1. Two piece canopy is lighter.
Mechanization for its opening doesn`t need to be so robust.
Frontal piece can be ticker to withstand FOD and high speed dash temperature and second part of the canopy is thinner and lighter.

2. With ticker, one piece canopies you have to solve the problem of higher refraction/deformation of the light

3. Frontal part of two piece canopy gives better protection during supersonic seat ejection. Sudden supersonic airstream can kill the pilot.

4. Specific materials that are used for PAK FA canopy can also pose a problem for Russians to make one piece canopy, but in return that materials are maybe better suited for smaller RCS than materials used for F-22 or J-20? That way you get the best from both worlds. You get 2 piece canopy with its advantages and you also get very low RCS.

Of course, these are just guesses 😉

Outstanding! Clearly you’re not a Chinese :b
Please leave sth to othes
Any complement?
I’d like to see anyone will possibly surpass………

f23 fail because bay is not big enough like f22. f23 use back and front style bay that pakfa also use but in the end f22 style bay can carry more efficently.
that is why j20 is more influence by f22 style bay and can carry much more

this one is official diagram

Wrong! This one was never an official publication, check the length of weapon bay in the mockup and real one in photo, the crevice even extend at different area.
On the other hand, Never the reason was the YF-23 failed, contrarily, that proposal tandem weapon bay onto YF-23 will give much more space to any weapons expected. A weapon bay designed like F-22 style was completely mediocre, if not due to that era.

Not exactly I think. It is the objective advantage made American and French choosing ordinary layout of such tailless delta wing for Hi-altitude, Hi-speed specification while T/W ratio was impossible to be higher.

For MiG-31, does anybody knows, is it possible that 3000 liters fuel tanks are capable to be carried by all external pylons under wing for the newer version of MiG-31s so that makes total external fuel capacity to be 12,000 liters?

well, I just have cited a top blue-suiter’s POW when he a was talking of ideology behind Russian 5th Gen fighters

If you always and be so glade to cite from Americanism, you’ll be easily traped then.

Internal weapons for PAKFA had been discussed for a long period, and have different views kept individually.

Take easy, Sens:
The question from Trident could be boil down to that is it possible, small like station under CFT of the F-15E series are also capable to load big a2g missile like SLAM-ER or Harpoon.
The confidential answer is yes.