To admit, that’s a question or stateemnt I’m very sceptical about. If they were really “proud” then they would have shown already their latest toy, they would have reported about the delivery and its hand-over similar to the handover of the Y-20 … however nothing in this regard: the deal was officially confirmed only after delivery, no images, no news-reports, nothing even where is is based.
I have more the feeling at least the PLAAF wants to play it down, to keep it low level, maybe in order not to open a strange discussion we can read so often in other forums like “why, when the just introduced the J-20”, “only to copy again”, “Stupid PLAAF-laedership” and so on.
I’m convinced they have their resons, be it the TVC-engine, the whole system, for dissimilar aerial combat training or a political deal … most like simply a combination of all.
Anyway, interesting to see, where they are based, at what unit they are assigned to since this would help us to explain a bit what the PLAAF really want to do with that bird.
Deino
so do you believe there are su-35s for plaaf at all?
Any source for that and some additional info ??
a very.. looong time ago
the news said they were working with Russia on it.
this was before Pak-fa.
I doubt it now, as Russia would greatly fear pissing of China.. or would they.
another one

which really does look like

I think there’s a newer one now
your model is c103 but the last i’ve heard is c103a
which is bigger, heavier, and has a full internal bay

Better than a photoshop 🙂 :
very beautiful.
the Chinese must be very proud and happy to have their brand new su-35s
Frm what I read frm South Korea sources, Turkey is the one who turned down ROK approach, saying that what KFX-IFX envisage is different frm what TFX aimed. Still frm the way I see it..KFX-IFX already moved to development stages when Turkey being approach, thus Both Korea and Indonesia seems unwilling to change and alter basic design, for benefit of Turkey. Eventough both welcome another partner.
KFX/IFX already set their design, and already proceed to development stages. Thus any alteration just for sake to include Turkey, will further development time frame than schedulled. Unless Turkey want to follow the approved design, which Turkey decided not completely in line with what they want.
I know iwote in the early tnread on 2013 that the 1st phase is not ginish, Korea then for domestic politics suspend the program for 18 mo, but now they are moving ahead on Phase 2 (development stage) which aimed to produce prototype by 2020. They already set target for blk 1, blk 2 and blk 3. Current agrement between KAI for Korea and IAe/DI for Indonesia only set for Blok1.
In sense after Blok 1 both Indonesia and ROK can go seperate ways or still developing Blk 2 and 3 together. Blok 1 and Blok 2 basically still 4.5 gen Aircraft. Korean envision on Blk3 is more stealthly design with inner weapon bays, and avionics more comparable to F-35 standard.
That’s why for this moment both ROK and Indonesia only aimed for Blk 1 or Blk 2 at most, since Blk 3 will be somewhat different class of development.Bellow is the set design for Blk 1.
what do you think the differences in goals for the Koreans and Turks are?
The models they proposed look more or less different and quite honestly, not sure if the Koreans are really that far ahead of the Turks. they both look like theyre playing with models. but the Koreans seem closer to finalizing on it.
I suspect it may end up being like Rafale and Eurofighter. they be like “no no we had to split up, our goals are just too different”, and outside of carrier landing.. both produced an aircraft that meets like 80-90% of the same needs.
Wait, what?!? That TAI brochure says “aircraft to substitute existing T-38 and F-16” ????
So both a low cost trainer and a medium/light sized combat plane?
If true, then it’s going to have to be a single engined plane, considering EJ200 being picked as the basis of new engine. As I just don’t see EJ200 core being changed to much so it loses a third of its size/weight (for a twin engined solution) nor do i see it being enlarged as that just doesn’t make sense for a T-38 replacement.
Of course, having a single EJ200 class engine, even if offering a little bit more power, mostly precludes the possibility of a proper stealth plane with weapon bays and internal fuel enough for 2500+ km ferry range. Maybe one could manage to include a tiny, two missile weapons bay but that’s about it.
not sure if medium/light can be said.
based on calculations via photoshop..
assuming the F-16 is 15 meters then..
F-16 132 pixles – 15 meters
TFX Agility 164 – 18.6 meters (f-15)
TFX Lethal 156 – 17.7 meters (mig.29)
TFX Speed 180 – 20.4 meters (Pak-fa)
those are some big planes
Well I would think that short of measuring it yourself, that is probably as good as we will get until and unless the thing turns up in a museum.
The Turkish requirement is for a shorter beast though is it not? I mean weapons have shrunk since the days where BAE were thinking of Tornado replacements.
Essentially people don’t know what to make of this development because it doesn’t fit anyone’s accepted world view. If you like the F35 then you can’t see the need, if you are Russian then it is plain confusing, and if you are European the combination of Turkey and Britain is probably toxic now 🙂
not sure how short. TAI produced renders of 3 variants and all 3 are very differennt sizes

this is the only slide that shows the actual TAI aircraft with an F-16 for a size comparison. The twin engined version looks very big. i would say close to an f-18E. the others look more mig-29 sized. (this was hard to find because there’s a ton of fake TAI TFX pics using photoshopped Korean stealth pics).
am I also the only one who thinks Korea/Indonesia should join with them on this project? they seem to be asking for the same things. might as well join together to share risk and costs.
Yes, yes you did. I assumed incorrectly that you were making a link between this competition and Replica. It turns out, you were just interested in dimensions.
thats fine, at least you admit your mistake unlike others.
anyways, is that chart correct?
googling didn’t produce much other than a picture that claimed 65 ft.

O.k. … replace scheme with colour ! But anyway I remember only the agressors with similar “colours” !
no, you re-read it wrong. read KGB’s post first, then you’ll understand my post.
Oh its too painful. If only, if only. The only similarity between the 1990s Replica and the 2016 Catia TFX designs are the intakes.
who mentioned anything about similarities? i asked if the replica was to scale
When was the USAF using such a scheme ten yeras ago ???
you need to reread that sentence

Found this, is it me or is the replica not to scale? didnt think it would be longer than the f-22
Its real.
im assuming China picked that color. Which is unorthodox for them. They love grey, black and white and everything in between.
looks like the same colors the RuAF uses
China likes to follow whatever colors the USAF was using.. 10 years ago
Interesting, which planes are those? Any recent jet fighters with that configuration?
I’m not sure if it would be possible on PAK FA because the tailhook I imagine needs to be closer to the rear of the aircraft and the trailing edge of PAK FA probably isn’t rear enough. Though I think they could adopt two hooks, one each under the engine nacelles, rear, near the nozzles. But I’m not sure how safe two hooks would be, because if one hook misses and one catches a wire, then that would put asymmetrical force on the airframe, which probably isn’t good.
hey, my apologies. I had thought the cutlass did that, but they used a single hook.