I think paralay’s numbers are for frontal surface: http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=16811&mode=view

seem like F-23 was supposed to have an under nose IRST like F-35

Yes and no, it was planned for ATF to be equiped with advanced IRST (AIRST) but it WoV would be much smaller then F-35 EOTS.

AIRST
http://i60.tinypic.com/9s49ea.jpg

F-23 intakes are curved in vertical but also in horizontal plane which complicate analysis of F-23 intake stealth capability:

I already posted the production YF 23 blueprints that show the same amount of engine fan as Pak Fa. So that idea can be scratched.

Whether someone took a jig saw to the outer cowleing of the engine yet or not doesn’t put into question the designation of the aircraft.

You either believe the Russian design team or you don’t. They are developing a stealth 5th gen aircraft. You either believe that or you believe that they are faking it. That is conspiracy.

A stealth jet is a jet who’s airframe and layout has been designed to deflect radar. And all the details on top of that does not change whether the contours were directly designed to deflect radar or not.

They make no bones for the fact that their 2nd tier jet (their f35) is not stealth.

YF-23 blueprints doesn’t mean much, RCS measurement was done on F-23EMD model which is different then YF-23. And if you look F-23EMD blueprint you see how well engine is hidden. After all it was Northrop which in that moment was world leader in stealth technology.

No I just dont like attempts to prove PAK-FA is same or better then F-22/35 in stealth realm. It simple isn’t no matter Russians say, and I see they are saying it is.

It is similar as if some American engineers say “we can build better RD-180 then russian one”.

It is quite curious that PAK FA apparently uses a simpler UV system for MAWS when Su-35S is already using an IR-based system. http://www.npk-spp.ru/deyatelnost/avionika/126-optiko-elektronnaya-razvedka-.html

It is logical.

Su-35 will detect early by enemy radars so missiles would be lunch from long range and their engines will stop working when they are closing on Su-35 so UV MAWS doesnt have any usefulness for SU-35 in that scenario expect in dogfights but most modern air to air aren’t dogfights.

Missiles which will be fired on PAK-FA will be lot closer, UV maws will detect its engines and be capabile to track them plus PAK-FA pilot and computer will have relative location of launcher so they can plan effective counter attack.

There is also possibility of IR sensor in 101KS-O, we know president-S have one install in DIRCM dome.

Hmm. You watch RT news?

This video should help you understand the whole AF-2 vs F-16.

If I understand right, in that scenario F-16D with two fuel tanks was more agile then AF-2 because it was used for reference and was better as pilot said? And AF-2 didnt had systems which F-35 have so it could be lighter and it wasnt restricted as operational F-35 are today.

While I don’t want to give this stupid sim the time of day, there are two points your wrong on:

The Apg-81 does have a jamming capability. Not a wide area, wide spectrum, force protection jamming like a Growler. But the APG-81 can jam radars, and has been demonstrated.

Second in REALITY, as has been stated by USAF personnel, a package of F-35’s will operate with far more distance between wingmen than legacy aircraft. That is one of the tactical aspects of the F-22/35 that differ from the F-15/16. The F-35 sensors and comms allow a wider separation between wingmen. And in fact, being in close proximity is a negative, not a positive for LO aircraft.

APG-81 cant be use as wide area jammer so I dont think it would be used as jammer agianst any capabile opponent because you would probable need to use one APG-81 agianst one enemy fighter and that would compromise F-35 location.

Much more interesting jamming question is SAP-518 capability against AIM-120/Meteor seekers.