← Home ← Back to /k/

Thread 64387662

161 posts 68 images /k/
Anonymous No.64387662 >>64387671 >>64387687 >>64387771 >>64388206 >>64388273 >>64389082 >>64392095 >>64393144 >>64395469 >>64396021
ITT: Anons calmly and politely discuss the KF-21
Anonymous No.64387669 >>64392801
They really fucked up the marketability of this thing by not having internal weapons bay baked in.
Anonymous No.64387671
>>64387662 (OP)
When realistically will this program be done?
Anonymous No.64387687 >>64387691 >>64387737 >>64387762 >>64388315 >>64397261
>>64387662 (OP)
What's the deal with this why does it look exactly like the f-22? Korean spies?
Anonymous No.64387691
>>64387687
To me, it looks like the bastard child of an F-35 and a F-15.
Anonymous No.64387737 >>64387762
>>64387687
Korea didn't need spies, we helped them build a lot of it. We just didn't give them our avionics.
sage No.64387762
>>64387687
>>64387737
Lockmart gave them old notes on the F-22 design and told them to figure it out yourself
Anonymous No.64387771 >>64387803 >>64391228 >>64392649
>>64387662 (OP)
It's like they tried to build a stealth fighter and then half way just went "fuck it. stealth is hard, Just bolt whatever to it and make another 4.5gen".
Anonymous No.64387803 >>64387822
>>64387771
Goes to show that the geometry is crazy complex. Even if it looks the part it won't act the part.
Anonymous No.64387822 >>64387833
>>64387803
It's more all the little details that produce a bunch of clutter on the frame. Intakes, sensors, missiles just stuck to the bottom. Stealth isn't just about having your plane be a certain shape, it also means that every part of it showing on the outside needs to not show up on radar and getting all that right is where it really gets difficult.
Anonymous No.64387833 >>64387868
>>64387822
>missiles just stuck to the bottom
I've heard that even in a clean config the RCS is anywhere between 0.1-0.25m
Anonymous No.64387868 >>64387932 >>64391213
>>64387833
From what I can find it says it has an RCS of about 1m which makes it stealthier than something like a Eurofighter which isn't designed for stealth really at all but still way behind even the Chinese never mind American jets.
Anonymous No.64387932 >>64387948
>>64387868
1m has gotta be when it's armed. Even the Superbug has an RCS of 0.5m with minimal stealth treatment.
Anonymous No.64387948
>>64387932
It doesn't have internal weapons bays so a "clean" loadout means it simply isn't armed.
Anonymous No.64388206 >>64388306 >>64388645 >>64389012 >>64392746 >>64393857
>>64387662 (OP)
I really wonder why the Poles are so interested in the KF-21.
If they want a stealthy aircraft, they can just buy more F-35s. The US is willing to sell them as many as they want.
If they want a cheaper, non-stealthy aircraft to be a bomb and missile truck, they have many other options that can be bought and fielded much quicker than the KF-21.
The only factor I can think of that would make the KF-21 attractive to the Poles is that the South Koreans might be willing to allow the Poles to set up a domestic production line for the aircraft in Poland.
Anonymous No.64388273 >>64391346
>>64387662 (OP)
that IRST isn't getting any stealth points. I remember they had to source Sapphire or emerald for the F35's one and made it in some geometric shape picrelated
Anonymous No.64388306
>>64388206
There aren't even that many missile trucks that would be cheaper than just getting more F-35s. The F-35 is insanely competitively priced.
Anonymous No.64388315 >>64390772
>>64387687
there's only so many shapes that are both aerodynamic and stealthy.
Anonymous No.64388645 >>64388669 >>64392124
>>64388206
Polack here, KF-21 is a part of a massive package deal that includes tanks, knockoff HIMARS, jets, a massive tech transfer and (last I've heard) domestic production on 2/3rds of the shit we bought. It's objectively worse than Fat Amy but our government is full of nogunz niggers and we can't have nice things
Anonymous No.64388669
>>64388645
From my perspective on this side of the pond, going for in-country production of K2 tanks was a good move. Curious to hear your thoughts on that one.
Anonymous No.64388673
its 30 years too late
Anonymous No.64388678 >>64388827 >>64388882
South Korea should have started making a aircraft carrier/ destroyer like Japan.
Anonymous No.64388827
>>64388678
They should just focus on a big air force imo
Anonymous No.64388882
>>64388678
I thought that they were designing an aircraft carrier
Anonymous No.64388917 >>64389241
It seems South Korea has been going back and forth on the aircraft carrier.
Anonymous No.64389012 >>64393857 >>64395532
>>64388206
>I really wonder why the Poles are so interested in the KF-21.
Corruption
Anonymous No.64389082 >>64389159
>>64387662 (OP)
the design relies on american F414 engines, which means US will kill any orders that could impact F35 sales
Anonymous No.64389159
>>64389082
>orders that could impact F35 sales
They won't, only countries like Poland would buy it
Anonymous No.64389241
>>64388917
Its as much a political vanity project as it is the ROKN trying to figure out a blue water strategy that makes sense for a country that is utterly dependent on overseas shipping, has as unfortunate geopolitical positioning as they do, and is trying to keep playing the balancing game with China and the US.
Anonymous No.64390085
worst-korea dumb af for not realizing *THIS* is a REAL "5th gen" fighter
Anonymous No.64390593
I'm not sure about what's happening in Poland, but the K9 SPH and K21 IFV that we bought for domestic production in Australia seem like a good choice. I think Hanwha are a lot more open to technology transfer than some other companies, so if you're a country wanting to have domestic manufacturing capability it makes sense.
Anonymous No.64390772
>>64388315
and sexy
Anonymous No.64391213 >>64392098
>>64387868
>chink
Lol. A ricer bodykit on a YUGE Su-27 body won't give you a rcs of 1 m.
>bbbbb but but but the claims
Believing chink claims in {current year}.
Anonymous No.64391228 >>64395070
>>64387771
Bruh, it's then understanding that releasing 4.5gen first and then doing a 5gen follow up is easier than sitting 5-10+ years more with no product until the 5gen is ready.
Anonymous No.64391346 >>64391594 >>64392164
>>64388273
The IRST is the least of their problems.
Anonymous No.64391594 >>64392164
>>64391346
Imagine the reflection from the big chad vents near the intakes...
Anonymous No.64391925
West taiwan must feel really threatened.
Anonymous No.64392004
who is this west taiwan falseflag nigga
Anonymous No.64392095 >>64392195
>>64387662 (OP)
Europeans are incapable of making anything comparable.
Anonymous No.64392098
>>64391213
>Believing chink claims in {current year}.
When has China ever lied about this stuff?
Anonymous No.64392124
>>64388645
Doesn't sound like that bad of a deal even if you're left with a less capable jet. Sounds like you're getting a brand new army on top of the ability to build more at your discretion
Anonymous No.64392164 >>64392345
>>64391346
>>64391594
Can a Warthunder player explain to a planelet what any of that means
Anonymous No.64392195 >>64392231
>>64392095
Calm down gookshill
Anonymous No.64392231 >>64395440
>>64392195
>a jet by europe, for europe!
Anonymous No.64392345 >>64392473 >>64392518
>>64392164
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lCOgFPtaZ4
They copied the overall general shape of the F-22, but they seem to have thrown the towel in for the actual stuff that matters, no continuous curves, exposed panel lines etc Watch the video, it has a superficial breakdown of the things you should avoid while designing a stealth fighter.
Things like the fixed bypass doors constant use of circular design elements, standard joints that create massive gaps etc.
Their cope, fueled by a sizeable shilling by VANK employees was to push the narrative of the internal weapon bay coming in later blocks, but it's retarded considering the IWB is just one of the many aspects that would need to be fixed in order for the KF-21 to even be remotely stealth, to the point that it would unironically be cheaper and easier to start over with another clean sheet design.
Issues with this fighter have already made the other co developer nation (malaysia or indonesia IIRC) to basically distance themselves from the whole thing.
Seeing this they've tried pushing the narrative of orders coming from left and right, but in reality outside of worst korea and that other codeveloping country I think they only received "possible future orders" from the flips.
The only issue is them trying to portray it as a 5th gen or a 4.5th gen fighter, while in reality it will be barely on par with an export model F-18/F-16.
The fact that it doesn't even have a DASS is ridicolous, but be ready for the local gookshill to start posting random tweets and powerpoints claiming they are TWO WEEKS! away from implementing everything.
Anonymous No.64392384
Wow the west taiwan cope over the KF-21 is funny.
Anonymous No.64392473
>>64392345
>lust provoking imagine
>time wasting post
muh sexoooooooooooooo *that tummy* plaplalap getpregnant getpregnat sluuuuuuuurp
Anonymous No.64392487 >>64392524
How sweet would the KF-21 look with a shiny stealth coating.
Anonymous No.64392518
>>64392345
You forgot to mention ROK has zero ability to manufacture RAM coatings. They would need to beg the US or Japan for it.
Anonymous No.64392524 >>64392538 >>64392539 >>64392693
>>64392487
>How sweet would the KF-21 look with a shiny stealth coating.
Anonymous No.64392538
>>64392524
tf is wrong with its face?
Anonymous No.64392539
>>64392524
jfc why are their 'men' so twinkified
t. listens to kpop sometimes
Anonymous No.64392598
The Uyghurs are the best looking west taiwanese.
Anonymous No.64392649 >>64392656 >>64392676 >>64392767 >>64393350 >>64395040 >>64395437 >>64395822 >>64396002
>>64387771
Fucktard, the space for the internal bay is already there.

