This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Fifth-generation fighter article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 9 sections are present. |
@ Steelpillow Hey, you probably new on this page. The Comparison Tables (specification ) were maintained on this page for 9 years (2014-2023). I've been editing this page for about 10 years. People put a lot of work in to it. Someone recently deleted tables without consensus or discussion. So I just restored them. Chelentano ( talk) 22:04, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/why-5th-generation-‘minus’-fighters-are-future-179708 47.198.108.186 ( talk) 16:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
TAI TF-X Kaan > TAI TF-KAAN 188.132.139.29 ( talk) 15:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
<severe civility violation/personal attacks removed -- ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)>
Gaslji ( talk · contribs) has been blocked from editing for 72 hours for personal attacks. I was very clear about the warning above. Do not turn this article or talk page into your personal battleground for whatever culture war you're fighting. ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:50, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Infobox type is intended for aircraft of a particular design, it is not intended for whole classes of aircraft. Please do not restore it here without a clear consensus that this abnormal use is justified. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 15:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Muhammet7655 ( talk) 16:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
}} {{Infobox aircraft type | type = Fighter aircraft
| national origin =
| manufacturer = | design group = | designer = | builder = | first flight = 1990 ( YF-23) | introduction = | introduced = 2005 ( F-22 Raptor) | retired = | status = In service | primary user = | more users = | produced = | number built = | developed from = Fourth-generation fighter | variants with their own articles = | developed into = Sixth-generation fighter
Collapsing this section due to more nationalism and personal attacks. ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
<redacted personal attacks -- ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)>
<redacted personal attacks -- ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)> |
TAI has definite arguements to get in serial production. TAI general manager Temel Kotil said "We will start the production of 20 KAANs in 2025. We will deliver it in 2028." [2] https://twitter.com/gdhdefence/status/1760981019610735020 YusufEren386641 ( talk) 20:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
"Turkish Fighter-KAAN , the 5+ Generation Multirole Fighter Aircraft, provides significant capabilities in both Air to Surface and Air to Air combat requirements. Turkish Aerospace’s survivable, strong and agile platform Turkish Fighter is a fully aware warrior, with intelligent and strong combat capabilities." [3] YusufEren386641 ( talk) 17:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
infobox problem is solved Orange-Puppy-2221 ( talk) 14:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
@ RXFire1: Your content is removed due to the following reasons. 1. Why is it biased and deliberately misleading? According to Rahul - " it (India) lacks the depth of research and design expertise required to build a successful stealth fighter. " - What design expertise did S.Korea have? Turkey have? Yet they came up with flying prototypes, right? Isn't that argument sound flawed? If we count Hurjet and FA-50, look India have designed Tejas, HJT-36, HTT-40 (flying), AMCA, TEDBF, Tejas MK2 (underdevelopment). So how can a policy expert come such conclusion? So this source [4] is clearly biased. Shantanu Roy-Chaudhury in his article here [5] observes that "Feasibility of the AMCA project, however, has been questioned as India does not have a robust industrial defence base." - India's premier aerospace company Hindustan Aeronautics Limited is building aircraft since decades. Prominent examples are Sukhoi Su-30MKI, Dornier 228, HAL Tejas etc. Almost 80 percent of the fleet of the defence forces is either supplied by HAL or serviced and supported by HAL. In all, the company has manufactured over 4,100 aircraft and over 5,000 engines while overhauling 11,000 aircraft and 33,000 engines across its 20 production divisions and 11 research and design centres spread across the country, see here . [6] In addition, Indian private sector aviation firms such as Tata Advanced Systems are producing fuselage to wings for lwading Aviation manufacturers like Boeing defence, Airbus etc. "Currently, Airbus’ procurement of components and services from India stands at about $750 million every year, which will rise to $1.5 billion in the next few years" [7] [8] Aircraft maker Boeing plans to double sourcing from India from the current value of $1 billion a year to $2 billion from over 200 suppliers, according to Darren Hulst, vice-president and global head of marketing, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. [9] In addition, TASL delivered 250th made-in-India AH-64 Apache fuselages, [10] and are preparing to built 40 EADS CASA C-295s [11] How is this possible if India doesn't have robust industrial base? So it's pretty much clear both of thesetheir observations are flawed, definitely sourcesNOT are WP:TRUTH but biased and intentionally misleading at the same time. Echo1Charlie ( talk) 03:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
There is no such thing as a 5+ generation fighter described in reliable sources, it is just marketing puff by some companies. As such it has no place in a general article like this one. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 17:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Is that even a thing? Not aware of any such radar especially on an airborne platform. 72.69.210.72 ( talk) 02:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
@ TzCher: @ Orange-Puppy-2221: Please discuss the dispute here rather than continuing to edit war. I've not studied the topic closely – why are we not including Turkey if there's a section on them (which appears to be adequately sourced)? — Czello ( music) 12:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
I propose to set up talk page archiving for this page - before this post it had 74 sections, which is a lot. I propose archiving at 1 year, but with a rule that at least 9 sections remain on the talk page. Does anyone object?-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
While all the nations that currently produce gen 5 aircraft are listed, they arent the only ones that use these types of aircraft, as many are sent to other countries. A list of these countries would be helpful. Thanks Icantthinkofaname1 ( talk) 22:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Fifth-generation fighter article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 9 sections are present. |
