it is a doggone close dead ringer for the F-22.
Now, that may just reflect physics realities. OR, it is a one-off from stolen data that will perform like any one-off: not bad but not like the original...
It looks like for once the intelligence community is keeping its cards close to the vest. Their blabbermouths haven’t done much to help us in the very hot cold war we are engaged in...
The J-20 looks like a Mac Truck with the fit and finish of a Kia. The F-22 looks like an angel.
I think I know which one will be spotted.
I'll take this opportunity yet again to lament the end of F-22 production. I still think that was an incredibly shortsighted action, especially given that F-22 exports could have provided hundreds of very high-tech jobs, bolstered our Pacific allies, and reduced the trade deficit. The Air Force could also well use another hundred or more F-22s. A Naval variant wouldn't have been too hard to produce either - if the will to do so had existed.
On the drone front, I think a lot of good points were made in the article, except that the Global Hawk and most of our current drone fleet aren't stealthy, and would be easy targets if a relatively high-tech country like China were to go after them. Future drones like the X47-B with stealth characteristics should be extremely problematic for our adversaries.
I found this comment interesting:
In-development drones include Boeing’s Phantom Eye—an even bigger, farther-flying improvement over the Global Hawk—plus no fewer than three fast, armed, unmanned planes intended to replace manned fighter-bombers.I'm guessing two of the drones he's referring to are the X-47B (bomber role only...probably), and the unmanned F-35 variant. Anyone have an idea what the third might be?
It looks like they too the wing from Boeing’s F-32 JSF entry and the F-35 forward fuselage from the intakes forward. Then borrowed the russians all movable vertical stabs or should I say earlier American designs. They canards, maybe they were unsure of the stability in pitch.