given the importance of low vis for 5th gen jet, esp upfront....highly doubt they had never explored such option
China Flanker Thread II
- Thread starter sumdud
- Start date
- Status
Where do you get this ridiculous notion from?
If they are able to build their own carrier version with canards, why would being Russian-designed preclude having a full understanding of the fuselage? Not only this, but now SAC (or any Chinese company) has access to computer simulation tools that didn’t exist in the 80’s USSR.
Don’t just post your random thoughts.
Seriously stop with this DSI nonsense. The very simple reason why aircrafts such as F-22, Su-57 and Flanker series aren't equipped with it is that their top speed is well over Mach 2.0 (designed or real).
Airflow over this speed still needs specific mechanics to be dealt with.
Airflow over this speed still needs specific mechanics to be dealt with.
The idea that DSI=Mach 2.0 speed limit is a myth. The DSI bump designed for the F-16 test plane was limited to below mach 2.0, but that limit is *design specific*. Nothing physically prohibits an inlet-bump designed for a speed beyond mach 2.0.
Yes it is dependent on the region of optimization. That said, we’ve gone way off topic for several pages by now.
Ok guys ... @siegecrossbow already noted it, You are far off topic!
Su-57, why Russians don't use DSI intakes and so on is off topic ... if you want to continue this discussion, please go ahead in the Aerodynamics thread, but here please stop.
Su-57, why Russians don't use DSI intakes and so on is off topic ... if you want to continue this discussion, please go ahead in the Aerodynamics thread, but here please stop.
- Status