Lateral Realities:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1542994&postcount=313

Our old friend toe-in:

AeroFranz @ ‘Secret Projects’
…Rule of thumb for S-duct is length = 3-5 times engine face diameter, depending on how aggressive you are with turning of the flow…

Jesus H. Christ!!! 😮 What can those elongated yellow panels in line with the towed-in engines possibly be!!??:confused:

Beware the False Messiah 😉

Approximate rendition of radar blocker (in blue) vis-a-vis compressor face (in red):

[ATTACH]183084[/ATTACH]

Note: rb slightly oversized, accounts for LEVCON deployed downwards in today’s pics, and the various aerodynamic intake ‘devices’ preceding rb (unless you think the 117 is shaped thus _/ ;)).

If one compare R-77 dimesions (20cm diameter ) or R-27 (~25cm) to that of the probable weapons bays (~1meter), will see that PAK-FA can carry 8 of them easily. 6 will be a huge surprise to me.

Yeah, but you have to remember the launch ‘plumbing’ takes up some space also, my money’s on 3 R-77s abreast, i.e. 3+3+1+1=8. If it’s only 6 in total (which I doubt), they’ll have to give up the 2 missiles per target doctrine.

How some people can take a month’s ‘sabbatical’ and still post the same old “the World is flat” tripe- is beyond me…….best ignore ’em.

(Assuming all bids meet the provisions) it f**ks up the plan to give the contract to the cheapest bidder.

Boeing are gonna be looking for added value extras back into that RFP! :diablo:

…and again…

I thought they packed ’em off to Miramar after such high jinx, hey Mav? :confused:

@ Zhukovskii 02/03/10:

There is a reason why Su 34 uses Democles.

Its unlikely that the PAK FA will have an EOTS equivalent.

Then there will be a reason for Thales to co-operate on an equivalent system for the PAK-FA, maybe even a HMD- they’ve had access to TopOwl-F for years.
The French (and Germans) have v.good hi-tech industrial ties with Russia at the moment.
Do you think all the F-35’s systems are indigenous?

8 weeks ago it was highly unlikely that the PAK-FA would turn-out as it has.

Do try to keep up quadbike.

So clearly the pretend ‘MiG-35’ (29M2) and MiG-29KUB ‘967’ are NOT the same aircraft- but both have the [early] Zhuk-AE aboard.

Imho, the pretend ‘MiG-35’ and the MiG-29K ‘961’ are involved in the MMRCA trials and ‘967’ is testing the Zhuk-AE for the RuNavy (and probably for the follow-on batch for the IN)…….but then…why no arrester hook :confused::confused: