oh my bad mis typo.
Which is a logical fallacy.
By that logic - I could say Su-30SM is an Su-27 with canards and tvc and (insert other changes) ergo they must be compatible with the same weaponry.
Proof of use with a particular type is how to show a weapon is compatible - otherwise we can go full-Disney Fantasy mode… which admittedly is probably what he’s happy with so long as his preferred Tech Tree gets the benefits.
Its not even a logical fallacy its just plain stupid to take a marketing slogan in a marketing brochure as a technical statement.
1 Like
Or could it be that you rarely write a post without a sidekick/passive aggressive behaviour?
We will never know.
3 Likes
Have a look-see above. If someone is arguing that 2+2 must equal 9.
Saying they are wrong and that they probably are not very good at Maths isn’t being passive-aggressive.
Good old Sukhoi Sid seems to think that using a brochure for one Flanker is good enough for other aircraft when it comes to proof of use of a particular weapon. As myself and others point out - that’s a load of bollocks.
I was talking about that brochure not jet itself.
Fair enough. Wanted to point out if its brochure being too old or they didnt sell kh38 (hence didnt mention it in table) or other reason.
1 Like
Those are not the same but thanks for the free eyesight test Dr. Oetker.
Also if i was you id be very careful judging other peoples intelligence.
oh look what we have here
Worry not fellas. I shall now embrace @racimazzedine logic in all it’s wonderful glory.
I have a STRONK Brochure that says THIS
Is basically the same as a Sea Harrier 1 but with a different nose. Basically the same.
AMRAAMS for SHAR 1 when?
Admittedly the brochure is mainly in crayon and has some elephants and X-wings doodled on it - the five year old I employed to draw it…ahem… the aviation professional I employed to source it got carried away.
Afaik Russia is the only operator of Kh-38s.
Or, at least I’ve only seend Kh-38s on jets in Russian service.
Im calling the act of taking a marketing term as a technical statement stupid. Im not calling you stupid.
ok my bad, i take that back.
but doesnt change the point su30mk with tvc is the pre-production name of the su30sm.
if there were changes done it in the mean time of selling jet to russia air force. i am pretty the info would have been public by now
1 Like
What about people who continually come out with stupid takes? What does one call them?
uk mains.
1 Like
So just to make sure i havent misunderstood anything:
I am correct that your argument is based on the sentence “SU-30MK with canards and TVC” written in the top left corner of the second brochure you posted in this comment ?Russian Bias in 2026? - #8882 by racimazzedine
Im gonna let my buddy Forrest Gump answer that one.
I personally prefer referring to him as Sukhoi Sid…but Forrest Gump also works…
What if missile somehow gets into Malaysia hands? Will it work based on fact its compatible with su30mkm (which is mk family)? Or is it locked behind some module or software Russia doesnt sell?
exactly as su30mk with tvc were a custom fit to india need.
when india got its sukhoi, russia was intrested and bought them. hence the su30sm.