By: sferrin
- 26th October 2006 at 06:05Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The MiG-31 is not a faceted aircraft, niether the the Su-27, first there are some aspects to mention. if you look at the YF-22/F-22 and at the MiG-31 you will find several differences.
The YF-22/F-22A have a rhomboid shaped inlet that is paralled to a rhomboid nose-cabin cross section.
the MiG-31 and the Su-27 have round cross section noses and cabins with rectangular shaped inlets.
The YF-22/F-22A have the inlet lips leading edges in parallel to the wing and tail plane leading edges
The MiG-31 inlet lips do not follow that platform alignment niether the Su-27.
Good god, now edge alignment is faceting? :rolleyes:
By: MiG-23MLD
- 26th October 2006 at 06:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good god, now edge alignment is faceting? :rolleyes:
Edge alignment is done using a fractal angle, the same used for faceting the forward fuselage nose, cabin, radome, nacelles and inlets in few words the entire fuselage.
By: ogami musashi
- 26th October 2006 at 10:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
your notions of faceting versus aerodynamics are quite incorect.
the facteing in F117 that made it bad flyer was that the angle of facet (that we could compare to sweep angles) was not optimum even bad for the inflow going.
just in the nose , the airflows vetors encountered thick surfaces less than 40° degrées surfaces.
in addiation all thoses surface were not blended to follow the flows.
Wich has nothing to do with raptor where NOWHERE incoming flows encounter high section areas.
It you had read what i wrote, i told you one the Low Observable theory used today is not to have direct reflection by diverting, and on part of the plane that are necessarily reflection, adjusting sweep angles so that the returns are not done in the emitter directions.
Read it and dig it. this principle applies to EVERY PLANE because what you mention, are parts of the plane that , on all plane, poses problems for stealth.
Every tail is a big reflector, nose from side is a reflector etc..
So LM choosed selected sweep angles, they are not flat as you see to believe and morevore their relative inclinaison has nothing to do with airsflows.
Airflows come for ahead and the section of the nose of the raptor (wich is lower than that of an F-15) does not pose any problem.
As to convince you, the F5 SSBD prooved its reduction in supersonic drag having and F-22 like nose (steched but with same section).
New
Posts: 3,010
By: MiG-23MLD
- 26th October 2006 at 13:33Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
your notions of faceting versus aerodynamics are quite incorect.
the facteing in F117 that made it bad flyer was that the angle of facet (that we could compare to sweep angles) was not optimum even bad for the inflow going.
just in the nose , the airflows vetors encountered thick surfaces less than 40° degrées surfaces.
in addiation all thoses surface were not blended to follow the flows.
Wich has nothing to do with raptor where NOWHERE incoming flows encounter high section areas.
It you had read what i wrote, i told you one the Low Observable theory used today is not to have direct reflection by diverting, and on part of the plane that are necessarily reflection, adjusting sweep angles so that the returns are not done in the emitter directions.
Read it and dig it. this principle applies to EVERY PLANE because what you mention, are parts of the plane that , on all plane, poses problems for stealth.
Every tail is a big reflector, nose from side is a reflector etc..
So LM choosed selected sweep angles, they are not flat as you see to believe and morevore their relative inclinaison has nothing to do with airsflows.
Airflows come for ahead and the section of the nose of the raptor (wich is lower than that of an F-15) does not pose any problem.
As to convince you, the F5 SSBD prooved its reduction in supersonic drag having and F-22 like nose (steched but with same section).
OGAMI Mushashi
Stealth is based upon two principles: one is radar absorbent materials and the other reflection angle or radar emission scattering, like light that is also a electromagnetic wave, the stealth treatment is absed upon reflection, refraction and absoption of radio waves.
The basic principle was reflect the less radar emission by absorbing it, reflecting it away from the original emitter radar.
The F-117 uses faceting in great degree, the F-22 in less degree, the most important is the reflection angle, this is what forced engineers to facet the aircraft fuselage and use planform alignment.
A fractal angle is used in the F-22 to give it the same reflection angle at any point where two edges form an angle or two surfaces meet.
but aerodynamics have played a bigger role in the F-22 fuselage, also the F-22 needed some fuselage wing blending and a more parabolic countour of its radome.
The rhomboid shape and serrated nozzles are features seen in the F-22 as in the B-2, F-117 and F-35.
Of course the F-117 and the F-22 are different because one is a pure stealth fighter and an expensive diamond and the other is a much less faceted aircraft a cheap diamond but better fighter, a true fighter.
the F-117 is a flying diamond, while the F-22 is a faceted F-15ACTIVE
By: ogami musashi
- 26th October 2006 at 15:15Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
i agreed already on the imposed sweep angles you said(your fractal).
