Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

That would destroy aerodynamics and probably increase RCS.

  • Like 1

"Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин

Ноет котик, ноет кротик,



Ноет в небе самолетик,

Ноют клумбы и кусты -

Ноют все. Поной и ты.

Posted
How would it destroy aerodynamics?

It covers LERX and the leading edge is now situated very close to the vortex generators on the outer side of intakes, which were designed to work with the rest of the current plane to create lift. How that would work with the new wing? No idea.

Also increasing wing surface without increasing wingspan would create more lift induced drag, so it will loose even more speed on manoeuvres.

"Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин

Ноет котик, ноет кротик,



Ноет в небе самолетик,

Ноют клумбы и кусты -

Ноют все. Поной и ты.

Posted
It covers LERX and the leading edge is now situated very close to the vortex generators on the outer side of intakes, which were designed to work with the rest of the current plane to create lift. How that would work with the new wing? No idea.

Also increasing wing surface without increasing wingspan would create more lift induced drag, so it will loose even more speed on manoeuvres.

 

By decreasing the AR you increase the Cdi, true, but we're adding a lot of wing in the process as well. In addition to this we're increasing the sweep angle, which will be beneficial for high speed flight.

 

As for LERX, obviously these need to be redesigned slightly to accomodate the new wing design, but this really should be a smaller obstacle.

 

Similar consideration were done regarding the FB-22.

Posted
By decreasing the AR you increase the Cdi, true, but we're adding a lot of wing in the process as well. In addition to this we're increasing the sweep angle, which will be beneficial for high speed flight.

 

As for LERX, obviously these need to be redesigned slightly to accomodate the new wing design, but this really should be a smaller obstacle.

 

Similar consideration were done regarding the FB-22.

The result will be the same as Gripen. Also you're going to move MAC, which won't do any good for stability.

"Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин

Ноет котик, ноет кротик,



Ноет в небе самолетик,

Ноют клумбы и кусты -

Ноют все. Поной и ты.

Posted
The result will be the same as Gripen. Also you're going to move MAC, which won't do any good for stability.

 

Moving the MAC isn't as much a problem with modern flight control systems, and the inherent stability is something that can be adjusted with other minor aerodynamic modifications on top.

 

But I agree that the drawing only shows a single modification that alone won't work, it requires other changes to be made as well, nut none that can't be done. It was simply to give food for thought regarding possible future wing designs just as we've seen new wing designs speculated for most aircraft designs.

 

Remember this? :) :

 

f16147.jpg

Posted
Please stay on topic.

Just one more time.:)

Moving the MAC isn't as much a problem with modern flight control systems, and the inherent stability is something that can be adjusted with other minor aerodynamic modifications on top.

 

But I agree that the drawing only shows a single modification that alone won't work, it requires other changes to be made as well, nut none that can't be done. It was simply to give food for thought regarding possible future wing designs just as we've seen new wing designs speculated for most aircraft designs.

 

Remember this? :) :

 

f16147.jpg

FCS works fine in cg range of about 15% MAC. Doing what you want may move cg out of this range. As for F-16 - it's whole new wing, not addition to the current.

"Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин

Ноет котик, ноет кротик,



Ноет в небе самолетик,

Ноют клумбы и кусты -

Ноют все. Поной и ты.

Posted

The F-35 is still in Open Beta....:megalol:

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Posted (edited)
Sure, but nobody wants to come here and read how you think it should be designed.

 

What? I am not saying anything of the sort...

 

I layed it out as a thought experiment, and I only see one person being irritated by it, and that apparently because the thread isn't filled to the brim with only F-35 news videos. If that's what he's looking for then simply make such a thread.

 

But I guess we can't discuss the F-35 even in an F-35 specific thread then -.-

Edited by Hummingbird
Posted
I'm just curious to see what comes out of the 6th gen fighter design and how they will gimp it in order NOT TO supersede the F-35 by accident. :)

 

1431530562676

 

... Yeah, sure...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...