Will they do a “visual” RCS mapping of it, and of the F-22, like they did with the F-35?

Of course they will, no doubt taking a lead from this very forum- having exorcised that Demon of Stupidity (with wall-eye vision), who claimed the inlets were straight through.

Then the nonsensical, die-hard PAK-FA detractors will be left with the fickle, loose change arguments like ‘look at those rivets!! that IRST & engine nozzles don’t look stealthy…’

That’s not the point; it’s about atitude: if anybody dare to question the unbelievable T 50 it’s blasfemy…

It’s not blasphemous at all. But there must be a sudden (deeply uncomfortable) realisation that the F-35 at least, will be outperformed by the T-50- even the lay-person can see that from pics.

If it achieves the LO characteristics/signature of the F-35 and matches or surpasses the flight performance of the F-22- the Russians must be thrilled!

But if the World is flat and the entire Universe revolves around the Earth- then you’re free to believe it.

Message for Carlo Kopp- Be careful what you wish for!!;)

They’re not different, STRATO, it’s just the angle of the pic.

OK Q. given the height of that wheel, where is the room for it to rotate and lie flat in the wing root (like Su-27), note position of MLG door.

A: There is no room. It retracts into the intake cavity. Savvy?

Edit: here is the room, also note fundamental differences of the MLG ‘mechanics’:

Highlighting a debate raging in BR forum, what (if any) implications does PAK-FA/FGFA have on MMRCA. Is that tender’s $10bn+ a prudent spend or would that cash be better spent and/or invested.

My 2 rupees (on where to put that $10bn+):

(1) cancel MMRCA tender- saga’s been far too drawn-out

(2) order additional Su-30s or even Su-35s (incidentally a Libyan order has been concluded- if reports are accurate), to cover force depletion.

(3) speed up LCA mk2 development and increase units on order

(4) spend the rest on PAK-FA/FGFA programme- in addition to what has already been allocated (maybe even acquiring more single-seaters), to facilitate an IOC of that type shortly after 2015 for both AFs.

The FGFA development can be drawn-out, keep the Russians sweet & happy (and don’t dribble-on about Gorshkov- that was Sevmash’s idiocy, about which the Russian Govt. is seriously embarrassed over). Oh, but don’t waste money on the MiG-35.

Many bucket-loads of thanks to djcross’ analyses & perspectives on the PAK-FA, over on the other thread :).

Another comparison (accuracy of the dimensions is not certain):

@ djcross, how do you think the T-50’s RCS (at least strucurally- as there’s much to develop) fares in the side elevation. I mean it’s very flat and has those dinky all-moving tail fins, wrt F-22/35. Obviously, from the rear elev. the F-22 comes out top.

This is my guess, of course if the plane does have s duct

You are doing a lot of fuss about it, check the intake closer, you are most likey wrong.

And hey! it fits with the landing gears room 🙂

Why is there a deep circular hole in the intake wall?…….oh, that would be for the tyre…

[ATTACH]181270[/ATTACH]

Let him be over_G. Everyone knows why he’s throwing his toys out of the pram.