One of these things is not like the other

File: 1477593619214.jpg (355KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 1500x1000px

One of these things just doesn't belong,

File: F-22 pron.jpg (2MB, 2900x1439px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2900x1439px

What if I say you're the pretender

File: Sukhoi_T-50_in_2011_4.jpg (483KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 1200x800px

Can you tell which thing is not like the others

The F-22 is actually a stealth fighter and the others are not

File: 1477593683487.jpg (152KB, 1500x1125px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1500x1125px

By the time I finish my song?

File: 1389231024796.jpg (490KB, 2880x1920px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 2880x1920px

What if I say that I'll never surrender

Flight Highschool Pak-FA, should have just been Su36 dressing up in Raptor's clothes and pretending to be someone else.

>>31866925

THE ONE WITHOUT S-DUCTS

F-22
F-35
PAK FA
J-20

hmmmm... J-20 is out of place because unlike all the others it is based on stolen research and reverse engineering.

Anyone who thinks the J-20 will be better than the PAK FA is delusional. Stop with your "muh S-Ducks". The J-20 has a more stealthy shape, but it will be worse in every other way. The Russians actually build working equipment, do original research, and push technology. The Chinese make shitty knockoffs.

>>31867237

F-22=F-35>J-20>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PAK-FA

One is an air superiority fighter that can carry minimal amounts of bombs for political posturing while the others are pre production prototypes of a multi role aircraft.

>>31867237
F-35 is very maneuverable with great RCS reduction

PAK-FA will be super maneuverable with moderate RCS reduction

The J-20 doesn't match the F-35's RCS AND is less maneuverable.

At least the Russians are excelling in one field. The Chinese are just failing combo across the board.

File: Chengdu-J-20d-0015GHz-Rs0000-IncPol-TM-Pol-Theta--E=0450-A=2250-.png (884KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

884KB, 1000x1000px

>>31868130
Weak as fuck bait.

Analysis of the circa 2011 J-20 prototype showed it had better VLO shaping than the F-35. Refinements from then until to the LRIP version in production now shows it's only gotten better.

The full production version will also feature 3D TVC nozzles, likely pushing it above the F-22 in maneuverability.

>vatniks vs. 50centers

a sight to behold

>>31868285
pffffffffft

>>31868285
>Analysis of a photo
Bitch, please. J-20 is a fullmetal piece of crap with aerodynamics of a railway carriage and RCS as such too.

>>31868285
J-20 has no engines. Welp, it has, but they are Russians. And that's problem. Russians know, that their engines are not powerfull enought to be used in S-duct-equipped plane. And that's why they invest large (for Russia) amount oa money into next gen engine for PAK-FA. Not enought power. Chinese are going to learn that hard way.

>implying that manned fighters even matter anymore
>implying AI hasn't BTFO even the best pilots in simulator ACM
>implying any human pilot in his right mind would want to share the skies with 100 cheap, fearless drones who don't turn to mush beyond 12 G

the traditional fighter is dead. All you need is a delivery plane and a (very) long range weapon. You get in close and you just killed yourself.

File: FX2.jpg (416KB, 768x652px) Image search: [Google]

416KB, 768x652px

>>31868804
>Continues to bait.

The chined J-20 nose section and canopy are close in appearance to the F-22, yielding similar specular RCS performance in a mature design. The J-20 trapezoidal edge aligned engine inlets are closest to the F-22, though they appear to be larger and employ an F-35 style DSI (Diverterless Supersonic Inlet) design, obviously intended to improve on F-22 inlet leading edge signature. The J-20 wing fuselage join, critical for beam and all aspect stealth, is in shaping and angle very similar to the F-22, and clearly superior to both the T-50 PAK-FA prototypes and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The J-20 flat lower fuselage is optimal for all aspect wideband stealth, and emulates the F-22 design closely. It can produce a significant ground bounce return in some geometries, especially at lower altitudes, or angles approaching the normal.

Planform alignment of the J-20 shows exact angular alignment between canard and delta leading edges, and exact crossed (starboard to port, port to starboard) angular edge alignment between canard and delta trailing edges. Leading edge sweep is ~43°, clearly intended for efficient supersonic flight. The J-20 nose and main undercarriage, and cheek weapon bay doors employ C-band through Ku-band optimised edge serration technology, based on F-117A and F-22 design rules.

