Hi Francisco.
Maverik Miller

Hello there; thx; not really ; modern russian fighters are all positive stability designs; thei gain very good subsonic ITR just having lotsa drug and mobile surfaces; this schemes are very clear :https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2015/11/21/wing-position-and-roll-stability/

That is also why continous subsonic turn rate is not good on “modern” russian fighters and they are very bad energy savers ; best design in this sense is typhhoon, followed by other eurocanards; f22 experienced problems as soon using thurst vectoring in exercise with typhoon as is inferior in keeping enrgy momentum; pak fa aerodinamics are less puntive then su35 in supersonic envelope ( even f15 is less disadvanteged in supersonic envelpoe compared to su35) but not really supersonic oriented; canard positioning , area and mobile surfeces required 10 years to typhoon to be developed, and result is that its subsonic ctr is much better then suhkoys; current aerodinamic modification in typhoon (necessarry also for confirmal fuel tanks) give it a boost of 40% in subsonic itr, which is useful just in atg role in typhoon; russian modern designes have optimized subsonic ITR sacrifyieng all the rest of aerodinamic envelope just because they thought that old, limited angle wvr missiles would have been main air to air weapon. When they designed mig35 they understood they do not have materials or design skills to make flyable an extreme negative stability design such as typhoo; mig 21 was dangerosu to fly but aerodimiacally more balanced for all flight envelopes; mirage2000 is better then su30mkII in supersonic envelope by a huge margin: that is what indian pilots say.

Like what you read? Give Francesco Ganzetti a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.