Boeing’s latest sixth-gen fighter concept is a tail-less canard

[500]

Like i said before their is a good reason why we second only to US when it comes to aviation technology

Good reason why #1 country chooses S-ducts for both of its fighters. Good reason why all new designs except pak fa chose S-duct.

It would seem that you have reading comprehension issue's, because i was only mocking your wannabe expert analysis I never support or denounced Boeing concept.

You used "the army of Boeing's engineers" as argument. But now you urself disagree with this army.

You agree with my main conclusion, only got buthurt on S-duct.

 

[Arzamas 16]

Good reason why #1 country chooses S-ducts for both of its fighters. Good reason why all new designs except pak fa chose S-duct.

Other countries want the easy way out, they either can't or don't wan't to spend more money to research other solutions.

You used "the army of Boeing's engineers" as argument. But now you urself disagree with this army.

You agree with my main conclusion, only got buthurt on S-duct.

buthurt? about what

Now i am forced too quote my self

It would seem that you have reading comprehension issue's, because i was only mocking your wannabe expert analysis I never support or denounced Boeing concept.

 

[Cheetah786]

Really? How many squadrons do the Russians and the Chinese have? 0? Thought so....

They have trillions of dollars and almost no debt, Americans have no money and trillions of dollars in debt growing every day.

 

[Audio]

They have trillions of dollars and almost no debt, Americans have no money and trillions of dollars in debt growing every day.

That's no argument.....btw, China has ~35% GDP debt. You will have to show me how trillions in bank make a working stealth plane without much knowledge and even less experience.


And anyhow, we were talking about operational squadrons and what i said is true. Don't know really why you chose to quote me on this.

 

[Cheetah786]

That's no argument.....btw, China has ~35% GDP debt. You will have to show me how trillions in bank make a working stealth plane without much knowledge and even less experience.


And anyhow, we were talking about operational squadrons and what i said is true. Don't know really why you chose to quote me on this.

Research and development can only be done by having money Chinese don't have to reinvent the wheel they just have to make it better.

As far as right now is concerned i personally don't no what Chinese or Russians have.since you do, i will take your word for it.

 

[Audio]

Research and development can only be done by having money Chinese don't have to reinvent the wheel they just have to make it better.

As far as right now is concerned i personally don't no what Chinese or Russians have.since you do, i will take your word for it.

Everything i said is freely available knowledge on the net. You can double check everything. As far as reinventing the wheel and making it better, ye sure, whatever floats your boat.

 

[Cheetah786]

Everything i said is freely available knowledge on the net. You can double check everything.

Yes clearly Chinese and Russians have the habit of publishing there classified information what was i thinking.

As far as reinventing the wheel and making it better, ye sure, whatever floats your boat.

My bad did i step on a painful nerve or some thing.

 

[Audio]

Yes clearly Chinese and Russians have the habit of publishing there classified information what was i thinking.
My bad did i step on a painful nerve or some thing.

You will be glad to know the subject of the discussion was number of squadrons of 5th gen planes. That information is not classified.
Now, my position was number of planes flying which is verifiable, your's is conjecture about debt.

 

[Audio]

double post...

 

[500]

Other countries want the easy way out, they either can't or don't wan't to spend more money to research other solutions.

Making a new design easier that staying with old?

buthurt? about what

About S-duct.

 

[Arzamas 16]

Making a new design easier that staying with old?

New? idiot first S-duct was used on Hawker Siddeley Trident over 50 years ago, radar technology is far newer.

About S-duct.

Wrong.

 

[500]

New? idiot first S-duct was used on Hawker Siddeley Trident over 50 years ago, radar technology is far newer.

You just said yourself that Sukhoi was testing S-duct? That means it was not familiar with this technology. Since 4th gen fighters mostly did not have an S-duct, it needed bigger redesign. Not talking that Siddeley Trident is subsonic passenger not a fighter.

Another example. Internal weapon bay is also an old concept, used on 3rd gen. But it needs lots of design and testing to reproduce it again:

Next time try to think before posting.

Wrong.

Then why you started cursing like a woman, although you agree with my general assessment of this Boeing's concept?

 

[Arzamas 16]

You just said yourself that Sukhoi was testing S-duct? That means it was not familiar with this technology. Since 4th gen fighters mostly did not have an S-duct, it needed bigger redesign. Not talking that Siddeley Trident is subsonic passenger not a fighter.

Another example. Internal weapon bay is also an old concept, used on 3rd gen. But it needs lots of design and testing to reproduce it again:

Next time try to think before posting.

The key word here is Sukhoi, we have 5 other design bureau's, the fact is that the S-Duct concept is very old, adapted or redesigned doesn't matter.

Then why you started cursing like a woman, although you agree with my general assessment of this Boeing's concept?

Cursing? show me the post where I cursed you.

 

[500]

The key word here is Sukhoi, we have 5 other design bureau's, the fact is that the S-Duct concept is very old, adapted or redesigned doesn't matter.

Regular intakes is much older and much more widespread. So your claim that S-duct is easier than regular duct is BS. Especially for Sukhoi, which never made an operational S-duct fighter.

Cursing? show me the post where I cursed you.

From very first post you started with personal attacks. Your behavior is typical for girl ditched by her bf.

If you were not buthurt you would simply say: I agree with your Boeing concept assessment, but you are wrong on S-duct issue.

 

[Arzamas 16]

Regular intakes is much older and much more widespread. So your claim that S-duct is easier than regular duct is BS. Especially for Sukhoi, which never made an operational S-duct fighter.

I was talking about radar blockers, and yes radar blocker technology is much harder to make than S-duct which is no problem for Sukhoi.

From very first post you started with personal attacks. Your behavior is typical for girl ditched by her bf.

If you were not buthurt you would simply say: I agree with your Boeing concept assessment, but you are wrong on S-duct issue.

You call words like dumb, idiot, stupid cursing

what are you? A nun