Featured Project Azm: Pakistan's Ambitious Quest to Develop 5th Generation Military Technologies.

[Baloch Pakistani]

Why don't we put air intakes on the upper side of the plane instead of its belly? And by doing so can it improve its stealthiness?

 

[Tamiyah]

Why don't we put air intakes on the upper side of the plane instead of its belly? And by doing so can it improve its stealthiness?

Too much to risk.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Why don't we put air intakes on the upper side of the plane instead of its belly? And by doing so can it improve its stealthiness?

Will screw up the airflow for high angle of attacks and thus the aircraft maneuverability due to engine stalls

 

[Cookie Monster]

Why don't we put air intakes on the upper side of the plane instead of its belly? And by doing so can it improve its stealthiness?

As far as I've read up on it...IIRC
...if the air intakes are above(as opposed to below or on the sides)...at high angles of attack there is insufficient airflow. This is why for all fighter jets u will see intakes either below or on the sides.

B2 has air intakes above...but it's not meant to do maneuvers that a fighter jet does...so it's not really a problem and it most likely adds to its stealth.

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1299451191584264193

In regards to the AESA being developed by PAC. I feel like either:

1. it will be for AZM
2. it will make its way down to earlier block JF-17s.

What do you guys think?

JF-17 Thunder is Pakistan's own baby and it knows inside out. Pakistan can afford to quietly experiment anything with it.

 

[Akh1112]

Why don't we put air intakes on the upper side of the plane instead of its belly? And by doing so can it improve its stealthiness?

Reduced high alpha performance.

 

[Chak Bamu]

@Chak Bamu Does the Azm FGF look like this?

No. Notice the apparent distance & plane of the canard & main wing. This would be quite a blunder IMV. Even close-coupled canards are not in the exact plane, but this seems to be close-coupled (extra close!) & apparently in the same plane.

But I really like the C-130 fan art in post #2016.

 

[CriticalThought]

Will screw up the airflow for high angle of attacks and thus the aircraft maneuverability due to engine stalls

As far as I've read up on it...IIRC
...if the air intakes are above(as opposed to below or on the sides)...at high angles of attack there is insufficient airflow. This is why for all fighter jets u will see intakes either below or on the sides.

B2 has air intakes above...but it's not meant to do maneuvers that a fighter jet does...so it's not really a problem and it most likely adds to its stealth.

Reduced high alpha performance.

On a classical airframe, yes. But when you are discussing fifth gen concepts, learn to let go of old ways of thinking, and educate yourselves in new ways. For example, could active flow control allow effective diversion of the flow to dorsal inlets?

 

[Tamiyah]

No. Notice the apparent distance & plane of the canard & main wing. This would be quite a blunder IMV. Even close-coupled canards are not in the exact plane, but this seems to be close-coupled (extra close!) & apparently in the same plane.

But I really like the C-130 fan art in post #2016.

Thank you for your reply.

 

[GriffinsRule]

On a classical airframe, yes. But when you are discussing fifth gen concepts, learn to let go of old ways of thinking, and educate yourselves in new ways. For example, could active flow control allow effective diversion of the flow to dorsal inlets?

So can it?

 

[Akh1112]

On a classical airframe, yes. But when you are discussing fifth gen concepts, learn to let go of old ways of thinking, and educate yourselves in new ways. For example, could active flow control allow effective diversion of the flow to dorsal inlets?

but youd need an intake for said active flow?

 

[CriticalThought]

So can it?

It's an open research problem. If you solve it, forward your results to PAC. In case you didn't get my drift, I am pointing out that Azm will have to be based on creative new research which would completely upturn old views. Don't authoritatively declare whether something can, or can't be done in AZM - in this case, dorsal inlets.

 

[CriticalThought]

but youd need an intake for said active flow?

If you read the link I posted, the active flow is generated by actuators controlled through electric current. When the plane is taking off, it is going through level flight and these actuators are not needed. By the time it reaches high angle of attack, the engines are already running and enough electricity is available such that the actuators can be used to maintain the flow.

But a real world design would account for failures and build redundancy. It might decouple a battery source from the main engine, where the battery source can be constantly recharged from the engine. These are all open questions. Make no mistakes, these are the kind of technologies on which the likes of BAE, Dassault, and LM would be working these days. Active flow control was being sponsored directly by DoD/DARPA in the past. I don't know the present state.

 

[Chak Bamu]

If you read the link I posted, the active flow is generated by actuators controlled through electric current. When the plane is taking off, it is going through level flight and these actuators are not needed. By the time it reaches high angle of attack, the engines are already running and enough electricity is available such that the actuators can be used to maintain the flow.

But a real world design would account for failures and build redundancy. It might decouple a battery source from the main engine, where the battery source can be constantly recharged from the engine. These are all open questions. Make no mistakes, these are the kind of technologies on which the likes of BAE, Dassault, and LM would be working these days. Active flow control was being sponsored directly by DoD/DARPA in the past. I don't know the present state.

Active flow control may be a suitable technology for sixth generation aircraft, if it is being actively researched. I very much doubt if PAC or really anyone else in Pakistan has the wherewithal to attempt it for Azm.

A word of caution - Americans successfully pitched dead-end research tangents in publications (like Popular Mechanics, for example) for Soviets to pick up and waste their resources. Pakistan has zero resources to spare & I would rather have PAC spend tax money where it brings the most benefit & not chase sexy new technologies.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Active flow control may be a suitable technology for sixth generation aircraft, if it is being actively researched. I very much doubt if PAC or really anyone else in Pakistan has the wherewithal to attempt it for Azm.

A word of caution - Americans successfully pitched dead-end research tangents in publications (like Popular Mechanics, for example) for Soviets to pick up and waste their resources. Pakistan has zero resources to spare & I would rather have PAC spend tax money where it brings the most benefit & not chase sexy new technologies.

Speaking of the American model, we can set-up pilot programs to actually look into all of these things. You never know, some hay may reveal gold if stacked the correct way. For example, we can study active flow control for a loyal wingman drone. It'd be a smaller-scale project than a full-fledged fighter, so risk is lower (in case it's a dead-end), but if it leads somewhere, we can operationalize it and actually develop a full-fledged solution sooner than later.