First they will release it as a 4th gen.

Get some money from some sales.

Then finish the development to a full 5th gen.
Anonymous No.64392656
>>64392649
Oddly similar to a dick cross section
Anonymous No.64392676 >>64392801 >>64393049
>>64392649
>First they will release it as a 4th gen.
>Get some money from some sales.
>Then keep it as 4th gen with wasted space in the airframe
I've seen this song and dance a billion times before, "provision for mounting but not fitted with". It's the same cope the bongs cart out when people say the QEs aren't supercarriers thanks to the cope slope, they are because they'll eventually have catapults. When? Stop asking questions
Anonymous No.64392693
>>64392524
That is disgusting, even for a faggot.
Anonymous No.64392746 >>64392770 >>64395440 >>64395852
>>64388206
Because F-35 still dont works and is very expensive ? (per GAO own words, not before 2032 at least)
Anonymous No.64392767
>>64392649
NTA. Good to know that the internal bay space is already allocated.
Anonymous No.64392770 >>64392848
>>64392746
>dont works
>expensive ?
Can't you fuckers get some English lessons with the money you get paid to post this shit?
Anonymous No.64392801 >>64393112 >>64393739
>>64387669
Sorks wanted a plane in service by 2027 and not 2037. Keep in mind that their aviation industry is doing a lot of things for the first time with this project, and gunning for a full slate of giganigga pingpong chingchong quantum stealth features from the outset would balloon costs immensely. Presumably it's better in their minds to settle for halfway measures and have something with a reasonable unit cost flying in the next few years than to have some indigestibly expensive vaporware that'll never leave the drawing board. I suspect that if they ever get around to making the IWB version, it'll have about as much in common with the current iteration as the F-35A does with the B. Anyways, assuming its RCS and kinematic performance is comparable to that of the Super Hornet (given that they have the same engines), it's still gud 'nuff to rape the shit out of anything the Norks can put in the air.

