Sohu explained why the J-20 can not yet be attributed to the fifth generation fighter

The Chinese media published material stating that the J-20, being the most advanced aircraft in China, still cannot be called a fifth-generation fighter. The Sohu publication names the reasons for this.

According to the author, in the military section of the mentioned resource, many Chinese experts are inclined to attribute the J-20 fighter to the fifth generation, but, in fact, there is a main factor that does not give the J-20 such a status.

From the material:

This factor is the lack of engines at the moment that can give the J-20 fighter super-maneuverability. Fighter jets are operated with Russian engines, there are few variants of the latest engines created in China for the new batch of J-20. But while these engines with a controlled thrust vector are being tested and until they go into series, the J-20 fighter cannot be fully attributed to the 5th generation.

In 2018, a modernized J-10B aircraft with a thrust vector controlled engine was demonstrated at the air show in Zhuhai (China). One of the modifications of this engine is being tested on the J-20. At present, the preliminary results of such tests are not officially reported.

In Sohu:

The fifth generation fighter is an aircraft that must have at least two parameters: the implementation of low visibility technology and the latest engine with controlled thrust vector.

Comments

[Thrifty]

It, like the notorious f35, generally can not be attributed to the 5th generation of fighters due to their complete discrepancy with the requirements for fighters of the 5th generation. This is at best, 4+ like the Penguin f35!

[Pessimist22]

And what are the fifth generation then?

[Thrifty]

The pessimist of the 22-5th generation is f22, and Su57! All the rest is 4 + generation !!!

[Pessimist22]

So, for F 22, engines with a flat nozzle to reduce IR visibility and are completely hidden in the fuselage and allow you to fly in supersonic mode without using afterburner, but in SU 57 you saw how the engines stand? That is, in IR visibility, it is significantly inferior to F 22 and F 35.

[Voyager]

That is, in IR visibility, it is significantly inferior to F 22 and F 35.

F-22 and in IR visibility - perhaps, and for now. And why F-35? Does he have a flat nozzle?

[Pessimist22]

If you noticed, then on F35 the engine is completely covered by covers, except for the nozzle, and on SU 57, as I understand it, these titanium covers are so close to the engine that they are not even painted, most likely due to temperature, let me correct if I'm wrong .

[Shurik70]

Is there an invisible plane in the world?

[Voyager]

I have been paying attention to these planes since the moment they didn’t even get on the wing, and I’m afraid you are wrong here and there.
The Su-57 engines have been covered by enclosures for many years, starting with the T-50-6 and further on different prototypes. I don’t know how and where you look, but already in 11-12 pre-production prototypes they are also covered with RPM

And, of course, all these engines glow in the IR, some more, some less. The F-22 has flat nozzles, it works, but for modern missiles is not a problem. The F-35 has one round and huge nozzle with frantic heat. It is also with technologies to reduce visibility, but the Su-57 uses the same technologies on the second-stage engine. In addition, Sukhoi’s engines are set apart.

[Errr]

Quote: Pessimist22

... at SU 57, as I understand it, these titanium casings are so close to the engine that they are not even painted, most likely due to the temperature ...

Now they are painting.

[Xenofont]

Yes, they wrote more than once that on the Su-57 engines in the screen. Just nobody wants to pay attention to it.

[tomket]

Quote: Pessimist22

So, for F 22, engines with a flat nozzle to reduce IR visibility and are completely hidden in the fuselage and allow you to fly in supersonic mode without using afterburner, but in SU 57 you saw how the engines stand? That is, in IR visibility, it is significantly inferior to F 22 and F 35.

And on f-35 are also flat nozzles?

[NEXUS]

Quote: Pessimist22

and at SU 57 have you seen how the engines stand?

