F-35B/C Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter)

[Treetop Flyer]

Wrong plane, synix

 

[Flying Toaster]

Do you think they don't know people are taking pictures?

That was the roundabout point of my question. Considering nearly every picture has tree branches creeping in, perhaps they weren't specifically aware of these. Of course was it their intention to have someone take pictures and "leak" them? That would certainly seem likely.

 

[jmcquate]

That's a lot of moving parts!

 

[Uncle Fester]

I'd say the solution is obvious...recall Major Gant.

 

[Fog]

The chinese must have had a spy in the Boeing "Phantom Works" when Boeing proposed the YF-23. This a/c looks like a stretched version of the Boeing a/c (probably for more internal fuel/weapons). This is probably not a coincidence. JMHO.

 

[RHPF]

The chinese must have had a spy in the Boeing "Phantom Works" when Boeing proposed the YF-23. This a/c looks like a stretched version of the Boeing a/c (probably for more internal fuel/weapons). This is probably not a coincidence. JMHO.

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

I don't see the YF-23 resemblance at all.

 

[ryan1234]

I don't see the YF-23 resemblance at all.

I just saw a YF-23 at Wright Patt... it looks a lot like it from the side.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

I'd say it looks more like an F-22. Or a stealthy MiG-31. The Russian design looks a lot more like the YF-23 to me.

YF-23:



J-20


PAK-FA / T-50

 

[eas7888]

Though I'm not an aerospace engineer, or an aerodynamics specialist, I would offer the suggestion that it may be a case of form following function.

 

[coolhandlukesd]

A preliminary assessment of the J-XX [J-20] Stealth Fighter Prototype by the Air Power Australia, BTW the People who run this website are not to fond of the F-35 and the F-18E/F. They might be a little biased.


http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-J-XX-Prototype.html


From Aviation week.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene.../awst/2011/01/03/AW_01_03_2011_p18-279564.xml

 

[Flying Toaster]

Or this-

vs.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

From the Australian article: "Any notion that an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or F/A-18E/F Super Hornet will be capable of competing against this Chengdu design in air combat, let alone penetrate airspace defended by this fighter, would be simply absurd." They go on to say that it will be a direct one to one equivalent to the F-22. All this despite the fact that they don't know what kind of engines it has or will have, what kind of radar, or any other avionics, and it hasn't even flown yet. They pulled that article right out of their ass.

 

[phrogdriver]

Not to mention the fact that the assessment does not account for training, ordnance carried, or the support given the aircraft, such as AEW, tankers, and the like.

Sort of reminds me how if you were to just flip open Jane's and compare basic stats, you would think an F-4 would easily take a F/A-18E/F. Lots of what goes on happens under the skin of the aircraft.

 

[Lawman]

I look at all these "OMG the Russians/Chinese/Martians/Whoever are building ____ we need more F-22's with AIM120D's and blahh" hysteria articles with the same big grain of salt.

Seriously, remember all the stink of "Oh No the Americans will never win a dogfight again" when they Russians did that aerobatic display with the SU-35. You couldnt watch a documentary on fighter planes without hearing about how the Russians had perfected Dogfighting. Or my personal favorite... all the crazies that came out of the woodwork when this started making photo appearances....

The Air Force Museum in Dayton is full of 1 off aircraft that were built, flown for the better part of several years, tested, and put in.. you guessed it a Museum. Just because the Chinese built something that looks eerily like something we built almost 25 years ago is no reason to go off the deep end like some of these people would believe.