Separate engines are not good idea since they will be a ballast during the flight.
It's still a better idea if they couldn't build an efficient combined engine.
its hull is too fat
So was SR-71
Latest Thread
Separate engines are not good idea since they will be a ballast during the flight.
its hull is too fat
Except it isnt. There is nothing that indicates it now having a S-duct intake unless you have a clear frontal view picture proving otherwise.
Obviously maneuvering is not a priority there.The only "6th gen" designs with vertical stabilizers are from nations that have not even built a 5th gen yet. Both F/A-XX and NGAD are supposed to be tailless as well as the other chinese SAC prototype. I am certain both the US and China have a very good understanding of how future air warfare will look like in regards to their fighter designs.
2 engines are better. Thats why u dont see 3 engine passenger planes anymore.3 engines might simply be necessary for its missions capabilities regarding range, speed and energy generation to power all kinds of new gen systems, whilst still retaining a compact design
Not at all.So was SR-71
Or it simply has s-ducts inlets like the F-22/KF-21/ KaanProbably they mastered some new physics which could not do designers of YF-23 and Su-57.
2 engines are better. Thats why u dont see 3 engine passenger planes anymore.