>>64392676
See, unlike the Bongs, the Koreans haven't been cannibalizing their defense budget for the past 50 years.
Anonymous No.64392848 >>64392861
>>64392770
Why so mad about what your own govt say ?
Per GAO. F-35 didn't reached initial program goals. It will never deliver what was promised. It cost fart more than expected. The first block (Block 4) which was supposed to provide full capability is not expected to be delivered until 2031 according to the GAO (most likely 2032 according to the Air Force). The US dod stopped accepting delivery for almost 2 years because the planes being delivered did not works. Remember the F-35 wasn't virtualized from the start and that's why they can't deliver the Block-4 so far. It is also not very modular and upgrading older airframes to the Block 4 will pose big problems, because newly built airframes for the standard Block 4 internal architecture will change.
Lots of fun ahead for F-35 buyers. No wonder the US dod cut by half F-35 orders and is rushing loyal wingman and 6th gen fighters.
Anonymous No.64392861 >>64392917
>>64392848
>reached
>fart
>did not works
>will change
>cut by half
Anonymous No.64392917 >>64392940 >>64395440
>>64392861
>seething this much about his own govt words
Kek
It still wont make the F-35 works you know, fanboy.
Anonymous No.64392940 >>64393124
>>64392917
>He's doubling down
1200 (One Thousand Two Hundred) delivered and counting little yellow boy. TR-3 is already fully sorted out. So what if they aren't going to be even more capable than they already are over every other plane by Block 4?
Anonymous No.64393049 >>64393112
>>64392676
It is much better this way then to develop and test an entire new airplane.

Imagine if dasault had developed the rafale with stealth in mind.
And all they had to do later is add the internal bays + a few minor stuff.

It would be much better than the current route where they have to create the FCAS from nothing.
Anonymous No.64393112 >>64393138
>>64392801
>>64393049
That's still violent copium. IWBs aren't hard, the fucking snowmonkeys figured it out. Moreover, it'll be a really shit 5th gen once they finally unfuck it. It's akin to dropping a top of the line GPU and RAM into a 10 year old computer, yeah its doing better but you were better off just assembling a new computer
Anonymous No.64393124 >>64393134 >>64393148
>>64392940
You still dont address the problems pointed out by your own govt, mutt. Your own govt who stopped taking delivery of say shitty planes for almost 2 years.
Selling shit, doesn't mean it's good. Especially when your own govt don't want to take delivery and is pushing to buy something else as soon as possible and recognized the program will NEVER delivered what was promised.
Ultimately, it's funny how poorly this was handled and how much it caused the US to lose the 6th gen race, because LM tried so hard to keep the F-35 program alive, draining funding from other programs for nearly 2 decades. Putting the United States back at least a decade on 6th generation aircraft.
Anonymous No.64393134 >>64393150
>>64393124
>hapa doesn't know how MIC contracting works
What's the next cope?
Anonymous No.64393138 >>64393153
>>64393112
>figured it out
Anonymous No.64393144 >>64393746
>>64387662 (OP)
>no internal weapons bay
the world doesn't need another 4.5++++++++ gen fighter
Anonymous No.64393148 >>64393179
>>64393124
6th gen is complete marketing hype vaporware. Unlike 5th gen which was also a bunch of marketing BS that at least was well defined, 6th gen is so loose and vague you can call the B2 a 6th gen based off what the chinks are saying
Anonymous No.64393150 >>64393182
>>64393134
>n- no u
Only one coping and avoiding to answer here is you.
And yes, i know how it's works. In other hands, i'm certain you never read any GAO documents about the F-35. And didn't know your own govt stop taking delivery, because you are just a fanboy like they existed back in the 00s.
Anonymous No.64393153
>>64393138
Thats a hell of a lot more than sticking the missiles on the belly and saying you'll add an IWB eventually. The felon is a shit 5th gen but by God it's more of a 5th gen than your tranny 4th gen will ever be
Anonymous No.64393179
>>64393148
You are right. It was mostly invented by LM marketing team. But it give some bases to speak about plane generation. 6th gen is collaborative works, multiband stealth, better range and speed that 5th gens. Plus all the funny shit of the 5th gens like data fusion.
Anonymous No.64393182 >>64393222 >>64393248
>>64393150
You're a dumb chink who thinks people can't read and blow your false claims open.
Please, tell me exactly where on GAO, or USAF/Pentagon reports where makes
1) mentions of pursuing alternative aircraft or accelerating purchases of replacements to the F-35
2) Recognition that the F-35 will never deliver what was promised beyond early budgetary issues ($82m per flyaway bitch)
3) Persistent TR-3 problems which I already told you were fixed in a 1, not 2 year period.
Anonymous No.64393222 >>64393321 >>64395872
>>64393182
While we're on this topic, why don't we talk about the public shortfalls from interpreted pacing that even the CCP couldn't hide?
The J-20 - entered service and production in 2017, but only has managed to produce somewhere 280-300 airframes with average production 30-40 airframes a year till recently. China cannot into avionics especially radar, and it's unknown if they even have LPI. Now take the WS-15 for example, it only just entered full production with the J20a/s this year, replacing the incredibly inefficient and anemic WS10 which has been in development is the 80s. Despite this, the WS15 only beats out the F-110 from the 80s.
The WS13 engines on the FC-31 are even worse, they spent nearly a decade in limbo after first getting them in 2016 going down all the way to the E version which they are putting on their J-35 this year, all to get the performance of an 80s F-404 from the legacy hornet. That was then binned completely and replaced with the WS-19 of unknown service record which just barely beat out the F-404.
Imagine how much would be more revealed if China released, much less did reports on their own progress?
Anonymous No.64393248 >>64393319 >>64393754 >>64395880
>>64393182
>muh chink
I'm european, you genestealer mutt.
Anyways.
I love your cope.
>1
Maybe the fact they cut by half the delivery, asked to keep fund for the 6th gen instead of the F-35. Told LM to fuck off in the 6th race. The Navy and Air Force buying more legacy teens cutting F-35 purchases, waiting for the 6th gens.
>2
>https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-25-107632
>https://responsiblestatecraft.org/f-35-failure/
kek i forgot about that part
>"The program plans to reduce the scope of Block 4 to deliver capabilities to the warfighter at a more predictable pace than in the past."
kek
They downgraded the Block 4 because they know they will never be able to deliver it (even if they speak about 2032 for the delivery and push it back years after years). I'm not even sure they will be able to virtualise the F-35 at the end.
>3
100% false.
It's so bad and expensive to fix, they just ignore like 3 or 4 of the 8 tier 1 critical issues the plane was facing and put it under the rug.
>dont fire the gun
>dont fly during thunder storm
etc.
I love the fanboy cope. Unable to read a GAO report or the most basic news about the program. Then rushing to defend it. LM wont pay you for this, shill.
Anonymous No.64393319 >>64393388 >>64394175
>>64393248
>euro
Ah, so that explains the piss poor English. You must be a frog. Only euro nigger who cannot into English and would announce it so proudly. How does it feel to have your 6th gen FCAS program fall apart in flames while Dassault says they're going to keep the rafail 'competitive' into 2040 with their gen 4.5++++++++++++++ upgrades?

