posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 04:13 PM
Originally posted by Zaphod58
All in all a rather interesting design. I'm not sure how well it'll stand up as it is now, and I suspect that once they start flying it they're
going to have to make a few changes to it.
I concur that it is an interesting design, but I can see a few screaming problems already from the mock-up.
How is its lift-to-weight? It has a very large internal volume, suggesting either a big payload or perhaps another potential reason at the end of the
post. Rest assured that both of these possibilities imply a lot of weight to the aircraft. The other thing I notice is that it has a very small
lifting area on the wings which worries me somewhat. Seeing this, I looked to see if it was using vortices along the top of the aircraft to generate
lift across its broad back, but I don't see much optimization for that either. I see no LERX to generate them conventionally (and the location of the
intakes makes their addition a challenging prospect), and the canards are so far outboard that you'd probably need an unreasonable AOA to blow the
resulting vortices back onto the spine of the aircraft. Honestly, I'm just not sure how this thing is going to generate enough lift to do credit to
its otherwise neat design.
What is the top speed of this aircraft? The reason I ask is because I can see a laundry list of features on this aircraft that just look horrendous
for efficient supersonic flight. The thickness of the main wing's cross section is most obvious. Those sort of thicknesses look more at home on
submarines than fighter aircraft. The downturned wingtips are a source of concern as well as they're hanging out in the wind causing both significant
drag and giving those forces huge leverage onto the skeleton of the aircraft. There are some other things I see as well, such as the panels where the
intakes would be on the F-22, and the lack of obvious area-rule features which make me suspect that this aircraft would have very poor transonic and
How is the aircraft controlled? I notice that the aircraft has some very small control surfaces, particularly the ailerons which are only present on
the inboard surfaces of the wing. This means that those aerodynamic surfaces will get crappy leverage to make maneuvers, and that the forces required
to do so will be spread across frighteningly small areas. If this aircraft wants to roll with an F-16 I would hope that it has some very beefy
connection points between those ailerons and the frame. The canards have their own control surfaces as well which could help with roll and pitch, but
doing so can get very tricky in the effects that the wake has on the acting surfaces of the main wing. I suspect that the aircraft will have at least
pitch thrust vector controls given the stand-in nozzle's shape. I'm curious as to where the center of lift will be on this sucker, and how much is
portioned between the canards, the main wing, and the dorsal surface.
I like the "Remove Before Flight" tags on the nozzle cover and the nose pitot. Very cute. I don't think they're necessary on a mock-up, but very
Originally posted by Darkpr0
It has a very large internal volume, suggesting either a big payload or perhaps another potential reason at the end of the post.
I rumbled about this early on, and it's gaining momentum in my mind. The combination of large internal volume, and really poor supersonic
characteristics make me wonder... Could this thing be using a high-bypass engine, sacrificing supersonic performance for brute subsonic power? Is that
even possible with this intake layout? The design is certainly already 'out there' enough to make me suspect that the inside could be just as
Bottom line: I don't think this is going to be that big a competitor for World's Best 5th Gen, but I am very curious as to see how/if it performs
with this futuristic design.