A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

YF-23 re-emerges for surprise bid



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #7  
Old July 21st 04, 05:32 AM
tffy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What's the point of having a low-shock-noise BOMBER? So you don't
disturb the peaceful sleep of the same guys you just bombed? The
technology is being investigated for overland supersonic transports,
not stike a/c.

Yeah yeah, Low Observable can also mean acoustic, sure... in
principle. In reality, however: 1) No amount of shock dissipation will
make the plane silent/undetectable. 2) No missile/search system tracks
via soundwaves.

QSF and a bomber project have nothing in common.

Paul F Austin wrote...
I wrote
I just saw another article on the "Popular Science" website about a
research program Northrop Grumman has been running with the goal of
quieter supersonic aircraft. Last year, they did some test runs with
an aerodynamically-modified F-5E Tiger II that were promising.
Perhaps they'll take what they learned and apply them to the YF-23
revival plan.


That's unlikely. The QSF techniques involve moving the shocks around to gain
cancellation. In the QSF F-5, that meant a loooong nose. It's unlikely that
you can have a QSF shape that's also stealthy.


I'm looking over the pictures of the F-5 demonstrator and don't really
see any real problems per se. The nose on the demonstrator isn't much
longer than the original one...the main difference is the fuselage is
much deeper.

A deeper fuse on the YF-23 design would mean a significantly larger
payload bay for air-to-ground weapons. I think this deepened fuselage
can be tailored to be low-observable and still reap the benefits of
the improved aero-acoustics.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.