This was not only meant as a chin air intake or some air intakes like su-57 and YF-/NATF-23 have could also go but the problem of a higher Drag and weight is something we won't get around without making the aircraft thinner (im case the side base don't need so mutch space as the air intake right now use.
The problem is that at moderate angles of attack, the dorsal intakes get blocked out by the fuselage. Unless you do something unusual like set the LERX/chines/strakes to feed the vortices into the intake.
I think you mean the F5D Skylancer?
www.rolls-royce.com
Your drawing was beautiful and I saw that it included a lot of study!
I don't get what you mean, the engine is already all the way back!
Yeas Dorsal intake.....
The auxiliary air Inlets of the F-5 are in the furthest aft end of the intake duct just before the compressor face of the engine. You don't want that on a stealth aircraft. The purpose of serpentine shaped ducts is to prevent direct line of sight to the compressor blades and disperse radar waves, thus lowering RCS.
try it. You don't need direct ducts although the lower distance to the edge of the engines on the dorsal position would be negligible, as well as the grille would only be opened in the maneuver controlled by the FBW. The flow does not need to be large, just complementary during the aggressiveness of the maneuver and can remain closed almost all of the time. In any case, it would be a very small duct and in no way superior to the discretion of the original ducts I designed. It's a new approach, for a new challenge... The grille below the plane is only opened during the maneuver and is necessary, controlled by a computer.
As a matter of fact, dorsal air intakes never made it into a supersonic fighter so far. And it's not because no one thought of auxiliary air intakes before
Really? maybe yes maybe no. Supersonic speed is not limited by dorsal position, but rather the problem of reduced flow at high speeds to the engine. as colleagues have already recalled, the high attitude versus speed, at least in theory, is only achieved when in the flight envelopes and dogfight engagement, and the dogfight is limited by the pilot's G limits... the important thing is that in this scenario, the requirements of invisibility are already relaxed, as the combat is no longer in the BVR arena. Your drawing is wonderful and exemplary, really cool. But it would be interesting to explore these other possibilities. Do not be prejudiced or worried about giving up any requirements, as this would indeed happen, however, other superlative characteristics will appear in a compensatory way. The versatility of exchanging equipment, more abundant fuel and increasing the areas of radar antennas and missiles would be very great, whilst still maintaining practically the same external area through these tricks... this secret project room is the greatest example of great tricks that they died just for the question...if no one did it before, then it wouldn't be good...and conceptually, these tricks are actually simple...an automatic grid can change everything....As a matter of fact, dorsal air intakes never made it into a supersonic fighter so far. And it's not because no one thought of auxiliary air intakes before
Ok, again the excelent and whole project was classy and very beautiful. It has its space.
About the only place I can really see a market for such a small aircraft is as the fighter for a baby carrier concept, and I'm talking the smallest of the breed at some 20ktons.
Correct. This is one dimension of what I try to address. A design of a smaller fighter seeks to address the premise of lowering acquisition and operating costs and other simplifications. However, although this constant search is always valid, the benefits may be smaller than the sacrifices of the challenge. For the product to have real market appeal, it must increase some characteristic that is relevant to these competitors. This is why I emphasize that autonomy or the size of the weapons load can be used as a differentiator, although it may detract from some other characteristic of the aircraft.
Consider the plight of Third World nations that struggle to purchase ANY jet fighter. They struggle to fund fighters that are more capable than their next door neighbor. They have forgotten about staving off Russia or any other Frist World air force.
I guess the problem is that there are a lot of fairly capable legacy fighters out there (Mig-29s, Su-27s, F-16As, older Mirages & Gripens etc)… Even if their electronics aren’t state of the art anymore, their performance will still be quite good.
Crud, those are the countries buying armed LIFTs, like the FA50 or M346.
Yes, the depicted JSOW (AGM-154) is similar in size/weight to JASSM (AGM-158). Smaller types of ASMs are of course possible. Some, which are similar in size to SDB II, could be carried internally as well.
For a point of reference, the KAI FA-50 goes for US$40-50M a copy.
Cost will definitely vary based on how sensor-heavy the lightweight fighter ends up.
I absolutely agree that electronic hardware and software is a big cost driver in a state of the art combat jet.