Or if you're from one of the GCAP countries, why are you embarrassing yourself like this? You've got a perfectly fine 6th gen contender coming in a decade with help from the Bongs and Japs. There's no need to be insecure about it when the rest of the euros and burgers praise it. Know your place.

>Maybe the fact they cut by half the delivery, asked to keep fund for the 6th gen instead of the F-35.
2,878 to 2,443 does not sound like half to me. Nor did the USAF change the procurement plan since 2001. The USN wants more F/A-XXs to replace their Tomcats which they never got to so we let them do their gay little thing.
>They downgraded the Block 4 because they know they will never be able to deliver it (even if they speak about 2032 for the delivery and push it back years after years). I'm not even sure they will be able to virtualise the F-35 at the end.
The biggest thing that was not included in the Block 4 upgrade was the AETP engine cause they didn't need more power for a plane that already flies like a spaceship with 1.45 TWR empty at a cost of 8 figures more. Remember Lockmart produces 160 a year and sells them to everyone.
>responsiblestatecraft niggers
>dont fire the gun
>dont fly during thunder storm
This fudd shit in 2025? kys lmao
Anonymous No.64393321 >>64393343 >>64394186 >>64395962
>>64393222
>LPI
If they have AESA it's kind of a given they have LPI. That's old technology by now.
China is lacking about engine tech so far, but now that everybody is on the same starting blocks with variable cycle engine. I wouldn't dare to look down on them.
Moreover, engines are not about raw power, but about life cycle, fuel consumption, maintenance cost, etc. Or the D-30 whould be one of the best engine in the world. Which they aren't.
Anonymous No.64393343 >>64393450
>>64393321
>If they have AESA it's kind of a given they have LPI. That's old technology by now.
Just looking at how many allied painting incidents were reported in the SCS, I doubt it. It's that or the chinks have zero discipline and spew out their signal patterns for all shadowing SIGNINT assets to see. That's probably what led to the 2022 Pelosi incident, lol.
>Moreover, engines are not about raw power, but about life cycle, fuel consumption, maintenance cost, etc
well too bad that TBOH is something American engines have always led in by many multiples. VCE under NGAP will also reduce fuel consumption by 25%, increase range by 30% upon the already much more efficient F-135's baseline.
Anonymous No.64393350
>>64392649
>spongebomber stealthpants
Anonymous No.64393388 >>64393400
>>64393319
>How does it feel to have your 6th gen FCAS program fall apart in flames
That's the best option for France.
Germany and Spain can't make planes. If you look at the Eurofighter vs Rafale, it's a no match. Euros can't make planes for shit. (Tornado, Eurofailure etc.). The only other capable Euros are the British (Jaguar, Concorde, which the mutt couldn't do, even the Soviets did kek) but they don't have the money and their multinational program is also falling apart. The Lancaster House deal was supposed to see France and the UK make 6th gen plane, but the Brexit and german pressures stopped the program.
>2,878 to 2,443 does not sound like half to me
Nice cope.
>USN wants more F/A-XXs to replace their Tomcats
kek
wtf, what year is this ?
>cause they didn't need more power
Lmao.
They dont need more power on the brick. The plane overheating and crashing computers because of overheat don't need a new engine... You don't know shit obviously and you are just a fanboy.
Remember that F-35 crashes were almost all about the planes failures, when almost all euro canards crashes where about pilot error. That say a lot about how good a plane is, or not.
You don't read anything about the F-35 program, you don't know anything about it. The basic concepts are unknown to you. You dont even know the last news about it and use excuses that have been proven false almost a decade ago already. You watched lazerpig faggot or some other shills which told you lies and that's it.
You are a pure shill. Even when your own govt say so, you ignore it. LM wont pay, you. LM wont laid you. You can stop the simping.
Anonymous No.64393400 >>64393473
>>64393388
So he does admit it!
lmaooooooooo
fucking frognigger oui oui monsieur
Not even gonna read the rest of your shit, can't believe I argued with an unironic frog for this long
Anonymous No.64393450 >>64393468
>>64393343
>That's probably what led to the 2022 Pelosi incident
You can't do that with an AESA radars, unless you directly use your fire-control radar, but this tend to disappear now.
From my time in the Navy. It's usually the United States that always uses radars full power. Chinese often only use nav radars, which make them more sneaky. When you have a Burke somewhere, everybody know about it and often other coalition ships are forced to sail away to do EW intelligence, because the USN never turn off.
>VCE under NGAP will also reduce fuel consumption by 25%, increase range by 30%
That's not really impressive. Every nations are expecting such numbers. I know the US (and euros) are leading on current gen engines, but the next generation models are different and will not be built on an existing engine. Putting us on the same level as others regarding architecture and some of the technology.
Anonymous No.64393468
>>64393450
Implessive! My name is John Antonio from Califang province and I agree with your statement! Thank you for your service!
Anonymous No.64393473
>>64393400
>he put an ad nominum and run away
Typical shill that got their shit pushed because they dont know shit.
>"if i can't defeat him, i will just make excuses to not speak to him"
It doesn't change the fact you dont know shit, couldn't answer questions and used bad arguments from youtube shills at the end of the day. While i know more about the program and what your own govt say about it.
Anonymous No.64393739 >>64393824
>>64392801
Unlike the bongs they also haven't shat out a single good fighter in the last 80 years.
Anonymous No.64393746
>>64393144
It's barely 4th gen. Air to ground capabily (with fixed external tgp) will come in """future""" upgrades.
They haven't been able to shit out the block 20 version of a fucking trainer (developed mostly by lockheed), you can imagine how the kf21 will end up.
Anonymous No.64393754 >>64394122
>>64393248
>I'm european, you genestealer mutt.
Prove it, gookshill, in your last thread you kept pretending to be british, but when asked to post a single timestamped picture of your outlet you immediately ran away. No european refers to himself as "european"
Anonymous No.64393780 >>64395435
South Korea must have west taiwan shaking in the sandals for all the hate posting in this thread.
Anonymous No.64393824
>>64393739
Because they haven't had any kind of aviation industry worth mentioning until the last <30. Generational investments in building a domestic MIC (from literally nothing) that started under Park Chung-Hee in the 60s only began to pay off with the development of homegrown high-end weapons in the last 20 years or so. The bongs are constrained by a tight purse. The gooks are constrained by a need to build institutional talent for things they haven't before.
Anonymous No.64393857 >>64394145 >>64395430
>>64388206
For some reason, probably as >>64389012 said, a lot of Polish government contracts are signed with South Korean companies. This includes over 1,000 K2 tanks, TA-50 jets, but also civillian equipment like Hyundai trams in Warsaw or police cars being mostly Kias and Hyundais.
