Seems to have quite long span!, thank you Deino, the plane looks much better at this angle, and very menacing 🙂

Wings are canted down, seems these small movable fins are not enough for it directional stability, counting on how long the plane is (or seems to be), this would not be surprising.

Canards seems to be canted upwards, much like the eagletalon early picture

I can see better the dorsal fins now.

I wonder if Russia would sell the PAK-FA to China??? Which, would give the PLAAF both the PAK-FA and J-20. Which, be a good insurance policy against the failure of the latter. Plus, it would provide valuble insight in to Advance Russia Technology….

Of course it would be stupid on Russia’s part. Yet, that has stopped her so far. :confused:

Quite boring Million Dollar Question, IMO

I rather would like to know if the Pakfa’s LEVCOMS generate local lift

The Pakfa is so well designed for multirol duties that the bomb bays are placed along the wings, matching their addded weight with the center of lift to minimize balance issues when loading, this can’t be said for the f-35, for example.

Beautiful design

Nothing was showed in that pic.

But what about this?

That’s nice, where is the original link?, very high wing setting, f-35 like fins, all movable fins, who knows, is the same thing from the original picture, and while (at least to me) is not the ‘revolutionary’ airframe i was waiting for, is interesting and decent.

Must say, it looks a bit heavy…but is just me, waiting for more detailed pictures

I like better the semantic discussion on what is actually ‘over-engineered’

IMO, over-engineered is to make a immense efford that is not proportional with the result, so for example an airframe that becomes 10 times more complex to build and maintain ,to save 5% of weight from a conventional layout, (considering that the change was only done to decrease it weight), is a case of over engineering.

I must agree the Raptor is a case of under-engineering, things just went wrong.

IMVHO, given on how the red star is located, seems that there are not rudders over that surface, making me thinking that the whole tail is a control surface.

There seems no indication of a conventional taiplane as well

I know most people here are f-23 fans (that horrible plane designed upside down..) but IMVHO, throwing rudder and tail control for a single surface is and was a bad idea, let’s wait for it canards…must have them

Thanks Pinko for your Bigfoot 😀

To me looks like a mig-25..

But looks like this plane..or ‘plane’ does have a high wing mount, like the one in the F-15/mig-25, and does not have (to me) a canopy with the ‘bubble’ design, like the mig-25/23

********

Hmmm, I seriously think is a Mig-25

That 6 years of development is normal for these kind of programs, little whinner