With the engine of the first stage, the SU-57 also has an afterburner supersonic sound. But ... the product 30 will give more traction, plus speed, while the fuel burns less.
As for who is a 5th generation fighter, who is not, it must be understood that the requirements for 5th generation fighters are different for everyone. Mattresses rely on stealth, while we rely on over-maneuverability and speed. According to our requirements, even the F-22 is not very fifth generation. As for the F-5, this device does not even have cruising supersonic, and to classify it as a fighter is, to put it mildly, a very controversial occupation.

[Bobrick]

Not so much 20 percent.
However, the decrease in visibility in the IR range is compensated by the loss of traction in such a nozzle up to 15-20%.
Somewhere there was even an opinion that the flat nozzle on the F-22 was, first of all, made to simplify the implementation of the all-angle controlled thrust vector, and not to reduce the visibility.

[Mountain shooter]

Quote: Thrifty

The pessimist of the 22-5th generation is f22, and Su57! All the rest is 4 + generation !!!

It was always surprising that our 57th was not considered the 5th generation, because it does not have "cruising supersonic"
And theirs J-20 or "Penguin" - they are "fifth" ...
A question of terminology ... To juggle with words - this is not to do super fighters

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

due to their complete mismatch of requirements for fifth generation fighters

Well, about the complete discrepancy, you are bent.

The 5th generation fighter is:
- radar with AFAR;
- supersonic cruising speed;
- low EPR (stealth technology in construction) and low thermal signature;
- multifunctionality (ability to attack air, land and sea targets);
- over-maneuverability.
Well, and as a matter of course, great automation and reliability in the management of aircraft and the use of weapons.

The requirements of low ESR and low thermal visibility conflict with the requirement of supersonic cruising speed and super maneuverability, therefore there can only be a compromise with an advantage in some direction.

On the F-35, a bias towards low visibility, on the Su-57, on the contrary, towards maneuverability. And this is determined by the tactics of application.

F-35 is a bomber or fighter that will target AWACS aircraft, other fighters or satellite navigation data.

Su-57 is a hunter-fighter, it will search for targets, destroy them, detect missiles attacking it and, using its speed and maneuverability, move away from a missile attack, changing course to the side of the missile (which is most effective and most likely) or performing an anti-missile maneuver or even knocking a rocket with your rocket.

With all this, the tactics of the Su-57 and F-35 can change directly to the opposite, but then here each aircraft will do these tasks a little worse than the one that is intended for this.

Although I think the low visibility of the F-35 is greatly exaggerated and is more a marketing move by Lockhead Martin (which became famous for corruption scandals and was on the verge of ruin until it began to promote the stealth project F-117, and then F-22/35).

A small EPR is primarily provided by the design of the airframe (the absence of right angles, dimensions), and the coating here does not play a role at all. I read somewhere that the radar absorbing coating should work as it should; its thickness should be equal to the radar wavelength. And as far as I know, both decimeter and meter radars, in our case, it’s simply not possible to apply such a coating to an airplane, but it can give some penny effect, but it definitely does not bring any decisive value.

It would be so simple, then F-15/16/18 planes or at least the ships would be covered with a radio-absorbing coating and they would become invisible to the radar, but they wouldn’t do something like that, but would try to play with the hull structure (Zumvolt as an example).

[Pessimist22]

I completely agree with you, they had different application tasks when they were designed.

[Alex_You]

Lord, that only one country can create an engine from scratch in a short time?

[mark1]

Yes. this is China. But something tells me that a "purely Chinese engine" will suspiciously resemble an engine created in another country in long agony.

[bessmertniy]

The main thing here is the presence of this engine. It will be for picking - the fighter's class will grow. Let not until the 5th generation, but significantly closer to it.

[orionvitt]

Quote: mark1

a "purely Chinese engine" will look suspiciously like an engine created in another country in long agony.

