Aerodynamics thread

[MiG-29]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

Once again, you are going off tangent with HMS which is totally irrelevant to the effectiveness of TVC. In the particular exercise between F-22 and USAF aircraft, as well as the Red Flag exercise involving Su-30MKI, the aircraft with TVC lost to aircraft without HMS. That is a fact.

Look your fantasy stems simply because no Chinese jet has TVC nozzles so far.

Su-30MKI will beat the F-15 and F-16 any time, the USAF pilot said once they master the technology the Su-30MKI will beat the F-16 and F-15 it was not the TVC nozzles fault but the unexperience of the Indian pilots.


You won`t change the fact Su-35, T-50 or F-22 have TVC nozzles.

Does HMS suffice to kill a F-22, yes they are good enough.

But F-22 lacks HMS and its missiles are obsolete compared to IRIS-T


you are simply denying that the German pilot said our aircraft is as good as the F-22.

But the german does not say F-22 lacks HMS and has obsolete AIM-9Ms, pretty much what England flew in 1982 against Argentina.


How good are TVC nozzles?

Pretty much very good.

 

[Engineer]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

Look your fantasy stems simply because no Chinese jet has TVC nozzles so far.

Look, the J-20 uses the canard layout. It is not handicap by the limitations of a tailplane thus has no need of TVC.

The issue with you is you are preoccupied with putting down the J-20. It has been your whole mean of existence on this forum. When you see canard on J-20, you claimed canard is bad. When you see DSI on J-20, you claimed DSI is bad. When you see side intake on the J-20, you claimed side intake is bad. J-20 has internal weapon bay, and you claimed that is bad. You even claimed stealth shaping is bad, even though it also exists on the F-22. Your obsession with TVC is simply a continuation of that pattern. You form your arguments based on emotion and not reality. Since your arguments are not found in reality, they are true fantasies.

Su-30MKI will beat the F-15 and F-16 any time, the USAF pilot said once they master the technology the Su-30MKI will beat the F-16 and F-15 it was not the TVC nozzles fault but the un-experience of the Indain pilots.

You won`t change the fact Su-35, T-50 or F-22 have TVC nozzles.

You won't change the fact that engaging TVC caused the defeat of the Su-30MKI pilot in the Red Flag exercise.

Does HMS suffice to kill a F-22, yes they are good enough.

But F-22 lacks HMS and its missiles are obsolte compared to IRIS-T

HMS is irrelevant as it doesn't affect the performance of TVC.

you are simply denying that the German pilot said our aircraft is as good as the F-22.

But the german does not say F-22 lacks HMS and has obsolete AIM-9Ms, pretty much what England flew in 1982 against Argentina.

You are inventing arguments for yourself to argue against, as I have made no reference to German pilot in my previous posts. What you did is a fallacy known as

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

How good is TVC nozzles?

Pretty much very good.

It is pretty good for the opponent. An aircraft with TVC is an easy kill as soon as TVC caused that aircraft to go post-stall.

 

[MiG-29]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

Look, the J-20 uses the canard layout. It is not handicap by the limitations of a tailplane thus has no need of TVC.







It is pretty good for the opponent. An aircraft with TVC is an easy kill as soon as TVC caused that aircraft to go post-stall.

Too much fantasy of your sight, do you know Eurofighter has a 25 degrees AoA limit?
while F-35 has 50 degrees of AoA.

Pretty much you live in fantasy.

For J-20 to beat T-50 or F-22 will need either one of these technologies.

TVC nozzles or HMS.

Canards are not what you think are just a control surface no more is not magic.


TVC allows you to add an extra vector, a none aerodynamic vector.
Post stall does help you to increase the envelope the aircraft can use and increase safety and carefree handling.

You can live in your fantasies.


But modern high performance fifth generation fighters use TVC nozzles for a reason.

F-35 is not high performance but a average fighter that lacks supercruise, supermaneouvrability and only includes average agility in the class of F-18 or F-16 and uses HMS and AIM-9Xs to beat a Su-35S type threat.

Can F-35 beat Su-35S?

yes it can as long as the Su-35 does not see it.
can F-35 beat the super agile Su-35 in WVR?
yes with HMS and EODAS and a AIM-9X it can beat a Eurofighter or a Su-35.


China can go for an EODAS type system and skip the TVC nozzles all togather, but it won`t change TVC also are useful for drag reduction and stealth enhancement.

For such a reason F-22 still has TVC nozzles.

 

[Engineer]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

Too much fantasy of your sight, do you know Eurofighter has a 25 degrees AoA limit?
while F-35 has 50 degrees of AoA.

Pretty much you live in fantasy.

For J-20 to beat T-50 or F-22 will need either one of these technologies.

TVC nozzles or HMS.

Canards are not what you think are just a control surface no more is not magic.