But that fractal is not a problem for form drag for example (except the leading edges) as the front section is lowever than a sukhoi 27 for example.
This is not a probleme either for induced drag as the raptor used multi layer vortex technology and a sweep angle very good to slow speed manoeuvering (42°) added to an efficient planform (the diamond wing).
As for you reference of fractal on B2, B2 as actually a very good Lift/drag ratio and very good flying characteristics.
Second the F-22 was not created to have a fractal all over the airframe as the plane i essentialy designed to alter reflection on his front +20, -20 ° ahead, for certain frequencies.
Still you can't compare with F117 and say the F-22 on his overall and poor aero efficiency. or else bring me direct facts, not just "they use faceting, so faceting brings bad aero efficiency".
i'd be happy to debate on specific parts of the plane and their possible drawbacks on aerodynamics.
By: JFrazier
- 26th October 2006 at 15:38Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I know I said I wasn't coming back but I just have to say that MiG's rants are bordering on insanity. I'm rolling on the floor with some of his unfounded explanations. :D
MiG, have you managed to explain why the F-22's so-called "faceting" is bad for aerodynamics because you seem to be the only one believing it.
By: zeroyon04
- 26th October 2006 at 16:46Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
to bring_it_on: (since your pm box is full)
I read some of your posts here, and there is one thing I want to point out about the pilot "dozer" that you keep quoting from that you might not know.
Many of the other forum members seem to not believe in what this pilot has to say, they believe that he does not know the capabilites of the Mig-29 and Su-27/30/35, when he quoted that he could match all manuvers that they could do and then some.
Michael "Dozer" Shower has infact shot down a Mig-29 during A2A combat in the 1999 Operation Allied Force over Serbia in his F-15. Considering he shot down a Mig-29 (and since he's now squadron commander of the F-22 wing at AK), im sure he's quite well aware of their capabilities. He's also not the "best demo pilot" in the AF. He said he's more concerned with combat training and tactics than aerial stunts, so I would imagine any F-22 pilot could do the same manuvers easily.
If you already knew or stated this, then nevermind :D I haven't read this whole thread (nor do I want to, filled with too much crazy talk)
Also, as a sidenote, my physics professor (who used to work for LM and Raytheon) had a lead role in designing the launch rail system for the AIM-9X on the F-22, so if you have any beef with that system, i'll direct it to him for you :D
By: bring_it_on
- 26th October 2006 at 16:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
they believe that he does not know the capabilites of the Mig-29 and Su-27/30/35, when he quoted that he could match all manuvers that they could do and then some.
I think he said what he said ( regarding I can do what they can and vice versa) based more on some of the stunts that have been performed at Airshows and are now part of the mainstream Aviation Pop culture !!
Michael "Dozer" Shower has infact shot down a Mig-29 during A2A combat in the 1999 Operation Allied Force over Serbia in his F-15.
Did not know that about him !! Thx a ton for the information !!
and since he's now squadron commander of the F-22 wing at AK),
Yup i followed him at fencecheck !!
Also, as a sidenote, my physics professor (who used to work for LM and Raytheon) had a lead role in designing the launch rail system for the AIM-9X on the F-22, so if you have any beef with that system, i'll direct it to him for you
Posts: 9,683
By: sferrin - 26th October 2006 at 06:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good god, now edge alignment is faceting? :rolleyes:
Posts: 911
By: LmRaptor - 26th October 2006 at 06:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I admire some peoples patience.
________
buy vapir vaporizer
________
hashish
________
WENDIE 99
Posts: 3,010
By: MiG-23MLD - 26th October 2006 at 06:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Edge alignment is done using a fractal angle, the same used for faceting the forward fuselage nose, cabin, radome, nacelles and inlets in few words the entire fuselage.
Posts: 223
By: ogami musashi - 26th October 2006 at 10:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
your notions of faceting versus aerodynamics are quite incorect.
the facteing in F117 that made it bad flyer was that the angle of facet (that we could compare to sweep angles) was not optimum even bad for the inflow going.
just in the nose , the airflows vetors encountered thick surfaces less than 40° degrées surfaces.
in addiation all thoses surface were not blended to follow the flows.
Wich has nothing to do with raptor where NOWHERE incoming flows encounter high section areas.
It you had read what i wrote, i told you one the Low Observable theory used today is not to have direct reflection by diverting, and on part of the plane that are necessarily reflection, adjusting sweep angles so that the returns are not done in the emitter directions.
Read it and dig it. this principle applies to EVERY PLANE because what you mention, are parts of the plane that , on all plane, poses problems for stealth.
Every tail is a big reflector, nose from side is a reflector etc..
So LM choosed selected sweep angles, they are not flat as you see to believe and morevore their relative inclinaison has nothing to do with airsflows.
