@KGB

MFI didn’t have stealth requirement because ATF RFI 1982 didn’t had it either. Only when Northrop proposed their stealth fighter and back it up with computer simulations USAF decide to put stealth as requirement and it was No1 requirement.

@KGB

You are right about Su-57 it is VLO design, and if it isn’t why would Russians bother with stealth nozzles for example?

But you still are trying to present F-23 same as Su-57, it isn’t. What you don’t get is F-23 intake design is bent in two planes, first bend is in horizontal plane, second bend is in vertical plane,because engines are above intakes.
Su-57 engines are in same level with intakes, what confuse people is shorter nose wheel so Su-57 look like it have engines above intakes.

One more thing F-23 intake would be different then one on YF-23 it would have DSI bump which hide small part on engine which can be seen. F-23 intake design is brilliant solution because it doesn’t need long S-duct intake but hide engine very well.

@KGB

When Su-57 took off they planed +200 for Russian air force, 50 before 2021, and then oil price drop plus sanctions, and India probable left program.

So money is reason why they are buying smaller number of Su-57, nothing else. If India return or economy recover be sure they will order more Su-57.

BTW if you don’t believe me:
tass.com/defense/994572

Money is problem.

P.S. What official say we can only consider as PR, so when they say “no problem because Su-35 is the best so we don’t need mass produced Su-57 now or in near future” we just :rolleyes:

Russians are also planing to build VTOL fighter for their new carrier. Borisov talked about that earlier. So it is possible for Turkey to get modern VTOL which isn’t F-35.
https://sputniknews.com/military/201712151060040750-new-russian-vtol-aircraft-analysis/

YF-23 was excellent super cruiser:

Though the YF-22 was a more maneuverable aircraft, the YF-23 had far greater supersonic cruise capability—especially when outfitted with the General Electric YF120 variable cycle engines. Even when powered by the less powerful Pratt & Whitney YF-119, the YF-23 had the ability to fly an entire sortie at supersonic speeds above Mach 1.4 (explained to me sometime ago by Barry Watts at the Wilson Center—who was an analyst on the Northrop team at the time). The sleek prototype jet could also cruise at slightly more than Mach 1.8 when equipped with the YF-120.

“I don’t recall Barry Watts, although the name has a familiar ring. He was right about supercruising for the whole sortie, as that’s the definition (Ps=0), but he was wrong about the number,” Jim Sandberg, test pilot of the YF-120 powered YF-23 told me a few years ago. “The one you quoted was just a bit shy for our PAV-1 that was equipped with the relatively underpowered YF-119 engines developed by P&W. ‘My’ airplane, PAV-2, equipped with the more powerful YF-120 engines developed by GE supercruised quite a bit faster—‘very fast’, as the USAF censors advised us to say.”

i will buy yours and msphere explanation if you have an article handy that show the lada being cheaper per kilometer,
not counting purchase cost, just the spares cost that would inflict such an enormous impact

That was example you can’t just compare fuel costs, you need to take cost of engine and parts in equation. You can find on net how much AL-31F cost and how much cost F100-PW-220, PW-220 higher price isn’t proportional with it’s service life, in fact I would say 3000hour of AL-31F is very similar with 4000 TACs of PW-220.

If you don’t know what your talking about, it is best say nothing…… There is no glass with golden paint. The EOTS windows aren’t even glass, nor are RCS treatments “golden paint”. You are dead wrong about the IRST treatment because you don’t seem to get what the EOTS “windows” are made of, why they are shaped as they are, and how even some RF energy that isn’t absorbed or reflected away from source isn’t going to reflect off the EOTS components due to the design.

EOTS window “glass”-https://www.dodmantech.com/ManTechPrograms/Files/DMST/Transparent%20era…

Sapphire glass is therm which you see many times so it is pointless to say it isn’t glass it is sapphire, and that doesn’t change nothing becuase both materials are very transparent for radar waves.

And again I would point out F-117. It only hidden FLIR when it wasn’t need, it had flat window with special mesh (radar absorb material) so it would reduce FLIR rcs when it is used.

I thought EOTS have gloden tint:
http://www.jsf.mil/images/f35/f35_technology_eots.jpg

But now I see it is clear sapphire glass which is not good for RCS:
http://plarealtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/f-35-eots.jpg

As far as IRST detection, claims of 50km, 100km ranges against ANY aircraft target are only being quoted by 3rd party news sources and fanboys, especially those in denial about radar stealth. Think about why countries (US, China, Russia, Japan, France) would spend numerous billions building LO aircraft, avoiding detection by a 10 million dollar radar sensor only to have it negated by a $500k – $1 million IR device. Surely the ultimate aircraft would have a giant gimballed telescope on the front. The reason countries still pursue radar stealth is that those detection ranges are fantasies.

Because long range missiles are using radar seekers is reason why radar stealth is still imperative. If we talk about IRST, Eurofighter Pirate IRST can detect subsonic fighter head-on from 90km. So it doenst need to see jet plume nor target need to be supersonic to be capable of long range detection. And I think PAK-FA have similar type of IRST but newer. So same or better can be expected for 101KS-V.

And Chinese are planing to use telescopes for their AD systems, I think.

5a – if ball is electronically transparent, then internal OLS relector cannot have required tilt angle to be made stealthy when in use. Not to mention the other internal components, all with an RCS greater than a pea.

F-35 EOTS is always exposed to radar waves.

Lockheed approch with F-117? Exposed optics? Nope.

Hidden FLIR when there isn’t need for it. Back side have thick RAM to reduce ball RCS as possible as it can done.
Guess what stealth aircraft use same approach as F-117?