft was bigger than an F-35.

how practical do you think it would be in reality?

it can be argued with confidence, the internal volumes allow you to place at least four air – to-air missiles

where exactly? even in your own drawing. much of the fueselage is taken up by the engine, and air intakes and air ducts.

Never put a significant RF scattering source (canard in this instance) in front of a reflector (wing).

what about in the case of the J-20 or X-36? or is their canards on a different position