Airflows come for ahead and the section of the nose of the raptor (wich is lower than that of an F-15) does not pose any problem.
As to convince you, the F5 SSBD prooved its reduction in supersonic drag having and F-22 like nose (steched but with same section).
Posts: 3,010
By: MiG-23MLD - 26th October 2006 at 13:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OGAMI Mushashi
Stealth is based upon two principles: one is radar absorbent materials and the other reflection angle or radar emission scattering, like light that is also a electromagnetic wave, the stealth treatment is absed upon reflection, refraction and absoption of radio waves.
The basic principle was reflect the less radar emission by absorbing it, reflecting it away from the original emitter radar.
The F-117 uses faceting in great degree, the F-22 in less degree, the most important is the reflection angle, this is what forced engineers to facet the aircraft fuselage and use planform alignment.
A fractal angle is used in the F-22 to give it the same reflection angle at any point where two edges form an angle or two surfaces meet.
but aerodynamics have played a bigger role in the F-22 fuselage, also the F-22 needed some fuselage wing blending and a more parabolic countour of its radome.
The rhomboid shape and serrated nozzles are features seen in the F-22 as in the B-2, F-117 and F-35.
Of course the F-117 and the F-22 are different because one is a pure stealth fighter and an expensive diamond and the other is a much less faceted aircraft a cheap diamond but better fighter, a true fighter.
the F-117 is a flying diamond, while the F-22 is a faceted F-15ACTIVE
Posts: 223
By: ogami musashi - 26th October 2006 at 15:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
i agreed already on the imposed sweep angles you said(your fractal).
But that fractal is not a problem for form drag for example (except the leading edges) as the front section is lowever than a sukhoi 27 for example.
This is not a probleme either for induced drag as the raptor used multi layer vortex technology and a sweep angle very good to slow speed manoeuvering (42°) added to an efficient planform (the diamond wing).
As for you reference of fractal on B2, B2 as actually a very good Lift/drag ratio and very good flying characteristics.
Second the F-22 was not created to have a fractal all over the airframe as the plane i essentialy designed to alter reflection on his front +20, -20 ° ahead, for certain frequencies.
Still you can't compare with F117 and say the F-22 on his overall and poor aero efficiency. or else bring me direct facts, not just "they use faceting, so faceting brings bad aero efficiency".
i'd be happy to debate on specific parts of the plane and their possible drawbacks on aerodynamics.
Posts: 278
By: JFrazier - 26th October 2006 at 15:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I know I said I wasn't coming back but I just have to say that MiG's rants are bordering on insanity. I'm rolling on the floor with some of his unfounded explanations. :D
MiG, have you managed to explain why the F-22's so-called "faceting" is bad for aerodynamics because you seem to be the only one believing it.
Posts: 42
By: zeroyon04 - 26th October 2006 at 16:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
to bring_it_on: (since your pm box is full)
I read some of your posts here, and there is one thing I want to point out about the pilot "dozer" that you keep quoting from that you might not know.
Many of the other forum members seem to not believe in what this pilot has to say, they believe that he does not know the capabilites of the Mig-29 and Su-27/30/35, when he quoted that he could match all manuvers that they could do and then some.
Michael "Dozer" Shower has infact shot down a Mig-29 during A2A combat in the 1999 Operation Allied Force over Serbia in his F-15. Considering he shot down a Mig-29 (and since he's now squadron commander of the F-22 wing at AK), im sure he's quite well aware of their capabilities. He's also not the "best demo pilot" in the AF. He said he's more concerned with combat training and tactics than aerial stunts, so I would imagine any F-22 pilot could do the same manuvers easily.
You can see his name near the bottom of the list on this page http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_302.shtml
If you already knew or stated this, then nevermind :D I haven't read this whole thread (nor do I want to, filled with too much crazy talk)
Also, as a sidenote, my physics professor (who used to work for LM and Raytheon) had a lead role in designing the launch rail system for the AIM-9X on the F-22, so if you have any beef with that system, i'll direct it to him for you :D
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 26th October 2006 at 16:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think he said what he said ( regarding I can do what they can and vice versa) based more on some of the stunts that have been performed at Airshows and are now part of the mainstream Aviation Pop culture !!
Did not know that about him !! Thx a ton for the information !!
Yup i followed him at fencecheck !!
No beef whatsoever !! I'm scared of professors ;)
Thx for reminding me to clean it up ASAP :)
Posts: 42
By: zeroyon04 - 15th November 2006 at 11:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sorry for digging up this old post, but I found something extra to add to my post above.
Here is an audio file I found (USAF radio com) on the MiG-29 kill I mentioned above on March 24th 1999: http://www.1stguns.de/support/mig29_kosovo_splash.mp3