Other than that, it's probably easier to diversify and partner with smaller companies outside the US for more freedom regarding local production/modifications, since Poland isn't Israel.
Anonymous No.64394122 >>64395436 >>64396752
>>64393754
>last thread ?
I havn't post in /k/ikes for month up until today. I just came accros this thread on the front page and was curious about what /k/lowns had to say about this. Of course there was spergs defending the F-35, as always. You are just letting random anons live rent free in your head, sad.
Nothing ever change. Since reddit took over, /k/ is in a sad state. /k/lowns being /k/lowns.
Anonymous No.64394145
>>64393857
We know why.
Korean gears are cheap, they mostly work, they accept offsets and the Korean government offers favorable liquidity to purchase their goods (and since it's eastearn europe, probably some personnal offset for local politicians).
Anonymous No.64394175
>>64393319
F/A-XX isn’t a tomcat replacement. Everything they’ve said publicly suggests a strong focus on strike with air to air as a relative afterthought. The Chinese present a much different threat profile vs the Soviets and the retirement of the A-6 has left a much larger capability gap than the F-14.
Anonymous No.64394186 >>64394231
>>64393321
GE has been working on different iterations of variable cycle technology since the 1980s. It isn’t a remotely level playing field either, it builds on the back of a lot of tech and manufacturing techniques that China is yet to successfully play catch up to.
Anonymous No.64394231 >>64394252 >>64394283
>>64394186
I thought Pratt&Whitney was doing the F-47 engines?
Anonymous No.64394252 >>64394283
>>64394231
>american fighter with canards
Fake !
Anonymous No.64394283 >>64394304
>>64394231
They have an offering in development, as does GE. Both also built previous prototypes for a potential F-35 re-engining, but that didn’t amount to anything since it wouldn’t fit the B and possibly not fit the C, while complicating production lines, logistics and costing a shit ton. They instead went with an ECU which Pratt won. I expect GE wins NGAP as they have much more experience working on adaptive engines, with YF120 for the ATF program and more recently ADVENT, plus Pratt is already having trouble keeping up with F135 demand as it is.
>>64394252
It’s a model made years ago by Rodrigo Avella over on secretprojects, licensed by RTX and seemingly many others to use when writing about NGAD presumably because they thought it looked cool. Prior to the F-47 unveiling I’d say it’s probably the most used model to represent a 6th gen aircraft in media.
Anonymous No.64394304 >>64394328 >>64396822
>>64394283
>I expect GE wins NGAP as they have much more experience working on adaptive engines
I know(?) it isn't official DoD policy to spread contracts around to keep defense contractors alive, but they sure do have a habit of spreading the love.
Anonymous No.64394328 >>64394368
>>64394304
There are definitely acknowledged concerns about keeping the industrial base healthy after the great consolidations in the wake of the peace dividend. The massive modernization effort underway has really shown it wasn’t a great idea to let most major weapon industries coalesce down to two competing behemoths, but is also allowing a lot of smaller players to try and grow in the space. I don’t think it’s an accident that none of the big three won CCA Inc.1 contracts, while newcomer Anduril did despite a not particularly impressive offering. It’s also notable that in the white world Kratos is an industry leader in future drones with Valkyrie, and is also entering the jet engine space by partnering with Boom on their Symphony engine. If all goes well it’s a good thing to see, 2-3 more major players in each area of defense procurement would do a lot for supply chain resiliency
Anonymous No.64394368 >>64394423
>>64394328
>Lockheed Martin: F-35
>Boeing: F-47
>Northrop Grumman: B-21
Shit sure is convenient. Who is the heir apparent for the F/A-XX?
Anonymous No.64394423 >>64394464 >>64394684
>>64394368
>who is the heir apparent for the F/A-XX?
Well that’s kind of the issue and probably the reason we don’t have a contract despite talk of awarding it in March. Boeing has invested a ton in 6th gen manufacturing, more than probably the other major primes combined, but they don’t have a good record with recent new programs to put it lightly and DoD really seems to not want a repeat of the LockMart 5th gen monopoly. Northrop Grumman is a major subcontractor on most fighter programs, has had the smoothest new major aerospace program in recent memory with B-21, has a lot of engineers freeing up as that ends development, and is probably the industry leader in stealthy strike world wide. However there are concerns that they do not currently have an active fighter production line in house, the massive Sentinel cost overruns are really hurting them in Washington, and there are concerns that righting that program could take enough effort and resources that they would not have capacity to fix Sentinel, scale B-21 production, and develop a new strike fighter. Personally I hope NG wins, as I think Sentinel concerns are a bit overblown, don’t trust Boeing to execute on both programs smoothly, and think it would be good to have a third prime back in the fighter game while avoiding a 6th gen monopoly. However there is also a case to be made for Boeing, as they apparently made a very strong showing with their AII-X demonstrator, which NG was not invited to build for.
Anonymous No.64394429
it will be the designated thirdie f35/f22 for western aligned countries
same with k2 and fa50
Anonymous No.64394464
>>64394423
Holy OSINT
Anonymous No.64394684 >>64394784
>>64394423
Wasn't Northrop Grumman almost assured to win the F/A-XX with their YF-23 with air intakes on the back ? So it would save development cost, since the plane was already designed and tested back then ?
Also avoiding Boeing being the new LM of 6th gen fighter.
Anonymous No.64394784 >>64394801 >>64394950
>>64394684
What you’re talking about is a render they released possibly as a knee jerk reaction to their HR posting a picture from funny sock day in front of a mural of a much much older vision of F/A-XX that began making the rounds online after aerospace enthusiasts dug it up. We have no idea how closely it tracks to any in house design of theirs, and the indecision on contracting this year means it is very much anyone’s game currently. The render also really could not be more different to a YF-23, the only real commonality is somewhat similar shaping in the nose. F/A-XX isn’t to be a purebred air superiority fighter like YF-23, it is a strike aircraft primarily focused on stealth, payload and range. In the render you can see the belly of the plane is so large it practically looks pregnant, the focus is clearly hauling ordnance. Deleting the tail or switching from ventral to dorsal intakes would mean you’ve got to completely rewrite the flight laws even if it were working from the same basic airframe, which it is not if we take the render to be representative of the current view of the final product.
Anonymous No.64394801
>>64394784
>pregnant
uoooh!!!
Anonymous No.64394950 >>64394988 >>64395023
>>64394784
The YF-22/23 are smaller and quite different from the final product. However, the prototype validated the concept and architecture. The YF-23 was always less of a superiority fighter than the F-22 anyways. And the F-22 was developped into the X-44 Manta and FB-22. You can't really see the "belly" too, with all the open hatches.
