DSI is 21st century technology. It's like, why do people fly Boeing 787 rather than a prop powered airliner. Same idea.
Dear sir i asked the
percentage of performance increase using DSI and at what speed range in jf17 and please give some elaborate and technical answer. DSI design would be done by keeping the speed variable in mind as i told you it is difficult to design it but easy to manufacture. It is not just copy the design of another plane to any another one. The amount of air flow at variable speed variable has to kept in mind.
USA (Lockhed martin ) have been working in DSI concept since 90's and Chinese were all of a sudden able to come up with a production ready DSI intake on the FC-1 in the early 2000s when no other manufacturer in the world had even attempted this. WOW is it a coincidence or some people says idea as well as design and CFD data was in some way or the other stolen by the Chinese through industrial and academic espionage at Lockheed Martin and the research labs that worked on DSI. What DSI does is to reduce the RCS as the vanes and doors of variable inlets are a source of RCS. They tend to be at angles that can reflect radar waves back to the emitter. By eliminating those variable inlets and even the splitter plate, the DSI basically reduces the RCS a bit.It also is claimed to help improve power available to the pilot in the subsonic range a bit..but its not an improvement that warranted a complete change from the conventional inlet to the new DSI inlet..otherwise we would have f-22 Raptor with DSI or certainly f-18 and other fighter manufacturer designing or working on it.
Now since it is Tejas thread......
On the Tejas, the splitter plate and the bleed channel leading onto the top of the wing near the wing root does the same job as the DSI. The method used on the Tejas is not a complicated mechanical boundary layer control method. That splitter plate doesn't move forward or backward depending on the speed and altitude of operation. It is fixed, which means that it is uncomplicated and light weight but it also means that it puts a restriction on just how fast the LCA can go- in this case the top speed being set at Mach 1.6 or 1.8 (i am not in ADA).
Some previous generation aircraft used a more complicated, and heavier system called a variable inlet- for instance the Mirage-2000 with its "mouse" cone that can move in or out of the air intake depending on speed and altitude. By moderating the size of the intake through which the air would get inside the intake, the "mouse" would control the pressure inside the air channel near the compressor. If the air velocity was too high (supersonic) the "mouse" would come out, narrowing down the air intake and that way compress the air entering the intake, and in that way increase pressure at the cost of velocity. So there were two benefits- the air pressure in the air channel was higher (a higher Coefficient of Pressure is beneficial) and the air velocity was sub-sonic. Now why is it that you need sub-sonic velocity in the channel ? Because supersonic waves would create havoc with the compressor blades due to the shock waves that are associated with them. They could cause a compressor stall.
And the reason that previous generation aircraft featured such intakes is because there was a time when Mach 2 and Mach 2+ performance was considered important. So aircraft that needed to fly that fast needed this complicated inlet system to ensure that they could safely fly to Mach 2 or beyond without the engine compressor blades stalling. Another aircraft that would illustrate the inlet and the diverter is the MiG-23. The MiG-23s had this complicated inlet geometry. This is one of the essential differences between the MiG-23 and 27 which you can verify by a simple visual comparison since the fixed inlet diverter is smaller- the variable inlet was removed on the MiG-27 and in its place a fixed inlet was put. This restricted the MiG-27's max speed to below that of the MiG-23, but since the primary job of the MiG-27 was Strike, CAS and Interdiction it's top speed was not that important.
On the Tejas, the ASR would have specified a top speed in the range of Mach 1.6-8 or so. That would've meant that if the inlet was designed well then you could get to that speed without the variable geometry, which is why they don't have a variable inlet. But the problem with the design that they chose, of an intake that is shielded by the wing is that it restricts or "jams" the airflow between the splitter plate and the wing. In this region, they created a veritable "pocket" into which the boundary layer air would get jammed. Now, you cannot have air trapped in that pocket without giving it a path to flow down or up with a channel- so the bleed channel was provided onto the top of the wing. And it turned out to be a blessing as it now directed turbulent flow onto the top of the wing and generated vortex that helped keep the air boundary layer stay attached even at high alpha angles. This concept is quite unique amongst fighters (similar things are done on leading and even trailing edges, but not near the intake) and how successful it has been can be gauged by the fact that even the newest AMCA design (whose wind-tunnel model ) had a similar bleed channel.
Hope this will clear the DSI doubt !!