J-XX Fighter Aircraft
- Thread starter FriedRiceNSpice
- Start date
- Status
Re: J-xx
So I think that we can safely say that the J-XX does in deed have canards? I have seen more versions with them than without and it seems like common sense to me.
So I think that we can safely say that the J-XX does in deed have canards? I have seen more versions with them than without and it seems like common sense to me.
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
Re: J-xx
Thats true. canards, contrary to popular believe, are not detrimental to stealth. The mig- 1.44 and eurofighter both have canards.
HOWEVER, if SAC chooses to equip the j-xx with TVC engines(al-41?), then canards are no longer neccesary. This option must be considered.
Finn McCool said:
Thats true. canards, contrary to popular believe, are not detrimental to stealth. The mig- 1.44 and eurofighter both have canards.
HOWEVER, if SAC chooses to equip the j-xx with TVC engines(al-41?), then canards are no longer neccesary. This option must be considered.
Roger604
Senior Member
Re: J-xx
Do you mean that there is no additional benefit to aerodynamics if a fighter has both TVC and canards?
I thought the Mig 1.44 was supposed to be a plasma stealth testbed. It doesn't have stealth shape. And I didn't know Eurofighter was supposed to be a proper stealth fighter at all.
MIGleader said:
Do you mean that there is no additional benefit to aerodynamics if a fighter has both TVC and canards?
I thought the Mig 1.44 was supposed to be a plasma stealth testbed. It doesn't have stealth shape. And I didn't know Eurofighter was supposed to be a proper stealth fighter at all.
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
Re: J-xx
not in my opinion. TVC already provides manuverbility above and beyond. Adding canards will do little. The russians offered China su-35s with canards or TVC, not both. i could be wrong, the mig 1.44 had both.
not in my opinion. TVC already provides manuverbility above and beyond. Adding canards will do little. The russians offered China su-35s with canards or TVC, not both. i could be wrong, the mig 1.44 had both.
Mig.1.44 did have stealthy desing incorperated. My point is that fighters can be stealthy and still have canards
Re: J-xx
You are correct in assessing that canards are not necessarily detrimental to stealth. Some of the early Lockheed Martin design concepts for the Joint Strike Fighter (now F-35) incorporated canards.
Stealth, however, is very much a matter of designing the shape of the airplane. There was an excellent article on the subject in Janes last April. To put it simply: neither the MiG-1.44 nor the Eurofighter Typhoon are true stealth designs. They incorporate some coatings to lower the radar signature, but the same could be said for current F-16 and F-18 fighters. A true stealth design demands that attention be paid to all of the design details from day one.
With regard to a combination of TVC and canards, I would point to the X-31 as a case in point. The X-31 employed a canard design, to ensure that it retained control full authority throughout the post stall envelope. A horizontal tail, in contrast, would lose its effectiveness under these conditions. At post stall conditions, a fighter with both TVC and canards will have a decided advantage over a conventional wing-and-tail arrangement with only TVC. Why do you think the Russians didn't want China to have an Su-30 equipped with both?
MIGleader said:
You are correct in assessing that canards are not necessarily detrimental to stealth. Some of the early Lockheed Martin design concepts for the Joint Strike Fighter (now F-35) incorporated canards.
Stealth, however, is very much a matter of designing the shape of the airplane. There was an excellent article on the subject in Janes last April. To put it simply: neither the MiG-1.44 nor the Eurofighter Typhoon are true stealth designs. They incorporate some coatings to lower the radar signature, but the same could be said for current F-16 and F-18 fighters. A true stealth design demands that attention be paid to all of the design details from day one.
With regard to a combination of TVC and canards, I would point to the X-31 as a case in point. The X-31 employed a canard design, to ensure that it retained control full authority throughout the post stall envelope. A horizontal tail, in contrast, would lose its effectiveness under these conditions. At post stall conditions, a fighter with both TVC and canards will have a decided advantage over a conventional wing-and-tail arrangement with only TVC. Why do you think the Russians didn't want China to have an Su-30 equipped with both?
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
Re: J-xx
If we take a mig-29OVT and pit it against a eurofighter with TVC in WVR combat, the eurofighter would not be able to outmanuver the OVT. Canards arnt the only thing that can boost manuverability. China has some experience with LERX. My point is that the j-xx is not guarenteed to have canards, although they certainly are an option.
If we take a mig-29OVT and pit it against a eurofighter with TVC in WVR combat, the eurofighter would not be able to outmanuver the OVT. Canards arnt the only thing that can boost manuverability. China has some experience with LERX. My point is that the j-xx is not guarenteed to have canards, although they certainly are an option.
Re: J-xx
An good example of a stealth design that incorporates a canard, can be found at the link below. This was an earlier concept explored for Lockheed's F-35, prior to construction of the X-35 prototypes.
I quite agree. The developers are probably exploring a variety of options for the J-XX, with canards being one option.MIGleader said:
An good example of a stealth design that incorporates a canard, can be found at the link below. This was an earlier concept explored for Lockheed's F-35, prior to construction of the X-35 prototypes.
I likewise agree with you that canards are not the only feature that can boost maneuverability. All else being equal however (including thrust-to-weight, wing loading, wing torsional stiffness and so forth), an airplane with a canard would have an edge in a close-quarters engagement.MIGleader said:
Re: J-xx
this new fighter may be j14
They can not be j12 or j9.J12 and j9 did exist.The former was from nanchang while the lator was developed by chengdu.They were as early as j8.But they were stopped in the late 1980s since china paid all its attention to economy.FriedRiceNSpice said:
this new fighter may be j14
- Status