That would be great if they have 10 stealthy "prototypes" in testing.
H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
That would be great if they have 10 stealthy "prototypes" in testing.
totally unrealistic
IMHO, it'll be long after the US release the IOC version of the B-21. China doesn't have any pressing need to unveil the H-20 as they already have a few projects in the public eye (i.e. carrier, J-35, J-15T, etc...).
Given that the H-20 will most likely be subsonic, I wonder even without afterburner, they will have to re-engineer the WS-10/WS-15 to optimize for subsonic flight?
by78
General
An that might have something to do with the H-20, but it could equally apply to future strike UCAVs, so sharing it here just in case. The paper deals with the turbulent flows experienced by open weapons bays during flight. Of interest, the study paid special attention to tandem cavities/weapons bays, calling it an important arrangement for future weapons bay design. The paper focuses on simulating airflows around open tandem bays when a hypothetical airframe is flying at Mach 0.85. The tandem bays each has a length-to-depth (L/D) ratio of 3.5, which are obtained by dividing a longer bay (L/D ratio of 7) in half with a metal plate.
Well, I think the paper regards "tandem weapon's bay" as an alternative worth to investigate, rather than something better if that is what you meant to say by "Of interest, the study paid special attention to tandem cavities/weapons bays, calling it an important arrangement for future weapons bay design."An that might have something to do with the H-20, but it could equally apply to future strike UCAVs, so sharing it here just in case. The paper deals with the turbulent flows experienced by open weapons bays during flight. Of interest, the study paid special attention to tandem cavities/weapons bays, calling it an important arrangement for future weapons bay design. The paper focuses on simulating airflows around open tandem bays when a hypothetical airframe is flying at Mach 0.85. The tandem bays each has a length-to-depth (L/D) ratio of 3.5, which are obtained by dividing a longer bay (L/D ratio of 7) in half with a metal plate.
The article states "采用跨声速的串联空腔布局形式是未来武器 舱设计的一个潜在特点［5］". Tandem bay is a potential choice and worth to study. The reference 5 is study from UK
Abstract
An experimental study was conducted to analyse the pressure distribution along the floor of a cavity, with and without the presence of an upstream tandem cavity, at a constant freestream Mach number of about 0-911. Measurements were made for single cavities and the results compared with those obtained in the presence of an upstream tandem cavity. This comparison was made over a wide range of geometries, covering open to closed classes of cavities with both identical and different dimensions for the two cavities. The effect of the spacing between the two cavities was also studied. The downstream cavity is shown to be significantly affected by the presence of an upstream cavity, with both the overall net static pressure and its gradient being affected, dependent upon the class of cavity geometry and spacing under consideration.From the abstract, we can see that they are investigating the impact of the airflow from the front bay to the aft bay. It does not say any advantage of tandem bay. I highly suspect that this study is driven by BAE Tempest which is very likely a tandem layout by looking at the mock-up.
The Chinese paper's conclusion is that the front bay acts as a typical L/D=3.5 bay, the aft bay is affected by the front bay. But the paper does not elaborate on whether the impact is good or bad or nutural.
