NOLA Posted February 21, 2013 Posted February 21, 2013 That wasn't even funny. Do you think a PAK-Fa is gonna be as cheap as they say it will? 'supposed' unit costs put it below the Su-35.... i'd like to see how they pull that off. I have never ever heard anyone say that. Sources or are you just inventing this?
marcos Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 I have the original, and it is not a fake. Well it seems to be the general consensus. I wasn't aware it was you that took the picture.
NOLA Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 Well it seems to be the general consensus. I wasn't aware it was you that took the picture. It never was. You are free to believe it is fake, i don't care.
marcos Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 If you didn't take the picture, how do you know it's not a fake?
NOLA Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 If you didn't take the picture, how do you know it's not a fake? If you didn't take the picture how do you know it is fake? Stupid question requires stupid answers. First off, ask youself, why would Department 1 (google it) require PS of the intakes, and in such a way that it is not "flattering" towards T-50? Surely they could have just PS'ed it with a black wall, and that is it. :smilewink: Besides *what exactly* do YOU think is PS? IGV? The compressor blades behind it? Both? That something else is there and they PS'ed IGV and compressor blades on top of it? If so; ---> ATS. Nuff said. Is this also PS? http://www.knaapo.ru/eng/popup-100x100.wbp?picpath=/media/rus/gallery/aircrafts/combat/t-50-3_1st_flight/t-50-3_22_hires.jpg http://www.knaapo.ru/eng/popup-100x100.wbp?picpath=/media/rus/gallery/aircrafts/combat/t-50-3_1st_flight/t-50-3_23_hires.jpg Dept 1 must be really bored then.
marcos Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) If you didn't take the picture how do you know it is fake? Stupid question requires stupid answers. 1) Because the engine is in the wrong place. 2) The Russians are not completely thick. Anyway. Since you didn't take the photo, yet claimed to have the original, I shall now assume you don't know what you're talking about. Edited February 23, 2013 by marcos
NOLA Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) So the engine is in wrong place on T-50-3? And you are saying i don't know what i am talking about? Wow.:megalol: So, just because i haven't taken the picture i can't proof it is not a fake? Is that your most reasonable argument? Surely that argument can applied on every picture? So every picture that is not taken by me, must be a fake? (Since i "cant" proof it is real) And you haven't answered *what* is fake in that picture. Try, it will be entertaining. Also, this must be fake? So far i have provided atleast two proofs that the infamous picture is real. Even ignoring the picture itself and reasoning. So far, your only argument on it being fake can be summed up as a - Since i didnt take the picture, it must be fake. Even ignoring the fact even if i took it, i could easily PS it. ;) b -: Edited February 23, 2013 by NOLA 1
marcos Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) No. You've provided 2 more pictures from the internet. Russia know that having a visible engine face will not provide stealth. Remember this picture? It was the first one where the engine started appearing. Did PS remove it or add it? Edited February 23, 2013 by marcos
ФрогФут Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 No. You've provided 2 more pictures from the internet. Russia know that having a visible engine face will not provide stealth. It is just very dark there... There is no way for compressor to be invisible from front with such intake configuration and engine position. "Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин Ноет котик, ноет кротик, Ноет в небе самолетик, Ноют клумбы и кусты - Ноют все. Поной и ты.
Maior Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 well, it might be temporary. The T-50 hasn't got it's supposed engines yet.We'll just have to wait and see.
marcos Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) It is just very dark there... There is no way for compressor to be invisible from front with such intake configuration and engine position. :thumbup: Really?:smilewink: I thought all intakes designed for over Mach 2.4 had about 1ft between the front of the intake and the start of the engine (like this).:lol: Funny thing is that it seems to be in a different position on each of these photoshops. Very near front. Further back. Edited February 23, 2013 by marcos
NOLA Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) No. You've provided 2 more pictures from the internet. Pictures showing you are wrong. Pictures that make you seemingly unable to say what is exactly photoshopped. Russia know that having a visible engine face will not provide stealth. That is besides the discussion. They are of course perfectly aware of it, they are not idiots. The did have S-intakes on Su-47 afterall, it is not exactly high tech. As i have repeated before, patent, patent and patent. It is all in there. There are atleast three different solutions that together will cover compressor face against radar. Without the use of S-intakes. Engines are mounted in engine nacelles 6 spaced apart along horizontal line while engine axes are directed at acute angle to the plane of aircraft axis of symmetry along flight direction.изогнутая форма каналов воздухозаборников требует увеличения их длины, и, следовательно, массы самолета;Curved form of intakes need increase in their length, hence increase in the mass of the planeI rest my case. Remember this picture? It was the first one where the engine started appearing. Did PS remove it or add it?I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. I can show you one million pictures where PAK FA's intakes are black, doesn't mean they are photoshopped. There is this thing, it is called shadows. You may have heard about it. PS: Just because no solutions are installed in terms of intake shielding =/= there will be none. It is not like first prototypes will be equipped with everything at once. "These things, they take time" © Edited February 23, 2013 by NOLA
marcos Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) The PAK-FA is nearly 20m long. The intakes about 12m. The engines are <5m long, yet somehow they begin just after the start of the intake.:lol: You can draw diagrams on bog-roll all you like but it won't prove anything. Edited February 23, 2013 by marcos
sobek Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 The engines are <5m long, yet somehow they begin just after the start of the intake. No they don't, are you looking at the same picture? Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives!
