How to defeat the F-22 with a Typhoon

[GGTharos]

Correct on your interpretation Sir. Bank angle and G are so inter-linked that saying 'turn at 2g' or 'turn at 60deg bank' is the same thing.

[marcos]

I make the angle 63.435deg (to the vertical) but close.*

 

*26.535deg to the horizontal as per my diagram on sheet.

 

60deg will only give you sqrt(3)g = 1.732g.

[mikoyan]

I think the problem is more complex than that; I wish I knew the math involved! so my questions are:

 

The raptor has diamond wings; how does that affect its turning performance? compared to the delta on the Eurofighter.

 

How do you account for fuselage lift and wing area in those calculations?

 

THe wing in both change (Slats go down) while the aircraft is maneuvering how do we calculate the effects on the slats going down. What about other surfaces movement; interaction and drag?

 

Wing profile? the raptors wing has some interesting shape; spacialy that pronaunced washout

 

http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=A0PDoV5rHytQVkoABKGJzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBlMTQ4cGxyBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1n?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Df-22%2Bwing%26n%3D30%26ei%3Dutf-8%26y%3DSearch%26fr%3Daaplw%26ri%3D1%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D1&w=500&h=473&imgurl=www.worldaffairsboard.com%2Fattachments%2Fmilitary-aviation%2F24454d1298569785-f-22-wing-area-plan.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldaffairsboard.com%2Fmilitary-aviation%2F58838-f-22-wing-area.html&size=33.1+KB&name=Thread%3A+F-22+wing+area%3F&p=f-22+wing&oid=7d4969d879d9771d19362fd358341af5&fr2=&fr=aaplw&tt=Thread%253A%2BF-22%2Bwing%2Barea%253F&b=0&ni=84&no=1&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12cb3cvbv&sigb=13etbglpv&sigi=130h5bt8f&.crumb=uzNVdKerxPm

[aaron886]

I ain't got time (:D) but let me just say this is an extremely complicated subject and no matter how much you know, you probably won't know the reasoning behind all of the design characteristics of an incredibly aerodynamically complex aircraft like the F-22. Many of the design characteristics are compound features, designed to balance, offset, or compliment another.

 

I will say in general, the canard delta favored by european defense consortia/companies is designed to be effective at low speeds, and make use of a slightly more efficient lifting configuration for those regimes. The tradeoff is more and different types of drag and typically increased RCS.

 

The "conventional" mid wing and all-moving-tailplane of US fighters contributes to lower RCS, generally reduced drag and superior high speed cruise performance (associated trim drag included.) The use of pronounced taper on the main wing is both aerodynamically efficient and (relatively) geometrically favorable for low RCS. The F-22 is one of the most fascinating modern fighters with regard to aerodynamics... it appears no sacrifice of performance was accepted in the pursuit of LO.

 

The effects of slats is a change in CL of the wing... it's not really possible to calculate (accurately) as a casual observer without test data or CFD results. Similar lines of reasoning are also extremely complicated and interdependent, and not really worth pursuing.

 

The extreme washout on (many fighters) wings is a calculated feature to improve airflow characteristics at high angles of attack. Many modern fighters have some degree of aeroelasticity built into the wing, meaning the wing flexes to produce favorable geometry at increased angle of attack or load factor. (Best example: Hornet) I don't know for sure but I assume this is the case with the F-22. There's no going back to the extremely hard wing of older aircraft, AFAIK.

 

Keeping it simple, don't judge me for not going into detail. :D