Maybe my eyes are messed up, but i dont see air inlet on top of the bomber on the yellow model

I would say that if this concept is a real SAC project and would lead to a real prototype not too far from now ( insh’ allah!) , then the yellow model could be one of the very first basic aerodynamic layout testing models (gliding model?), or even perhaps the intakes are under the fuselage on that one. There is SOME configuration similarity between the two, although the black one is obviously more refined and stealthified.

Perhaps this is why the well known “JH-7B” striker model from Xian we know for the last half decade has not actually been pursued, because there was something better from SAC, or perhaps Xian’s striker project was not good enough and there was another tender which SAC won (would fit better with the timeline)?

Sukhoi themselves apparently had a supersonic striker project with intakes above wing. This looks like a 21st century, stealth version of that ( i’m not alleging any connection btw, just that the apparent concept and apparent role look fairly similar). I’m not sure if i see a long bay under fuselage and 2 small bays on side, or perhaps the small ones are for the landing gear.

Week old news: 20 Su-30 and Su-35 to be delivered this year to RuAF. How many Su-35 are to be delivered this year, 12 ? That leaves 8 Su-30SM in all?
http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20130531/940529120.html

Couple of nice pics of let’s call it MiG-29M2, don’t know when and where though (LII?)
http://img-5.photosight.ru/7c3/4953805_xlarge.jpg
http://icon.s.photosight.ru/img/8/f83/4859338_large.jpg

Anyway, speaking of S. Kuznetsov’s gallery above, he mentions something about Paris, are Su-35 , Yak-130 and MiG-35 going to be displayed at Le Bourget later this month?

Photo report from the visit to MiG by Maria Lystseva:
http://fotografersha.livejournal.com/397682.html

…and from Sergey Kuznetsov:
https://picasaweb.google.com/117990383296131038585/Lukhovitsy#

Well, looking at the last video, was trying to see if there’s the second ejection seat in the back cockpit, but to me it does not appears so, hence i thought it must be 741, painted the same as 747 the two-seater, and with the “MiG-35” logo added. As for the older picture with the pods, that was a typo when you said 941 earlier i assume? (941 is a K, cammoed, and with the jagged radome too).
Speaking of video, any idea if the MiG at 1:37 in your video is a K or a MiG-29M/MiG-35 ? Thanks.

Thanks Berkut, great find.

I’m not sure if i’m wrong and i might be mixing things up, but aren’t some “informed” folks hinting that the F-22 can supercruise in a relevant scenario for only about 150 miles or so ? (and i might add, i can bet my hat that in a relevant configuration and scenario the F-22 WILL NOT go M 1.72 in supercruise, despite what LM shills boast).

On another subject, perhaps the MiG-31 replacement will be a T-50P or PU. Anyway, can’t wait until the T-50M flies with the new 18,000kgf engines, THAT will be mighty scary! Imperialist pigs beware :p

So it’s a RD-93 after all. Quite interesting, someone on another forum speculated that while the UCAV (or it’s developed series production version), might still be subsonic, there will be instances on it’s planned flying profile when quick acceleration will be needed. Maybe it’s some sort of fighter UCAV (an idea i’ve always had fun with in my head , if you can make one of these little UCAVs cheap enough, that can turn 12 or 15G, have good flying characteristic, have 2 or 4 good missiles and a gun, and good enough radar, optical and self defence systems-passive especially , you just press the “kill” button and you have the thing going berzerk, eating at anything withing it’s reach, crashing into the opponent if necessary; send a swarm of these against an F-22 and F-35 strike coming to “liberate” you and boy, you’re gonna make their day crap or what) Maybe the production version will have a WS-13. We’ll see hopefully.