https://www.twz.com/air/why-does-the-f-47s-design-look-so-different-than-what-many-expected
>>65316260because it isn't realarr usa might is papah tagah
>>65316260Because it's a carbon copy of the J-20Don't @ me
The F-47, by all previous documentation and requirements, will be a system of multiple aircrafts working together rather than a single aircraft.It's likely that the "control unit" of this system will feature whatever the fuck lets it survive in hostile airspace, while the "edge units" will be cheap and feature the highest drone capability in a viable airframe.It's hard to tell whether this is the control or the edge unit, though if this is an edge unit then I can't imagine why it wouldn't have fat fucking weapons bays and a shitload of attachment pointsso preliminary analysis is that lockmart figured out that in a post-stealth environment, canards are the way to go to give the pilot (if there is one) a better chance at survival.Either that or they have their head stuck up the ass and they're just looking to get the biggest paycheck from uncle sam by building the most badass looking plane this side of taiwan.
Because the US doesn't always scream about what they're doing 10-20 years before they do it.If you had been paying attention the US had been keeping these tail-less Xplane programs running for decades, it was obviously the ultimate goal that wasn't ready in time for the F-22/F-35, so it's not real shock we're getting it for the F-47.See the McDonnell Douglas/Boeing X-36.
>>65316260That is the most wangdoodle torqued up weird fuckin shaped 3d render of a supposed plane I have ever seen in my life.An 8 year old would draw a better jet.
>>65316277it's over
>>65316317Think of it as the Stalker from Tyrian, controlling many sidekicks. Or Luca from Macross Frontier.
>>65316260buy an ad
>>65316464>Funnels! GET THEM!
>>65316260Was the NG guy supposed to talk so much about stealth here? He revealed a bunch of stuff that was only theorized before
>>65319209If it was anything truly sensitive, it would be scrubbed.Further, knowing something works and knowing how/why something works are totally different realms of knowledge.
>>65319209He literally made the design that got copied by the chinks
>>65319309The J-36 was first spotted in 2024, and its a design that everyone has toyed with.
>>65319309>they copied this drawing on a cum napkincome on
What happened to the F-36 through F-46?
>>65319844No you see Anon, China has no mathematicians and no capability to conduct aerodynamic and radar cross section simulations so they couldn't possibly come up with the most generic tailless stealth fighter design imaginable.
>>65316260>why does the AI generated render based very loosely of 240p infrared footage of an object several miles away filmed by a ghost hunting youtube slop channel not resemble a thing nobody knows the appearance of?The number of unqualified assumptions in OPs question is smaller only than the number of loads I put on his mom's face
>>65320379Nothing. They jumped to 47 because they wanted to jerk Trumps ego as 47th president.
>>6532071240 series jump appears to have been planned previously. A Navy test pilot put experience in a YF-45D on his linkedin several years ago before scrubbing it. He was based at Nellis at the time and it lines up with the AII demonstrator program. All the USAF CCAs are also FQ-4x so far, using all even numbers. Though it is of course possible it would’ve originally been F-41 or F-43, but those don’t sound as good as -45 or -47 if you’re butchering the rotten corpse of the tri service system anyway.
>>65320379Same thing that happened to 20-21 and 23-34.
>>65320751-20 was that failed Northrop export fighter, -21 was Israel’s Kfir operated as an aggressor. -19 was skipped though. Wikipedia claims that was at Northrop’s request, so if that’s true I guess you could say they killed the tri service system.
>65316277
>>65316272nah it's real
>all 6th gens so far look uglyStealth was a mistake
>>65320944Crazy, they're NOT building multi-billion dollar stealth jet programs around YOUR sense af aesthetic taste.What were they THINKING?
>>65320944Wanna know what the coolest looking 6th gen looks like?Whatever the fuck shape it needs to be to function as best it can.
>>65321551Shut up boomer
>>65321744Aint even a boomer, just not a retarded child.
>>65316260>Why Does The F-47’s Design Look So Different Than What Many Expected?its the best we could do with the limited j-20/j-50 documentation we were able to obtain. the fact it has cannards shows we had issues with flight stability modeling for idiotic (what should be) non-priorities like maneuverability, which simply does not matter anymoreall any modern 6th gen jet needs to do do is climb to high altitude as fast and as high as it can, obtain speed, launch missiles and leave. there will never be a need to "maneuver" let alone 'dog fight' ever again>>65316335>Because the US doesn't always scream about what they're doing 10-20 years before they do it.yes...yes we do...its quite literally our 'hallmark'we rolled the B2 stealth bomber out on a sunday evening episode of "inside edition"
>>65316277The J-20 literally started development after the X-36 was shown off
>>65319209Tailless delta has been the "holy grail of true advancement" since a mere handful of decades after airplanes existed. It doesnt take a full on sherlock holmes genius or 8 billion supercomputers to understand drag and performance, or how shape/size interacts with radar.The technology level to make it Just Werk was always the limiting factor.
>>65321755The canards are (moveable, dummy) there primarily for slow speed/high speed cruising optimization. It's a significantly better choice than making compromises with the full planform.And regardless of the CCA/BVR obvious warfare supremacy a plane does still need some positive aspect of maneuverability because "shit happens".