>Deleting the tail or switching from ventral to dorsal intakes would mean you’ve got to completely rewrite the flight laws
Not really. Air intakes are generally invisible to the pure aerodynamic flow of the cell, since they suck air in, so offer almost no resistance. It's when manoeuvering that it can pose problems, but the YF-23 already figured this out back then and now the chinese J-50 reuse the same exact concept to put it's air intake on top of the airframe. So i highly doubt the very same company that found the solution back then when making this fighter, would struggle to it now. And removing the tail doesn't change much, except by reducing the drag and agility. Agility which seem of no concern for the 6th gen.
Will see, but i bait it will reuse lot of stuff from the YF-23.
Anonymous No.64394988 >>64395047
>>64394950
>It's when manoeuvering that it can pose problems, but the YF-23 already figured this out back then and now the chinese J-50 reuse the same exact concept to put it's air intake on top of the airframe
What? The YF-23 clearly has conventional ventral intakes.
Anonymous No.64395023 >>64395065
>>64394950
Northrop Grumman never flew the YF-23 off a carrier. This is what they estimated it would take to get it working off a carrier. Even then the Navy did not like what they saw. There isn’t any similarity in the requirements, there won’t be major similarity in the airframe unless they’d like to lose again. Everything else you’ve wrote makes me question if you were dropped on your head as a child. You can’t completely delete tail control surfaces and completely change the intakes design and location and expect the aircraft to maneuver the same. Developing the flight control laws and validating the flight envelopes are the largest parts of flight testing, if aircraft worked how you think they do we’d see fighters getting facelifts for every new model year rather than lead times in excess of a decade for any major program.
Anonymous No.64395040
>>64392649
>We thought about doing and then went "fuck it this is too hard".
Anonymous No.64395047
>>64394988
They aren't conventional. They dont use DSI or diverters. They are quite easy to use a dorsal air intakes. Also perfectly match the ADVENT engine.
Anonymous No.64395065 >>64395100
>>64395023
We are 3 decades later anon. Since we flew tailless lambda and delta wings with dorsal air intake off carriers.
Now take the same fighter, without the tails and canards put the intake on the top and here we are. Your carrier based YF-23. The Northrop Grumman F/A-XX wont be made in a void. I bait on it. They already have all the cards and will use them.
Anonymous No.64395070 >>64395315
>>64391228
>We'll have something like a 5th gen maybe around 2050 when everyone else who can build jets are thinking about what a 7th gen is
Anonymous No.64395100 >>64395214
>>64395065
They are not using a four decade old design concept for a land based air superiority fighter as the basis for a naval strike fighter. To delete the ruddervators and make a tailless plane or switch to dorsal intakes would require so many changes to the airframe that it ceases to be the same plane, let alone doing both. Trying to reheat a design for the Air Force that lost its competition over three decades ago isn’t holding any cards, and if they’re were so short of engineering talent they needed to do that I find it far more likely they’d look at their work on ATA, which much more closely matches the requirements. The Navy does not need or want a Tomcat, they need a strike fighter that can carry more than 2 2k lbs class weapons internally to at least the range of an F-35C, but ideally farther. China’s biggest threat to the carriers is the PLARF, and F/A-XX is being built to pop their A2AD bubble, not primarily to engage aircraft.
Anonymous No.64395214 >>64395229
>>64395100
>To delete the ruddervators and make a tailless plane or switch to dorsal intakes would require so many changes to the airframe that it ceases to be the same plane
How ?
The FB-22 and X-44 Manta were a things. You dont need to reinvent the wheel when you already have a good concept. I dont know why you focus so much on the "air superiority fighter", since the F-22 proved he could also be a strike aircraft anyways.
>to at least the range of an F-35C
We already know the range will be 25% superior at the very least. Also it's most probably loyal wingman that will carry strike missions. You seem to forget about that part. There will be more drones than fighters soon.
But then again, you could be totally right. I'm just baiting we'll see a fighter that has a lot in common with the YF-23. Because it was such a good and innovative platform that can totaly fit the F/A-XX.
Anonymous No.64395229 >>64395267
>>64395214
The FB-22 and X-44 were concepts as far as we know. Neither are acknowledged to have flown, and the FB-22 at least was mostly just a larger wing. F-22 and derivatives really don’t make for good strike aircraft anyway, as their bays are pretty limited in size and only fit 1k lbs class munitions. They can do SDBs and some JDAMs fine but you aren’t fitting an AARGM-ER/SiAW in there. We also don’t know the exact range, per iirc AvWeek the 25% figure relates to a Super Hornet, but they didn’t clarify with what munitions which leaves a lot of wiggle room there. At worst that would mean it barely meets F-35C range, more optimistically it hits the old A-6 ~800nmi combat radius with 4x 2k lbs class munitions. In theory F/A-XX can foist a lot off to drones, but the closest we’ve seen to the Navy developing that capability is a scale model Boeing made of an MQ-25 with a JASSM under each wing. The Navy is really dragging ass on CCA type drones and doesn’t have a ton of budget to play with between F/A-XX, the Columbias, Constellation, DDG(X) coming up, and getting more Fords in service. Even F/A-XX didn’t make the budget request this year and is completely reliant on top up funding from the OBBB and the Senate looking to grant their $1.4 billion UPL request. With their budget reality we can’t really count on them pulling a fix all rabbit out of the drone hat, when the current situation stems from ATA, NATF, and A/F-X all being cancelled before getting anything to the fleet. Even with the F-35, the C has taken the longest to get in service and has the smallest fleet available.
Anonymous No.64395267 >>64395289
>>64395229
Both concept got lot of funding for prototypes. Enlaring wing is not a new concept. The F-16XL was pretty straight forward and successful as a concept (even if it didn't sold).
For the range, from my understanding it was about F-35C
>https://www.twz.com/air/f-a-xx-will-have-just-25-more-range-over-existing-navy-fighters
And the goal for 6th gens is to have fewer fighters but far more drones. They were speaking about 20 millions per drones, while planes are expected to be in the F-22 price range.
Anonymous No.64395289 >>64395332
>>64395267
Yes, enlarging the wing isn’t a new concept, and has been done with some success. However chopping the tail off a plane not designed to be tailless or inverting the intake position isn’t. TWZ is unfortunately very click baity, don’t trust much that they write without checking somewhere more reputable. Aviation Week and Naval News tend to be better in my experience. I tracked down my source and Steve Trimble from AvWeek says it was vs the Super Hornet, this podcast goes over a lot but it has a good F/A-XX section. It was recorded around Tailhook

