Paralay's vision of NGAD

[paralay]

The expected dimension of a promising fighter. The contours of the YF-23 while applied as the closest in volume. The right is inscribed in the dimensions of the lift of the aircraft carrier "Gerald Ford".
The second stage engine for the F-35 fighter will be the first stage engine for the promising F / A-XX.
Expected afterburner 20500 - 21500 kgf, 10% higher than the serial F135.
Take 47,000 lb / 21320 kgf

The predicted thrust-to-weight ratio of the sixth generation twin-engine fighter is no less than:
normal take-off weight 1.25
with a maximum take-off weight of 1.0

From here we get the maximum take-off weight of 21320 kgf * 2: 1.0 = 42640 kg, the normal weight of 21320 kgf * 2: 1.25 = 34112 kg.

Normal take-off weight F-22 * 1.5 = 33324 kg (75,000 lbs / 34019 kg)
The maximum take-off weight is F-22 * 1.25 = 42382 kg (94000 lbs / 42639 kg)

The 300-foot (91 m) LIM EMALS (aircraft carrier Gerald Ford) will accelerate a 100,000-pound (45,000 kg) aircraft to 130 knots (240 km / h; 150 miles per hour).

The radius of action is 38% higher than that of the F-22, that is, in the region of 1200 km (in-in) / 1640 km (in-s)

The volume of the load compartments is at least 8.6 - 11 m3 or 1.5 times more than that of the fifth generation fighter. Maximum combat load 42382 kg * 0.26 = 11000 kg

 

[sferrin]

How would that configuration deal with the low speed approach requirement? Wouldn't the canard configuration be more appropriate?

 

[paralay]

B)
"Duck" is a great scheme if it is from an enemy aircraft

 

[paralay]

F-22 and NGAD

 

[Geo]

F-22 and NGAD

Try your view on NGAD and PAK DP.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I'm honestly expecting two separate aircraft for the USAF and USN NGAD/FAXX bids. USAF will very likely be over 100klbs, FB-111 sized or so.

For the Navy, though, steam catapults max out at about 85k-88klbs throw weight, and IIRC the old arresting gear has a max recovery weight of about 65000lbs. And the Nimitz class will still make up over half the carriers in the USN till sometime in the 2040s, maybe even 2050s. 8 years between CVN78 and 79, which suggests that it will take close to 40 years before there are 6 Ford-class in service. That's 2057 or so to get 6x CVN78s in service at 8 years between commissionings, and means that the last Nimitz won't leave the fleet until something like 2097...

 

[paralay]

 

[paralay]

The weapon bay needs to be enlarged

 

[dark sidius]

The weapon bay needs to be enlarged

Where this shape come from ?

 

[paralay]

This is a compilation of several well-known images of a promising fighter. This layout does not have enough volume for the declared take-off weight and promising engines.
I assume that the F/A-XX and NGAD programs will be combined into one. The fighter will probably have a V-shaped rotary tail and a variable geometry wing, for example, like the XB-70.

 

[Scott Kenny]

This is a compilation of several well-known images of a promising fighter. This layout does not have enough volume for the declared take-off weight and promising engines.
I assume that the F/A-XX and NGAD programs will be combined into one. The fighter will probably have a V-shaped rotary tail and a variable geometry wing, for example, like the XB-70.

I strongly disagree. The USAF needs a lot more range than the Navy does, and the USAF does not have the weight limits that the USN does for carrier takeoff and landings.

The F/A-XX cannot exceed ~85,000lbs MTOW from the carrier due to catapult limits and cannot exceed ~55,000lbs landing weight due to arresting gear limits. The landing weight restriction means that the effective max empty weight is ~45,000lbs, bringing back all missiles and enough fuel to allow at least one missed approach before forcing the pilot to hit the tanker.

NGAD could happily be F-111 sized, 105,000lbs MTOW. Or even larger, for a "Strike NGAD" that packs some 20,000lbs of boom instead of 3000-4000lbs of air-to-air missiles.

 

[paralay]

A country printing dollars can afford to have two heavy fighters in development, if someone still needs dollars. But the situation in the world is changing rapidly. As I understand it, the financing of NGAD is already in question, at least with a three-circuit engine

 

[VTOLicious]

On the other hand countries with much less economic power are developing an indigenous 5th generation fighter, associated equipment, engine and CCA (e.g. Turkey)... However, US armed forces have a lot of other stuff on the shopping (wish)list what eventually is the real issue.

 

[sublight_]

You and Rodrigo are on the same page...

 

[Scott Kenny]

A country printing dollars can afford to have two heavy fighters in development, if someone still needs dollars. But the situation in the world is changing rapidly. As I understand it, the financing of NGAD is already in question, at least with a three-circuit engine

I think it's more the USAF is starting to run out of political clout, times needing all their planes replaced at more or less the same time.

They have greatly abused Special Access Programs for funding-without-oversight for a long time and are getting called on the carpet over that issue.

It doesn't help that the USAF is also in the midst of replacing all their major hardware right now, but that's largely a situation caused by WW2. Same issue with the USN needing to design a whole new fleet, the WW2 production left a large number of ships that had all been built at the same time. With the USAF, it's more about how technology developed during and after WW2. Jets in 1945. Century Series in the 1950s where a plane designed not 3 years prior was obsolete at adoption (F-102A). Then there was the F4, that really kinda replaced too much of the fleet, so that the replacements for the fighter all came due at the same time. Teen series in the 1970s, and they went from early to late capabilities between two versions of the same airframe. ATF and JSF tried to get a bit more split between the two remaining fighter types, in terms of when the replacements needed to happen. But F-22 production was cut short so the F-15s weren't replaced, and now it's very critical to replace those 40+ year old planes. F-16s at least have remained in production so I think the fleet average age is under 20. And the F-22s are now pushing 20.

 

[paralay]

The essence of the concept of a joint heavy fighter. The prototype is the F-22. But the dimensions correspond to the stated masses. During takeoff and landing, the wing is deployed to the maximum, keels 45 degrees. At subsonic speed, the wing is deployed as much as possible, keels horizontally. At supersonic speed, the wing is in the middle position, keels horizontally
The shape of the wing and keel can be any, depending on the artistic taste of the engineer, the surface area should be close to the one shown here

In the combat load variant:
1. 12 AIM-120 + 4 AIM-9
2. 6 AIM-120 + 2 AIM-174 + 4 AIM-9
3. 6 AIM-120 + 2 AGM-158 + 4 AIM-9

 

[Rodrigo Avella]

The essence of the concept of a joint heavy fighter. The prototype is the F-22. But the dimensions correspond to the stated masses. During takeoff and landing, the wing is deployed to the maximum, keels 45 degrees. At subsonic speed, the wing is deployed as much as possible, keels horizontally. At supersonic speed, the wing is in the middle position, keels horizontally
The shape of the wing and keel can be any, depending on the artistic taste of the engineer, the surface area should be close to the one shown here

In the combat load variant:
1. 12 AIM-120 + 4 AIM-9
2. 6 AIM-120 + 2 AIM-174 + 4 AIM-9
3. 6 AIM-120 + 2 AGM-158 + 4 AIM-9

Hello! I really love it!!!! I was about to make a design where the wingtips fold down. If you allow me, I would love to make this design in 3D. Regards!

 

[paralay]

The weapon bay turned out to be very large for a fighter, 19% of the volume. The modern "record holder" F-35 has only 13.5%. Perhaps they are smaller, especially the front one

model

NGAD.stl

Посмотреть и скачать с Яндекс Диска

disk.yandex.ru

NGAD.jpg

Посмотреть и скачать с Яндекс Диска

disk.yandex.ru