>>65321755B-2 was treaty bound to be publicly shown because of its nuclear capability. F-117 was in service nearly a decade before it was known publicly. RQ-180 is still publicly unacknowledged and all information about it is pieced together by hobbyists and journalists. RQ-170 was similarly unknown until it deployed to large bases in Afghanistan. There are myriad aircraft that have flown over the NTTR that we are unlikely to ever know anything about and have only vague designations to go by.
>>65319309
>>65319482I really need to get a better graphics card...
>>65316260It looks different in every computer render because they're just asspulling designs.
>>65321755>its the best we could do with the limited j-20/j-50 documentation we were able to obtain. the fact it has cannards shows we had issues with flight stability modeling for idiotic (what should be) non-priorities like maneuverability, which simply does not matter anymorelol>we>ourFuck off retarded nigger
>>65322565This
>>65319482>>65319844>>65320396>n-noooo we didn't steal it!lol lmao.
>>65320944>all 6th genschina doesn't have a 6th genthe J-36 is not a 6th gen, it's questionable whether or not it even has competitive stealth coating compared to the F35.
>>65321755>its the best we could do with the limited j-20/j-50 documentation we were able to obtainembarrassing chinkshill attempt.
>>65325218J-36 isn't meant to be a 6th gen (in reality); it's the equivalent of an early test airframe pushing the boundaries and collecting data "cheaply" using current gen avionics, engines, sensors. Then in 10-20 years when china actually DOES have a potential 6th gen engine, high-end computers/sensors/avionics, they can just slot it into a "known" airframe shape that they already have experience building/flying.The airframe engineers who did the J-20/J-35 need SOMETHING to do while china spends the 10-20 years building 6th gen hardware (engines, computers, sensors, etc). Having them iterate tailess airframes publicly for a decade is a visible middle finger to the wider western public (who don't understand the nuance between a test airframe and a real 6th gen fighter program), and also sells the CHINA STRONK narrative to the domestic audience as well. So yeah, china gets to parade around these "6th gen" fighters that aren't intended to even be built into frontline fighters in their current hardware iterations while they spend 10-20 years actually working on the shit to put inside of them.
Does china even have fifth gen fighters?
>>65325412Has the F-35C taken off from the USS Ford yet?
>>65325422No, why would it?It was never scheduled to operate the F-35C in the first few years.The F-35C was integrated on the nimitz class first, and is going to be a standard for future ford-class carriers, with older ford class carriers getting the upgrade during their first overhaul.You're basically asking> Why hasn't the USN done something it specifically said over a decade ago it wasn't gonna do?
>>65325422are you going to keep answering questions with questions because you know what the answer is and you don't like that china doesn't have any 5th gens?
>>65325422F-35C squadrons have been flying from USN carriers for years my wumao friend.
>>65325422Does china currently own any modern aircraft that don't look like fisher price bathroom toy versions of western planes? Now love me long time or else I'm gonna get REALLY HEATED in a moment.
>>65326665J20J35
>>65325661Not from EMALS carrier
>>65327633See >>65325478The EMALS carriers will be coming into service every 4-5 years for the next 20+ years.We already have 10 Nimitz-class carriers in service. If you're going to spend your engineering time/money, the first thing you'd want is to make sure the new plane can fly on the older carriers that you'll be operating for the next 20+ years.The very first ford-class does not have F-35C capability baked in because they focused efforts on the 10 other ships that are going to be in-service.The next ford-class wll have F-35C capability out of the gate, as will all subsequent ships of the class.And the USS GRF itself literally JUST went into Planned Incremental Availability (PIA) last week and that will extend through 2027 where it'll get the modifications to operate F-35Cs.tldr; if you weren't a retard you'd already know the answer to your question and know it's a pretty valid one considering the entire fleet makeup.
>>65327633>nooooo, what about [highly specific thing that needs to be true for me to surrender the argument]?nobody cares, china doesn't even have a stealth aircraft taking off from carriers period. you lost buddy, stop throwing a tantrum.
>>65326778>J20fisher price bathroom toy version of a western stealth aircraft>J35fisher price bathroom toy version of a western stealth aircrafti accept your concession.
>>65327695Counter argument: Both are never being locked on by enemy missile. Unlike some certain "stealth plane"
>>65327711Because neither one is a fighter with weapons.They're test articles.
>>65327711because they're never getting used, china knows their shit sucks ass lmao.>"s-stealth plane"i accept your concession.
>>65327711J-10 hasn't been locked by a missile either, is that because it's stealthier than the F-35?
>>65327695And yet the US military deems Chinese stealth capabilities credible enough to have a F35 aggressor squadron for training.
>>65327877Well yeah, the US military wants funding. What would they gain by accurately representing current existing chinese technology?
JAPANESE GRANDFATHER LOVE COMFORT WOMAN GRANDMOTHER LONG TIME
>>65327877We always take all threats as credible no matter how ridiculous they are so we can dab on your very imaginations.
>>65327877 America overestimation of Russia fighter tech has caused the development of many awesome American designs.
>>65327711>test plane that have and will never see combat have never been threatenedgee anon you really thought long and hard on that one
Where is china might white emperor fighter?
>>65327993/thread
>>65327877Why wouldn't you train against your own tech? It's there, you have it, and it's one of the only ways to develop as yet unthought of things when you don't have constant peer-tech fighting.
>>65327877
>>65327993
