• SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    8 days ago

    They nailed most of the features, only missing minor details. Canopy, nose windows, two bigass engines, wing profile, t-tail, landing gear. They can’t draw for shit but they got the info.

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 days ago

      The sketch has widening wings, while the plane has constant-width wings. The body profile is completely wrong. The engines on the sketch are not anything nearly as bigass as on the plane. The vertical stabilizers are just completely wrong. The landing gear is on the wrong place. The wings are on the wrong place…

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        That’s fair, though we don’t know how close the sketch “artist” actually saw the thing. I’m just saying it ain’t terribly far off.

        • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          If your job is to inform the Joint Chiefs that the ruskies have a bomber with a canopy and ejector seat, two big honking jet engines and a tail gunner, this’ll do.

          • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 days ago

            I mean, maybe? Never worked intelligence but I assume there’s a shitload of extrapolation and assumption. Also realistically they’ll paint it as a 12th Gen aircraft and demand 50 billion more funding to close the capabilities gap.