Thrust Vectoring for in use aircraft types

[Tzoli]

Thrust Vectoring was in research since the late 1980's early 1990 and first appeared on production Jet aircraft with the F-22 Raptor in 2005.
This showed that even a 2D vertical thrust vectoring could drastically increase the maneuverability of an aircraft not to mention the 3D ones used on the Russian aircrafts.
My question is weren't the USAAF and USNAF considered to upgrade their aircraft to utilize this technology?
I know there were test aircrafts used by NASA like the F-15 STOL/MTD and F-15 ACTIVE Eagle, the F-16 VISTA Falcon and F-18 HARV Hornet demonstrating the possibility of installing such engines/controls in these aircrafts and resulting in enhanced agility!
It would had been interesting to see aircrafts upgraded with such technology:
F-14 Tomcat?
F-15 Eagle (possible)
F-16 Falcon (possible)
F-18 Hornet (possible)
F-20 Tigershark?
F-22 Raptor? (With full 3D vectoring)
A-10 Warthog / Thunderbolt II?
or other aircrafts still in serice in the late 1990's early 2000's?

 

[Emeryc93]

It really depends on what the aircraft can handle. On F-22's the aircraft has a max G factor that would prevent full 3D vectoring. That's the problem with most of these aircraft, it induces more G loads than the aircraft can handle. Most of the time a fighter can get by with stabilators or canards. As to the A-10, thats a high bypass engine and is not suited for any thrust vectoring. The airframe is not meant to handle that kind of action. Thrust vectoring or lack there of is not pertinent for every fighter design, there has to be a purpose, its why its use is so limited. Fighter aircraft are inherently unstable, thrust vectoring can make it beyond the point of control.

 

[sferrin]

It really depends on what the aircraft can handle. On F-22's the aircraft has a max G factor that would prevent full 3D vectoring. That's the problem with most of these aircraft, it induces more G loads than the aircraft can handle. Most of the time a fighter can get by with stabilators or canards. As to the A-10, thats a high bypass engine and is not suited for any thrust vectoring. The airframe is not meant to handle that kind of action. Thrust vectoring or lack there of is not pertinent for every fighter design, there has to be a purpose, its why its use is so limited. Fighter aircraft are inherently unstable, thrust vectoring can make it beyond the point of control.

Uh, you could use 3D TVC on a 2g aircraft if you wanted. All you need to do is keep the vectoring within the aircraft limitations. Now I would agree that if the aircraft wasn't designed for it in the first place you might not be able to use much depending on the aircraft. Did the F-15 ACTIVE, F-16 VISTA, and F-18 HARV need their structures beefed up? All used 3D TVC.

 

[BLACK_MAMBA]

This showed that even a 2D vertical thrust vectoring could drastically increase the maneuverability of an aircraft not to mention the 3D ones used on the Russian aircrafts.

The Russians use 2D thrust vectoring on operational aircraft. Their nozzles pivot in a V shape instead of the "simple" up-down 2D of the Raptor. This gives them the ability create "3D" movement when using two engines but the individual engine only moves 2D. 3D thrust vectoring has only been used on experimental aircraft but not with operational squadrons. Some studies for the ATF program (for the Rockwell ATF proposal I think) also involved V shaped thrust vectored engines.

 

[sferrin]

Thought the latest Su-35 and Su-57 use full 3D not pseudo-3D.

 

[Tzoli]

The new engines of the Su-57 seems to be will be able to utilise full 3D vectoring:

Russia revealed new engine developed to power fifth generation aircraft

The Rostec State Corporation released photographs showing the heavily upgraded version of the AL-31F, that was developed for the Russian Air Force fifth-generation aircraft. The new engine has been named “Izdeliye 30” and developed by NPO Saturn. The “Izdeliye 30” is a 30,000-lb class engine...

defence-blog.com

 

[marauder2048]

Did the F-15 ACTIVE, F-16 VISTA, and F-18 HARV need their structures beefed up?

F-15 ACTIVE had structural mods to accommodate 4,000 lbs of lateral vectoring force and 6,000 pounds of pitch vectoring force.

 

[isayyo2]

Thought the latest Su-35 and Su-57 use full 3D not pseudo-3D.

Su-35BM/S should be full 3d, I think that's one of the reasons they omitted canards from the SU-37. I wonder if the SU-30SM2 will also get it on their new engines?

