Search results

One thing they can do is bury a whole lot of fake missiles with handful of real ones, if US want to play "Whack a mole" with precision weapon it would get expensive...

That's a very in depth question that is a little outside my knowledge, you'll really have to study an aircraft design textbook... In general, not only aero-center would shift due to control surface movements, all the flight coefficients will shift as well. This does not only apply to J-10 but...

yes, Ef2000's canard is pure control device, no lift, not even vortex generation. also yes, I maybe a little hasty in saying negative AoA->negative lift, not true for asymmetric foil. However that picture does not show what you think it shows. As I said pay attention to those towers in the...

eurofighter doesn't what? Those photos can be deceptive, you can't tell the true flight vector from this picture; what is the true horizon? is the plane in leveled flight and not descending/ascending/maneuvering?...etc Edit: actually true horizon can be obtained from the picture, you notice...

Yes, this is exactly what I'm talking about a few posts back, lemme quote it again:

If you replace "center of lift" with "aerodynamic center" in your sentence than you would be right, those two are very different things https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerodynamic_center In any case you can't possibly eye-ball a plane and tell where their CoM, aerodynamic center are. However you...

No, it is the exact opposite; when in positive AoA the plane naturally wants to pitch up, the canards have to actively deflect downward to keep the nose down, the design is unstable. My point is that in those instance the canards does not produce negative lift to hold the nose downward, it...

For one it produces a more uniform lift distribution in the longitudinal axis, less stress on the airframe. The canards must be positive AoA with respect to airstream in those pic you see, they are just negative deflect with respect to the plane. This is expected for a relaxed stability delta...

I think J-10's canard is supposed to contribute lift in leveled flight, while the other design's (gripen/ef2000...) symmetric canards only provide control torque, does not contribute lift in leveled flight. In zero canard deflection and zero AoA, J-10's canard shift both center of lift and...

You got some good eyes... I'd love to know too.

I don't give this "new" J-10 rumor too much credence, but Semi stealth is not that ridiculous depending on how stealthy they want. Say a 0.1m^2 frontal stealth (say 20 degree cone), does not care about any other angle is perfectly doable in low cost fashion. ie, add structural absorber fillings...

Those things are reasonable. I'm a little conflicted on larger wing span though, it is better for low speed handling, very important for carrier ops; but it adds drag at high speed.... just have to wait and see.

IMO large weapon bay is not a must for J-35, as a naval bird it does have anti-surface needs, but requiring it to internally hold ashm will make it a radically different thing, ie a F-35 like striker. It is enough for it to internally hold A2A load, ashm will just have to go external or let J-15...

lets just wait and see. if I turned out to be right I'd sure be reminding everybody :yahoo:.

This one is rated for deep space mission. Now all we need is heavy launcher and lander, either the 921 two launch or LM-9 single launch architecture.

Now I have this mental image of H-6 and Tu-160 dog fighting each other....

I'm not taking it granted yet, just predicting it. FC-31 has weapon bay almost the size of J-20 main bay yet has a much shorter length, its area-ruling must be worse than J-20 right? This is not good for super-cruise, the navy really wants a super-cruise plane so SAC will have to do anything...

Actually my rational is that lengthening has more to do with reducing trans/supersonic drag, improving area-ruling. FC-31 at it's current form is far from being able to super-cruise, therefore I think they'll do everything possible to achieve it, with new engine.

Not enough length there for SD-10, blocked by main gear. However I predict J-35 will have side bay by lengthening the fuselage.

The outer shell is ablative heat shield, it's supposed to look like shit after re-entry, especially a high speed one. It is detachable so the spacecraft itself is re-usable.