USA United States Air Force

[TR_123456]

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Looks kinda odd for a 6th gen.

It is personal view of the artist, otherwise the rear half design can be anything.
Let's see for how many weeks or months USA will hide its jet.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

I think they'll make 2 jets - 1 engine exportable future of JSF & 2 engine domestic future of ATF. Time will tell soon.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Another artist's good imagination:
> This is tandem tri-plane, but putting canard just in front of intake could obstruct airflow, unless onlyouter 2/3rd or half of canard moves.
> Bcoz of darkened flag in poster, some people are still speculating small all-moving rudders.
> Like Bird-of-Prey the wing can still be slightly tilted up with with drooped winglet, but He forgot to allign the bend-axis longitudinally parallel to length. Such wing adds to stability while a fighter needs to be unstable for agility.
> Such platipus like flatter nose could mean lesser pitch agility & little more RCS return by nose.
> Overall this looks like 1 engine exportable jet. I wonder how in Trump's words "nothing even comes close from speed to maneuverability to payload" & this is "most advanced, capable, lethal".

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Another artist imagines F-47 little longer, dihedral wing with anhedral winglet.
The wing root is shifted back & intakes are also much behind, not enough space for serpentine duct, so engine would be visible.
Engine bays are apart & middle space filled like in Su-57, so might have tandem IWBs.
Perfect side, front, bottom images not available.

Boeing F-47 Thunderstorm NGAD fighter | Galleries | Vehicle

6thgen | boeing | f-47 | fighter | jet | ngad | stealth | supersonic | thunderstorm

www.cgtrader.com

Boeing F-47 Thunderstorm NGAD - 3D model by NETRUNNER_pl

Boeing F-47 Thunderstorm NGAD Lowpoly model of new concept american stealth fighter The Boeing F-47 is a 6-generation fighter aircraft developed for the U.S. Air Force under the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program. It’s designed to succeed the F-22 Raptor, with enhanced stealth...

sketchfab.com

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Some 3D artist imagined & made 3D model & animation of F-47, whose fuselage looks like F/A-XX concept, upward tilted wings remind of Bird-of-Prey, engine bay hump reminds of YF-23.
So F-47 NGAD = F/A-XX + BoP + YF-23.
I'm putting a smaller collage as the images are huge, bigger than the collage.

View attachment 74224

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1904269703222083633

Some selected screenshots from animation showing specific angles to show airframe shape, parts:

View attachment 74225

The artist has updated a modified version w/o canard stating that USN doesn't wan't canards.
Well, this is opposite expectation if USAF wants canards but not USN bcoz the wing leading edge has high sweep angle means higher landing speed w/o canard.
I'm posting a collage again as the images are huge.
> Perhaps the nose & chine need more blending like in Rodrigo Avellas F/A-X concept for bigger & wider coverage radar.
> Wings have been made little Lambda style than Delta earlier.
> There doesn't seem to be any winglet.
> Intakes have DSI. The intake lower edge is ahead of upper edge (blended with wing root). This can be a problem if high AoA & tight turn is desired as some air can slip out over wing causing insufficient air flow & compressor stall. Giving aux-intakes below or moving lip like in EF-2000 would increase complexity & RCS.
> Parallel IWB not tandem & SWB have been marked.
> Engine bays quite far separated, the duct may not be serpentine enough, engine would be visible.
> Exhaust look like that of YF-23 w/o TVC.

It seems that this is going to become a standard look of all 6gen jets.
Blame game already started on who's copying whom‍. It is bcoz of planform shaping fundamental started since 5gen.

 

[Oublious]

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

The model in the CGI:

https://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/1750097

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

For common people like us it can actually be a big headache to imagine & estimate a new jet in 2D, unless we know how to use 3D CAD S/w.
Most 3D artists also make models w/o thinking too much themselves.

Let's take F-22 as foundation reference.
If we wan't a better TE jet as per 6gen features of more capacity of weapons, fuel, new components, then it'll be bigger. So if the size/volume/weight is more & if same or more dry/wet ATWR (Airframe Thrust to Weight Ratio) needs to be maintained, then more airframe weight -> more thrust -> more air -> more area of intake, duct & inlet.
For idea, F-22's F119 Vs F-35's F-135 engines: 100cm Vs 109cm inlet dia., 116/128 KN Vs 156/191 KN dry/wet thrust. 9% more inlet dia., almost 19% more area, 10.3% more dry thrust, 22.4% more wet thrust.

There is no fixed formula b/w area of intake/duct/inlet & thrust, let's assume 1:1 ratio in increase for easy understanding. So if we fit F-22 with a bigger & 33% better engine of 156*1.33= 207.5 KN, the challenges are -
- increase air flow by 33%, means increase area of intake, duct & inlet by 33%. Inlet diameter increases by square-root(1.33) times or 15.32%.
- increase payload & range, means lengthen the jet.
- restrict airframe volume to 133%.
- restrict airframe height to that of F-22 if possible.

If the airframe expands only in width & height then it is easy to estimate.
If the airframe expands in all 3 XYZ axis in same ratio then also it is easy to estimate.
But if all 3 axis have different ratios then we have to be careful not to eceed new volume/weight.

Option 1 - stretch the airframe length only by 33%, which will need tandem IWB for extra AAMs.
Option 2 - stretch the airframe width only by 33%, which can adjust 4 more AAMs easily.
Option 3 - stretch both airframe width & length by ratio such that X*Y=1.33, like 1.1*1.2 or 10% X 20%.

