I think I'd like to see something from a credible source as this is incorrect terminolgy.
I think I'd like to see something from a credible source as this is incorrect terminolgy.
From the quoted article, it is a total of 16 hardpoints, 8 of which are internal... Therefore the other 8 are external hardpoints. IMO that should be feasible.I agree with gf0012.
16 hardpoints and 8 internal hardpoint..
That Pak-Fa would have to be huge..
From the quoted article, it is a total of 16 hardpoints, 8 of which are internal... Therefore the other 8 are external hardpoints. IMO that should be feasible.
What makes the source questionable to my mind is the quoted range of 5,500 km... Is that supposed to be the ferry range? On internal fuel, with droptanks, what? I suspect that is either the ferry range, or carrying the max load of droptanks, and not an actual combat configuration.
Sort of brings to mind when Oz media reported a driver was rampaging around in a tank, knocking down cell towers. It was actually an FV432 APC... The media did not know enough to realise there was a difference.
-Cheers
Hence my discomfort at the accuracy of the reporting. You don't have something like "nn" internal hardpoints - when internal they're referred to as mounts because unless they're back to back and inline they will be on ejectors, rotary dispensers and/or carousels.From the quoted article, it is a total of 16 hardpoints, 8 of which are internal... Therefore the other 8 are external hardpoints. IMO that should be feasible.
.........................................
Sort of brings to mind when Oz media reported a driver was rampaging around in a tank, knocking down cell towers. It was actually an FV432 APC... The media did not know enough to realise there was a difference.
-Cheers
A quick update, apparently ground tests are continuing. It hasn't exploded yet. The first test flight will take place "very soon". It will either take place in Moscow, at LII Gromov or at KnAAPO.
ÀÐÌÑ-ÒÀÑÑ
The flight may even take place before the new year. So just out of curiosity, how much will we able to tell about it's LO characteristics from photos of the airframe, and a relatively vague official description?
Complexity of wing design, eg whether blended, whether it follows basically all other LO manned and unmanned designs even though all the US designs have been generationally and conceptually different at each release, they all have one common element. I'll be curious to see whether the russians include that "feature"So just out of curiosity, how much will we able to tell about it's LO characteristics from photos of the airframe, and a relatively vague official description?
TAIL: http://www.testpilot.ru/russia/mikoyan/mfi/img/mfi-s37.jpg - since the mfi and berkut are the base test beds, I would say that Tail would be outward canted, see the picture,Complexity of wing design, eg whether blended, whether it follows basically all other LO manned and unmanned designs even though all the US designs have been generationally and conceptually different at each release, they all have one common element. I'll be curious to see whether the russians include that "feature"
presence of s bend inlets, whether they're proud or guarded
presence of shock ramps if s bends not present
scattered panel fit
tail, whether skegs are canted inward, outward etc... angle of cant
presence of hard points (immediately signal disruptive)
cleanness of design
c0ckpit treatment
whether refueling port is aft or forward of the pit
top and frontal aspects will give off clues
Nope, mine has been on technical generalities regarding LO sig management.Are u guys talking of the info's that has been revealed, or just guessing? I think Russia should just come out with a final taxi run, n reveal the design, or reveal the design during its 1st flight test, instead of revealing bits n pieces. Its very childish.
I think I'd like to see an official photo. The floor on that image is "tiled" - ie it's a tiled windows imageparalay.iboards.ru/download/file.php?id=6718&mode=view
According to some guy, who presumably has some relation to PAK-FA (or at least seen him) (yeah, i see how "reliable" all this sounds), "it is him".
Anyway, latest pictures/speculations confirm that, as expected, it wont have revolutionary design. Emphasis is made on overall efficiency, not LO (although it's also included).