Canard is not just a control surface, but a lifting surface providing extra lift which aids in turning. On top of that, canard also produces vortex that increase lift even more at high AoA. Opposite to what you have asserted, thrust vectoring is the pure control here since TVC doesn't provide aerodynamics lift. So, right off the bat we already see you are spouting out nothing but fantasies concerning canard and TVC. Since canard adds lift in turning while TVC doesn't, J-20 is perfectly capable in out maneuvering T-50. HMS doesn't aid in maneuverability, and is irrelevant in this discussion.

TVC allows you to add an extra vector, a none aerodynamic vector.

You don't even know what "vector" means, but in your mind the word sounds technical so you added it into your statement. Since sounding good is all in your mind and has nothing to do with reality, your statement is just another fantasy.

Post stall does help you to increase the envelope the aircraft can use and increase safety and carefree handling.

You can live in your fantasies.

Carefree handling comes from a good flight control software that maintains the aircraft in the most optimal flight condition in addition to prevent the aircraft from entering an adverse condition. Post-stall capability, by definition, would require the AoA protection in the flight control software to be removed. In other words, the pilot would constantly have to check whether he is maneuvering too hard so as to avoid a stall. This is the opposite of carefree handling. Under a high pressure environment such as that of a dog fight, removing such a protection actually decreases safety. Once again, by claiming the opposite of reality you are living in a fantasy.

The flight envelope you referred to is the post-stall regime, which has been shown not to be useful in an actual dog fight. Keep on dreaming that post-stall matters; your dream won't change the reality.

But modern high performance fifth generation fighters use TVC nozzles for a reason.

F-35 is not high performance but a average fighter that lacks supercruise, supermaneouvrability and only includes average agility in the class of F-18 or F-16 and uses HMS and AIM-9Xs to beat a Su-35S type threat.

Can F-35 beat Su-35S?

yes it can as long as the Su-35 does not see it.
can F-35 beat the super agile Su-35 in WVR?
yes with HMS and EODAS and a AIM-9X it can beat a Eurofighter or a Su-35.

HMS does not support your fantasies in TVC in anyway.

China can go for an EODAS type system and skip the TVC nozzles all togather, but it won`t change TVC also are useful for drag reduction and stealth enhancement.

For such a reason F-22 still has TVC nozzles.

With or without EODAS or HMS, the J-20 is a very maneuverable plane already due to the layout utilizing canard, LERX, and body-lift. So, J-20 doesn't need TVC, especially so without being handicapped by drag of a tailplane. The argument on stealth enhancement is founded upon another fantasy of yours where you believe flight controls deflect widely during flight. Those controls may deflect widely during maneuvering, but maneuver means the aircraft has already been spotted, and talk of stealth is completely meaningless when the aircraft is seen.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

You are very welcome. I am glad you finally come to the realization that going post-stall with TVC doesn't help in a dog fight.

At the end of the day, it is aerodynamics and engine power that gives F-22 the edge. Even without TVC, the F-22 will still be 80% more maneuverable than an F-15.

Thank you my brother, if you will check me in my previous posts, I have always maintained--since you changed my mind, that going post-stall is a loser, and TVC will NOT make up for poor energy management. To further give credit where it is due, it was your referencing some J-20 material--from Dr. Song and another that opened my eyes to the brilliance of the J-20s canards, and its overall design, one of the reasons that I always maintain that the J-20 is a very smart aeroplane. Now I am bowing, deeply and humbly, still smiling my friend, but because we are Friends, Happy New Year brother, and happy Valentines day,, I hope you have someone special to share it with! Brat

 

[Air Force Brat]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

Once again, you are going off tangent with HMS which is totally irrelevant to the effectiveness of TVC. In the particular exercise between F-22 and USAF aircraft, as well as the Red Flag exercise involving Su-30MKI, the aircraft with TVC lost to aircraft without HMS. That is a fact.

Yes, there he goes, he's in full burner, bye Mig, and Happy New Year to you as well brother! Brat

 

[MiG-29]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

Canard is not just a control surface, but a lifting surface providing extra lift which aids in turning. On top of that, canard also produces vortex that increase lift even more at high AoA. Opposite to what you have asserted, thrust vectoring is the pure control here since TVC doesn't provide aerodynamics lift. .

hahaha

Look first study physics, any force is a vector, TVC nozzles is another vector, lift is a vector, we call that vector lift because it is the product of air flows, but TVC nozzles is also air flow hahahaha.

we call it lift just because its direction is opposite to the gravity, with thrust vectoring you are aiding the wing`s lift and that is what the F-22 does, that is the reason the turn and roll rates are increased.
To put it in few words study what is sum of vectors and what is the resultant vector then you will undestand why is called thrust Vectoring hahaha.

Canard and tailplanes are airfoils and F-22 is longitudinally instable so the lift generated by the tailplane reduces the tendency to pitch up, actually is not killing lift as a stable design.

The tailplane by generating lift is balancing the pitch up tendency of the longitudinally unstable F-22.

Why? well simple F-22 has a pitch up nose tendency that is balanced by the lift of the tailplane.

