Uppps ... maybe I missed something, but since when was the flying wing design to feature canards !?? And how could such a design look like ?
Deino
H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Uppps ... maybe I missed something, but since when was the flying wing design to feature canards !?? And how could such a design look like ?
Deino
Deino, do read the whole sentence again.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
In this case Deino I think you may have miss read that.
From my reading their were two bomber concepts. One was super sonic and featured canards.
The other was a true flying wing or blended wing body.
That said having canards on a flying wing is not impossible, from time to time Northrop Grumman's LRS-B concept art has shown a cranked kite flying wing with retractable canards for additional stability.
Quickie
Colonel
It may be people are mistakenly linking together 2 unrelated projects that are not really in competition.
A bomber with canards would suggest a striker fighter jet. Canards are commonly associated with a smaller fighter jet that emphasizes maneuverability, and not with a large long range strategic bomber. So, two entirely different projects filling a different requirement that can't really be in competition.
A bomber with canards would suggest a striker fighter jet. Canards are commonly associated with a smaller fighter jet that emphasizes maneuverability, and not with a large long range strategic bomber. So, two entirely different projects filling a different requirement that can't really be in competition.
Nah, XB-70 and B-1 both feature canards, so it is definitely conceivable for a chinese supersonic strategic bomber proposal to also feature canards
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Not just those two , concord and concordski as well as blackjack all have some form of canards
Canard like surfaces are also not exclusively for enhanced maneuverability, as they mostly are on fighters.
On the B-1 they serve as an "active vibration damping system" I think. To reduce vibrtions that occur during low-altitude, high-speed flight.
On the Tu-144 they were retractable, AFAIK, and were there to improve slow speed handling of that high speed design.
The Concorde, for all I know, really only has some kind of vanes that do something usefull to the airstream in slow-speed, high AoA conditions.
On the B-1 they serve as an "active vibration damping system" I think. To reduce vibrtions that occur during low-altitude, high-speed flight.
On the Tu-144 they were retractable, AFAIK, and were there to improve slow speed handling of that high speed design.
The Concorde, for all I know, really only has some kind of vanes that do something usefull to the airstream in slow-speed, high AoA conditions.
Quickie
Colonel
I meant the canards (just like the horizontal stabilizers) functioning as the main pitch control surfaces as it does for J-10, Rafale (although it also uses the elevons) and J-20. XB-70 and B-1 etc use the horizontal stabilizers/elevators or elevons , not the canards, as the main pitch control surfaces.
Last edited:
Sure, but the point I was making was not about what the role of the canards aboard supersonic strategic bombers was, but simply stating that it is conceivable for supersonic strategic bombers to have them and that canards are not necessarily only expected on fighter jets.
In other words, based on the rumour's limited information about the supersonic canard design losing to the flying wing, it's prudent to envision the role of the canard to likely be more similar in role to the canards of large supersonic bomber aircraft like XB-70, B-1B or even a supersonic airliner like Tu-144, than what is present on fighter jets... which is just a long way of saying, canards on supersonic bomber aircraft are a thing.
So there's no reason to think the canard-delta supersonic bomber was a smaller design, and thus no reason to consider the idea that it was not in competition with (and subsequently lost to) the flying wing for the strategic bomber project.