<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener("load", function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <iframe src="http://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID=5344031959487438224&amp;blogName=winthrop360&amp;publishMode=PUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT&amp;navbarType=BLUE&amp;layoutType=CLASSIC&amp;searchRoot=http%3A%2F%2Fwinthrop360.blogspot.com%2Fsearch&amp;blogLocale=en&amp;homepageUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwinthrop360.blogspot.com%2F" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" height="30px" width="100%" id="navbar-iframe" allowtransparency="true" title="Blogger Navigation and Search"></iframe> <div></div>

t-50

[CW: It's getting redundant, but a second UPI article about fifth-generation fighters by Heritage Foundation Russia expert Ariel Cohen gets hammered. This is a comment in response to Russia bets on new Sukhoi fighter to match F-35]

skip_the_bias (user comment): Is it just me, or is this article biased in favor of the U.S.? Consider the statement, "U.S.-based simulations and tests suggest that the stealth-enabled fifth-generation F-22 and F-35 can defeat any current aircraft," including the T-50? What are the sources for making this claim, what exactly is the nature of these so-called simulations/tests, and what good are those simulations when the T-50 prototype is still in the process of being built and its true capabilities are unknown? As for the "Raptorsky" moniker, if the T-50 is based on the Su-47 and MiG-1.42/1.44 technology demonstrators, which are clearly NOT copies of the F-22, then the T-50 can hardly be considered a copy of the F-22 Raptor, and the moniker is misplaced (although it sure sounds good for short-sighted pro-Western propaganda.)

[CW: To quote a German general, "We have severely underestimated the Russians... This is the revenge of reality"]

“t-50”