Also, I believe that I have been fair. Sukhoi has had almost two years to rectify the obvious problems with the T-50 design. It doesn't look like Sukhoi fixed a thing at all.
Perhaps because Sukhoi engineers -Who unlike us have made supersonic fighter jets before- were engaged with the rather more important task of putting 30 odd tonnes of supersonic bulk in the air safely and also carry out stuff such as evaluation, testing, verification, and adjusting and fine tuning.. while crunching numbers.
I am sure you'll forgive them, they are only human after all.
The goal is less about him than about presenting counter-arguments to his nonsense to the readers. Am willing to be generous and say 1/2 of them are objective enough to see through.
It really is sad to see how anyone could be, to put it bluntly, an 'attention whore'. Pioneering observations? Wow...!!! He speaks as if Ufimtsev, Skolnik, Jenn, and Knott never existed.
I don't know about 'attention whore' .. but the man has consistently demonstrated that he has very little comprehension of military technology and operation.
He clearly hasn't seen an operation manual of any piece of hardware -clearly not one of any system with ballistic or anti ballistic properties-, he has no comprehension of how military tech evolves in application and scope. How operational requirements change in the face of changing potential operations theaters and how military equipment must address a host of requirements and considerations.
He seems to understand nothing about fighter plane design, reading his posts, there is almost and underlying feeling that he considers the F-22 (for example) just an antiquated design, simply because it looks "too conventional", No connection to 'why and for what reason' in the design of a particular feature or even overall system.
He claims that canards are nothing more than tailplanes at the front! Missing out completely both on the design requirements and restrictions of canard vs tailplane configurations, but more importantly in his favorite area, RCS, the interactions of complex bodies with radio waves, behavior and characteristics of.
It has been suggested that the F-22 is less maneuverable than the J-20 (who knows ) simply because of the tailplane/canard thing, while completely ignoring the fact that the F-22 has consistently demonstrated sustained AoAs of 60^ at least.. unheard of for western operational aircraft.
An almost blind faith for just newly developed systems, with no tradition, no bibliography (internal), no history, no expertise behind them.
Boing,Lokheed,Sukhoi, MiG,Mil, Sikorsky ..whatever you feel about their products, they have been doing this job for decades.. and some Monday morning quarter backs come on these fora with ideas on how FIGHTER JETS should be made !!!!! How arrogant I would say !!!!