+1 Ken

One question that needs clarification on my side is:
Are the article 129 and the type 30 two different projects or are they the same? Any news wrt the new engine?

Another question:
Are there new AAMs scheduled beyond RVV-MD/SD? And what are the non-export designations? R-74 & R-77-1?

The differences between the Rafale A and the final Rafale are similarly comprehensive as are the differences between the EAP and Eurofighter. There is no need to artifically twist facts to somehow excuse the slower progress of the Eurofighter programme. It is as it is.

Wrt RecceLite I never heard that the RAF wants it. The Luftwaffe does and has that pod in its inventory. Bear in mind that the Litening 3 will offer a recce capability with P1Eb that allows recording of the video imagery, including automated recording as defined by mission planning.

I would not be surprised to see the Carnards to operate independently from each other, when the pilot roll the jet.

But When the J-20 makes a turn, both Carnards would be pointing downwards, it all depends on the Airspeed.
You can clearly see it on those pics above, with the EF. The air vortices created from the Carnards are being feed upon the Main wings and thus creating(optimizing) the lift over the main wings.

Its not that complicated.
Yes its the Main Wings(Delta wings design) thats creating the lift, not the carnards itself.

On a triplane(Su-33, MKI etc) design, you have the Elevators to add lift as well.

But on slow speed handeling, like on take-off, IMO when rotating the jet, the Carnards will help creating lift, but only for a brief moment. See pics of MKI, all delta wings with Carnards and even the Pak-Fa with its LEVCONS do this.

Asymetric use of canards would cause severe torsion forces to act on the fuselage which can cause major fatigue in those areas. That’s the reason why canards are used symetrically. Canards also produce lift on their own in contrast to tailplanes which dump lift. However, most lift is created by affecting the wing airflow as you have described.

Well let me re-clarify they will apparently have some kind of DASS 😉 as well as IFF, so at least they won’t shoot each other down by accident!

Progress I suppose…

IFF yes, DASS I doubt so.

Wrt Oman delivery dates, how about T3A aircraft production has just begun, T2 isn’t completed yet and maybe Oman simply asked for that delivery date for this or that reason or they are looking for specific capabilities from day one which may need some more time… There are many reasons why this may happen. The Saudis received their first aircraft less than two years after the contract was signed, though they received aircraft from the UK T2 production slots which accelerated things.

Btw I would suggest to simply ignore that Joint Stupid Retard. 😉

Who will be the customer for these new MiG-29M? I mean to remember that they were earmarked for Syria!? But is this still current?

T3A production contract amounts to 7.6 bln € + 2.5 bln € for T1 & T2 obsolesence removal. That’s about 59 mln € per airframe.

ok, but how many Su-27PD and Su-30 was there originaly?

I found this:

There was just one Su-27PD afaik and this was the one which later became part of the test pilots aerobatics team. There were two Su-30 prototypes, one of which became the famous Su-30MK demonstrator (BoNo 603), but I don’t know about the other. There were the two Su-30 pre-production ac which became the Su-30RVs and six Su-30 production aircraft (BoNos 51-56) for the RuAF. One of these 6 ac became the first Su-30MKI prototype (56 IIRC) and another one became the Su-30KN demonstrator (53 IIRC).