j10s can destroy j11 because the j11 is a very very big target. j10s problem is range because its a small airplane and china is such a big country. but if range was not a problem j10s all the way

The youtube linked below has been posted many times before, but some folks still do not understand what is being said.

Northrop Grumman F-35 sensor video

Pay special attention to the visual at 3:27-3.33. Real time combat identification and targeting on the wing is the trick F-35 brings to the table. The capability, in a single pass, to discriminate between fleeting combatants by type, decoys and civilians solves the shortfall that made NATO air operations over Bosnia and Kosovo a failure. If a Thales or Selex product has the same capability, or the plan for a plan to provide the capability, show it!

lol j20 has those things too or the location for it. see picture of the bottom

need to send these to diaoyutai asap!

South Korea has the advantage of being able to draw on the expertise of American & W. European suppliers. It doesn’t need to do everything itself. And its own technology is much more advanced than that of Iran.

As for your bizarre & factually incorrect political rantings – I suggest that you desist forthwith.

i am not sure what are you saying.
iran does not have much expertise to follow because they are isolated so they developed many things on their own like tanks, ships, helicopters and others.
korea want to make these same things but need alot of help to do it and mostly from Americans so it is true that they do not have industrial base but need to rely on the industrial base of others.

kfx cannot exist because there is no technogical base for koreans to make it. very easy to make plastic model. kfx is like iranian stealth, but at least iranian stealth you can sit in it.

I would think of the following:
The Chinese started with the IL76 as basis and thought about what didn’t their needs. The fuselage is too small, and probably they need more payload (MBT carrying capability).
Attaching that fuselage to the IL76 wing would result in quite a poor aircraft, additional drag through wetted surface and high induced drag at high weights reduces range.
Next step is to increase wing area, that reduces the induced drag, helps take-off performance and landing distance. Disadvantage: structural mass increases, partly compensated by new technology like a supercritical wing.

The latter was only possible with a new engine.

The increased wing and thrust and limited fuselage length results in a large tail. Bit disadvantage for drag and weight, but not that bad.

MTOW of a military transport is kind of a decision. If field performance and structural design margins are relaxed, you get the numbers a C-17 features. If civil design rules apply, the C-17 becomes a 250t aircraft.

china need a new cargo airplane that can carry its tanks. the new tanks china makes is a little bit wider than russian one so it cannot fit in their ilshin.
also most of the world moved to wide body

wow even tho plane look bad, even iran can make bubble canopy but some others cannot!?

mig29 is nice but can it carry like this all on one engine?

Russians do not believe in using targetting pods?