I'll tell you the open secret. Without our own, developed, scientific school of aviation engine building, even messing with such an extremely complex product as an aircraft engine is practically impossible. And in general, copying from scratch will not work. Rather, it will turn out, in appearance, but according to the characteristics, it will come out, to put it mildly, not quite right. I talked a lot with the designers of aircraft engines (on past work), just in time for the issue of copying aircraft engines by the Chinese, and they unanimously stated that the engine should be designed and brought up from scratch. If you copy something, then only with the full availability of source technologies and design documentation. There is no other way. This can include the interest in the Chinese, the purchase of Motor Sich, an enterprise, let’s say, not of the first freshness. In terms of technology. But anyway.

[mark1]

Quote: orionvitt

If you copy something, then only with the full availability of source technologies and design documentation.

I agree with you. And even in this case, it may not be exactly that (Soviet and the same Chinese experience). I’m more about industrial espionage. Due to this, the time of the initial stage of development is reduced.

[Pathos]

Yes, they’ll handle everything after assembly with a file :)

And if without the humor on engines of 29x the engines were smoking too and the resource was not that coat, but not a single NATO member and staff at the sight of this product and its maneuver thought about the resource of our engine, but boldly walked by itself and gave it to far away until a bucket came from ours, there a second salvo only the guns should be wow :)

The double-circuit turbojet engine was also hard for Arkhip Mikhailovich cradle to constantly fly the turbine blades of the glider near Sukhoi was ready and the engine was lagging, but they didn’t think anywhere and somewhere, and voila still drive the NATO along the borders

And one more moment of a turbojet engine is much simpler than a piston engine in which more than 2000 parts and in a turbojet engine are all on the same axis, even techies recognized the simplicity of a turbojet engine

[Prisoner]

And moreover, created many years ago.

[mark1]

And here I just do not agree. Judging by the speed of appearance of Chinese analogues of modern world (and especially ours) developments (naturally, in fact, they all "themselves" invented), one gets the impression that over the shoulder of each developer there is a Chinese look.
Not .. well, well done, of course ... they work quickly ...

[NEOZ]

Quote: mark1

But something tells me that a "purely Chinese engine" will suspiciously resemble an engine created in another country in long agony.

I know the name: AL41F with UVT ..... :)))))))))))

[orionvitt]

That's the number. And I thought that they would declare their J-20, an airplane of the 6th generation. This is in their repertoire.

the lack of engines at the moment that are capable of giving the J-20 fighter super-maneuverability

So what? Super maneuverability depends not only on the engine, but also more on the aerodynamics of the aircraft. It is clear that with a good engine and an ax will fly (F-117 ) Drying and MIGs, and without UVT, showed miracles of maneuverability, and even more so with it. The vaunted fifth-generation Americans didn’t come close to super-maneuverability, and they don’t worry about anything. But in general, this proves once again that making an engine is an order of magnitude more complicated than an airplane.

[Pathos]

The whole problem in the cooling of the turbine blades will pick up the material and everything will be normal again, Ф22 only the Americans say they will go to the super sound without afterburner, but nobody will check this.

Petka how did you win so much money? Yes, he sat down with the English to play a point, the Englishman says I have 21, but what a show !? Are you that gentleman's word !!!! And then my suit went

[voyaka uh]

"Super-maneuverability depends not only on the engine, but also to a greater extent on the aerodynamics of the aircraft." ////
----
And at what linear speed can the nozzles be turned?
The Americans on Red Flag specifically in training battles forced the Indians to use super maneuverability. And the Su-30 always before this slowed down to 0.5 - 0.6 MAX. The Americans build their attacking tactics on this feature. F-15 pilots are trained to never slow down below 0.9 MAX. In no combat situation.

[Genry]

Quote: voyaka uh

F-15 pilots are trained to never slow down below 0.9 MAX.

Great habit to get you in the tail.

[Tuzik]

Quote: voyaka uh

F-15 pilots are trained to never slow down below 0.9 MAX. In no combat situation.

And what are the advantages? Also more and longer turn.

[voyaka uh]

There are statistics. Aircraft were shot down by explosive rockets when they slowed down.
It is safer to fight at transonic speed than to slow down.