https://aviationweek.com/podcasts/check-6/podcast-getting-hook

The goal of offloading all of this work onto drones is nice, but right now the Navy doesn’t have programs of record to do those roles. They’ve acknowledged they plan to be slower than the Marines and Air Force on drones, so it’s likely we won’t see those platforms come II to service in any real number until probably around 2040. That’s assuming the current climate with China stays hot and they get the budget. In the late 1980s the Navy planned on operating all stealth carrier air wings in the mid 2000s. In reality the F-35C didn’t hit the fleet until 2019 and most carriers still don’t operate them. We don’t know price point for F/A-XX currently but we do know it’s to be less than F-47. They’re skimping a lot on the highest tech end of things and looking to use a derivative of in service engines rather than NGAP like the Air Force to make that happen.
Anonymous No.64395315
>>64395070
Excuse me, bro, but we're here in 2025 and the US still doesn't have a 6th gen
Anonymous No.64395332 >>64395368
>>64395289
You dont need to chop the tail, especially on the YF-23. You just make the wing and tail one piece.
Aviation Week is wrong, they don't speak about the F-18 specifically. So it's open to interpretation.
The 6th gen was always about loyal wingman and the navy already flew quite a few drones back then.
>https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2025/july/pie-sky-robotic-loyal-wingman
>https://nextgendefense.com/us-navy-loyal-wingman/
The US is the most advanced country when it come to carrier based drones.
Anonymous No.64395368
>>64395332
The YF-23 is not a design suitable to a carrier and will not be adapted to carrier use. It is a cool plane and was ahead of its time in many ways in the early 90s, but we have moved beyond it. It is no longer the bleeding edge.

The range question probably doesn’t matter much, I went to check the F-35’s radius again, and assuming the C is about equivalent to the A Gen Allvin’s F-47 infograph puts it at 670nmi, so it’s somewhere in the 750-850nmi bracket.

The Navy was the world leader in advanced high performance drones in the early 2010s with UCLASS. However they massively scaled back their ambitions and have only publicly funded MQ-25, which has not been a fast moving program and is iirc significantly behind schedule. It is also currently only a tanker. They technically lead on *carrier* based drones, but that’s effectively made them the fastest cripple as no other Navy with carriers has seriously invested yet. They squandered a very promising early lead and are no longer leading, appearing to be behind the American, Chinese, and Australian Air Forces, with even the USMC now being ahead with Valkyrie appearing to be the farthest along of any major drone wingman program. Your USNI link is also a hit piece against CCA’s written by a pilot who only wants more manned aircraft.
Anonymous No.64395430 >>64395518
>>64393857
>it's probably easier to diversify
Not really, considering poland keeps having logistical issues with every single thing they buy because they are too retarded to invest in the logistical chain beforehand and then complain to the manufacturer.
Anonymous No.64395435
>>64393780
You can keep pretending any criticism towards retarded ROKs is from the chink bugs if it makes you feel better at night. But the fact you can't come up with a single counterargument already says enough.
Anonymous No.64395436 >>64399861
>>64394122
Hey, gookshill, I still don't see a timestamped picture of either a gun or your electrical outlet. Stop trying to larp as an european.
Anonymous No.64395437
>>64392649
implessive
Anonymous No.64395440
>>64392746
>>64392917
>>64392231
I accept your defeat
Anonymous No.64395469
>>64387662 (OP)
Why does it even look like that? If there's no internal bay and it's not stealth then they could have made it more useful with an airframe shaped better suited to their needs.
Anonymous No.64395518 >>64395532
>>64395430
They are investing in local production base of Korean equipment, I suppose it's easier to work something out with KAI rather than Lockheed Martin which is kept on a tight leash by the American government.
Anonymous No.64395532 >>64395551
>>64395518
>>64389012
>I suppose it's easier to get bribes from KAI
ftfy
Anonymous No.64395551 >>64395794
>>64395532
>implying that western manufacturers are clean
https://english.radio.cz/former-foreign-minister-caught-discussing-corruption-around-military-contract-8610404
Anonymous No.64395794
>>64395551
>whataboutism
gook, vatnik or chink?
Anonymous No.64395822 >>64395862 >>64395881
>>64392649
That area isn't deep enough to be an IWB, unless they have some finless 7 inch diameter A2A missiles I don't know about (they don't, and aren't working on one, either). Furthermore, if you've already built a cavity for an IWB, and designed it for one, why not just take the minor steps to integrate it? It's not going to be anymore time consuming than bolting a conformal carry rack in its place like the gooks did, and the money and time were already spent designing it in to the airframe, so it's not like it will cost anymore money and time. I honestly don't think they're planning to add an IWB, and don't think that cavity is an IWB - that's just unsubstantiated cope from their online shills.

