you saw it?The image is really close to the actual thing. Dağılabilirsiniz arkadaşlar.
Latest Thread
you saw it?The image is really close to the actual thing. Dağılabilirsiniz arkadaşlar.
Radonsider did. But I saw her landing gear, including the landing gear patent that was shown here. It is accurate.you saw it?
Picture is a drawing, look under the right wing.
And also nationality marks are also wrong. Our nationality marks on the F35-A is different from this.
Images not officially released by TUSAS, probably just cheap media propaganda. I don't trust Yeni Şafak.
View attachment 51815
I agree. UFO magicCircular area on top of the fuselage is interesting.
Another thing to add is munitions loaded into pylons look like Teber-82, you might say L-JDAM but their front fins are not that bigGUYS PLEASE CALM DOWN. THERE IS NOTHING RIDICULOUS ABOUT THE PICTURE!!
I don't get why you are so keen on them showing pylons? Didn't we also see them in KE illustrations? They are OPTIONAL, I mean can't you see that big a*s internal weapons bay?
This thing really looks similar to what I saw and MADDOG also confirmed from landing gear design, as it was patented by TAI,
Round nozzle is because of avoiding thrust loss, this shape is the most optimal for net thrust, the more it's flat, the more thrust you lose, both USA and Russia tested them, from Russia's testing we know that a flat nozzle makes you lose about 20% of your net thrust,
it will probably be changed when we get a higher thrust engine, ok?
Now everyone please calm down
I'm guessing Ukrainian. Why u doubting it?Assuming the tenders are real (which I doubt), what engine is that?
I'm guessing Ukrainian. Why u doubting it?
Everything you have said is wrong.The source. TAI usually communicate via their own channels. The surface is not smooth unlike all other shapes wings. Stealth has been sacrificed for manoeuvrability, which doesn’t make sense for a deep strike bomber. Intake is placed too far in the front again sacrificing stealth. Engine outlet is not buried in the frame, again sacrificing stealth. In general this is poor work and most likely fan art. I have a hard time seeing TAI produce this given their track record of quality and attention to detail.
The surface is smooth, I don't know what you're referring to exactly. Maneuverability? Nope. You can't say anything regarding the placement of the intake unless you did proper studies on the aircraft. The engine nozzle does not need to be buried inside the frame. It probably will be in the future when TF-6000 and its derivatives are ready. There is nothing wrong with the quality either. TAI might give engineering drawings (which I believe is the case) to media channels. This isn't anything new. I don't trust Yeni Şafak either, but the design sticks. And it has been posted by major defense channels so it most likely is real.The source. TAI usually communicate via their own channels. The surface is not smooth unlike all other shapes wings. Stealth has been sacrificed for manoeuvrability, which doesn’t make sense for a deep strike bomber. Intake is placed too far in the front again sacrificing stealth. Engine outlet is not buried in the frame, again sacrificing stealth. In general this is poor work and most likely fan art. I have a hard time seeing TAI produce this given their track record of quality and attention to detail.
Everything you have said is wrong.
1-Stealth is not sacrificed fro manoeuvrability
2-Engine outlet not buried≠not stealth
3-WTF is wrong with intake? There is a S duct inside, the intake is absolutely not a problem
Surface not being smooth is probably related into rendering
The guy you're replying to literally saw the aircraft with his own eyes. He is the strongest argument. But like you said, we will see.we will see in a few weeks/months. I don’t want to enter detailed discussion now. However, strongest argument is that this a dubious source and TAI does not communicate in this way.
The guy you're replying to literally saw the aircraft with his own eyes. He is the strongest argument. But like you said, we will see.
That huge circle on top looks like it can open up... We can only speculate why there is such a huge opening there. But I'm guessing we will hear wild theories over the next few days including lift fans for VTOL and multidirectional countermeasures. I'm going to take the safe route and say that it is nothingAnka3 showed itself. Engine start in April, followed by the first flight
View attachment 51809 View attachment 51810
Source: Yenişafak
Whilst I appreciate your approach, the probability of this being a fan-art is close to none. Because not many people know about the existence of the patent to begin with. This is a forum and we can't verify any information obtained at any given moment. However we can speculate, and that's what we are doing. This is not a fan-art, it's the actual thing. And this is highly probable. However I don't wish to derail the thread. So that's that...a few points.
1. This is an international forum with no verification. People could make all sorts of claims. He might have seen it, he might not have seen it.
2. Even if he has seen it, he hasn’t seen the final assembled product, because it is still under assembly. Therefore, he had no chance to observe the details (and we are talking details, because all wing shaped UAVs more or less look similar in structure form)
3. regarding the argument on landing gear looking right. The patent is public information and surely the person behind this potential fan art has seen the patent and designed the fan art accordingly. I.e. the landing gear proves nothing
Anyways, we will see soon enough. I can’t wait!