Interesting but my feeling tells me it is more one of the countless configurations tested for UCAVs
Ask anything Thread (Air Force)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Interesting but my feeling tells me it is more one of the countless configurations tested for UCAVs
What is the purpose of this type of landing gear, and is it still employed anywhere?
Pretty sure they can take off from unpaved surfaces?
lcloo
Major
Tracked landing gears were experiements for heavy bombers of 1940s and 1950s and were abandoned. They were tested for landing and take off from soft or unprepared surfaces.
Obviously the results of the experiment was not a happy one, and tracked landing gear disappeared and never seen again, right up to today.
A question I've been thinking for a bit is that since presumably the stealthy rectangular TVC nozzles placed on the J-XDS and the new iteration of the J-36 are used on WS-10/WS-15 equivalent engines, could that technology be compatible with the WS-10 and the upcoming WS-15 and be used for the J-20? Especially since recent imagery has shown the exhausts of WS-10C2 engines on the J-20 lacking radar blocking features.
Is there chatter on this topic from insiders on whether such a thing has ever been considered or are there other factors that makes such a choice unfeasible or undesirable (cost of integration, lack of maturity in technology, benefit not outweighing cost etc.). Or if it would be possible to integrate just the rectangular nozzles and forget about adding TVC on top of that.
Is there chatter on this topic from insiders on whether such a thing has ever been considered or are there other factors that makes such a choice unfeasible or undesirable (cost of integration, lack of maturity in technology, benefit not outweighing cost etc.). Or if it would be possible to integrate just the rectangular nozzles and forget about adding TVC on top of that.
Haven’t heard anything regarding this (not that I would even if PLAAF is considering it), my logic would be that give the design schedule of the 6th gen prototypes and the J20A, the rectangular nozzles would be at least known to the J20A design team when they were working on the redesign.
Given that, imo the rectangular nozzle not appearing on them can mean one of two things. 1: we’re currently seeing a stopgap solution and eventually J20A would have rectangular nozzles. IMO unlikely as this would basically require a redesign of the whole rear fuselage, at that point just wait a bit more and use the new nozzle from the get-go, instead of building a few dozen with the WS10C before switching. 2: it’s deemed not worth the effort, due to technical, financial, insufficient performance boost, or any of a bunch of other reasons.
I apologize for the lazy-sounding answer, but since the tech was clearly available (at least conceptually), the decision to not incorporate it means that the team thought the benefits are not worth the effort.
Why did PLAAF/PLAN largely avoid acquiring Mikoyan aircraft (Mig-19 being the notable exception)? Why not Mig-25, -27, -29?
MiG-29 is too short legged to be considered and basically does the same thing as J-10, although it was initially offered.
MiG-27 is pretty bad for what it is and China has stuff like JH-7 which is better in basically every way.
MiG-25 is niche and has obsolete electronics and MiG-31 is not offered for export.