Mitsubishi Fighter - ATD-X "son of Zero"

[kurohinge1]

[SIZE="4"]Japan to develop stealth fighter jets[/SIZE]

According to a news article by the Associated Press, Tokyo has begun developing an indigenous stealth jet fighter that will be deployed in 2016. Mitsubishi, the prime contractor, has already developed a full-scale model, of which several pictures have been accidentally leaked to the press. The model is named 'Mitsubishi ATD-X"'. A laboratory of the French government has evaluated the "stealthy-ness" of ATD-X, and given it a high rating. Will ATD-X achieve air superiority over the F-22, which Washington refuses to sell to Tokyo?"
. . . more

. . . . . . . . .

[GuyJean]

Looks nice.. But is that an actual picture of it?. Thought fighter jets would look a bit different in 2016..

I think Japan would kick ass at making airplanes. Except the joystick would be on the wrong side of the cockpit.

GJ

[GuyJean]

.. is that an actual picture of it?..

Looks like it is:



Thought they'd look more like the X36:



Oh, and shouldn't they have radar that can 'see' a 1999 model 'stealth' airplane in 2016?

GJ

[Socratesabroad]

I think Japan would kick ass at making airplanes. Except the joystick would be on the wrong side of the cockpit.

I'm curious about that. While I don't doubt for a second that they have the capacity to build aircraft, I have to wonder if the end product would be any good. High-tech prowess doesn't always lead to aeronautical success, as clearly evidenced by J satellite launching. And unlike the pre-War days Japan doesn't have a battlefield lab overseas where they can work the kinks out.

Oh, and shouldn't they have radar that can 'see' a 1999 model 'stealth' airplane in 2016?

Interesting point, and I'm curious about the answer. Or since any aircraft is bound to have some physical radar signature are the designers simply taking 'stealth' to mean chocking the plane full of electronics to jam and confuse enemy radar?

[kurohinge1]

. . . Oh, and shouldn't they have radar that can 'see' a 1999 model 'stealth' airplane in 2016?

What's all this talk about radar?

Stealth is achieved by simply not filling in the right forms (in triplicate) and/or filing them with the right department. Until all that is done correctly, the plane simply doesn't exist.

There's your stealth.

[Grumblebum]

Interesting point, and I'm curious about the answer. Or since any aircraft is bound to have some physical radar signature are the designers simply taking 'stealth' to mean chocking the plane full of electronics to jam and confuse enemy radar?

My limited understanding is that these aircraft aren't supposed to be total stealth aircraft. Its supposed to be a compromise between limited stealth and reasonable combat capability. The idea being to reduce the aircraft's radar signature as much as possible, so that while it may not be totally invisible, on radar it looks like anything but a fighter aircraft.

As I understand it stealth designs start in 2 areas - first, using a material for the aircraft skin which doesn't reflect radar much, and second, designing the aircraft shape itself so that radar signals won't bounce off it cleanly.

[Typhoon]

Looks nice.. But is that an actual picture of it?. Thought fighter jets would look a bit different in 2016..

With a ground-controlled robot for a pilot who is not susceptible to G force.

[quote="GuyJean"]

I think Japan would kick ass at making airplanes. Except the joystick would be on the wrong side of the cockpit. ]

They can put it anywhere they want as long as they fly in the right, rather then left, lane.