The use of LERX to generate lift is high drag – while you can pull better AoAs, you destroy your energy levels in the process.
As With the three coupled vortex generation mechanism, a higher Cl can be achieved, so you don’t have to pull as big AOA as other aircrafts needed to achieve the same level of lift, thus drag might not be as big as we expected?
As the result the overall L/D might be even better?
A LERX is no substitute for a bigger wing. That J-20 wing looks around the same size as an EF-T wing, only the J-20 is a substantially bigger/heavier frame.
again, Song’s study showed that for this particular Canard+LERX+blended wing body configuration, majority of lift is generated on the body and inner part of the wing, so that a relatively smaller aspect ratio can actually do better 🙂
I am not querying the existence of the so-called carrier killing missile, but I am very sceptical that it can do what the Chinese claim. Have they got the ability to find and track a carrier in real time, launch a ballistic missile hundreds or thousands of miles away, continue to track the carrier, and relay the information to the missile as it re-enters the atmosphere, guiding on to a target which will have moved several miles during the time the missile has been in flight?
As far as I am aware, the USA and Russians developed ICBMS with a CEP measured in a few hundred feet, but that is firing from a static silo against another static target, with a thermonuclear weapon. The Chinese missile will, I presume, be conventional, and so will have to hit its target, a miss by half a mile won’t count. How many of these missiles will China make, because I can guarantee they won’t be cheap. I really don’t buy it, and as I said, I find it rather jarring that China is launching a carrier at the same time it is claiming to have an infallible anti-carrier weapon. The carrier I believe, the carrier killer I don’t.
This was where the rumor started…:cool:
Why on earth would they fit corn reflectors this way?
and where is this ship now?
Sign In
