1 posted on
03/23/2005 8:40:42 AM PST by
lizol
To: Grzegorz 246
I know you like such toys.
2 posted on
03/23/2005 8:41:34 AM PST by
lizol
To: lizol
Looks like an X wing fighter in that picture.
3 posted on
03/23/2005 8:42:51 AM PST by
Mr.Clark
(From the darkness....I shall come)
To: lizol
No stealth systems - easy meat for an AMRAAM. So much for that idea.
5 posted on
03/23/2005 8:45:58 AM PST by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: lizol
Hey our plans from 1985 have been ripped off!
![Image hosted by TinyPic.com](http://tinypic.com/2befjp)
6 posted on
03/23/2005 8:46:23 AM PST by
Sax
To: lizol
Forward-swept wings make for a very twitchy aircraft. Not very stable at high speeds, but can turn on a dime. Combined with vectored-thrust engines, this thing will be a dogfighter extraordinaire. Missles will have a hard time hitting it if they can be detected in time, because this thing will be able to out-turn them all day long.
7 posted on
03/23/2005 8:47:20 AM PST by
Little Pig
(Is it time for "Cowboys and Muslims" yet?)
To: lizol
Now that they've undoubtedly stolen the plans to the "Raptor,F-22", and seen it fly, the Russians now need to get to work builing a cheap knock-off.
8 posted on
03/23/2005 8:50:07 AM PST by
Finalapproach29er
(Open borders=National suicide)
To: lizol
In 1976 we looked at a SFW version of the F-16. Probably didn't have the computer technology advanced enough to assist in controlling the flight.
![Image hosted by TinyPic.com](http://tinypic.com/2beh46)
9 posted on
03/23/2005 8:52:06 AM PST by
Sax
To: lizol
Russia has a fabled history of aircraft design.
I recall seeing the big bad bear while flying well above the artic circle in my KC-97....It was a fabulous long range recon aircraft of it's day.
To: lizol
I cannot believe they did not choose 1.42/1.44 as the platform. 1.42/1.44 was probably the only one that ever made it close to the abilities of F/A-22. Forward swept wings were thought to be not as attracting as it was to be for its ability. Well, I think they won't succeed that much with a fighter that may be too expensive.
16 posted on
03/23/2005 9:07:24 AM PST by
Wiz
To: Paleo Conservative
17 posted on
03/23/2005 9:07:59 AM PST by
Wiz
To: lizol
![](http://www.homoon.jp/users/azumi2108/ssq10/Clip012011111.jpg)
Gant, can you fly that plane?
To: lizol
While Putin's boys are talking about going here:
![](http://english.pravda.ru/img/2005/03/su47.jpg)
We've been flying this for over 8 years:
![](http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/photorelease/q4/dvd-226-5.jpg)
31 posted on
03/23/2005 10:31:42 AM PST by
Yossarian
(Remember: NOT ALL HEART ATTACKS HAVE TRADITIONAL SYMPTOMS)
To: sukhoi-30mki
To: lizol
5th generation? Hah! We're already on 7th generation. X-wing fighters? Forget it.
41 posted on
03/23/2005 6:04:54 PM PST by
RightWhale
(Please correct if cosmic balance requires.)
To: lizol; All
To: lizol; sukhoi-30mki
Is this the much talked about PAK-FA. Any info on this would be appreciated..
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson