Can we close that thread?
Woaw so much to read for a pics threads
You’re right (canards are out of phase with the main aero acting surface – the wing).
But it’s OT!
more likely some installation from first external weapon release tests on the Su-35S, it is too thin to be any kind of supporting, strengthening equipment.
Cracks and some kind of vibration dampening I wld guess.
Got it. Thx for the clarification.
Sry, but editor is mislead or (not informed on last developments) on secveral points :
(i) French MinDef specified since that France still has a 12 reapers target, the number of 16 was given by pentagon “just in case” not to have to go to a second FMS procedure.
(ii) France do not intend to order all the equipment listed (same reason)
(iii) only the two first would be complete US systems, rest would have European input, including satcom.
Scroll down the page 😉
As a complement, you can read the editor note here :
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/146174/pentago…
The Reaper would be flown from the US to cut cost of acquisition (and improve persistence ?).
One of the well known deficits of the F-16 is its AoA limitation of ~ 25deg.
Being a late 1970 design I won’t call it a “deficit” (weak point)
Just like saying that Amstrong (Neil) was outperformed by Michael Jackson 😉
The prob with canards is that the AoA is limited by the design of the airframe. And this impact all modifications. Close coupled are less affected.
What abt the good old Provider, Cariboo or C-141?
C’mon a good old Bizon carying a Bouran…. Theres is nothing more sexy.
But the same can be said abt 747 and Shutle
Spey probably offered a better dry thrust especially it’s sfc.
Larger…. More drag
Man hve to had thr price of switching from tranche 1 to 3…. And the Raf upgrade too. For all tht I know the 35 comes only with planned soft upgrade.
MiG-29M/35 and Su-35S
http://russianplanes.net/id111569
http://russianplanes.net/id111568
Just noted the LERX’s leading edge flaps… Interesting!
SR71 was not controversial per essence: it was built to end a controversy and the program was terminated only not to raise some new controversy. But you might hve thought about the A12 / YF-12.
Edit: but the YF12 might be regarded as disqualified in this thread
Due to fixed inlets, chances of F-22 having even equal T/W to PAK-FA at M2.0+ is laughable to none.
Even this graph explains it well enough. More than that, all current variable inlets have a ramp at the subsonic section which recovers even more pressure, sometimes even above P0, and went the extra pressure/mass flow via bypass doors.
I don’t think those are simple fixed inlets 😀
There was a breakthrough in the US regarding CFD (new core with coupling equations) ard 2003 as publicized at the time.
Regarding the PAk-FA, tech maturation regarding materials might hve added some limitations to the max Mach that could hve or would be lifted at a time.
Regarding its own inlets, it’s a very clever solution they hve chosen. My guess since the under fuselage photos were released is that it will be highly silly to speak abt straight inlet or non-DSI.
I am with Amiga500 on the overall points of it’s aerodynamics. It’s a fast cruiser, with Über agility in mind (including high Beta) and a peak mach and ultra high alt (with new engines?)-> F22VsPAK-FA cld be somewhat similar to a 21st century version of Mig Alley’s F86VsMig15