A pretty impressive list of positives I see, and it should be cheaper and easier to design and implement than an S-duct. I wonder why then, that the Americans and Chinese have opted for S-ducts on all their fifth gen designs…
Patience Ms. plawolf, all will be revealed in good time. If they’re doing what I think they’re doing (and I’m pretty certain they are!), from an engineering aspect- it’ll be a uniquely innovative and a quite radical solution.
If you refer to f-22, it had other design, and powerfull engines, so it didn’t matter. Materials also were not the same in 1990s than today, maybe they had not another option.
According to P.Butowski in this month’s AI, the T-50’s definitive (second stage) engine will be rated @ 18T (176.5kN/39,679lbs).
Is there now consensus on this Board that there is no S type intakes on the PAKFA or we are still waiting for better info on this? Absense of S type intakes on PAKFA to hide the compressor face does seem odd!
No full S-duct? Yes, I believe there is a consensus. 😉
On the 2008 Saturn patent, the rear-end has an ‘S’ channel- this is probably an LO feature. Nonetheless, interesting to see how seriously they’re taking engine stealth.
BTW, patent of Sukhoi’s ‘ways of decreasing aircraft engine visibility’ – that everyone thought to be T-50 radar blocker, – is finally published…and well, it’s really a blocker. Kind of you would hardly expect, to be more specific…looks like Cheshire Cat smile I’d say:)not less interesting than other recently published Saturn patent dealing with LO stuff…
Let me guess, 2/3rds [semi] S-duct with 1/3rd blocker. Can’t wait to see the real deal!!
Thanks,
JA.
Sign In
