I might be worng, but for me it looks like a shadow.Notice the inlet wall that would suggests there is a twin air duct behind?!!
I might be worng, but for me it looks like a shadow.Notice the inlet wall that would suggests there is a twin air duct behind?!!
Notice the inlet wall that would suggests there is a twin air duct behind?!!
Also noticeable is the short head clearance. I don't know how a 6ft is gona fit inside.
I guess, this is why we see UAE citizen right from the beginning of teaser.Interesting would be - and even more much more important - is it state-founded or only from UAC, what's the budget, is the RuAF interested or are there other nations providing founds. Otherwise it will remain simply what it is right now: A fancy mock up and excieting PR-stunt.
Yes that side bay is intriguing, but the geometry of the inlet and airframe at that point is complicated, plus the needs of the weapon release. A simple rail lunch bay for SRAAM/MRAAM would just need the side to open, but not the bottom as it does on the rear part. Maybe bot small bombs can be released, and AAMs can be rail launched from it. It does not seem trivial in any case.It seems to me that we've seen what I'm calling the lateral bay doors hanging open under their own weight. I think that the doors would be actuated open further when in use.
There are two options I suppose. The missiles are ejected from the bay, or the missiles are mounted to the door. And, I guess, there's the third option of a SRAAM on the door and a BVRAAM in the bay.
The door is quite long and the profiling of the door suggests that there is a requirement to get something about that long out of the bay. If the bay was for SRAAM and to be door mounted, I don't think the doors would have to have that long tapered forward part. I can guess that there would be another fuselage frame or reinforced point to pick up on if they'd have wanted, which means that it's there for a reason.
It would be uncharacteristic and outright dumb to organize this fuss and then not having a basic level of approval / funding to carry the project forward. If over MAKS no customers shows serious interest, they dump the thing? There is a lot of work already invested in this design, for sure, and it has a serious potentialInteresting would be - and even more much more important - is it state-founded or only from UAC, what's the budget, is the RuAF interested or are there other nations providing founds. Otherwise it will remain simply what it is right now: A fancy mock up and excieting PR-stunt.
It would be uncharacteristic and outright dumb to organize this fuss and then not having a basic level of approval / funding to carry the project forward. If over MAKS no customers shows serious interest, they dump the thing? There is a lot of work already invested in this design, for sure, and it has a serious potential
I guess, this is why we see UAE citizen right from the beginning of teaser.Interesting would be - and even more much more important - is it state-founded or only from UAC, what's the budget, is the RuAF interested or are there other nations providing founds. Otherwise it will remain simply what it is right now: A fancy mock up and excieting PR-stunt.
Russia and the UAE will develop a fifth-generation fighter jet
The new aircraft will be modeled on Russia’s fourth-generation MiG-29 jet fighter, and experts believe it will find demand on the global market.www.rbth.com
Additionally, the character representing RuAF can be seen in the same teaser and the model of the plane was noticed on the table of the vice-PM who supervising MIC and state weapons procurement.
For me the situation is plain and simple.honestly I wonder about the politics of this..
From 2010 to this day I see the Russian military development is extremely tidy and well organized. Not perfect, but it respects the fundamentals of program management and strategic development. But of course, I don't have a glass ball to know what will happen exactly with the LTS, I just think it is logic to expect them to check for the water before they jump into the pool. They are not a starving nation anymore.Are you sure?
From "Checkmate" to "write another check, mate"?Interesting would be - and even more much more important - is it state-founded or only from UAC, what's the budget, is the RuAF interested or are there other nations providing founds. Otherwise it will remain simply what it is right now: A fancy mock up and excieting PR-stunt.
S-37 was an X-plane to experiment with FSW and composites. Dunno where the misconception it's meant to be a prototype of the combat fighter-jet came from. Journalists, i guess?I just hope this doesn't become another S-37 - looks good but ultimately gets nowhere.
On the pilots' uniforms in the end of the extended trailer, you can notice flags of Myanmar and Malaysia.
I knew that LERX/intake notch reminded me of something, of course it was the MiG Izdeliye 33 which had a very similar LERX notch in one of its configurations.
Global Security's S-37 page https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/su-47.htmS-37 was an X-plane to experiment with FSW and composites. Dunno where the misconception it's meant to be a prototype of the combat fighter-jet came from. Journalists, i guess?I just hope this doesn't become another S-37 - looks good but ultimately gets nowhere.
So the air channel is split... that makes the nose wheel probably quite capable of handling serious loads needed for rough landings (STOL is a claimed characteristic of the plane) and maybe even CATOBAR launch in a potential future.
That canopy bow is in a pretty unfortunate place for forward view. It would definitely benefit from a single piece canopy, though the IRST position probably explains why they didn't go for one.Notice that the pilot outside vision is quite poor.
A bit bigger ... I know there is a saying "beauty lies always in the eyes of the beholder" but here - and in strict to contrast to the Su-57 - I simply cannot see any beauty!
Anyway a most interesting design.
How much commonality do you guys reckon it has with the 57? The fins and canopy assembly look identical at a first glance.
On the pilots' uniforms in the end of the extended trailer, you can notice flags of Myanmar and Malaysia.
There's also US and UK, so I definitely don't think we should be assuming the pilots represent nations interested in joining the project. I think it's more "the pilots of the world are going to be stunned by this".
ETA: As Myanmar's a Chinese client it gets politically interesting if Rostec are trying to court them.
I knew that LERX/intake notch reminded me of something, of course it was the MiG Izdeliye 33 which had a very similar LERX notch in one of its configurations.rtificial hi-res. Enjoy:
Aren't they getting F-35?!
So... who about this: One R-74 class missile in each side bay. A ventral bay with two R-77 class missiles (would prefer R-37 class, but I'm not sure there is room)...
But they'll primarily pitch it to clients has also having 4xR-37 class missiles or 4x700kg class air-to-surface weapons carried by two S-70 Okhotnik that it leads into battle... 'checkmate' in terms of a chess set having multiple pieces which work together (only some of which are manned).
That is my bet on what they'll pitch.
My read: The aircraft is shown delivered to the UAE (whose representative doesn't look surprised), then it shows Argentina and Vietnam receiving a text and getting excited (presumably indicating there has been some interest), then it shows the rest of the world being impressed.
No need by now for sure. But the robustness of the assembly and the underlying structure needs to be there, so that the further development is feasible.Double nose-wheel, though I can't tell if there's anywhere for a catapult bridle to attach.
Russians do it like that, to protect in case of a canopy loss and to make easier to manufacture the front windshield stronger than the rest. Again, they know what they do.That canopy bow is in a pretty unfortunate place for forward view. It would definitely benefit from a single piece canopy, though the IRST position probably explains why they didn't go for one.
Not only the canopy bow but the geometry of the canopy (not wind screen) that rescind abruptly where the pilot's helmeted head sits. That could make swiveling from left to right difficult with a rear view only possible when the pilot lean forward.That canopy bow is in a pretty unfortunate place for forward view. It would definitely benefit from a single piece canopy, though the IRST position probably explains why they didn't go for one.Notice that the pilot outside vision is quite poor.
They definitely are.Aren't they getting F-35?!
It's the UAE, they aren't quite as bad as Qatar, but is there anything left that they haven't flirted with signing up for?
with helmets as they are built today for off-boresight targeting and synthetic imagery, the available space looks oddly small.