[Tuzik]

Clear. And I thought it was only in the game Ace Combat rolls)

[orionvitt]

Quote: voyaka uh

The Americans on Red Flag specifically in training battles forced the Indians to use super maneuverability.

What do you mean forced? Did you threaten with a knife before departure? As far as I heard, in training battles with the Indians, the Americans looked very pale.

[voyaka uh]

"Forced", creating a quantitative advantage in one episode of the battle.
Chasing three of its F-15s of one Su-30. To check its maximum
maneuverability and speed at the same time.
To do this, they succumbed to other places and, in general, lost the game.
To the joy and pride of the Indians who sent their best pilots.
The US Air Force works on strictly collective tactics, and not on the skill of aces.

[orionvitt]

Quote: voyaka uh

To do this, they succumbed to other places and, in general, lost the game.

This means that they lost on purpose, so that, God forbid, not be caught in the absence of team spirit and collectivism. Originally. Excuse so-so. As far as I am aware, in these "exercises", the Indian pilots, initially, (according to the terms of the exercises), were delivered ahead of time with unfavorable conditions. But they still won.

[voyaka uh]

"But we won anyway." ///
----
So that's great
The main thing is that everyone be satisfied

[Pathos]

EEEEEEEEEE well, as if the Su 27 and MiG 29 did not have an initially deflected thrust vector, and just due to the aerodynamics of the glider, anyone could hit the tail of the adversary and the turn speed was much more fun than everyone. Well, a cobra without a controlled thrust vector of 91m has generally landed the states for the next 20 years

MiG pilots 25 and 31 are trained to never slow down below 3 MAX. In no combat situation.

[NEOZ]

Quote: orionvitt

So what? Super maneuverability depends not only on the engine, but also more on the aerodynamics of the aircraft.

and aerodynamics come into conflict with low visibility ... that's why we need a dvigun with more traction to compensate for poor aerodynamics.

[rocket757]

We can assume two options - the first is that the Chinese are cunning and they have everything super super super good! The second option .... they have problems, problems, problems, and it is impossible to hide them, but there is no way to overcome them either!
The third option is not visible.

[Vyacheslav Viktorovich]

That is, answering the question in the title in simple words: "J-20 cannot be attributed to the 5th generation because of Russian engines."

[mark1]

And this is only the visible part of the iceberg ..., the rest is also not confirmed by anything.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Vyacheslav Viktorovich

"The J-20 cannot be classified as the 5th generation because of the Russian engines."

Ungrateful! They would say thanks for the fact that they were sold at least THESE dviguny. Otherwise their J-20 wouldn’t fly at all!

[DOT]

And why do the Chinese invent a bicycle .. I would buy a lot of money from Russia and all things!

[krops777]

The fifth generation fighter is an aircraft that must have at least two parameters: the implementation of low visibility technology and the latest engine with controlled thrust vector.

But what about supersonic without afterburner or is it already the 6th generation by Chinese standards. It’s time for the Chinese to admit that materials science is very lame, it’s good that at least the USSR had enough technology in its time not to betray.

[Zaurbek]

They have a way ... purchase of AL-41

[NEOZ]

Quote: Zaurbek

purchase of AL-41

already as a year .... and what do you think, what engines will the new J20 have !!!! !!!!!

[Zaurbek]

And about serial purchases ... as was the case with D30. So far, one-time has passed and besides stealth, there is also the Su35S.

[Demagogue]

The Chinese are cunning. J-20 does not have the necessary fighter maneuverability at the moment. The engines are closed, unlike the su-57, but two protruding nozzles are a big problem.

[jonht]

On serial and SU-57 has casings. They are not experienced, and even then up to 8 or 9 cars, but 9 and 10 are usually not shown.

