SinoDefence Forum

Totoro

This is to be another in the series of 'ideal this and that' topics, thanks goes to Planeman for coming up with the idea.

Lets kick it off with an illustration.



Now, keep in mind i couldn't be bothered to do a precise drawing. All the components on that image are not fully to scale. Obviously, the front and the side drawings are using a diff scale than the top and bottom drawings.

Anyway, Idea is this: To make a Q5 for the next century. Brand new plane but tailored to the same role - CAS and BAI missions with secondary ability for deep strikes and aerial self defence (fighter role if you will).

Now, I don't imagine that CAS in the next century will be done flying low as it was done before, with A10, su25 etc. Hence there is no integrated cannon. Great emphasis is on IR stealth, with a high bypass turbofan being buried deep inside the fuselage, with enough room in there to have channels take some cold air from the intakes around the engine and mix it with the exhaust (which is already cooler than usual small bypass turbofan engine) and then have all that air pass over the tail duct area where the heat would be absorbed by the fuselage, as much as possible. At the same time, first two meters of the jet plume would be fully shielded from below, offering even lower IR signature.

Engine removal would be done from above, with a (portable) crane. A large covering on the back of the plane would be removed, and through that hole the engine could be taken out and replaced with a new one. Sure, it is a little bit more complicated than rest of today's planes but it may be worth it. Alternatively, engine could perhaps be removed by detaching the back part of the fuselage, with the tail engine duct and the whole tail control surfaces. Then the engine could be yanked out from behind. (i still think first option is better)

Naturally, a plane in the 21st century couldn't go without lowering the radar signature, but as that may prove to be a bit too expensive, it is 'only' a secondary goal. Overall shape would be very clean, not dispersing the EM waves in too many directions, especially from the front section. Stuff like leading edges of wings and tail surfaces and intake edges could afford to have a not tot thick layer of RAM. With internal stores, that would give a plane considerately smaller rcs, though i imagine fuselage is not large enough to give enough space for intake ducts to curve around, fully hiding the engine face. Still, i would imagine 80% of the engine face would still be fully hidden.

Engine would be without afterburner, of course, making it some meter and a half shorter, lighter, which would enable the rest of the plane to be constructed in a more efficient and cheaper manner, having to cover only subsonic speed range.

The nose would house a relatively small multifunctional radar, probably working in 1cm wavelength band. That would make it hard to use it at long distances, so use of medium range AAMS would be more or less sacrificed for precision of radar against ground targets. Below the radar would be the telephoto IIR sensor/laser designator and rangefinder housing, which would come standard on every plane.

Right after the front landing gear is the central weapons bay. It wouldn't be very deep, and its size is tailored for 3 brimstone class missiles. (or SDB class bombs) Alternatively, a 30mm gun mount could be put into it, with the barrel being positioned on a side, protruding forward, alongside the front landing gear bay.

Two central body weapon bays would also be shallow, tailored for 4 more brimstone class missiles each, perhaps a bit more deeper than the 33cms that are needed for a brimstone. If needs be, larger AAMs could be carried, to be cued from other airplanes. Also, bombs of 500 kg class and under should fit in there nicely. (or 4 SDB class bombs in each bay)

panzerkom

I like the idea and design features and all, but I just dunno if it is still necessary to have an aircraft designed specifically for the subsonic CAS role.

Norfolk

It probably still is necessary to have subsonic CAS aircraft. In spite of improvements in technology, fighter and fighter-bomber aircraft still seem to be too fast and not able to loiter the same as subsonic CAS aircraft. Attack helicopters don't seem able yet to bridge the gap. So for the foreseeable future, dedicated, subsonic CAS aircraft with some measure of aerial self-defence ability and a limited strike capability in addition to their primary close-support role and capabilities are practically necessary to do the job right.

I would very much prefer an internally mounted cannon, and V/STOL flight capability as well, but I'm no aerospace or CAS expert.

Totoro

Well, VSTOL complicates and compromises design a lot, and makes everything much more expensive. I think enabling the plane to use unprepared runways is more than enough, coupled with a powerful engine for short takeoffs.

It is true that its a bit pointless to design a plane solely for the cas role. But i would think it is more than obvious that this plane would be different from a10, su25 and so on. Sure, it could do CAS, but it can also do other roles. It would be tailored for higher speeds and higher flight ceiling than those planes.

Norfolk, please note that the cannon is modular and its adition would not make the plane much heavier or increase drag or anything. Even with the cannon onboard, there'd still be a decent warload to be carrier internally. Though, for the love of me, i can't see why anyone would risk going so low and slow to use a cannon *in a high risk war enviroment against a well defended enemy*. Its one thing when youre hunting lonely iraqi tanks in a middle of a desert, but at this day and age, low level antiair defences are way too deadly for that while at the same time the technology advances have enabled us to get those very same tanks from higher altitudes and at higher speeds. There is simply less need to go that low.

adeptitus

For CAS role, how about an armed version of the HAIG L-15? It can be modified to look like this:
http://www.airforce-technology.com/p.../yak_1302.html
http://www.airforce-technology.com/p.../yak_1305.html

If the PLAAF were to procure several hundred of these modified L-15 armed trainers, I think they'd make a good multi-use aircraft. The combat radius and payload isn't that much different from Q-5.

I also like the A-10 concept. The PLA does have the GAU-8/A clone, the H/PJ12. But I think if the PLAAF were to ever develop a plane around that gun, it'd have very limited uses. Probably not worth the trouble.

Totoro

L15 is fine and certainly seems like a better platform than Q5 but it'd be too little, too late. Putting a new plane into service and not lowering its IR and radar signature as much as the budget allows is just not prudent at this time and age. Especially for CAS missions which, while I still maintain would be done at higher altitudes than what A10 practices, would still be low enough to warrant greater protection from detection.

planeman

I think UCAVs are the way forward, but for sake of interest, I'm thinking along manned aircraft lines. Here's a rough sketch of a Q-X-6. It'd have curved stealth and have a weapons load and performance similar to UCAVs - better than Q-5 but still modest compared to say F-35. I don't think slow battlefield tank busting like A-10 is a good idea, but smaller anti-tank missiles like HJ-10 would offer a good battlefield punch. It'd also be able to carry two SRAAMs for self defence or 2 LT-2/SL-6 PGMs for strike.

The engine would be a non-afterburning version of the RD-33.

I'm not sure what to do about the tail - maybe a twin boom arrangement.

Skywatcher

Might want to add on an integrated cannon, which would be very handy in dealing with targets that don't justify shooting missiles or rocket barrages at (i.e. supply trucks, infantry columns and targets of opportunity)