The cranked leading edge of the blended wing body was first popularized in modern designs by the x-47. If memory serves, that was ultimately canceled in part due to the RCS not being as low as some other UCAV designs. There were also two distinct peaks in frontal aspect RCS as you might expect.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
The cranked leading edge of the blended wing body was first popularized in modern designs by the x-47. If memory serves, that was ultimately canceled in part due to the RCS not being as low as some other UCAV designs. There were also two distinct peaks in frontal aspect RCS as you might expect.
It should be noted that the paper discusses the "typical mission profile", which is to achieve a combat radius of 4500km with a 17t deployable payload (missile), meaning that the maximum weapon payload of the aircraft is likely to be more than 17t. At the same time, you will find that the so-called design MTOW= empty weight + 17t weapon payload + 72t fuel mass. Considering the engine that requires a thrust of 114.22KN, the actual MTOW of this aircraft is likely to be larger than 168t.To provide some context for the academic paper.
According to the original poster , roughly translated:
1. The general stats of the warplane mentioned in the paper (168-ton designed MTOW, 78.5-ton empty weight, 72.2-ton fuel weight, 17-ton+0.2-ton payload capacity with a combat radius of 4500 kilometers) looks to be close/roughly similar to that of the B-2 Spirit strategic bomber of the USAF.
2. The required bench thrust given in the paper is 114.22kN, but the warplane seems to already have a new, target engine (in the pipeline?).
3. According to the paper, the original engines slated for the warplane has a cruising fuel consumption rate of 0.7kg/(kgf·h), and the cruising fuel consumption rate of D-30KP-2/WS-18 officially given by Saturn NPO is 0.705kg/(kgf·h). Both engine models seem to be comparable to one another.
4. The new, target engines meant to replace the original engines are stated to have a cruising fuel consumption rate of 0.0679kg/(N·h), which is equal to 0.665kg/(kgf·h).
Possible objectives of the academic paper in question:
1. The warplane was to be powered by D-30KP-2/WS-18 at the beginning of the design, and they have already considered to replace them with new, target engines later on.
2. The paper discusses the methods of determining the performance parameters of the new, target engines without significantly altering the structure (of the warplane).
3. In fact, one major contribution of the paper is to explore the avenue of changing the engines without redesigning/reconfiguring the inlets and nozzles of the warplane.
Of course, we won't know whether said warplane subject in this academic paper is fictitious (for concept evaluation purposes only) or real (meant to represent actual plans to a certain degree).
The stats for the engine thrust and MTOW look rather... off, somehow.