J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

[Schwerter_]

But the ultimate goal is not to reduce the drag. It's like I want to buy a hand drill. But what I really want to buy is not the hand drill, what I really want to buy is a hole which can be made by the drill. It is the same case here, reducing the drag isn't directly contributing to win, increasing range does. Same thing for super cruise, super cruise does dot increase the top speed, but it saves fuel at super sonic speed, thus increase range at super sonic speed.

idk man, as I said the paper stated that the main purpose of changing the hump design is to reduce drag and meet the requirements on transsonic acceleration, if you have evidence that proves the main design purpose of said hump is to increase range instead of what's EXPLICITLY stated in the paper, maybe you would be so kind as to share them?

 

[by78]

But why do they want to improve the aerodynamic? It may increase the top speed by some degree, but definitely not going to improve it fundamentally. So the primary goal is still to improve the fuel economy. They are definitely not doing it for saving money, so it is mainly for increasing range of the jet, which is the same objective of increasing fuel capacity. To sum up, they added the hump to increase the range, at the cost of physical rearward visibility.

Eh, not so fast. The reshaped canopy area is to reduce transonic drag, and in doing so, the fighter will have improved transonic maneuverability, which is essential for an air superiority fighter. In other words, range is not the only consideration in optimizing the canopy area, much less the primary consideration. In fact, the original paper doesn't even mention range or max speed when talking about the reshaped canopy; the one parameter it did explicitly mention, however, was acceleration.

 

[latenlazy]

It’s worth noting that drag reduction helps *every* flight parameter. How you choose to bank in the energy advantage from drag reduction is as much a function of operation as it is design.

 

[secretprojects]

It’s worth noting that drag reduction helps *every* flight parameter. How you choose to bank in the energy advantage from drag reduction is as much a function of operation as it is design.

Drag reduction at transonic speed doesn't help you fly faster at supersonic or economic cruise speed.

 

[Schwerter_]

Drag reduction at transonic speed doesn't help you fly faster at supersonic or economic cruise speed.

If you'd be so kind as to take a look at the drag reduction curve in the paper before posting, you would notice that it is titled "Profits of drag reduction for SUPERSONIC FLOWS"

 

[taxiya]

Why are there so many people who doesn't read and study before opening their mouth?

 

[taxiya]

This is the drag reduction gain over the full speed range. There is reduction gain through the whole range, the greatest gain is around transonic region. The gain kept very high after Ma 1.

 

[Atomicfrog]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1465250093796184065

View attachment 79526

Lots of space for fuel behind the cockpit !

 

[Deino]

Was this already posted?

 

[Richard Santos]

What is the light color panel on the side of the intake? Is that a cheek mounted radar?