if that’s true then why bother with procuring J-10s if the A-Darter can punch anything from India?

To punch harder 😉

Same size as AIM-9X, same length as ASRAAM but slimmer, sliimmer & lighter than R-73 or Python . . . .

It’s a standard modern WVR AAM, & certainly not unusually big.

swerve, you’re right, I don’t know how I got it into my head the IRIST was bigger.

PS: Thank you Teer for the link. Good one there.

I’ve heard the same thing. I think it had something to do with interaction between canard vortices and canted fins. I can’t remember where I heard that. My aerodynamics studies were mainly limited to playing with lift/drag curves and potential flow theory in my Aero I class in my college days (us space types only had to take 1 semester of aero classes but I digress). So I could be wrong about the vortex interaction explanation. Anyways the MiG 1.44 apparently had no issue with this- it was considered aerodynamically quite excellent by its developers as I recall hearing. The Typhoon also tested a twin tail configuration in some early wind tunnel tests but they went with a single tail.

I believe they chose it because the canard+delta would have been too high risk development-wise (or safety-wise?) if used in conjunction with the lift fan.

Hi Erkokite, good to hear about your experiences. Yes, the MiG 1.44 seems to do that. But what are the costs? I imagine the vortexes would mean the tail would need to be exceedingly strong. Titanium doesn’t come cheap nor does it do good things for weight.

@Deino I’m neither. I think that this is at this point fan boy art but I am speculating that the J-20 is well on its way. I think its an F-22 / PAKFA type design and not a delta canard. Remember, Shenyang won the design.

I personally would like to see a single engined delta (not canard but with tvc and all moving single tail) as the ideal one engined 5th gen fighter. (just my dreams).

I really like this design. I think it has a lot of potential as a smallish bvr-centric UCAV

So what Prasun Sengupta is saying is that the Saudis are so dumb that they couldn’t have the Swedes train them and would rather finance a larger and costlier Erieye deal of the PAF so that they would train them in return ? Wow, what logic !

Psychological research indicates that biases are very difficult to take out. A non-involved third party opinion is given as the solution. Always glad to hear those non-involved 3rd parties on this thread knock sense into us.

@Sanem

Sallam (peace). Thanks for the great discussions on the thread. I’m trying to write a paper on UCAVs and found the above links useful so thought I’d share. If you have any more up to date papers to share, please don’t hold back. cheers

For instance an interesting point from one of those papers:

Congress had earmarked 2010 as the year when a third of the USAF should have been UCAVs.

PS: Anybody knows why the lambda wing is so popular with UCAVs? For instance, if the mission remains the same, why does the aerodynamics differ?

I think that there is an element of speculation in everything anyone is saying. I’d say that whether tphaung agrees with me or not is as whether I’d agree with him. We are all speculating.

To tphaung’s credit, he has done some good work before, but I’d still take his assertions with a rather healthy dose of salt. I personally take Eagle Hannan’s assertions with a degree of authenticity and don’t think he (or the PAF officials he quotes) as making things up. Thus my summary of his work.

I had no clue that my work would be so widely distributed. I’m really doing my best and with sincerity. Don’t agree with me, that’s fine. Don’t like my translation, that’s fine too. What saddens me most is to see Pakistanis call me names, that too on Pakdef. I have left the United States, material well being, possessions and benefits and family to struggle for Islam and Pakistan, a country I don’t claim to belong to. The least one could do is show some modicum of respect. But then, fortunately my reward is elsewhere.

I believe it is a later design for the Shenyang J-13 project

http://www.airlinebuzz.com/forums/blog.php?b=40

Or maybe the date is simply deliberately given to be misleading?