Then they must be having problems with the DSI. The F-35 doesn’t have a bleed system, not even a passive bleed system incorporated into the ‘bump’ itself (see porous elements on JF-17 below), this may have limited benefits for the subsonic regime but performance will degrade significantly in the supersonic.

Besides, interaction of a DSI shockwave and bleed system will result in significant flow distortion, particularly in the S-duck.
It has the opposite effect of what conventional splitter-plate diverter type fixed inlets at supersonic speeds, where the passive bleed system on the splitter plate offers significant benefits by stabilising the downstream (after-terminal-shockwave) boundary layer.

Having said that, they may be attempting to increase the bleed mass flow rate to improve the intakes’ characteristics in both sub & supersonic regimes. It certainly appears the intake has undergone a redesign which would imply it was a problem area for increased drag. This is a common problem with DSIs.

Eitherway, it definitely looks like a step backwards.

Some papers on the performance of the DSI on the JF-17 and its bleed system.

http://enu.kz/repository/2010/AIAA-2010-481.pdf

http://enu.kz/repository/2011/AIAA-2011-920.pdf

The F-16 design is truly one for the ages!

Corrected it for you 🙂

4 jet engines and a rocket motor…where’s all that fuel supposed to go? Can’t see it having much of a range.

USN :

She has a lovely pussy…cat! :dev2:

I would never expect Boeing to speculate on what could have happened, and as I said previously, that would in no way be correct for Boeing to do so. But what they can do, because they are in the best position to judge, is to say whether any of the current ideas being put forward could be feasible in any way; for example, the notion of a cockpit fire, similar to the Egyptair incidence, but one in which renders the aircraft flyable for a considerable time. Only they are qualified to say whether such an occurrence is fairly likely, highly unlikely or a complete impossibility.

“Our KF-16s went up in the air and shot that plane down. Why? Because if you violate my airspace, then from now on, our slap will be hard,” Kim told reporters at a press conference.

I think you’re quoting Turkey’s Erdogan there, not Kim Tae Young 🙂 April fool’s must be a busy time for you my crispy fried friend, kinda like the Santa Clause of 1 April, spreading his mischievous good will to all mankind 🙂

Here you go, it was a BBC News interview with Inmarsat’s senior vice president for external affairs, Chris McLaughlin. Towards the end of the interview he discusses what could be in place and at what cost. But it’s amazing how they could determine the approx location of the aircraft using a system that wasn’t really meant to be used that way. Imagine what could be done with a specific system designed for this purpose?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26723980