I did some configuration tests in a sim I have for this and it flies WELL. I used SimplePlanes (burn me for it) the physics are simplified, but it can do a good amount as far as CG, thrust line, airfoil shape, etc. I was able to get it down to nearly 120 mph at 30° pitch. The design is not very stable with the elevators at 0°, I didn't have time to make split rudders for the wing. I augmented the thrust for yaw and it held well.
It's the same there, only the jump comes from the leading edge of the wing
Quite an irrelevant response if I may. Why an abstract, focus-shifting response to a relatively simple question: what are the so-called "pretty scathing issues" in the recent DOT&E report on the J-20 assuming he's unironically saying so?
Allegedly this has all-moving wingtips instead of split rudders.
i agree it seems too fanciful to me -- too many moving parts
So when I did the Boeing F/A-XX in there, I put all moving wingtips just as the had in this photo, and that had no effect to negate adverse yaw.
Wonder if they've got less visually obvious solutions like nose strakes or something dorsal (therefore unnoticed)
I have the book and had worked with Paul Metz on the YF-23 and the B-2 in the 1990's. Wow, many years have passed for sure.
The blisters on the underside cover the actuators except for the two, split outboard surfaces, could be multiple, smaller linear cylinders (like the YF-23) or rotary hingeline units. I don't think the aircraft uses Electrohydrostatic Actuators (EHA) as the F-35 uses. The F-35 EHAs are very large units. As an example, take a look at the fairings below the F-35 horizontal stabilizers, this will give you an idea how much envelope is required to house an EHA. I think the J-36 is probably using a common, distributed hydro power system, maybe operating at 5000 psig mainly for weight savings (also since it seems to be a prototype). Also, anyone familiar with the F-104, the 104 used what is nicknamed "piccolo" actuators to power the ailerons due to the very thin outer wing cross-section. Ten (five per redundant system) small hydro cylinders in a machined block, very interesting how Lockheed solved the problem.
B-21 will eventually grow into platform which will be able to relay information and control platforms. It will be more than just a bomber.
I hope someday he'll tell us which he liked better, the YF-23 or the F-22A.
I have have heard unofficially from former NG colleagues (both engineering and pilots) that Paul had stated and knew the YF-23/F-23 was the best all-around aircraft as compared to the YF/F-22 or any other fighter. If you watch some videos of Paul being interviewed as well, he stated the YF-23 is by far the best aircraft he has ever flown and was stated when he was flying the F-22 for LM. The 23 was well ahead of its time and that I think was a handicap regarding Northrop/NG, the corp developed well advanced platforms (the older flying wing family as examples). Its like, we can give you what your spec states but we can give so much more to blow everyone else away. Great approach for tech but hurts trying to win a program.
I sure hope so because I can't see Boeing doing a good job and I can't see the .gov giving everything to LM again.
Another way to look at the evidence is that the aircraft is an attack aircraft with self defense capability.
I think NG has been putting most of its efforts into F/A-XX especially based the success of the X-47/A/B aircraft. Poor Boeing really needs an overhaul. The new head of the Phantom Works is a former NG advanced projects person. LM could get the USAF NGAD just because Boeing could potentially screw the program up. I predict (and I could be wrong) NG for F/A-XX and LM for USAF NGAD. Now NGAS will be interesting, I know that Boeing PW is working a larger, land-based version of the MQ-25 and I think NGAS is up for grabs.
www.twz.com
As far as F/A-XX is concerned, I'd love to see NG return to its naval glory as it did with the tomcat, I mean look at the gear on this thing, sure seems beefy!
thanks for teaching, i assume you correlate mach angle with the sweep the intake has and the Mach angle obviously gives you the speed, I did not know that but thanks.Here the angle is greater - 65 degrees. Maximum speed for duralumin aircraft
A set of seal jumps determines the length of the air intake duct. It cannot be less than a certain limit.
YF-23 - 3.7 m
Su-27 - 4.6 m
Su-57 - 4.4 m
3.7 m : 4.5m * 2500 km/h = 2056 km/h
It's the PLAAF's Weapon of Choice.Time again for NATO reporting name suggestions....
If it´s a 'J-36': Fatnose
If it´s a 'JH-36': Fatboy
If it´s a 'H-36': Boxer (as Bill Sweetman came up with)
And just for the eventuality of a future variant without the third engine, respectively:
'Fatnose Slim'
'Fatboy Slim'
'Slim Boxer'
Tbh, given how we can have a felon using its main iwbs for 1 LACM, 1 ARM, 1 ASCM and 1 VLRAAM at the same time(while having self defense capability), the best way to conclude fighter/striker argument IMHO is simply multirole aircraft.
Any idea what the white one might be?
Uhm. . .Here the angle is greater - 65 degrees. Maximum speed for duralumin aircraft
A set of seal jumps determines the length of the air intake duct. It cannot be less than a certain limit.
YF-23 - 3.7 m
Su-27 - 4.6 m
Su-57 - 4.4 m
3.7 m : 4.5m * 2500 km/h = 2056 km/h
In case the weapon does not arm, it can go back into the convenient carrying container.
Unmanned Model 437 Vanguard, by Scaled Composites, a subsidiary of NG.
Time again for NATO reporting name suggestions....
If it´s a 'J-36': Fatnose
If it´s a 'JH-36': Fatboy
If it´s a 'H-36': Boxer (as Bill Sweetman came up with)
And just for the eventuality of a future variant without the third engine, respectively:
'Fatnose Slim'
'Fatboy Slim'
'Slim Boxer'
There is a hurry because with what we see China take the advantage.Time to roll out the SR-72 if it exists
That's not how I read it, but it's not worth arguing over.
I agree with that. NG seems to be concentrating on FAXX and Boeing is too much of a fustercluck to give another contract to.
Stealthy tanker.
I think what people are saying is that it's not going to be as good WVR dogfighting due to the stealth requirements. So the plane is more of an "interceptor with strike/bomber capabilities" than either the "F-15-on-steroids" F-22 or the "Stealthy supersonic A-7" F-35.