 

[norseman]

Typhoon can take some seriously brutal manoeuvring, way past what a pilot can endure. The 3DTV development for the EJ200 was also optimised for fuel efficiency with a "smart" adjustment capability to adapt to the optimised outlet angle for any required profile (almost like the smart adaptive suspension's in high end Jaguar cars). Shame that after all that development squeaky tight budgets haven't allowed for the refit (or the various other developments due to the "least level needed" approach in most air forces). Now, EJ27x engines with 3DTV and conformal tanks and the next gen adaptive bus tech for smart quick munitions integration, but all sit on the would be nice to have.....

 

[marauder2048]

e EJ200 was also optimised for fuel efficiency with a "smart" adjustment capability to adapt to the optimised outlet angle for any required profile

That was one of the surprises in F-15 ACTIVE for me: that non-straight flow paths could improve fuel efficiency relative to the baseline.

 

[norseman]

Yip, in F-15 there was some pre-set modes that could be engaged for optimisation, especially on ferry flights with aspects such as air density etc taken as a variable but the current tech allows for adaptive smart vectoring (a degree of AI adaption) per engine to give an optimised approach for all angles, mission profiles etc. I did hear from a friend that some work in this area was also considered for the Rafale but as you can guess, budgets. :-(

My understanding is that the Japanese XF-9 has this tech as a baseline (as well as an enormous increase in electrical generation capability, ie 35-50% above the likes of the F135 per engine)

 

[BLACK_MAMBA]

Thought the latest Su-35 and Su-57 use full 3D not pseudo-3D.

Su-35BM/S should be full 3d, I think that's one of the reasons they committed canards from the SU-37. I wonder if the SU-30SM2 will also get it on their new engines?

I understood advances in electronics resulted in a serious reduction in weight around the front fuselage between the Su-35 prototypes (renamed to 37) and the production 35 hence the canards could be deleted as the extra lift around the front fuselage was no longer needed.

I have yet to see proof of full 3D thrust vectoring on production variants of the 35 but I am gladly corrected. My first picture posted in post #4 is a production 35BM at Paris in 2013 if I recall.

 

[isayyo2]

Thought the latest Su-35 and Su-57 use full 3D not pseudo-3D.

Su-35BM/S should be full 3d, I think that's one of the reasons they committed canards from the SU-37. I wonder if the SU-30SM2 will also get it on their new engines?

I understood advances in electronics resulted in a serious reduction in weight around the front fuselage between the Su-35 prototypes (renamed to 37) and the production 35 hence the canards could be deleted as the extra lift around the front fuselage was no longer needed.

I have yet to see proof of full 3D thrust vectoring on production variants of the 35 but I am gladly corrected. My first picture posted in post #4 is a production 35BM at Paris in 2013 if I recall.

Yep, you’re right!
“The engines are equipped with thrust-vectoring nozzles, which have their rotational axes canted at an angle”
So for sure the Mig-29OVT had 3d, anything else?

 

[Tzoli]

Looks like there was an actual Super Tomcat project with Thrust Vectoring Engines?
at 4:40

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbKOmmmRDT0

 

[isayyo2]

Looks like there was an actual Super Tomcat project with Thrust Vectoring Engines?
at 4:40

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbKOmmmRDT0

It was considered: F-14D #22 - F-14 Tomcat Projects

 

[stealthflanker]

Thought the latest Su-35 and Su-57 use full 3D not pseudo-3D.

Su-35BM/S should be full 3d, I think that's one of the reasons they committed canards from the SU-37. I wonder if the SU-30SM2 will also get it on their new engines?

I understood advances in electronics resulted in a serious reduction in weight around the front fuselage between the Su-35 prototypes (renamed to 37) and the production 35 hence the canards could be deleted as the extra lift around the front fuselage was no longer needed.

I'm curious on the source of this. I do heard the statement of "the T-10M have heavier radar thus needs Canard or something like that" But nowhere i found this in my copy of Famous Russian Aircraft. Or maybe i missed it somehow.

 

[fightingirish]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1535602745666940928

View: https://twitter.com/Fighterman_FFRC/status/1535602745666940928?t=a5hszmRqqX-Ne_aJ-y0Jbw&s=19

 

[GTX]

Oh I do like that: