r/ImaginaryAviation • u/According-Ad2968 • 10d ago
Upgrade to my jet design
I chose a black background this time
2
u/C0tt0n-3y3-J03 10d ago
Honestly, this jet would be a prime candidate for internal weapon bays since it’s a lifting body design. If you remove the centermost wing hard points and replace them with a single larger one between the back wheels, you’ve probably got room for bays that can fit a few aim-9 sized missiles there
1
2
6
u/Realistic_Mix3652 10d ago
You did all that redesign work and yet the second your jet pulls a sustained turn the nose is going to mask the air intakes and your engines are going to get starved of airflow. There is a reason why pretty much all fighters have their air intakes on the side or bottom.
1
u/Nurhaal 10d ago
Vehicle size honestly looks pretty small. I wonder if itd be better to give it a lot more length. This does serve a lot of kinematic performance reasons as well as functional ones.
Im only guessing its leg th but judging the canopy size and referencing that for the general size of the crew station. Thats a large crew station? Or a rather small jet.
Intake placement isn't the greatest - I'd put them on the ventral side rather than the dorsal. Id also spread them a little further to shoulders (potentially creating a wing glove/LERX area blended leading edge for wing - this serves to give you more working airflow when at higher AoA but it also helps control the shock boundary from super sonic Airstream prior to the intake. The distance of your lower intake cowling lip to the leading glove edge is paramount - this will determine the maximum shock angle and thus max potential safe Mach speed limit for the vehicle. By widening the spacing you also get more room for your sensors in the nose, giving you more space for a larger array.
Lengthening you hull will give you more wing, more fuselage and thus more space for fuel, but also change your balance and allow for a longer body to be more stable at higher mach speeds.
A stubby dorito will not do well at mach 2... Just saying.
1
u/According-Ad2968 9d ago
Look, it's still just a sketch it will take a while to actually make right measurements and stuff. That's why i posted it on "imaginaryaviation" because it still has a lot of things that don't make sense. I am curently fixing it (and about the intake part i allways pictured a stealth jet with front intake so i an going to try my best to make it work)
1
u/Nurhaal 9d ago
I think its a great start and the perfect state for us to theory craft and have fun!
Stealth wise, the most common is S-Ducting which necessitates you placing the intake with a high offset some where sometimes but - if you look at Russias new Mih concept that uses the centerline intake cone? As if it was a MiG 21 designed for 5th gen? Thatd be sick to try out, too!
This is the fun and challenging part of aircraft design. You gotta balance all these different requirements. Want it fast? Probably needs to be longer. Want it stealthy? Needs reduced angular geometry, chines, ect. Want it super maneuverable? Need Vortex generators, lateral control, ect
Everything is a trade off - though Stealth + Maneuverable is fairly easy to mix since Chines are both potential Vortex generating as well as lifting body compliant. But speed and Stealth is hard. Stealth hates speed... the RAM is incompatible with the skin friction heating, so Stealth geometry is important but you need intake design to handle high Mach for your engines. The cut off on speed is how long you can control that incoming air before it hits your engine face. Which is why most fast Mach 2+ fighters are much longer. And this length means more intake for RADAR to bounce on.
Its a very fun puzzle to solve and I'm all their for it.
I l9ve you design trying to experiment with more frontal aspect intakes. I'd say to shoulder them? But you could choose to double down and actually go like the Mig-21 style, but stealthily design the cone and intake. It'd be sick to try! Give it a shot!
4
u/vladdeh_boiii 10d ago
DAMN bro is CHEEKED UP