@ Steelpillow Hey, you probably new on this page. The Comparison Tables (specification ) were maintained on this page for 9 years (2014-2023). I've been editing this page for about 10 years. People put a lot of work in to it. Someone recently deleted tables without consensus or discussion. So I just restored them. Chelentano ( talk) 22:04, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/why-5th-generation-‘minus’-fighters-are-future-179708 47.198.108.186 ( talk) 16:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
TAI TF-X Kaan > TAI TF-KAAN 188.132.139.29 ( talk) 15:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
<severe civility violation/personal attacks removed -- ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)>
Gaslji ( talk · contribs) has been blocked from editing for 72 hours for personal attacks. I was very clear about the warning above. Do not turn this article or talk page into your personal battleground for whatever culture war you're fighting. ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:50, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Infobox type is intended for aircraft of a particular design, it is not intended for whole classes of aircraft. Please do not restore it here without a clear consensus that this abnormal use is justified. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 15:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Muhammet7655 ( talk) 16:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
}} {{Infobox aircraft type | type = Fighter aircraft
| national origin =
| manufacturer = | design group = | designer = | builder = | first flight = 1990 ( YF-23) | introduction = | introduced = 2005 ( F-22 Raptor) | retired = | status = In service | primary user = | more users = | produced = | number built = | developed from = Fourth-generation fighter | variants with their own articles = | developed into = Sixth-generation fighter
Collapsing this section due to more nationalism and personal attacks. ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
<redacted personal attacks -- ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)>
<redacted personal attacks -- ⇒ SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)> |
TAI has definite arguements to get in serial production. TAI general manager Temel Kotil said "We will start the production of 20 KAANs in 2025. We will deliver it in 2028." [2] https://twitter.com/gdhdefence/status/1760981019610735020 YusufEren386641 ( talk) 20:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
"Turkish Fighter-KAAN , the 5+ Generation Multirole Fighter Aircraft, provides significant capabilities in both Air to Surface and Air to Air combat requirements. Turkish Aerospace’s survivable, strong and agile platform Turkish Fighter is a fully aware warrior, with intelligent and strong combat capabilities." [3] YusufEren386641 ( talk) 17:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
infobox problem is solved Orange-Puppy-2221 ( talk) 14:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
@ RXFire1: Your content is removed due to the following reasons. 1. Why is it biased and deliberately misleading? According to Rahul - " it (India) lacks the depth of research and design expertise required to build a successful stealth fighter. " - What design expertise did S.Korea have? Turkey have? Yet they came up with flying prototypes, right? Isn't that argument sound flawed? If we count Hurjet and FA-50, look India have designed Tejas, HJT-36, HTT-40 (flying), AMCA, TEDBF, Tejas MK2 (underdevelopment). So how can a policy expert come such conclusion? So this source [4] is clearly biased. Shantanu Roy-Chaudhury in his article here [5] observes that "Feasibility of the AMCA project, however, has been questioned as India does not have a robust industrial defence base." - India's premier aerospace company Hindustan Aeronautics Limited is building aircraft since decades. Prominent examples are Sukhoi Su-30MKI, Dornier 228, HAL Tejas etc. Almost 80 percent of the fleet of the defence forces is either supplied by HAL or serviced and supported by HAL. In all, the company has manufactured over 4,100 aircraft and over 5,000 engines while overhauling 11,000 aircraft and 33,000 engines across its 20 production divisions and 11 research and design centres spread across the country, see here . [6] In addition, Indian private sector aviation firms such as Tata Advanced Systems are producing fuselage to wings for lwading Aviation manufacturers like Boeing defence, Airbus etc. "Currently, Airbus’ procurement of components and services from India stands at about $750 million every year, which will rise to $1.5 billion in the next few years" [7] [8] Aircraft maker Boeing plans to double sourcing from India from the current value of $1 billion a year to $2 billion from over 200 suppliers, according to Darren Hulst, vice-president and global head of marketing, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. [9] In addition, TASL delivered 250th made-in-India AH-64 Apache fuselages, [10] and are preparing to built 40 EADS CASA C-295s [11] How is this possible if India doesn't have robust industrial base? So it's pretty much clear both of thesetheir observations are flawed, definitely sourcesNOT are WP:TRUTH but biased and intentionally misleading at the same time. Echo1Charlie ( talk) 03:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
There is no such thing as a 5+ generation fighter described in reliable sources, it is just marketing puff by some companies. As such it has no place in a general article like this one. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 17:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Is that even a thing? Not aware of any such radar especially on an airborne platform. 72.69.210.72 ( talk) 02:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
@ TzCher: @ Orange-Puppy-2221: Please discuss the dispute here rather than continuing to edit war. I've not studied the topic closely – why are we not including Turkey if there's a section on them (which appears to be adequately sourced)? — Czello ( music) 12:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
I propose to set up talk page archiving for this page - before this post it had 74 sections, which is a lot. I propose archiving at 1 year, but with a rule that at least 9 sections remain on the talk page. Does anyone object?-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
While all the nations that currently produce gen 5 aircraft are listed, they arent the only ones that use these types of aircraft, as many are sent to other countries. A list of these countries would be helpful. Thanks Icantthinkofaname1 ( talk) 22:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)