Tu-128 Fiddler Dual role (Bomber plus Interceptor)
Supersonic luxury Jet project
post # 441 are pages from the book by Yefim Gordon.
Regarding weird MiG-21s:
They had ogival shaped wing planforms & were prototypes for testing the would-be manufactured Tu-144 design aspects.
ive posted most of these mig21 versions over different posts here-- except mig21 sh, i reckon-- new for me
look the airintakes are inverted & are on upperside; in this modern era this would be a nice target for infrared homing missile & or sensors to detect.
In the case it becomes a UAV these airintakes would entirely be ousted or diminished...btw the speed of UCAVs aren't much problem for loads of Heat creation
Yefim Gordon, "Mikoyan MiG-21 (Famous Russian Aircraft)"
Yefim Gordon, "Sukhoi Su-27 (Famous Russian Aircraft Series)"
Yefim Gordon, "Mikoyan MiG-29 (Famous Russian Aircraft Series)"
Yefim Gordon, "Mikoyan MiG-31 (Famous Russian Aircraft Series)"
credits to the original uploader
if you have got speed do upload them to any streaming documents site e.g Scribd or Issu or DoxTop.
See this as example DefenceDog: Tupolev Tu-95-142: Yefim Gordon
founds some info--
F-14: Variable Swing wing concept. This comes from the school of design that once thought that the variable wing is an answer to everything from short take off to high speed flight.
F-15 represents the modified or tailed delta wing concept. Its really a delta, with an added tail. Structurally and aerodynamically, the F-15 has all the benefits of a low aspect delta wing, like the sweep for high speed and the long wing root that gives the wings and fuselage great rigidity. Around the time the F-15 was being developed, John Boyd's EM theories became known and began to influence the design.
The F-18 is the most complex of all, even more aerodynamically complex than the F-16. In fact, the aerodynamic concepts of the F-18 is a generation ahead of the F-14 and F-15 in the focus on vortice management. Its one of the few aircraft out there that treats vortex layers like a science and not guesswork, and this is one of the characteristics of a true 4th gen fighter, not a 3.5th gen one.[/QUOTE]
aerodynamically speaking all are a bit similar and a bit different.
F-14 and F-16:The common points are few, one is a single engine Mach 2 fighter with LERXes and the other is a VG wing fighter.
as such the F-16 and F-14 have some degree of fuselage lift, the F-16 in the wing fuselage blending and the F-14 in the fuselage flat beaver tail.
However the aircraft have similarities in the following way
The F-15 and F-14 are almost the same type of fighter, just customized to different needs basicly in the wing planform and engine nacelles.
The F-14 is a VG wing fighter to improve AoA handling and increase lift at landings and take offs, a flat fuselage tail ended in a beaver tail increases lift fuselage; the F-15 has a cropped delta wing with blunt LERXes to allow excellent turn rates due to excess power and low wing loading; the F-14 offers less drag at supersonic speeds therefore has lower thrust to weight ratio.
The F-14 has more wing control devices than the F-15 to increase lift with spoilers acting as ailerons, and leading edge flaps (slats) to increase lift and reduce vortex wing separation, however the F-16 and F-18 have slats too
Contrary to the F-16 and F-18; the F-15 and F-14 have inlet horizontal ramps with highly racked walls for higher mach numbers and speeds that generate multishock waves to reduce the flow speed.
All these aircraft have a boundary layer gap between the inlets and the fuselage
The F-16 and F-18: are basicly optimized for lower speeds and higher agility therefore have round inlets with fixed ramps but both have LERXes to improve AoA handling. the F-16 uses its forebody to slow down the air flow to the engine and reduce the absolute AoA for the engine, the F-18 uses the wing`s LERX to do the same
The F-16 uses a single vertical dorsal fin but has twin ventral fins like the F-14 to improve lateral stability, the F-15 and F-18 do not use ventral fins but their twin dorsal and vertical fins are enough to ensure lateral stability.
The F-16 and F-18 use their wingtips hardpoints as antiflutter weights; the F-15 in the other hand has cropped and racked wing tips and an extended trailing edge to reduce buffeting and flutter.
The F-14 uses wing vanes to improve longitudinal stability, the F-16 uses relaxed stability.
The F-14 highly sweep angle reduces flutter and buffeting
Since the F-14 is the less agile of all them, it has the longest range BVR weaponry and radar, the F-16 is the most agile and initially had only limited radar and weaponry all have good visibility from their cockpitsF-14 has square, swept intakes, long VG wing and relatively small twin vertical tail with the fins atop the engine ducts. It's also got a much older cockpit style with two seats.
F-15 has square swept intakes, shorter triangular wing and taller tails mounted outside the engine ducts with a more obvious 'bubble' canopy.
F-18 C/D has smaller rounded intakes, stubby square wings with little sweep and an angled tail.
F-18 E/F (Super Hornet) is a larger F-18 with squared intakes.
Last edited by ANTIBODY; 03-27-2011 at 06:32 PM.
where did you get thatIts one of the few aircraft out there that treats vortex layers like a science and not guesswork, and this is one of the characteristics of a true 4th gen fighter, not a 3.5th gen one.
^^^ just wanted to have a disscussion on above comments, bro!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)