By: JSR
- 30th January 2016 at 00:25Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'll look up those links on Secret Projects.
Yeah, F-2 was the first fighter fielded with an AESA radar IIRC. Perhaps a bit prematurely, but AFAIK the teething troubles were sorted out fairly soon.
F-2 was first fighter with AESA because it only thing they concentrated at era of abundance in money and time. To built factory for stealth fighter . you need factory for atleast 5000 workers and another 50,000 working in subcontractors. On top of several thousand in design team. Which is simply not possible in Japan. this thing is a flop.
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 30th January 2016 at 00:38Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, but having the same engine would lower costs.
Trust me, you can't find an engine more expensive than the F135 (besides the F119)...
By: eagle
- 30th January 2016 at 02:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Is this meant to be a dedicated twin seater? Coz the whole front section looks odd, as if it's been in some kind of ground collision and bent the fuselage.
It looks odd because the canopy and possibly the complete cockpit section has been borrowed from a T-4. Landing gear is from a T-2.
@ 17 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uxMG3n03uI
By: nirav
- 30th January 2016 at 07:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It would have been fun if the Japanese had painted it black and released a few grainy pictures only of the jet with no media briefing.
Would have certainly put the Chinese message boards in a tizzy. :D
By: Blitzo
- 30th January 2016 at 08:59Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It would have been fun if the Japanese had painted it black and released a few grainy pictures only of the jet with no media briefing.
Would have certainly put the Chinese message boards in a tizzy. :D
Only if the Japanese hadn't provided constant updates and information about the progress of the ATD-X since the project was announced back in the mid 2000s.
Also, the Chinese boards mostly follow Chinese military developments. I do think if the Japanese (or Indian, or UK, or French, or European, or US) projects maintained as high opsec as Chinese ones we'd be following them with as much intensity too though.
By: TomcatViP
- 30th January 2016 at 18:38Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's a beautiful airframe. Superb design with interestingly a strong focus on high AoA (reviving somewhat their aircraft heritage).
Notice also how the palets have been altered by adding some stealth feature.
I can't wait to see it in flight.
New
Posts: 572
By: Jessmo23
- 30th January 2016 at 19:43Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
More than a hand full of commercial engines make them look inexpensive. Of course they are much larger.
You know this is par for the course with msphere. He wants a 40k thrust. Engine made in Tiajuana, with 2 dollars and hour labor and that costs $300 USD. /eyeroll
By: swerve
- 30th January 2016 at 22:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, but having the same engine would lower costs.
Ah yes, Japan should abandon this foolish idea of designing & building anything & just buy American. Satellite launchers? Buy American! Scrap its capability! Satellites? The same! Warships, radars, missiles, tanks - why not everything?
New
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii
- 31st January 2016 at 05:14Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ok, so it's a tech demonstrator. What specific technologies are we talking about here?
Mecha transformation and fist-blade particle cannons, obviously.
I also think they have a lot to offer other island nations with a long and proud history of fighter development looking for something in the 2030/40 range.
Fiji? :eek:
It's a beautiful airframe.
Do you think so? The cockpit proportions make it look like a trainer. That aside, it looks depressingly conventional.
I am glad to see that Japan is progressing with the project and hope that it does indeed turn into a full-scale F-3 fighter, but at this point I'm not feeling the excitement.
New
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon
- 31st January 2016 at 11:07Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Only if the Japanese hadn't provided constant updates and information about the progress of the ATD-X since the project was announced back in the mid 2000s.
Also, the Chinese boards mostly follow Chinese military developments. I do think if the Japanese (or Indian, or UK, or French, or European, or US) projects maintained as high opsec as Chinese ones we'd be following them with as much intensity too though.
Chinese boards are saying right now
ahaha, japanese stealth cant carry weapons. china did it first years ago!
New
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon
- 31st January 2016 at 11:08Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Mecha transformation and fist-blade particle cannons, obviously.
Fiji? :eek:
Do you think so? The cockpit proportions make it look like a trainer. That aside, it looks depressingly conventional.
I am glad to see that Japan is progressing with the project and hope that it does indeed turn into a full-scale F-3 fighter, but at this point I'm not feeling the excitement.
it looks like a trainer because it IS a trainer. cockpit is straight out of T-4. just like how you're straight out of compton.
By: OooShiny
- 31st January 2016 at 13:30Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
More than a hand full of commercial engines make them look inexpensive. Of course they are much larger.
If you are operating Su-30s you'd probably be up for 4 engines over the lifetime of a single f135. For 3.5mill a pop and the additional maintenance of 2 engines vs 1, the pw would probably work out cheaper over time. Putting 2 in a plane though, nah.
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 31st January 2016 at 21:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You know this is par for the course with msphere. He wants a 40k thrust. Engine made in Tiajuana, with 2 dollars and hour labor and that costs $300 USD. /eyeroll
Did I say I wanted 40k thrust? Where?
New
Posts: 572
By: Jessmo23
- 31st January 2016 at 21:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The F-22 like requirement will dictate, the thrust you need. Are you going to get decent range and acceleration from a plane putting out 11k wet?
New
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot
- 31st January 2016 at 21:43Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The F-22 like requirement will dictate, the thrust you need. Are you going to get decent range and acceleration from a plane putting out 11k wet?
He wasn't trying to engage in a serious discussion... he just wanted to hit his daily quota on F-35 bashing posts.