[3danimal]

This is not about radial grilles-blockers, but about s-shaped air intakes. (Together with bars)

[Pathos]

Yes, there the Chinese have the whole plane, in fact, a problem from which side you don’t look. In a word, not a plane, but Indoutka and amers have a penguin and an iron and all sorts of rubbish heaped well he loves people they will give ist quadratic Well, how such pepelats can fly, only clumsily

[3danimal]

35 flies (comparable to the F-18), the 22nd flies even better.

[Demagogue]

Quote: jonht

On serial and SU-57 has casings. They are not experienced, and even then up to 8 or 9 cars, but 9 and 10 are usually not shown.

Is there any photos? I saw hints of shrouds only on the serial assembly video.

[Boa kaa]

Fighter jets are operated with Russian engines, there are few variants of the latest engines created in China for the new batch of J-20. But while these engines with a controlled thrust vector are being tested and until they go into series, the fighter J-20 can not be fully attributed to the 5th generation.

Probably the "smart monkey" fell from the branch and woke up. I looked around myself soberly and came to this conclusion.
Or from the propaganda given by the Central Committee of the CPC, they gave the go-ahead - to slow down. And then the States painfully began to carefully look at the hongfuz ... No matter what happens!

[Cats]

Judging by the well-known characteristics, both the F-35 and J-20 can be attributed to generation 5 - aircraft.

[Incvizitor]

It’s easier, like the Nazis, to name 5m and that’s all, the paper will tolerate it, just change the requirements for 5m as convenient.

[3danimal]

Did the fascists have 5 generation aircraft? They can not be fully attributed to 1mu, rather 0+ :)

[maiman61]

Calmly !. The engine for American missiles was sold with full documentation and the right to manufacture in the USA! But! Americans cannot make this engine in the USA, but buy in Russia! And this is the engine of the 60s! No need to indulge in a fairy tale that the Chinese will be able to make an engine for a 5th generation airplane.

[NEOZ]

Quote: maiman61

No need to indulge in a fairy tale that the Chinese will be able to make an engine for a 5th generation airplane.

they can buy it and call their own! e.g. WS41F :))))))))))))

[3danimal]

On the RD-180 engines, the 1st stage of the Atlas of NASA flies.
What about SpaceX and their Merlin engines?

[maiman61]

Add another lunar program and submarines. Unable to understand what is at stake?

[3danimal]

What a wonderful, rude manner)
SpaceX gives a significant share in American (and world) launches, flies on its own engines. Here m now, not 50 years ago. And this does not fit into the concept of such a strong dependence on Russian supplies.
NASA's second rungs also fly their own engines, why?
More logical is a simple desire to save money, acquiring, moreover, a product with suitable characteristics, including reliability. How state police get Toyota SUVs.

[maiman61]

And how to talk with a stupid? After all, he does not understand the human language. The point is that, having full documentation and the right to manufacture, the Americans CANNOT make this engine. What is not clear? Well, strain your only gyrus, please!

[3danimal]

Doesn’t make NASA engine in the USA (he uses it). And, it is likely that financial issues are not in last place here.
The point is to make, to have difficulties with debugging, etc., if you are readily sold to a working and reliable product?
This is NASA's position.
Americans, as you explain, are different. There is NASA, but there is SpaceX, or Boeing, or Blue Origin, everyone has their own (NASA does not have all) engines and rockets. SpaceX does its job well. And the question of the production of RD-180 is not even considered in principle.
Are you so used to the idea of ​​supercentralization that you don’t see this?

[3danimal]

As the famous intellectual Nikita Khrushchev used to say: “there are two opinions - one is mine, the other is stupid”

[Aleks2000]

In fact, this is all garbage.
Cruising supersonic and stealth is the classic definition.
In Su 57, everyone hides, hides - whether there is, or not.

They wanted to palm off the Indians without this - the stealth cover of the cabin (supposedly 50% stealth) was announced a year and a half after them ...

And super-maneuverability - as specialists wrote here - is a speed of up to 700 km, that is, at such a speed both SAM and ZAU do not care - there is super-maneuverability, no ...

But the Chinese have more planes, and on the way, allegedly, the next, light ...

[shadow]

After reading the comments, I asked one question: why was it necessary to create f35, if there is f22? And to create from scratch.

[Kurare]

F22 is expensive, with breakthrough technologies, the main task of which is to gain superiority in the air and, practically, without shock functions, with a ban on export. 35th was to become inexpensive, universal and, importantly, created partly for the money of others. It did not work out, especially with regard to price.

[Tuzik]

It was possible to turn it into a percussion (F22V), but in any way to the vertical. And of course, the ban on the sale played an important role.

[Kurare]

Quote: Tuzik

It was possible to turn it into a percussion (Ф22В)

There were plans, but did not realize because of the very high price of such improvements. We decided to leave it like that. In addition, the concept of 2 types of fighters in the United States has not changed, the replacement of the F-15 / F-16 pair was needed.
Now it is clear that the plans for the transition to a new generation have not been completely successful.

[3danimal]

22 highly specialized, without the ability to quickly upgrade software and electronics. 35th, in comparison with it - "constructor".

[Lord of the Sith]

This factor is the lack of engines at the moment that can give the J-20 fighter super-maneuverability. Fighter jets are operated with Russian engines

How is "zrada" in Chinese?))

[Tuzik]

Pànguó zuì. Pango Tsei)

[Saxahorse]

Nonsense. What does "super-maneuverability" have to do with the characteristics of a fifth-generation aircraft? With onboard air-to-air missiles with a range of 100-200 km, even if you maneuver, you will still get on board.

[Bobrick]

Such missiles have an overload limit of 20 G, but their speed is about 3-4 thousand km / h (about 1000 m / s). those. the bend radius, with such an overload, will be about 500 meters (the formula for determining centrifugal acceleration from school physics).

An ultra-maneuverable fighter can carry out at least a single turn with an overload of 10 G at a speed of 300-400 km / h (about 100 m / s), and its turn radius will be about 100-200 meters.

Thus, a fighter with super maneuverability has a great chance at a turn to leave the missile capture zone at a turn, that’s all.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Bobrick

leaving the missile capture zone in a bend is all.

You still advise the infantry to just jump off bullets. Business then ..

[3danimal]

In general, it is true, but there is a problem with the reaction time of the pilot, at such a high speed of the rocket. In addition, on approach, this speed is already less.
The cruising of modern fighters is about 800 km / h, you can’t immediately drop it to 300. The pilot learns about a possible attack from the work of the radar in the distance, but whether or not the rocket is launched is already from a distance of ~ 20 km, when the ARL of the GOS is turned on.

[Bobrick]

As far as I know, the viewing modes and guidance modes of rocket systems have been different since the 60s, and not only in operating frequencies, but also in signal strength.

If the Russian RER and EW services are really the best in the world, then the guidance modes are already known and crammed into aircraft detection systems. And then the pilot has a minimum of 80 seconds from the moment of the launch of the rocket in order to think what measures to take.

[3danimal]

I understand, but I see the difficulty here: with an explosive rocket with a PARL POS, everything is simpler - the plane is in the "sharp" beam of light, which is immediately reported by the fired missile system far enough and you can begin to perform anti-missile / attack maneuvers. The same spiral, for example.
With AIM-120 it is more difficult - from the moment of switching on its GOS to undermining, about 25s remain near. Quite a bit. And it’s unlikely that it will be possible to crush it by interference - a guidance mode is provided for their source. All hope for maneuvering and dropping dipole reflectors.

[eklmn]

Question to the forum -
The F-22 has a coating (also F-35) for “more invisibility”.
The coating is sensitive to the sun, so they stand in the shade. The Chinese proudly stated that they created a coating that is not afraid of the sun.
Those. Chinese and Americans cover their planes with special “plaster”, which covers all “rivets and seams” and which cannot be painted.
If you find a close-up photo of the Su-57 on the Internet, you can see rivets / seams and, sometimes, even rust. And the plane is painted.
Someone can answer me what is the difference in the “invisibility” of “plastered” aircraft and painted?
Thanks for answers...!

[3danimal]

An important point is the minimization of these same rivets and seams, one-piece cabin light, in particular, the sawtooth edges of the hatches.
As for the characteristics of the coatings (obviously, they differ), it may be worth looking in English.

[eklmn]

“As for the characteristics of the coatings (obviously different), it might be worth looking up in English.”
Thanks for the advice. I looked in English. and found! (Why didn’t guess before? Aged, probably became lazy ...)
“Secret stealth sauce: this is what makes the F-22 or F-35 almost invisible.”
April 2019
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/secret-stealth-sauce-what-makes-f-22-or-f-35-nearly-invisible-50897
“Without proper maintenance, their invisibility characteristics of these aircraft deteriorate over time, making them vulnerable to enemy radars.”
“While pilots of advanced fifth-generation fighters, such as the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor or F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, often attract attention, the ground crews maintain the pristine surface of these aircraft, which are often real heroes. Without proper skin care, the characteristics of these stealth aircraft deteriorate over time, making them vulnerable to enemy radar. ”
.... ““ Right now, something is wrong with the lightbar on this plane. Since this panel needs maintenance, we need to remove the radar absorbent and clean all the fasteners so that they can fix the panel, ”said Moon. “As soon as the panel is repaired, we will again cover the surface with absorbent material.”
More interesting here:
May 2017
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017/05/22/lockheed-pitches-new-f-22-mods-to-boost-the-life-of-its-stealth-coating/
“According to Cottam, one of the modifications is to apply a product called Mighty Tough Boot to the aircraft, which fills the gaps on the surface of the F-22, which can cause the aircraft to be visible on the radar. “Gaps in an airplane is what enhances the signature of an airplane, therefore, by placing these coatings or these gap fillers on the airplane’s body, we reduce the visibility of the airplane,” he said. “This reduces the number of angles and gaps that are captured by the radar.”
On my own, I’ll add that Mighty Tough Boot is sold in the “Home Depot” store. You can buy in buckets or barrels ...

[Tuzik]

What percentage of "plaster" adds the invisibility of F35, Voyaka Uh (Alexei) may know if such information was posted somewhere. Why don't they plaster the Su-57, I guess they are working on it. Probably they do not want to rush, they beat, feel, so that they do not face a bunch of problems like the Americans.

[3danimal]

Note that in our media (and here on the forum) the Su-57 is often regarded as a fully finished production aircraft (“even tomorrow for battle”).

[Tuzik]

It does not interfere. Amerikosy immediately draw a letter A to new planes, knowing that there will be B and C and D in the future. The fact that the Su-57 will improve over time I have no doubt, the platform is clearly for a long time, only the letters will be different M, M2, M3.

[3danimal]

Following this logic, was the Su-27 completely raw?
I meant that now PR is running very “ahead of the engine” :)

[Tuzik]

I read your heading "For the curious" with interest. It turns out that I did not understand your message initially. I am glad when there are alternative opinions on such a trump site.

[eklmn]

Thanks, I will continue!
But in my comments on this article there is no “For the curious”?
Most likely you found this in another article. Interesting - in which?

[Tuzik]

She just opened the profile, and read

[eklmn]

Glad you like my “blots”, I will continue ...!
I am proud of the number of Cons I received (exceeded 5 thousand!) - This means that, as a surgeon, I get on a tumor!

[Golovan Jack]

Quote: eklmn

I get on a tumor

... or to the desman

[sivuch]

do not flatter yourself. Cons put to you for illiteracy.

[eklmn]

You discouraged me - it turns out I was flattering myself, I thought that I was suffering for the idea! Grammar, of course, I will correct, maybe I will get out on the pros ...

[lvov_aleksey]

I am already bored about SOHU.
it's like about white helmets