Man the final lock doesnt mean that the radar didnt pick the plane earlier, that was a harsh close combat , just look that 0.3 mach, if the pilot was such a sucker, most probably he wanted a nice pic of the 22s

Hm , i dont know, really i still think that with such weight, the russians wont drop the flanker wing design and swith to delta so easely, and taking in mind that indo/ruskies will/are use/using carriers, well, a delta isnt so brigth idea

We must wait, the wing of the model is quite different of the most delta shaped of the saturn thingy, i think they will go with some kind of flanker wing, but that fuselage layout isnt bad idea

Just returned to the thread and saw the f-22 front pic, is interesting that actually is the weapon bay that forces the design to show so many surfaces pointing downwards reducing it stealthness, specially the nouse section must be a radar lightbulb without ram, if the pakfa follows the other pattern, they can do more a f-23 nose layout (more planar), im surprised that the 22s lower surface actually isnt flat

F-22 is in service , has been for quite some time , and F-35 is on record for its EIS date.

Not according to the pilots . Raptor pilots claim a clear advantage in detection against legacy platforms aswell as against AESA radars (F-15 AESA) .

1- The first was about the pakfa, man..
2-Yes, there are also examples with the grippen, Ef, rafale, etc…but all these cases arent because the incredible lower RCS, but mostly because datalink tactics radar performance, passive receptors RWR, and really the f-22 has a far better physical performance over the f-15 at heigh and speed (BVR strategic arena), because they were caught on surprise doesnt mean instantaneously that was because the lower rcs

The 1.42 still flies? never have seen any big display of it, only take off and landing, never any agility display

Still that plane is on testing?

“conceptually leagues ahead of it’s contemporary Eurocanards.”

Well, Rafale aerodynamics are very advanced, Typhoon design is simpler, i would say that Rafale design is a match of the 1.42

i find interesting that tendency of russian designs (on both 142 and berkut) to increase the distance of the vertical tails, so they merge with the wing/lift body, not touching the main fuselage

23 is right in some things,wrong on others

the f-14 was meant to be an interceptor, the f-15 was better as dogfigther, the f-15a had far better climb and TW, the 15c have also better g-limit, but at heigh the 15s become fully combat capable in the end 80s, due new engines

Now we have the f-14, a better plane for high speed interception, and better at heigh

The deal of the 14 was the aim-54, that missile wasnt meant to take dogfigthers, was a long range interception missile, with that you need good heigh and speed performance, the f-14 wins there

I wont start a thread bout sales and that stuff, but there were cuts on the f22,f35,b2 etc.. sure if the SU would be arround the spending would be a lot more..the 90s spacecom marked helped a lot, also i wont start with the dollar value, i think that the *expected* profit was much larger

About lasers, the system has intrinsic problems due it nature, isnt that you can “upgrade” it a lot, lasers have their advantages but still is too optimist to think lasers will replace other defence systems , what im saying on posts above are practical problems, isnt something you can fix with better electronics or manufacturing, for example i dont care a lot of the heating issue -seems most ppl thinks is the main issue-, no that isnt the main issue, the space shuttle was studied and built, because “it was the future”…..there you go

But of course cheese cutting is always a option 🙂

“Whats the name of the fela who couldnt go with saying DEW’s over @ ACIG?? Ahhh KP , i sure miss his reading . Serious reading at that too….”

hmm sorry dont understand

I dont think lasers are a waste of money..but im sure lasers wont end in the death-ray that most ppl think

Guys you are crying for such little thing…sometimes the factor behind the most terrible accidents is just BAD LUCK, who knows what maneovre was done? the wind direction?, the performance of the gun at that moment? the engine performance?

bad luck guys, bad luck

And of course they know…but there are differences in what they know and what we see on news or reports

there are many billionarie projects that ended on nothing, lets see what happens with this one, but what i say is that lasers arent like sci-fi movies, so an airborn laser will have their limitations, and wont be the ultimate defensive plataform, there is a tendency to overrate the things in the pop culture, specially in the aviation fan community

i have seen laser interceptions..and it take a while to do the job..again thats relative to which frecuency you are using -and the distance-, an UV laser is more efficient than an IR one, but even high frecuency lasers have their issues

the 747 with s300 was a light comment but a missile plattaform dont sound bad, because u can intercept simultaneously many targets