China Flanker Thread II
- Thread starter sumdud
- Start date
- Status
Engineer
Major
Engineer
Major
Actually, in the publicly available paper, Dr. Song never mentioned applying thrust vectoring to the J-20. The mentioning of thrust vectoring is used to lead the point that aerodynamic configuration is the most important. This is the only paragraph where thrust vectoring is mentioned:
Perhaps it is due to the focus of that paper being on aerodynamics, but thrust vectoring was never considered as a mechanism to boost the performance of the aircraft in the paper.
back issue of air international ,USAF conducted mock dogfight between F-22 and F-15C,during the mock air combat, USAF discover aside from F-22 TVC allow the aircraft greater manuevility over F-15C,other tactical advantage was F-22's supercruise.
In one instant,One F-15's pilot simple unable get simulated gun killed against F-22 flying sypercruise.send a radio urging the F-22 hold steady so he can get a "gun kill"!!!!
In one instant,One F-15's pilot simple unable get simulated gun killed against F-22 flying sypercruise.send a radio urging the F-22 hold steady so he can get a "gun kill"!!!!
TVC do not allow supercruise.. Greater thrust allows. And F-15C vs F-22?? Are you kidding me? F-15C even has a worse agility against Flanker. Not to mention against F-22. What are you trying to prove?
Quickie
Colonel
As in all your previous post, you're wrong on so many counts with all your pseudo aerodynamics theory.
If T/W ratio and TVC is all the matters, why don't they put a more powerful engine and TVC on the F-15? It should then be able to beat all the whole range of modern fighters like the Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen in maneouvrebility and turn rates.
I don't like the way you simply accuse the people here of being in a fantasy, believing in myth and other such accusations - I think there're forum rules forbidding this sort of thing.
Last edited:
get real here Jr. the canard is your primary pitch control, and you will be deflecting it to manuever your aircraft, and YES it will increase YOUR radar cross section when you do. Mr Mig makes some valid points, he also indulges in flights of fantasy as do several other members?
Last edited by a moderator:
MiG-29
Banned Idiot
i am not wrong, simply because i have seen graphs of YF-22 with and without TVC nozzles and how it did compare with F-16 and F-15 in roll and pitch rate.
see
this proves who is talking just for talking
I have also seen graphs of turn rate versus lift coefficient and how wing loading and thrust affect it, in fact i have seen equations that prove i am right
You just defend your self but where is the proof?
The effect of wing maximum lift coefficient is inverse to that of wing loading; that is, increasing the maximum lift coefficient acts in the same way as reducing the wing loading. For example, increasing the maximum lift coefficient from 0.7 to 1.4 would shift the curve for a wing loading of 100 pounds per square foot to the exact position as that occupied by the curve for a wing loading of 50 pounds per square foot and a maximum lift coefficient of 0.7. Two other important aircraft physical parameters may also limit turning performance. First, at a given speed and altitude, the aircraft drag increases rapidly with lift coefficient; as a consequence, the available thrust may not be sufficient to balance the drag at some load factors that the wing can sustain. In this case the aircraft loses altitude in the turn, an undesirable situation in combat. As for maximum lift coefficient, the drag rise with increasing lift depends upon the wing design and Mach number, as well as upon the added drag required to trim the aircraft at high lift coefficients. [/B]
i challenge you provide a document TVC does not improve turn rate, thrust, range stealth.
You won`t find it
In fact all these resposes is just to avoid a reality, at this moment China has not thrust vectoring capable fighters.
Are they willing to design them? of course yes they will.
You can not understand things simple like that F-22 is highly dependant on TVC nozzles.
What you can not understand is simply Eurofighter was armed with HMS and F-22 has not HMS.
And yes HMS are equalizers if you do not have TVC nozzles.
and yes you are wrong, China knows TVC nozzles are enhancers
J-11s or J-20 with TVC nozzles will improve performance a great deal
but good thrust and low drag increases turn rate so eliminate external weapons and you add better turn rates
Last edited:
MiG-29
Banned Idiot
One benefit obtainable from a control-canard is avoidance of pitch-up. An all-moving canard capable of a significant nose-down deflection will protect against pitch-up. Control canards have poor stealth characteristics, because they present large moving surfaces forward of the wing.
+
F-22 test pilot Paul Metz:
"-All aircraft experience a loss of control effectiveness at supersonic speeds. To generate the same maneuver supersonically as subsonically, the controls must be deflected further. This, in turn, results in a big increase in supersonic trim drag and a subsequent loss in acceleration and turn performance-"
can you understand now why Su-35 has now no canards and TVC nozzles to reduce tailplane deflection?
If China has no 117 equivalent the Su-35 can provide an engine for J-11B and J-20
Last edited by a moderator:
Er... no... I mean... 117 is a good engine, and yes, China might not have an equivalent engine as of now. But it would be pretty dumb for China to buy 35 to 40 Su-35 fighters just for their engine. If Russia would sell the engine just by itself, then maybe China would get those engine.
China did not buy the Su-35 (as of now) is in my opinion, they already have the J-11/ J-11B and soon the J-16, either way you look at it... be it inferior or weaker or whatever as compared to the Su-35 (on paper) China would not jeopadise their own domestic projects to have foreign system that cannot use the Chinese weaponries, it is as you can see, politically incorrect, and business wise it was pretty dumb.
Plus, the Chinese's own J-20 was so far within schedule and so by 2018, it should be certified for mass production, so the Su-35 doesn't really come in.
As for the Chinese homegrown engines namely the WS-15 or whatever, as of now, we are unclear of their status and do these engines has TVC or whatever.
Mr Mig 29, I am sure you are very very very proud of the Russian industry and that you have made excellent point both technically and with good references to it. But people here are not buying your ideas for various of reasons, from political to business to national pride... lets forget it and get on with the Chinese Flankers, instead of coming up with F-22 being superior, F-35, and Su-35 and whatever, it doesn't matter. As long as the Chinese didn't announce their intention to purchase or had purchased, all things are just hearsay (other than the technical aspect) and you can choose what you want to believe, while others can choose what they wanted to believe, and instead of making this place more heated up, please let things cool abit, okay?
- Status