 

[Engineer]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

hahaha

Look first study physics, any force is a vector, TVC nozzles is another vector, lift is a vector, we call that vector lift because it is the product of air flows, but TVC nozzles is also air flow hahahaha.

we call it lift just because its direction is opposite to the gravity, with thrust vectoring you are aiding the wing`s lift and that is what the F-22 does, that is the reason the turn and roll rates are increased.
To put it in few words study what is sum of vectors and what is the resultant vector then you will undestand why is called thrust Vectoring hahaha.

From your description it is obvious you are so deep in fantasy and have no idea about real world physics. Firstly, go and repeat first year Algebra before you start lecturing others about vector. Specifically, learn what is a component because the vectoring in TVC is related to that. The vectoring in thrust vectoring has nothing to do with thrust being another vector to lift, since a regular engine also produces thrust in a different direction to lift, LMAO! Secondly, thrust vectoring doesn't add lift unless it is used in conjunction with canard as the F-15 S/MTD did. Without canard, all TVC can do is increase AoA when aerodynamic means of doing so failed. However, no matter how TVC is able to increase AoA, the airframe cannot produce anymore lift than c[sub]l,max[/sub] because adding or decreasing AoA both reduces lift. It is simple flight dynamics.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Pilots who believe your fantasy get caught in a stall and go down in simulated dog fight,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. You are not an USAF pilot, so you have no credibility.

Canard and tailplanes are airfoils and F-22 is longitudinally instable so the lift generated by the tailplane reduces the tendency to pitch up, actually is not killing lift as a stable design.

The tailplane by generating lift is balancing the pitch up tendency of the longitudinally unstable F-22.

Why? well simple F-22 has a pitch up nose tendency that is balanced by the lift of the tailplane.

When an aircraft tries to out maneuver an opponent, the plane is near maximum AoA. At such high AoA, the tailplane pushes the tail down to maintain high pitch angle which doesn't add to lift. Pushing down means killing lift. What's more, the aerodynamic center shifts backward as an aircraft goes from subsonic to supersonic speed. In a traditional layout, this means the aircraft goes from unstable at subsonic speed to stable at supersonic speed. The tailplane goes from lift generating to lift killing through this transition. On the other hand, a canard always create lift. The only time it doesn't is when a pitch down moment is needed. Thus a canard aircraft is not handicapped by a tailplane thus does not need TVC. It is one reason why there is not a single owner of Eurofighter who uses TVN.

 

[jobjed]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

hahaha

with thrust vectoring you are aiding the wing`s lift

No you're not. On the topic of aiding the wing's lift, the tailplane and/or canards can do whatever a TVC can in aiding lift. TVC offers no additional benefits in increasing wing lift. The only benefit of TVC is manoeuverability, not lift.

 

[MiG-29]

Re: J-20 The New Generation Fighter Thread IV

. The tailplane goes from lift generating to lift killing through this transition. On the other hand, a canard always create lift. The only time it doesn't is when a pitch down moment is needed. Thus a canard aircraft is not handicapped by a tailplane thus does not need TVC. It is one reason why there is not a single owner of Eurofighter who uses TVN.

Look in your fantasy world lift is not a vector, but it is it has a direction and a magnitude, thrust has on regular jets another direction. thrust vectoring is changing the direction of the thrust vector, thus it is called thrust vectoring.

Lift and thrust are vectors, and obviously they add or rest in a vector resultant.


So go an read physics, since thrust vectoring means changing the thrust vector direction and in with that you can help the lift vector, as such F-22 or any jet with thrust vectoring increases turn rates or roll rates


By the way, Su-27 has tailplanes and S-47 has tailplanes, and SU-35 has tailplanes, now show me a video of any of your canard delta aircraft doing post stall without thrust vectoring?


there are not pure blah blah blah blah blah of your part


X-31 has thrust vectoring.


The reality is jets need thrust vectoring
By the way learn this SR-71 uses the chines to keep lateral stability, now Su-27 uses LERXes to do the same, they also increase lateral stability for such a reason they can go 120 degrees


A water tunnel flow visualization investigation was performed into the high angle of
attach aerodynamics of a 2% scale model of the F/A-18 fighter aircraft. The main focus
of this study was the effect of pitch rate on the development and bursting of vortices
generated fran the leading edge extensions in the high angle of attack range with and without yaw. Results of this investigation indicate that that the vortex bursting point
(relative to the static case) moves rearward with increasing pitch-up motion and forward
with increasing pitch-down motion. For the same pitch rate, vortex bursting was found to
occur earlier for the pitch-down motion than for the pitch-up motion, implying aerodynamic
hysteresis effects.


The advantage of the hybrid planform over the
conventional wing is due to the LEX induced vortex flow which increases in strength with
increasing angle of attack. The stable vortex flow creates an area of high negative
pressure on the wing upper surface which increases lift and delays separation of laminar
flow in the basic planform.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!