The J-20 design incorporates a number of key F-22 design practices in VLO shaping and we know for a fact the F-22 is stealthier than the F-35. We also know Chengdu has access to high MX ferrite and carbon composites for reducing RCS further.

The prototype J-20 has a lower RCS than the production F-35. That is what all the evidence points to. You're free to provide evidence to the contrary. Further bait will be ignored.

File: 1473571178788_SigpTNN.jpg (442KB, 1400x946px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 1400x946px

The SU-27 and it's derivatives were the best thing to happen in russian fighter history. Will Suhkoi be able to pull it off again?
Also,
Can the T-50 perform the cobra maneuver?

>>31869075
>Russians know, that their engines are not powerfull enought to be used in S-duct-equipped plane.
>What is S-37?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAoCX5oANj4

>>31869441
>Can the T-50 perform the cobra maneuver?
Who cares? It's an airshow trick mostly worthless for actual combat.

>>31869386
Utter nonsense.

>>31869386
>no evidence for any of the claims
>provide evidence to disprove my opinions

File: 1390309_1706171769639817_521433451_n.jpg (59KB, 750x750px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 750x750px

>>31869695
The evidence is any picture of the J-20 and F-22 compared. Like the one in that post.

The similarities in design philosophies are obvious. A quick one previously mentioned is the fact that the J-20s body is flat with engine ducts flush against the fuselage in addition to edge serration along the weapon's bay doors all adding to VLO shaping. These are features clearly adapted from the F-22.

As a fun fact, these features are all inferior on the T-50.

>>31869756
Just because they could ape the shaping doesn't mean they managed to copy the materials needed to produce the same effects.

And everyone, including the Russians who built it, admit the T-50 is just 4.5 gen equivalent RCS reduction, not a stealth fighter.

>>31869756
>As a fun fact, these features are all inferior on the T-50.
One word: canards

>>31867237
>The J-20 has a more stealthy shape
CANARDS

File: Chengdu-J-XX-VLO-Prototype-42S.jpg (660KB, 1024x1113px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 1024x1113px

>>31869782
Chengdu doesn't need to 'copy' the materials. Ferrite's properties aren't some exclusive military secret. Chengdu has a number of resources at their disposal in assisting the VLO shaping with RCS reduction. Ferrite Epoxy Conglomerates, Silver, CFC, Aluminium and Carbon Nano-Tube absorbers are all materials China has industrial scale access to in their projects.

File: sizecomparison.jpg (23KB, 1105x602px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 1105x602px

>>31868285
>auspower

Ha no. The J-20 is a big bird and is heavy as bricks because of it's massive internal fuel storage. Top it off it's powered by shitty Russian engines. The Russians know better than to fully compromise their fighters with VLO and are trying to design the best fighter around their engines.

But what about stealth? Well sure it has forward VLO, but it's engine and tail do not have good VLO. And that's not even talking about it's canards.

I'd love to see thrust vectoring on this though. Seeing a brick lose all it's energy in a single turn as it struggles with it's under powered engines would be a sight to see indeed.

>>31866925
>>31866937
>STILL no S-Ducts

absolutely disgusting

When will Russia discover this lost technology?

>>31870618
the berkut called

>>31870628
they're s-ducts in the way that the pak-fa has s-ducts

aka: not

>>31869756
Is it safe to say that Russia is decades behind the US and China in stealth technology?

>>31870598
It always blows my mind what a teeny little fighter the F-35 is.

>>31870651
Russia literally invented stealth, fgt

File: 77b6bc10e1834bbafa9bb85d9456d130.jpg (117KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1920x1080px

>>31870640
Yes goy. These are totally not S ducts

>>31870683
>being this uninformed

It's okay

>>31870697
So you'll have no problems showing an image of the inlets from the front so we can see that they are full s-ducts and not pak-fa memeducts, right?

File: viggen_16.jpg (24KB, 550x390px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 550x390px

>>31870704
Are intentionally being retarded? F ducts are not fusion reactor technologies. Its a fuckin bend duct that reduces air flow slightly requiring optimisations to turbine blade profile.

Literally every country has made one at some point.

File: totally sducts guys.jpg (72KB, 710x532px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 710x532px

>>31870736
So you'll have no problems showing an image of the inlets from the front so we can see that they are full s-ducts and not pak-fa memeducts, right?

File: Capture.jpg (57KB, 896x635px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 896x635px

>>31870749
Thats an edited image. try again. proved to be fake

File: 1436202840229.jpg (66KB, 956x631px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 956x631px

>>31870868

>>31868130
>The J-20 doesn't match the F-35's AND is less maneuverable.

What?

>>31869075
>that their engines are not powerfull enought to be used in S-duct-equipped plane.
What?

>>31869862
>hurdur canards = less stealthy
MEME

File: j-31_zhuhai_2014_0.jpg (35KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 1000x667px

no one ever talks about the J31

>>31870928
Nice meme burger. but im from a completely different country. S ducts are the biggest meme propaganda by the NSAbots on this board. Its literally a curved piece of composite tube.

Any country that has composites and an oven can make one. If youve ever done any CFD on any FEA software ever, youll know how absolutely trivial simulating air flow on a bent tube,

But yeah....Muh superior S ducts. That previous pic is literally an indian meme plane that barely flies. It still has s ducts. now fuck off

File: proofster.webm (889KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

889KB, 320x240px

>>31870868

File: lol2.jpg (2MB, 1254x3171px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1254x3171px

>>31870949

File: 1451909468907.jpg (45KB, 513x420px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 513x420px

>>31870990
>Any country that has composites and an oven can make one.

so why didn't they make them for the pak-fa when the f-22, f-35, j31, j20, viggen, etc, etc, etc has them but no russian fighter has ever had them?

File: smirk.png (602KB, 565x720px) Image search: [Google]

602KB, 565x720px

>>31870935
Are you really so desperate that you're going to try misquoting posts?

>>31870935

File: intakes9.jpg (40KB, 798x340px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 798x340px

>>31870992

File: 1472565096778.jpg (25KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 300x300px

>>31871013
>random drawing proves that the image is fake and photoshop

File: 1476701024567.png (430KB, 640x481px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 640x481px

>>31871013
>posting fan art from defence.pk

File: 1422647176623.jpg (56KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 604x453px

>>31870990
Holly shit. So easy

>>31869568
>What is S-37?
Machine that uses engines from Mig-31 with more thrust than even next gen engine for PAK-FA is going to have. Chinese use AL-31 with much less thrust.

>>31871010
>greentext cannot be used to summarize shitposts

Oh wow thank you anon!

>>31871062
The S-37 also was fucking huge and way heavier.
Thrust/Weight is what matters if you are trying to make this argument.

>>31871007
>>31871013
>>31871025
>>31871029

If it had side intakes then all the burgers would cry copycats. To avoid embarassment like the chinese, Russians have cleverly overcome this using diverter plates and levcons that activates when with in enemy radar range

>>31871067
>anything that makes me question my beliefs is a shitpost

Wow, thank you anon!

File: AyyLmao.jpg (84KB, 508x504px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 508x504px

>>31870990
>Its literally a curved piece of composite tube.

Which redirects airflow thus reducing the power of the engine. If you have good engines isn't a problem, but if your rely on shits engines then you either give up on S-ducts so you can have an energy and maneuverability (See PAK-FA) or you decided to try to come up with decades VLO design in the span of a few years with shit energy (See J-20).

File: dae.jpg (138KB, 980x1040px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 980x1040px

>>31871078
>If it had side intakes then all the burgers would cry copycats.

It's intakes are already on the side you retard.

>Russians have cleverly overcome this using diverter plates and levcons that activates when with in enemy radar range

>>31871078
>Russians have cleverly overcome this using diverter plates and levcons that activates when with in enemy radar range
No, those are adjustable intakes and they are needed for aerodinamic purposes.

File: 1446671502001.jpg (112KB, 604x473px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 604x473px

>>31870868

>>31871093
you dumb burger, i hope you arent a STEM graduate, if not I can only laugh at the pathetic state of education in america.

