Chinese UCAV/CCA/flying wing drones (ISR, A2A, A2G)

ACuriousPLAFan said:

I would second @Blitzo here.

And "... the advancement of Chinese industry in the years in between..." does not mean that Chinese engineers won't need consiserable number of years to figure out and settle on everything needed for building and operating such a massive unmanned flying wing aircraft, especially given how China has no prior experience in designing, building, and operating full-scale flying-wing aircrafts and had to start from scratch (unlike the US, which already began efforts all the way back in the 1970s).

If anything, the development efforts on technologies of similar scale and complexity often take many years, if not decades. You think that the work on the J-20 only started in the 2000s? No, it started way back in the early 1990s, if not in the late 1980s. The same goes for the J-36 and J-XDS/50 - The work started back in the early 2010s, if not in the late 2000s.

Click to expand...

I don't think you are getting my point, I'm simply trying to warn against people putting a direct comparison between whatever is depicted in the papers to WZ-X and saying WZ-X must have the exact same design for intakes, engine etc.

Also, it really depends on what you can consider as "pre-research" as one can argue that as every plane takes experience and designs tested in previous generation of aircraft and hence pre research for any plane built after dates back to the original Wright flyer. AFAIK, J-20 as an actual projected intended to produce a functional aircraft was only started in the mid 2000s with pre-research for next generation of aircraft going back to the 90s. Now going back to my point, if you were going to dig up some research from the pre-research era for next generation fighter and say J-20 is going to look exactly like this, have the exact subsystem as is depicted it or have the exact specs in the paper would be rather disingenuous wouldn't it? Anyways my point is that the papers should be only used as a rough reference only.

Tomboy said:

I don't think you are getting my point, I'm simply trying to warn against people putting a direct comparison between whatever is depicted in the papers to WZ-X and saying WZ-X must have the exact same design for intakes, engine etc.

Also, it really depends on what you can consider as "pre-research" as one can argue that as every plane takes experience and designs tested in previous generation of aircraft and hence pre research for any plane built after dates back to the original Wright flyer. AFAIK, J-20 as an actual projected intended to produce a functional aircraft was only started in the mid 2000s with pre-research for next generation of aircraft going back to the 90s. Now going back to my point, if you were going to dig up some research from the pre-research era for next generation fighter and say J-20 is going to look exactly like this or have the exact subsystem as depicted it would be rather disingenuous wouldn't it?

Click to expand...

And you think the WZ-X doesn't need any pre-research work on the concepts, working principles and technicalities before actually starting the development work, whether those works eventually contributed to the final efforts on the WZ-X or not?

On the other hand, I should be the one asking this: What makes you even think that the alleged model of WZ-X is actually depicting the exact same details as the real thing, let alone outright deducing that it has only one engine?

ACuriousPLAFan said:

And you think the WZ-X doesn't need any pre-research work on the concepts, working principles and technicalities before actually starting the development work, whether those works eventually contributed to the final efforts on the WZ-X or not?

Click to expand...

Again, not my point. Read my post again. I was simply trying to say not to take preliminary research as final specs or design.

ACuriousPLAFan said:

On the other hand, I should be the one asking this: What makes you even think that the alleged model of WZ-X is actually depicting the exact same details as the real thing, let alone outright deducing that it has only one engine?

Click to expand...

Is the poster not considered credible around here? His post is obviously hinting that they are related but, yes you are right, I was perhaps to fast on the conclusion of it being single engined. I do apologize for that here.

Tomboy said:

Again, not my point. Read my post again. I was simply trying to say not to take preliminary research as final specs or design.

Is the poster not considered credible around here? His post is obviously hinting that they are related but, yes you are right, I was perhaps to fast on the conclusion of it being single engined. I do apologize for that here.

Click to expand...

Alright.

Multiple papers and press coverage point to use of active vibration suppression and other incremental measures to allow flying wing aircraft like H-20 to fly >60% faster​

Multiple academic papers have recently been published on the use of active vibration suppression in flying wing aircraft as a means to overcome airflow vibrations, rigid-elastic coupling, at high speeds. In an with SCMP, researchers from the Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Beijing Institute of Technology described how their work could lead to 62.5% speed increases, and were optimistic that flying wings could even break the sound barrier. Since the 1930s when the flying wing shape first came into popularity, vibration at speed has always been one of a number of limiting factors. have recently been making strides in dampening vibrations using a series of corpus-wide sensors, dampers, and always-on AI monitoring systems. The system is roughly analogous how noise cancelling headphones mute sound by cancelling sound waves before they enter the ear. The SCMP article title insinuated that the tech might be used in future Chinese bombers, possibly implying the H-20.


Below is the specific research referenced in the SCMP article:

• Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The same team from Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics has previously worked on a number of other incremental measures to overcome rigid-elastic coupling and achieve faster speeds for flying wing aircraft. Findings included slightly shifting aircraft center of gravity and testing alternative structural configurations to change torsion forces. Below are a small selection of their recent work:

• Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
• Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
• Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!