Kaktus29 Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 people, look i listened to official russian developers -can't find the link-they know about the blades needed to be hidden.. my god how thick do you think russian scientist are? ..but there is no point in making hidden engine IF you didn't finish developing the engine.. get it..? if they do the air-frame and especially the engine intakes stealthy and then the engine comes out and dimensions don't fit..now what? .so they don't bother with stealth intakes right now, but more on software,radar, 5gen avionics and RWR, LPI, and air-frame testing to see what works better.. when they polish all this the only puzzle will be what will the 5gen engine dimensions be? and then according to this info redesign the intakes.. Russians are not making a mistake like the americans when they designed JSF with certain dimensions and put it into production while still in testing..and now horribly trying to avert disaster.. one step at a time is better than 100 steps in one swing.. So far, everything looks amazing and splendid.. in 2016-18 i think the first production could start(even though Russians are claiming 2015 i think later is wiser and better,no need to rush it and do a JSF on yourself..) again, look at the prototype of SU-27 back in the 70-80s.. it was weird.. and then the final product?.wow total aerodynamic porn.. up to now there is no plane more aerodynamically CORRECT than Su-27..
wilky510 Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 people, look i listened to official russian developers -can't find the link-they know about the blades needed to be hidden.. my god how thick do you think russian scientist are? ..but there is no point in making hidden engine IF you didn't finish developing the engine.. get it..? if they do the air-frame and especially the engine intakes stealthy and then the engine comes out and dimensions don't fit..now what? .so they don't bother with stealth intakes right now, but more on software,radar, 5gen avionics and RWR, LPI, and air-frame testing to see what works better.. when they polish all this the only puzzle will be what will the 5gen engine dimensions be? and then according to this info redesign the intakes.. Russians are not making a mistake like the americans when they designed JSF with certain dimensions and put it into production while still in testing..and now horribly trying to avert disaster.. one step at a time is better than 100 steps in one swing.. So far, everything looks amazing and splendid.. in 2016-18 i think the first production could start(even though Russians are claiming 2015 i think later is wiser and better,no need to rush it and do a JSF on yourself..) again, look at the prototype of SU-27 back in the 70-80s.. it was weird.. and then the final product?.wow total aerodynamic porn.. up to now there is no plane more aerodynamically CORRECT than Su-27.. I like how you defend the Russians by saying they aren't stupid, and then go on to babble how 'stupid' the Americans were with the JSF.
Mandrake5 Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 I like how you defend the Russians by saying they aren't stupid, and then go on to babble how 'stupid' the Americans were with the JSF. Sssh, these red fanboys are hilarious, don't scare them away with your corrupt imperialist 'logic' :)
ФрогФут Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 when they polish all this the only puzzle will be what will the 5gen engine dimensions be? and then according to this info redesign the intakes.. T-50 is already flying with it's first stage engines and will go in service with them. Second stage engines are planned after 2020, so no intake changes. "Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин Ноет котик, ноет кротик, Ноет в небе самолетик, Ноют клумбы и кусты - Ноют все. Поной и ты.
marcos Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 No they don't, are you looking at the same picture? My sarcasm obviously bypassed you.:)
sobek Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 My sarcasm obviously bypassed you.:) Could be because your point is less than obvious... Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives!
marcos Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Could be because your point is less than obvious... My point was that the engines can't possibly start where they're shown on NOLA's images. If you look further back, you'll see that's the point I'm making. The fact that some forum members can believe they're more intelligent than the best minds in the Sukhoi Design Bureau is extraordinary.
marcos Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 I like how you defend the Russians by saying they aren't stupid, and then go on to babble how 'stupid' the Americans were with the JSF. Lockheed Martin aren't stupid, if there is a problem it's that they're too clever for their own good. Too much attention to profiteering.
Recommended Posts