J-15 carrier fighter thread

[prior]

Looks like Mig 1.44

 

[bd popeye]

I would say this CG is too fat, and the air intake is too small for twin engines.

The first time I saw that CG was in 2001. It came along with some other carrier CG drawings.

And after looking for 20 minutes I cannot find those pictures. One was an PLAN copy of an S-3 Viking.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Looks like Mig 1.44

NYET!, comrade!

 

[Quickie]

Unfortunately, the above design can't be taken seriously. Horizontal stabilizers with 2 big canards? No way this is going to work.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Unfortunately, the above design can't be taken seriously. Horizontal stabilizers with 2 big canards? No way this is going to work.

I wouldn't say it wouldn't work, since our F-15 with canards and OVT was also "very busy", but I would imagine it would be very draggy, especially once you began to hang all that stuff out in the breeze, but it would likely have pitch transitions that would snap your neck, on the order of stopping in midair, cartoon like?????LOL

 

[Air Force Brat]

Looks like Mig 1.44

you need to have another look at the MIG 1.42/1.44, I dare say you might find something that bears a strong resemblance, just not this little bird, LOL.......

 

[Quickie]

I wouldn't say it wouldn't work, since our F-15 with canards and OVT was also "very busy", but I would imagine it would be very draggy, especially once you began to hang all that stuff out in the breeze, but it would likely have pitch transitions that would snap your neck, on the order of stopping in midair, cartoon like?????LOL

Still, there are glaring differences. Like the J-15, the F-15 test aircraft has close coupled canards, as opposed to the out-of-position canards of the fan art design, which are even bigger than its horizontal stabilizers.

 

[plawolf]

Unfortunately, the above design can't be taken seriously. Horizontal stabilizers with 2 big canards? No way this is going to work.

Those ain't horizontal stabilisers, those are just the canted vertical stabilisers as seen from above. From the side view, you have the streak fins CAC fighters typically have.

Other than the too small intake, it looks to be fine.

 

[Quickie]

Those ain't horizontal stabilisers, those are just the canted vertical stabilisers as seen from above. From the side view, you have the streak fins CAC fighters typically have.

Other than the too small intake, it looks to be fine.

Then, the design would be even more unflyable. The centre of lift is way too in front.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Then, the design would be even more unflyable. The centre of lift is way too in front.

exactly, it just doesn't look right, although in one view, it does appear that below the canted verts, there does seem to be two horizontal stabilizers canted very steeply down, (lots of anhedral) like an F-4 Phantom. Not sure they are there??? and if they are, they could even be fixed??????? but just lots of things that make this aircraft appear not very realistic???

wolfie calls them (strakes) which even if fixed would carry some load and move the center of lift aft,,,, the V tailed bonanza had an aftermarket kit to retrofit strakes to stop it from wallowing in turbulence, and impart more directional stability-----( the real weakness of v tailed or tailless aircraft)...... this aircraft does appear to have strakes below the vertical stabs, kind-of like an arrow????