Prove that cavity is deep enough to be an IWB, and then show me what A2A missiles is small enough in diameter to fit inside it after you add the needed missile rack and ejection system that you HAVE to have to be ablel to launch and eject your internally carried missile. With how shallow that cavity is - even if you make this mythical 5 inch diameter A2A missile that somehow has long range, too - you're not going to be able to internally carry bombs. This is all bullshit cope from gook shills.
Anonymous No.64395852
>>64392746
Proofs tiny dick moon faced girly boy?
Anonymous No.64395862
>>64395822
>That area isn't deep enough to be an IWB
yes it is.
Anonymous No.64395872 >>64396575
>>64393222
>managed to produce somewhere 280-300 airframes
More like 170-180. There's literally zero proof besides numbers painted on the side of J-20s for the claims of 300 airframe built. And we all know how the USSR used to paint different ID numbers on the same plane and allow the CIA/DoD to see them to make the US think they had more planes than they actually did, and we all know chinks lie more that the USSR so I don't think tail numbers are a reliable way of counting built airframes.
Anonymous No.64395880
>>64393248
>dont fire the gun
>dont fly during thunder storm
Your cope is 3 years in the past. Time to update your script. Those have been fixed years ago.
Anonymous No.64395881 >>64396002 >>64396752
>>64395822
>That area isn't deep enough to be an IWB,
yes it is
Anonymous No.64395962
>>64393321
>If they have AESA it's kind of a given they have LPI
No it's not. PESA can be LPI, too. That doesn't mean all PESA radar LPI, brainlet.
Anonymous No.64396002 >>64396024 >>64396032
>>64395881
You can't see shit from that angle. This pic here (>>64392649) shows it's not deep enough.
Anonymous No.64396021
>>64387662 (OP)
It's cute. Probably a good trainer. Possibly a good Mass produced aircraft for either low intensity conflicts or a conflict where one side needs to spam aircraft.
Anonymous No.64396024
>>64396002
????

>b.b.but the horizontal I beam

It can be redesigned.
It also could be there near the front or the rear of the bay.

The free space is there.
Anonymous No.64396032 >>64396048 >>64396186 >>64396752
>>64396002
???

The empty space is there.

>B.but the horizontal I beam

We don't know if it is near the front or the rear of the bay, so maybe it won't even interfere..
And also it can be redesigned later to free the space..
Anonymous No.64396048
>>64396032
Built for big Polish bombs
Anonymous No.64396186 >>64396327 >>64396539
>>64396032
>The empty space is there.
No it's not.
>And also it can be redesigned later to free the space..
So, the cope was that it was too expensive and time consuming to add an IWB from the start (it's not, that's just gook shill cope), to now being that they can just redesign the structural members of the airframe? lol lmao even.
T-I-G-E-R-S No.64396326
>64389012i
Given the ongoing witch hunt, it's a yet another politically motivated baseless accusation. You must've a double digit IQ to fall for it.
Anonymous No.64396327 >>64396344 >>64396752
Looks more like a riveted eclosure for something than a structural member.

>>64396186
>it's not
Show us all the IWBs you've designed.
Anonymous No.64396344 >>64396401
>>64396327
>Show us all the IWBs you've designed.
Once you show me the one moon faced gooks designed.
Anonymous No.64396401
>>64396344
Nigger, the whole point is that the gooks have chosen to take on the technical debt of figuring that out later. Is it a bad idea that'll cost them more in the long run? Maybe. But right now, it means that they've got a flying plane in LRIP that's successfully chucked Meteor and IRIS-T in testing.
Anonymous No.64396539
>>64396186
Nigger
Why else would they leave all this empty space inside the airplane, if not to implement IWB later?
Anonymous No.64396575
>>64395872
I'm just giving the chinks the benefit of doubt, we'll see if the numbers are bullshit whether or not can produce their new J-20A/S variants faster than drying paint cause they can't fake paint a different seating and leading edge config.
Anonymous No.64396752 >>64396870
>>64396327
>>64396032
>>64394122
>>64395881
Spamming on a Rice grinding tips image board won’t ever help your gookshit sells
And friendly reminder that our gookshill is a mentally ill hapamutt/gook diaspora currently residing in the states

>xcancel.com/FacelessManTwit/status/1952354174253113550
>xcancel.com/FacelessManTwit/status/1952395385701277909
>xcancel.com/FacelessManTwit/status/1952432437352341891
>xcancel.com/FacelessManTwit/status/1952537655222337623
>xcancel.com/FacelessManTwit/status/1952539869919732132
>xcancel.com/FacelessManTwit/status/1952545095061828048
Anonymous No.64396822 >>64402520
>>64394304
Let hope they fund the Boom engine
Imagine 3 jet engine competitors
Anonymous No.64396870 >>64397470
>>64396752
You're the one who needs to take meds ESLnigger
Anonymous No.64397261
>>64387687
>looks like F22 because F22 strong!
>is it strong like F22?
kek
Anonymous No.64397470 >>64398403
>>64396870
>thinking a (you) tick in 4chanX is evidence
How new?
Anonymous No.64398403
>>64397470
>every post I don't like was made by a single spammer
>there can't possibly be more than one person who disagrees with me
I'm sorry you're too retarded to pick up on the distinct cadences of different posters.
Anonymous No.64399861
>>64395436
He never will, cause he is a VANK employee. Last time he tried to larp as a bong
Anonymous No.64402520
>>64396822
>Boom engine
That is so out of left field lmao