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 31st January 2016 at 22:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The F-22 like requirement will dictate, the thrust you need. Are you going to get decent range and acceleration from a plane putting out 11k wet?
Errrrrrrr..... again, where have I mentioned the F-22-like requirement? Are you seeing things?
By: Blitzo
- 31st January 2016 at 23:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Chinese boards are saying right now
ahaha, japanese stealth cant carry weapons. china did it first years ago!
From what I understand, the X-2 can't carry weapons though, or at least it has no weapons bay. Nothing wrong with that -- it's a stealth fighter demonstrator, not a stealth fighter or even a stealth fighter prototype.
Funnily enough I remember back on this very forum when J-20 first emerged, people were saying it didn't have a weapons bay...
By: halloweene
- 31st January 2016 at 23:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From what I understand, the X-2 can't carry weapons though, or at least it has no weapons bay. Nothing wrong with that -- it's a stealth fighter demonstrator, not a stealth fighter or even a stealth fighter prototype.
Funnily enough I remember back on this very forum when J-20 first emerged, people were saying it didn't have a weapons bay...
Posts: 572
By: Jessmo23 - 30th January 2016 at 00:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, but having the same engine would lower costs.
Posts: 4,731
By: JSR - 30th January 2016 at 00:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
F-2 was first fighter with AESA because it only thing they concentrated at era of abundance in money and time. To built factory for stealth fighter . you need factory for atleast 5000 workers and another 50,000 working in subcontractors. On top of several thousand in design team. Which is simply not possible in Japan. this thing is a flop.
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 30th January 2016 at 00:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Trust me, you can't find an engine more expensive than the F135 (besides the F119)...
Posts: 2,271
By: eagle - 30th January 2016 at 02:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It looks odd because the canopy and possibly the complete cockpit section has been borrowed from a T-4. Landing gear is from a T-2.
@ 17 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uxMG3n03uI
Posts: 442
By: nirav - 30th January 2016 at 07:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It would have been fun if the Japanese had painted it black and released a few grainy pictures only of the jet with no media briefing.
Would have certainly put the Chinese message boards in a tizzy. :D
Posts: 1,299
By: Blitzo - 30th January 2016 at 08:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Only if the Japanese hadn't provided constant updates and information about the progress of the ATD-X since the project was announced back in the mid 2000s.
Also, the Chinese boards mostly follow Chinese military developments. I do think if the Japanese (or Indian, or UK, or French, or European, or US) projects maintained as high opsec as Chinese ones we'd be following them with as much intensity too though.
Posts: 4,951
By: MadRat - 30th January 2016 at 14:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
More than a hand full of commercial engines make them look inexpensive. Of course they are much larger.
Posts: 5,905
By: TomcatViP - 30th January 2016 at 18:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's a beautiful airframe. Superb design with interestingly a strong focus on high AoA (reviving somewhat their aircraft heritage).
Notice also how the palets have been altered by adding some stealth feature.
I can't wait to see it in flight.
Posts: 572
By: Jessmo23 - 30th January 2016 at 19:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You know this is par for the course with msphere. He wants a 40k thrust. Engine made in Tiajuana, with 2 dollars and hour labor and that costs $300 USD. /eyeroll
Posts: 13,432
By: swerve - 30th January 2016 at 22:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ah yes, Japan should abandon this foolish idea of designing & building anything & just buy American. Satellite launchers? Buy American! Scrap its capability! Satellites? The same! Warships, radars, missiles, tanks - why not everything?
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii - 31st January 2016 at 05:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Mecha transformation and fist-blade particle cannons, obviously.
Fiji? :eek:
Do you think so? The cockpit proportions make it look like a trainer. That aside, it looks depressingly conventional.
I am glad to see that Japan is progressing with the project and hope that it does indeed turn into a full-scale F-3 fighter, but at this point I'm not feeling the excitement.
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon - 31st January 2016 at 11:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Chinese boards are saying right now
ahaha, japanese stealth cant carry weapons. china did it first years ago!
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon - 31st January 2016 at 11:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
it looks like a trainer because it IS a trainer. cockpit is straight out of T-4. just like how you're straight out of compton.
Posts: 147
By: OooShiny - 31st January 2016 at 13:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If you are operating Su-30s you'd probably be up for 4 engines over the lifetime of a single f135. For 3.5mill a pop and the additional maintenance of 2 engines vs 1, the pw would probably work out cheaper over time. Putting 2 in a plane though, nah.
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 31st January 2016 at 21:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Did I say I wanted 40k thrust? Where?Posts: 572
By: Jessmo23 - 31st January 2016 at 21:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The F-22 like requirement will dictate, the thrust you need. Are you going to get decent range and acceleration from a plane putting out 11k wet?
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot - 31st January 2016 at 21:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
He wasn't trying to engage in a serious discussion... he just wanted to hit his daily quota on F-35 bashing posts.
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 31st January 2016 at 22:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Errrrrrrr..... again, where have I mentioned the F-22-like requirement? Are you seeing things?Posts: 1,299
By: Blitzo - 31st January 2016 at 23:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From what I understand, the X-2 can't carry weapons though, or at least it has no weapons bay. Nothing wrong with that -- it's a stealth fighter demonstrator, not a stealth fighter or even a stealth fighter prototype.
Funnily enough I remember back on this very forum when J-20 first emerged, people were saying it didn't have a weapons bay...
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 31st January 2016 at 23:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Pretty good reults in "Solange" tetsbed...