< Insert name of Chinese aircraft here >

They all look like a Porsche. Track record of Yugo.

Not all work can be done concurrent like that. Sounds exceptional compared to previous designs.

The navy keeps their capabilities under a pretty tight lock and key, too. Even a setup on a frigate can make the entire weapons systems of a bleeding edge fighter look silly in comparison due to much less constraints in physical size. And with frequent ship overhauls on their weapons systems, there is no perfect way to know the limits of one ship to the next. These ships have gone through constant upgrades that really don’t seem to freeze until retirement. If fighter-sized systems were so bleeding edge then ships would mount 4-6 of them around their perimeter of destroyers rather than SPY/SPG.

Prove it. Because track while scan technology has been around since 1951. It’s not a new technology.

I guess when we are talking 80’s people keep exercising their selective memories. Illuminators in the 80’s were fielded in the 70’s and were far more capable than the initial designs from the 50’s and 60’s. Ships were getting overhauls on their weapon system parts practically every five years. Sometimes even more often. And we are talking a large mechanical mechanism not as restricted in capability to that mounted on aircraft. And aircraft fielded in the 70’s could illuminate a half dozen targets supersonic or otherwise, AND track while scanning with the same unit. But (zOMG!) one missile per shipped launched missile was the limit. Poppycock.

Don’t underestimate illuminator technology. You don’t lock up one illuminator per missile, you time share. And each pair of illuminator can work in unison to simultaneously illuminate dozens of targets. The technology in aircraft to illuminate more targets than missiles available using a single illuminator has been around for decades. The motors and transmitters on ships aren’t anywhere near constrained for power and cooling as an aircraft.

We certainly cannot keep quoting low figures for Super Hornet versus F-35A when there is no evidence to suggest Super Hornet is immune to inflation. You go Super Hornet to take advantage of existing stocks of ordnance. Otherwise F-35A beats it in almost every aspect. Let’s face it, Super Hornet is a high drag large aircraft with a mid-sized capacity to do work. It has less to do with pylon canting and everything to do with surface area. If Super Hornet had stayed compact like the original Hornet, and been optimized to low drag, it probably has more attrition in naval use due to higher wing loading and higher landing speed. The larger design was chosen because it was safe. Safer on carriers. Safer in politics.

http://shop.keypublishing.com/issue/list/publication/AIC