Air flow to an engine = velocity X cross section

If an S duct reduces air flow volume due to reduction in velocity owing to the higher resistance offered by the tube, You simply increase Cross section. Boom. You have your old airflow.

thats why F22 has those ugly ass huge intakes.

s ducts actually improve supersonic performace. Look at DSI. the bend actually provides a similar varition in pressure profiles to a DSI.

>>31871131
LOL. Nice meme steve.

>>31871146
Dont you know? Everything that is somewhat against Russia is a Meme! Facts are a meme! Truth is a meme! Logic is a meme! Pointing out garbage is a meme!

>>31871187

Are you this guy? >>31871093

If so reply to this >>31871136

>>31871210
No.
Desperate for people to talk to?

File: secondary flow vortices in a curved duct.png (48KB, 630x336px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 630x336px

>>31871210
>>31871136 Here

It isn't the absolute airflow that's the problem.

It's the distortion and secondary flow and what not that results from the redirection. At the bends you have flow distortions which does in the performance. In order to reduce this issue you can elongate the duct as to reduce the sharpness of the angles but that adds weight which reduces overall performance. You can have a shorter ducts with sharper angles but that increases distortion which reduces performance. This is the actual reason why this >>31871013 is fiction.


If serpentine ducts have no effect on engine performance then riddle me this:

Why the fuck did the B-1B have a limited Mach number in comparison to the non ducted B-1A and TU-160?

If so trivially easy and has no draw backs then why doesn't the PAK-FA have them?

File: 1475000241234.jpg (248KB, 887x720px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 887x720px

>>31871668
ughhhhhhh

I meant here >>31871093

not >>31871136

File: PAK-FA Patent Illustrations.png (94KB, 1370x714px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1370x714px

And to really drive the point home as far as the PAK-FA's exposed blades: this is taken from Sukhoi's own patent filing.The blades are clearly visible and in fact identified.

File: blockers.jpg (178KB, 1052x459px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1052x459px

>>31871816
Those are radar blockers like in the F-18 and x-32

>>31872666
>radar blocker meme
Its cute how often the vatniks always go for the next straw, no matter how often it had been debunked before, maybe this time they are lucky and met people who dont know about it, if it doesnt work in the end they can pretend it was never claimed like always and attack everyone stating otherwise.

>>31866937
>>31866932
>>31866929
>>31866925
S D U C T S
D
U
C
T
S

>>31870949
because its export bait for third world shitters.

File: FB_IMG_1478023040868.jpg (26KB, 500x381px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x381px

>>31871078
>levcons that activates when within enemy radar range

File: 172571.jpg (342KB, 1500x954px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1500x954px

>>31872953
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA#Stealth
>To mask the significant RCS contribution of the engine face, the partial serpentine inlet obscures most, but not all, of the engine's fan and inlet guide-vanes (IGV). The production aircraft incorporates radar blockers similar in principle to those used on the F/A-18E/F in front of the engine fan to hide it from all angles.
If radar blockers are a meme then the US fell for it just as hard.

>>31873057
The Super Hornet is a not a stealth aircraft.

>>31873068
YF-32 was. The YF-23, the stealthiest fighter to ever fly, did not have s-ducts. The YB-23 design also did not have S-Ducts. Maybe this s-duct thing is a design consideration and not the end all be all of stealth?

>>31872666
>thinks that guide vanes are radar blockers

WEW LAD
E
W
L
A
D

>>31873057
>Y-ou cant see the blades, its a shop, there is a s-duct
>E-rrmm its a radar blocker
>choot, choot, everyone join the ride on the never ending exuses train of the vatniks

>>31871668
>Why the fuck did the B-1B have a limited Mach number in comparison to the non ducted B-1A and TU-160?

Are you retarded? The inlets were changed because it was vastly cheaper and more importantly the engines were now expected to take off with a full fuel and munitions load and get to its target instead of taking off with half its fuel and then refueling in air before heading to its target.

>If so trivially easy and has no draw backs then why doesn't the PAK-FA have them?

Because it's a 4.5++ Fighter and not 5th Gen.

>>31873084
>no S-duct
>intake on the bottom
>exhaust on the top
>not an S-duct

Really made me think

File: 3050266_1350905561051.42res_300_168.jpg (16KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 300x168px

>>31872666
>Using the X-32 as an example of how to do anything

>>31873084
The YF-23 did have s-ducts. I'm not sure why you think it didn't. The X-32 did not, but it also lost the competition and we don't know how stealthy it was.

