still didnt get the point.
plane A get develope, plane B is sold and based on plane A.
whta your saying is plane A is different than plane B. and yet not source was presented.
your making usless point. i suggest stop yaping and present a source.
Given you love Sukhois so much - I am surprised you don’t know?
However I will humour you. Even UAC themselves regard the two products SU30SM and SU30MK as distinct aircraft. They have two different production lines in different geographical locations of Russia, different avionics, different parts particularly for the TVC and FCS wizardry.
In fact - the above shows you either a) know nothing or little about the subject you are arguing about or b) you are just trying to start an argument where there is no need for one.
Which is it?
1 Like
Do you have a genuine issue with stuff with wings? Previously you were asking how Harriers could go round corners without catching fire on the Typhoon thread…
What’s next?
‘F-35 isn’t stealthy - I can see it so it can’t have Stealth!’
yes i do love plane, not only russian.
no way pal, didnt i said not to mix with su30mkv. yes i did.
but than explain this smart guy
okay, prove it ? you cant. as always.
nah i dont, just like to act like a brit sometime and come to other forums and say bullshit like always
do you ?
i didnt, someone here wanted to know kh38 is compatible with su30sm. i did prove it with source and yet he didnt accept the fact. nor did he present a source that back him up
You seem to have a dislike for Brits and/or anything a Brit says… that strikes me as an EXCELLENT method of learning about the world around you…
(Just to point out the bleeding obvious - that was sarcasm. Brits tend to use it a lot besides British English.)
nah i dont dislike, i actualy have great discussion with few of them about the eft and weapons.
but there are some stereotype around some. not naming names ofc
you literally did not. You showed a brochure mentioning compatibility with the SU30MK.
And i literally cant get a source that the 38MT is incompatible with the SU30SM, because ususally weapons manufacturers dont include a list of weapons their product cant use with said product. That is why we do it the opposite way and usually proof that something can use something.
No kh38 in weaponry table?
5 Likes
Whoops…
Rule 1- When arguing about sources - READ the source you wave around first.
Any comment Stevie Wonder @racimazzedine ?
I’ll screengrab so he cannot ninja-quote.
because su30mk was made before kh38…
not that hard
That brochure may very well be older than the Kh-38 as a concept.
The Kh-38 was stated as compatable with Su-30MKs.
I can explain that brochure.
He posted another where the SU30MK is shown with KH38MT as a possibility. And this brochure calls the Su30SM the “SU30MK with canards and TVC” so thats his argument why they are the same plane and therefore share weapons compatibilites.
say that again ?
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.