so now we are going for personal preferences. Then link a source from where you got that random table that doesn’t even elaborate on why it says so but you for some reasone believe it unquestionably.
2 Likes
ok, this is a kindergarten level of arguments. It has similar numbers so it was developed from it.
- no
- there is no i-90 program after 1991
miss
and money its not the main problem after 1991
i was sended you two big proofs of similarities
the bypass ratio is proof to
first you tell me is :
dispute is over
This is no proof. You still haven’t sent a source from where you got this table. And the schemes of both engines have enough differences to don’t even take your words seriously. So either link a full source or stop saying complete nonsense
There isn’t really anything classified about the fulcrum nowadays
- no
- there is no i-90 program after 1991
1.44’s only prototype wasn’t assembled in early 1994?
miss
and money its not the main problem after 1991
And money was the main problem, seeing as it was almost entirely cut in '95 leading to the stagnation and eventual cancellation of the MFI program? You can’t exactly develop a program without funding?
Either way none of what you’ve said points to ANY SEMBLANCE of MFI being ready for production…
MiG-31*
Tehcnically this is interceptor. At least by USSR classification.
1 Like
Technically anything is a fighter if you believe enough.
3 Likes
Can confirm. Air superiority Su-24 and Su-17M4 have a special place in my heart.
2 Likes
wrong
RD-33 has a bypass ratio of 0.48
AL-31 has a bypass ratio of 0.56
1 Like
there is no i-90 program
not all you can buy with money
not fighter jet
wrong data
0.49
0.49 * 1.13 ratio ≈ 0.57
ah yes the Mig-29 manual is wrong data
so what is it then
a jet brick?
4 Likes
The MiG-31 is obviously a space shuttle
2 Likes
Suborbital smoker+coffee maker combo
2 Likes
Buran :’(
I hate USSR just for this, they abandoned all their marvels to decay and destruction instead of putting them in museums
2 Likes
Are these jet engines?
1 Like