>>31873145
>Doesn't refute the science

>>31873105
>H-hey everyone radar blockers are a Gen 5 feature that's why gen 4 American planes used them...

File: lookmanoducts.jpg (138KB, 1415x573px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1415x573px

>>31873084
>stealthiest fighter to ever fly, did not have s-ducts

File: 1475315753833.jpg (160KB, 1066x750px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1066x750px

>>31870598
Wrong chart.

This one is the real one.

File: J-20 + Flanker comparison.jpg (116KB, 1068x568px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1068x568px

>>31873409
And it is based on this:

>>31873354
>muh science

you claimed it, now prove that it negatively affects the performance of fighters with it :3

File: S-duct.jpg (249KB, 827x650px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 827x650px

S-duct.

File: 1475905263254.png (49KB, 1519x1000px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1519x1000px

>>31873430
Here disprove this kiddo's thesis, as that's my source:

http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-1399/KUMAR-THESIS.pdf

>>31873470
>implying I'm going to read all this bullshit because you can't be bothered to prove yourself

File: iu-5.jpg (47KB, 700x467px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 700x467px

>>31873167
>>31873181
>>31873393
I was confused. Thank you for the correction. I thought since the fan wasn't completely concealed it wasn't a true s-duct. It clearly has an s shape though.

File: 160747wz0t97buf9l7lz5q.jpg (117KB, 1600x1082px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1600x1082px

j-20 is so sex.

>>31873354
>m-ust pretend this was a valid statement and not some crap i ignore NOW like the stuff before
>better come up with the next exuse in advance

File: J-20 60th test flight. J-20 Mighty Dragon Chengdu J-20 fifth generation stealth, twin-engine fighter aircraft prototype People's Liberation Army Air Force OPERATIONAL weapons aam bvr missile ls pgm gps (18).jpg (21KB, 768x820px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 768x820px

>>31873764
Put the pipe down Robinson. It's getting smokey in here.

What in the hell is an s duct, and why are you guys being such raging faggots over it?

File: 88609b8cgw1f9b1xs9wr4j21it213tny.jpg (245KB, 1500x2000px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1500x2000px

>>31873999
>post a pic of a typical AL-31F styled engine centerlinbe fuel dump

pic is what real smoke looks like.

>>31869782
>And everyone, including the Russians who built it, admit the T-50 is just 4.5 gen equivalent RCS reduction, not a stealth fighter.
No one except for butthurt forum children says that.

>>31873532
>That I have to be the one proving it

What you want me to set up some experiments and redo some established science? Try reading for once it's good for you. You only really need to read page one of the intro. If you can do it maybe read up to page four of the into background.

I summarized it in my post here, but that's where I'm puling that from.

>>31874037
>y-y-you mean i actually have to read it instead of just pointing to it and saying it agrees with me??

>>31870704
>>31870749
So you'll have no problems showing an image of the inlets from the front so we can see that they are magically not S-ducts and both the weapons bay and chassis just disappear into nothingness allowing the ducts to be straight?

>>31874049
Are you actually illiterate? I told you precisely where to find it.

>read page one of the intro. If you can do it maybe read up to page four
>read page 1 to 4
>page 1 to 4

Maybe I can get some text to speech to help you. We're all very support of those with disabilities here.

>>31874124
Disproves all that you said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C5qfMfhjZk

>>31869104
until we reach the technological singularity, human pilots will have the edge of spur-of-the-moment decision making that AI just doesn't have the capacity for

File: hciakqoqoujx.jpg (65KB, 750x897px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 750x897px

>>31874006
The engine fan blades and compressor blades are bad for stealth because they reflect radar. Stealth fighters take measures to reduce this, in Russia's case they have opted to obscure the engine face with radar blockers made from radar absorbing material like in the F-18 and x-32. The US and China are using an S-shaped air inlet so there is no direct line of sight to the engine face. There is shitposting on all sides because /k/ is full of amateur aeronautical engineers who were rejected by the aircraft companies because they hired people who knew more than them.