Talk:KAI KF-X

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Aviation / Aircraft (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 
Note icon
An editor has requested that an image be added to this article. Once the requested image is added, remove the Imageneeded parameter from the project template call on this page to remove this image request.
 
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the aircraft project.
WikiProject Military history (Rated B-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Fair use rationale for Image:KFX.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:KFX.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 12:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

4.5 Generation[edit]

This new article http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/05/205_44789.html from the Korea Times flat out states that the KFX will be an advanced 4.5 generation fighter aircraft rather than a 5th generation aircraft which is what the older article claimed. We should remove the comparable aircraft section completely. Semi-Lobster (talk) 16:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

You are right, but this project is still in development, so we don't if final project be 5th or 4.5th generation. It's more likely South Korea will purchase F-35 or F-22 instead of making their own, however it's still open project.--Korsentry 08:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KoreanSentry (talkcontribs)
The focus of the project has been shifted instead to produce a F-16 Block 50 class aircraft according to these articles. http://www.asiae.co.kr/news/view.htm?sec=sisa1&idxno=2009072414004260622 http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4202866&c=ASI&s=AIR http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/07/113_49176.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.178.120 (talk) 21:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Block 50? Why not Block 60? -The Bushranger (talk) 19:10, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
That's what I was wondering. AESA, datalink, and all those listed performance improvements compared to the Block 50 should place it higher than even the Block 60. Perhaps they are just using the Block 50 standard for simplicity, as it is more common and thus, a more widely understood "benchmark." Just my thoughts though. You'll have to ask the ROKAF to be completely sure. =)

50k pounds of thrust?[edit]

Is there some translation error here? The 40k pounds of thrust from the Pratt & Whitney F135 is considered to be extreme for a jet fighter engine and the Koreans really want to add 25% on top of that? Hcobb (talk) 15:34, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Rush it to the OR[edit]

Where exactly is the original research? I spot like two refs per sentence here. Hcobb (talk) 04:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

The entire specifications section, including the crew. I actually meant to tag only that specific section however. If there is no solid evidence on the specifications then simply leave them empty, more information will come eventually. -Nem1yan (talk) 03:59, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on KAI KF-X. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:42, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Indonesian government involvement[edit]

I think we should be careful about placing Indonesia into KAI's K-FX program as they're only investor and first hand purchaser not really involved in development in technologically way, there's no way Indonesia will get fully optional K-FX, what they're getting is very basic level of K-FX. Calling I-FX is totally wrong, Indonesia only invested less than 10% so far. Which is not acceptable when considering Koreans are doing all the hard works. --Korsentry — Preceding unsigned comment added by KoreanSentry (talkcontribs) 06:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)