About the pak-fa engine , there isnt the posibility of a resurrection of the r-79 as a core for the new engine?, that powerplant seemed to be the best choice for the plane , was it abandoned?, the engine had a dry thrust of 10.5 tons and with afterburned (reheated :rolleyes:) of 15.5 tons (compared with the 16 tons of the f-119 isnt bad), also it seems it gave a good range/performance

Any good link about the r-79?

Well MIG, with all the due respect, lets dont mix economy/politic/etc, on the thread, i mean that is highly speculative, and we will end with the oil prices/diamonds/titanium markets, etc, stuff that dont goes well with the discussion.

The main problem is to develop the new aircraft is the engine, plain and simple, all that because the supercruiser fashion, ram airframe/X-band LO , really arent that hard as the engine

Supercruiser is a plain failure IMO, actually i hope the russians wont develop a new engine for the pak-fa, with SC and a base higher fuel consume, well, some guys here will say “but it dont have SC”….but im sure many engineers/logistic team will say….”and who cares?”, dont get me wrong but sometimes is about the higher nominal thrust, and sometimes is about how long you can sustain it, agility is about aerodesign /engine, well yes a new engine would be needed, but a more powerful engine not always ensure a better maneouverability

The japanese seems to have something real,i dont know from where they got the money,i dont care, but seems they have progresed a lot more than the chinese, so if you take the tangent now…well seems the japaguys will get first the plane

Word is, there isn’t much hope for it, according to this report.
S. Korea May Drop Stealth Fighter Development Plan

The KFX, ATD-X, and I’m guessing at this point the Indian MCA are all on life support at this point it seems. A damn pity; I’m REALLY hoping the ATD-X at least gets airborne.

I mean, come on, its the land of anime and giant robots; they NEED an indigenous fighter jet! 😮

Thanks, well, isnt a surprise that koreans stoped any aspiration to have such plane

Is quite interesting that the japaneses have developed some kind of TVC , much like in the “occidental way” (x-31/ATF/f-22), an LO/aerodynamic (and maybe structural) airframe configuration; all seems to be an integral part of the project , and not independient developments,because everything seems to be linked is unlikely (IMO) that they will stop their development with imported f-35/22s

I hope Japan truely get into the fighter tech (and maybe market) with this research

Interesting thread, but better keep out russia from it.

Now, it would be interesting to classify fields per country, so, lets say..

What nations are more advanced on…

-Aerodynamics
-Structural airframe (composites/titanium, Al alloys)
-Electronics (radar, IR stuff, networking)
-Engines (this gonna be good ;))

Would be nice if some of you throw some of these wind-tunel models from different countries, the J-10 evolution , J-12 speculation, etc.

I have tried to search more about these AESA L-Band modules…any more information about this? , im lazy..and really dont have aviation magazines, so somebody who enlight a bit more about that topic?

I bet he was fired because they found he was an alien …and wasnt documented…

Come on, this discussion is stupid…

The point that sfferin and others in this thread were making that He still supports the idea of a light fighter , something like a basic F-16A , he claims is all that is needed to win wars , F-15 , Su-27 , F-22 type big fighters with high tech radars , electronics , EW , jammers etc etc is a waste according to his theory . This is good and ok for back in the day when A2A radars werent all that accurate and Missiles crappy @ best however with modern times his theory of what an ideal fighters should be remains unchanged . I wonder how he would have reacted if some senior retired WW2 guy would have said in his day that jet engines are useless and they should stick with WW2 tech and tactics .

He wasnt GD or LMA , but was part of the LFM that back in the DAY advocated using a set of principles to DEVELOP FIGHTER AIRCRAFTS their worked influenced the specifications of what was then the F-X , so in many ways he gave to the designers (more appropriatly his team which included force and civilians) the specs under which they were to design the fighter.

1-You are clearly exagerating, an agile cheap simple aircraft was a heck of need for the USAF at the 70s-80s-90s, when all the ppl were thinking that BVR is everything , and is a heck of need now, how many f-22/35 will be ready for accion?, how many missiles will be launched?, what is the cost per missile launched?, seems he goes on that direction

2- He wasnt GD or LMA , but was part of the LFM that back in the DAY advocated using a set of principles to DEVELOP FIGHTER AIRCRAFTS ,……… man i know that, but it was responsability for designers to give them the design, i just said what were the goals

This is good and ok for back in the day when A2A radars werent all that accurate and Missiles crappy

this is gold….what you think, missiles are accurate now? yeah radar guided missiles are very important, but if you take a look, many of them -if not most- were launched at very close range the problem increase dramatically when ECM is arround, Riccioni seems to know the “real live” combat , and not the fairy tale combat tht seems very popular

Anyway, it seems a internal fuel thread, go on..just jumped here, because seems this guy was the mentor of the -IMO- best designed US plane, so i find a bit funny how many ppl criticise him