Edit | Leave a Comment | Favorite
User Comments:
Anonymous commented at 2014-11-28 17:07:19 » #1643255
Study aeronautical design, anon2. You will see how this is not a fighter, no matter how much you stretch the term. It's a tactical bomber, plain and simple. And an obsolete one at that. There's nothing about this design that can be 'refined'.
You don't know anything about aviation, do you?
2 Points Flag
Study aeronautical design, anon2. You will see how this is not a fighter, no matter how much you stretch the term. It's a tactical bomber, plain and simple. And an obsolete one at that. There's nothing about this design that can be 'refined'.
You don't know anything about aviation, do you?
2 Points Flag
Anonymous commented at 2015-05-03 10:18:53 » #1733412
Nice try kid but real tactical bomber designs are never that small and never designed with a canard-delta layout. If you know anything about the aviation industry then you'd know this is a multi-role fifth-gen fighter. Keep your ignorance and bias to yourself.
1 Points Flag
Nice try kid but real tactical bomber designs are never that small and never designed with a canard-delta layout. If you know anything about the aviation industry then you'd know this is a multi-role fifth-gen fighter. Keep your ignorance and bias to yourself.
1 Points Flag
Anonymous commented at 2015-06-25 00:57:34 » #1764473
@1733412 - And which tactical bombers deigns have you been studying?
Canard layouts have nothing to do with the mission profile (used from light planes up to the Tu-144, and most everything in between), meaning their presence does not equate to the design being a fighter, so that argument is irrelevant.
As for size, try looking up the A-4...one of the smallest carrier jets and purposely designed as a tactical nuclear bomber.
I know about the industry, I know about the history, and I sure as hell know the J-20 is not and never will be a fighter. That's not bias nor ignorance...that is fact.
1 Points Flag
@1733412 - And which tactical bombers deigns have you been studying?
Canard layouts have nothing to do with the mission profile (used from light planes up to the Tu-144, and most everything in between), meaning their presence does not equate to the design being a fighter, so that argument is irrelevant.
As for size, try looking up the A-4...one of the smallest carrier jets and purposely designed as a tactical nuclear bomber.
I know about the industry, I know about the history, and I sure as hell know the J-20 is not and never will be a fighter. That's not bias nor ignorance...that is fact.
1 Points Flag
Womenslayer69 commented at 2021-08-30 21:53:31 » #2644606
what the fuck are you retards talking about?
3 Points Flag
what the fuck are you retards talking about?
3 Points Flag
1