posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 05:06 PM
the ultimate fighter plane would have to eliminate any unnecessary dead weight, this would mean no silly lift fans, if it was to be STOVL capable at
all it would have to acheive it with 'always on' engines like the Harrier, though I would give it two of them and include some form of burning,
either afterburning or plenum chamber burning. I would also require at least the aft most nozzles to be capable of 3D vectoring for combat
It would also mean no variable sweep, the aerodynamic benefits of VG can be reproduced by other methods like retractable high lift devices etc and the
mechanism used for VG is heavy, this not only impedes performance but also eats into fuel and weapons loads.
In fact with a fully variable nozzle arrangement you could probably eliminate ALL flying surfaces except the wing, X-44 style, with no loss of control
or agility, the lack of fins, tails or canards also naturally reduces overall weight. Coupled with Internal weapons carriage and the usual
considerations you could then produce a fighter with an even smaller RCS than the current generation.
As for the airframe then my fighter would resemble an X-44 but with FVTV (Fully Variable Thrust Vector) abnd be STOVL capable and super agile.
BVR capability is naturally a must but there is so much more to it than that, I need more tiume to mull over my systems fit but it must not be so
comprehensive that it weighs the fighter down too much.