so how can they give AESA TOT when they dont have there own?

Because they think 10-15 even 20 years into the future?

These are jets that will be manufactured in India (except for the first 1-20).

I’m a amateur with s/w like this but I thought it would be fun to also consider the ‘evidence’ vs. other aircraft… if you laugh then do it better yourself, and actually I would like that 🙂

First a basic comparative Mig29, Su-27, F-15.

Then inflight

The evidence is presented in smaller size, so here it’s also in 50% smaller to mess with the eyes.

A clean view of a SU-27.

A F-15 against a supposed SU-27

Fuzzy cut-out (missing some radome, canopy) against a Mig-29

This time againt a F-15

Against SU-27

And again SU-27

Personally I think 2 of 3 (and maybe 3/3) in flight photos is of a F-15 with extra fuel tanks, but this thing on the ground… definitely not a Mig-29. Other than that I can’t guess.

Not sure why the US would want to fly the airframe but I am sure they wouldn’t say no to a whole jet.

Also, Sweden aquired SU-27, SU-30 and Mig-29 Non-export radars and other components. There’s declassified documents to prove this. If Sweden had it, the US did too. We have always shared this kind of info with the US and UK. In this revealed case, delivers were between 1995-1999.

(This came out after the middle-man Exico AB failed to pay taxes (!) on their over $10 million income from imports. The tax office charged the owner and faced with prison time he went to court/press with info. The Military had by then already cut them off since they were involved in side-projects)

Paperwork (FMV = Swedish Defence Material Administration):

I saved some English links with similar stories.

American Free Press
Ten years after the sinking of the Baltic ferry Estonia, Europe’s worst maritime disaster, a former Swedish customs chief has confessed that Soviet military secrets were being smuggled on the ill-fated passenger ferry.

http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/5103/a/37601
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=60997=

http://www.globalpolitician.com/articles.asp?ID=1394&print=true

http://www.geocities.com/area51/shadowlands/6583/project031.html

:p

Usually some russian official will state “The jet is 75% complete and 200 x better than NATO jets” as soon as a project is underway… (when it’s 1% complete)

When I saw this first picture in the AIR FORCE Magazine Online article, it was like seeing an old friend again after several years!

I personally had some doubts about how serious this source is (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/a17.html), but obviously the US Air Force – or at least their computer artist – take his inspiration (or is it more than inspiration?) from this source as well! Just compare the wing planform!

Just compare yourself:

Heh I like the photo on the website of the flying triangles… with the text:

A man named Steve Douglass captured two unusual flying triangles on video. He believes they could be A-17s, but admits they could also be F-117s, Tornados, or F-14s.

(Yes they look like F-14s)

As for the computer drawings they don’t look much like how other stealth and stealth/bomber R&D projects is moving forward these days.

Where one would expect a internal weapons bay there seem to be nothing.. And overall, it just looks like the artists haven’t noticed where development is going. I mean work done on ‘flying wing’ stealth demonstrators in the US, France and Sweden all pretty much share a design commonality all very different from these pics.

I looked at the Ukraine transfers as officially reported to the UN, it doesn’t say if it’s a military or civilian receiver tho.

1 SU-27 to China in 2004
1 SU-27 to Eritrea in 2003
3 SU-27 to Ethiopia in 2003
1 SU-27P to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 2001

Those are the officially reported ones between 2004-1993. http://disarmament2.un.org/UN_REGISTER.NSF/

Btw, if the US did get a SU-27 by unofficial means a reason to keep it quiet can be to protect the seller, as they might face sanctions from Russia etc. I find this unlikely, I don’t think any nation would be interested in risking a relationship to Russia just to sell the US a jet under the table. So if it happened I would say it did so by official means.

Not sure if this was ever posted.
http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=71331#compstory

New Delhi, July 20: Deeply aware of a rapidly depleting fleet that will pull down the IAF’s strength to a shocking 28 fighter squadrons by 2012, IAF chief Air Chief Marshal SP Tyagi for the first time spoke out on Wednesday on the critical threats to the country’s fighter strength.

In an exclusive interview to The Indian Express, Tyagi said that since it would take 15 years for the 126 new fighters under consideration to be fully inducted and operational, Air Headquarters has told the government that it needs an immediate stopgap acquisition of fighters to tide over the crisis.

‘‘The 126 new fighters will take 15 years. We cannot afford to wait that long. Numbers are falling. We absolutely have to increase the number of aircraft. Our only option is to get something in a hurry. We are looking to order more aircraft of the types we already operate and have told the government,’’ Tyagi said.

The IAF has a sanctioned squadron strength of 39.5 squadrons but currently operates just 32. If that number hits the 28 figure, it would be the force’s lowest ever below sanctioned strength.

Tyagi has his reasons for urgent acquisition. He indicated that Pakistan would soon have new American F-16s and from next year, would begin inducting Chinese-made JF-17 aircraft in large numbers. If things don’t go the IAF’s way, he said, Pakistan will have greater fighter density for a country its size compared to India.

The IAF’s proposal is to scan the international defence market for new or good condition second-hand fighters, including Mirage-2000s — a proposal to buy some from Qatar fell through recently — and MiG-29s. Tyagi said it was imperative that a few squadrons were quickly acquired to save the force from hitting unacceptably low numbers.

It has also emerged now that the request for proposal (RFP) for 126 new fighters is still not complete, and is undergoing scrutiny at the Law Ministry. The request, incidentally, includes an IAF ‘‘formula’’ through which it will not be as simple as picking the cheapest eligible contender, but place greater emphasis on long-term ownership costs.

‘‘We are buying 80 helicopters, six mid-air refuellers, three AWACS and I need to plan for all this. But I still need more fighters. There is an argument that we could buy fewer but more capable aircraft…(but) there is absolutely no substitute for numbers.’’

The IAF is also unhappy with progress on HAL’s indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA Tejas), which it feels will be obsolete by the time it becomes part of the fleet, possibly as late as 2015.

—

Typical.

I don’t know what will define a 6th Gen fighter but I do know that several corporations will try to claim that their old generation is one.

This talk about Generations only really work when one stay within the same company.

Btw, look at this: