It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: wewuzkangz
"Analysts have speculated that as 6th generation developers seek to engineer a sixth-generation aircraft, they will likely explore a range of next-generation technologies such as maximum sensor connectivity, super cruise ability and an aircraft with electronically configured “smart skins.”"
aviationweek.com... The title is already self explanatory. But what I want to know is more specifications " The program is aimed at technology for a new combat-aircraft engine with 25% lower thrust-specific fuel consumption, but 5% more military power and 10% higher maximum thrust than Pratt’s F135." - I have explained earlier that the afterburner max thrust is 27% more than their previous engine 117. "“It validated the 25% fuel-efficiency goals set by AFRL which translates into a 30%-plus-range improvement for the platform,” he adds." - I have explained that they have a 42% increase in range minimum because the above 5,000km range is telling me its not passed 5,500 or 6,000km because they would have stated it. but that its not passed 5,500km but above 5000 km gives the engine a 42% increase in range minimum but no more than 57%.....Now the F-22 with 2 external fuel tanks is listed by wiki as 2,960km give or take but divide the fuel weight ratio of with or without fuel tanks gives it a 2,049km range. The F-X was intended to replace the F-18 and using those F-18 engines with ADVENT specs would not be fair I guess so I will lay off on this for now but they have already exceeded the specs given in few examples that I gave as of now.
hypersonic missiles was another mention of the F-X not to be a biased Ahole but looking at all the russian missile projects that have been done or under development I have more confidence on this statement with the mig-41 getting such weapons before the F-X with too many examples to give right now.
Our F-35 project was not all that cheap either that even our military explained about not wanting to start another program as of yet. But we still want to purse it. I have seen costs of developing avionics go down. But I will still remain unsure if new technology makes things cheaper regarding engines and program developments. I know your doubtful but my optimism is based off comparing their prototype having features that are not present on the F-35 for example which I have all stated before starting this topic.......Would your doubts be removed if most of these features were all present by 2019 along with lower costs?
Zhuk radars feature a maximum detection range from 110 to180 kilometers for airborne targets and 300 kilometers for sea targets.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: C0bzz
I don't think so. They have the Zhuk AE that they planned on putting into upgraded MiG-29s and Su-27s, and will be in the MiG-35, but I don't think they have an operational one.
originally posted by: wewuzkangz If a SU-57 was to engage the F-35 in front to front confrontation. Would it still be difficult to get behind a supposedly more manueverable aircraft with a 240 degree radar azimuth?