ohmrlobalobayeh
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 3,388
- Reaction score
- -23
- Country
- Location
But do You have in return any technical valid argument to counter his claim?? Why should it be with all the issues he - and I added a few more - reach the same level of stealth?? What about the nozzles, what about the non-alignment, what about the clearly visible chaff&flare-boxes ?? I know there are maybe methods to make them stealthy but as long as they are visible the way now, it need to be discussed.
Only to say the Chinese must know their business or he is stupid - honestly to say so - is not an argument. Otherwise the Russian T50 must be already a 6.5th generation fighter if one follows all that hype in some Russian forums...
Again: I can understand all Your feelings and the J-20 is not only a giant leap in Chinese aeronautic achievements; it's more ... but is not a magical bird. It has to obey the laws of Physics in the same way as all other aircrafts and if there are certain "points of concern" ... then let's argue.
Why do I have to counter his claim? if u backtrack my replies to his claims, i merely requested:
do show us how you drew up that conclusive statement when ironically, you have already acknowledged yourself that:
Nevertheless, I have consistently been fair and advised everyone from making definitive statements simply because the measurement data for all these aircrafts are not public information.
Source: https://defence.pk/threads/chengdu-...tes-discussions.111471/page-422#ixzz4Nyzxb8xr
Source: https://defence.pk/threads/chengdu-...tes-discussions.111471/page-422#ixzz4NyzpeVfc
in order to let me understand why he he claimed what he claimed.
Yet all i can see in his replies are 'because this design doesnt fit with my opinion of how XXX should be designed' .
I dont need a PHD in aircraft engineering to see the gap in his arguement. I think even my grandma could tell that he has no sustantial proof to his claims.