Exploring option-1 1st, the fuselage width remains same, area of intake, duct & engine increased, again there are 3 sub-options:
1A - expand area in width & height by 15.32%, engine can be pushed down, but intake slightly portrudes down & out, duct above IWB is manageable.
1B - expand area in height only by 33%, engine can be pushed down, but intake portrudes down more & duct above IWB produces bump.
1C - expand area in width only by 33%, engine is pushed down, intake portrudes out sideways but manageable, duct above IWB is manageable.

I don't have 3D CAD S/w, so I put the above options 3 sub-options in approximate cross section diagrams of F-22:

So we see that increased size/volume of 1 or some components or system affects other parts & entire airframe.
The engine power, size, weight is dictating design of stealth jet if same ATWR has to be maintained.

 

[Nilgiri]

For common people like us it can actually be a big headache to imagine & estimate a new jet in 2D, unless we know how to use 3D CAD S/w.
Most 3D artists also make models w/o thinking too much themselves.

Let's take F-22 as foundation reference.
If we wan't a better TE jet as per 6gen features of more capacity of weapons, fuel, new components, then it'll be bigger. So if the size/volume/weight is more & if same or more dry/wet ATWR (Airframe Thrust to Weight Ratio) needs to be maintained, then more airframe weight -> more thrust -> more air -> more area of intake, duct & inlet.
For idea, F-22's F119 Vs F-35's F-135 engines: 100cm Vs 109cm inlet dia., 116/128 KN Vs 156/191 KN dry/wet thrust. 9% more inlet dia., almost 19% more area, 10.3% more dry thrust, 22.4% more wet thrust.

There is no fixed formula b/w area of intake/duct/inlet & thrust, let's assume 1:1 ratio in increase for easy understanding. So if we fit F-22 with a bigger & 33% better engine of 156*1.33= 207.5 KN, the challenges are -
- increase air flow by 33%, means increase area of intake, duct & inlet by 33%. Inlet diameter increases by square-root(1.33) times or 15.32%.
- increase payload & range, means lengthen the jet.
- restrict airframe volume to 133%.
- restrict airframe height to that of F-22 if possible.

If the airframe expands only in width & height then it is easy to estimate.
If the airframe expands in all 3 XYZ axis in same ratio then also it is easy to estimate.
But if all 3 axis have different ratios then we have to be careful not to eceed new volume/weight.

Option 1 - stretch the airframe length only by 33%, which will need tandem IWB for extra AAMs.
Option 2 - stretch the airframe width only by 33%, which can adjust 4 more AAMs easily.
Option 3 - stretch both airframe width & length by ratio such that X*Y=1.33, like 1.1*1.2 or 10% X 20%.

Exploring option-1 1st, the fuselage width remains same, area of intake, duct & engine increased, again there are 3 sub-options:
1A - expand area in width & height by 15.32%, engine can be pushed down, but intake slightly portrudes down & out, duct above IWB is manageable.
1B - expand area in height only by 33%, engine can be pushed down, but intake portrudes down more & duct above IWB produces bump.
1C - expand area in width only by 33%, engine is pushed down, intake portrudes out sideways but manageable, duct above IWB is manageable.

I don't have 3D CAD S/w, so I put the above options 3 sub-options in approximate cross section diagrams of F-22:

View attachment 74373

So we see that increased size/volume of 1 or some components or system affects other parts & entire airframe.
The engine power, size, weight is dictating design of stealth jet if same ATWR has to be maintained.

There are also things that cascade to aircraft stability and control when you fudge around dimensionally.

You create more of a lifting surface with say wideness relative to the C of G that needs to be taken into account in stabilizer sizing and placement and so on.

If the C of G itself is moved, then the whole moment diagram is changed and this causes drastic size changes for same reason.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Perhaps the easiest full-scale F-47 look-alike TD/prototype modified from existing jet F-22.
The wing & tail-stab positions are interchanged & rudders removed.
Making its front, side, bottom views w/o 3D S/w by just imagining is very tedious at this time, what i used to do on graph sheets in school-days in 1990s watching F-117, B-2, deveoping F-22 on Discovery channel. The good old days
Anyways, i wonder if LM built such a jet for competition or research.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Here is the V2 with wing lengthened, leading edge angle increased.
The canard had to be shortened, maintaining planform design. With TVC nozzles, big canards may not be required.
I made the nose narrower, triangular to lessen drag & RCS.
Comparison with V1 is also shown.
The day i'll get a light weight, old, stable version of some 3D CAD S/w for my old laptop, i'll start translating these into 3D.
Feedbacks are welcome, i'm making a V3 also.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

YF-23's designer's conceptual view of F-47 NGAD:

YF-23 Designer Offers His Take On Boeing’s F-47 NGAD Configuration | Aviation Week Network

Renowned aircraft designer Darold Cummings explores questions raised by Boeing’s F-47 NGAD design.

aviationweek.com

F-22 is 62 ft. long & the drawing is quoted at 61 ft. which i don't is possible for a 6gen specs with bigger better engine, more fuel, weapons, equipment.
NGAD should be expected to be bigger than F-22. So, following is comparison with F-22 after comparing cockpit.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Artist Rodrigo Avella & some others made a CAD earlier speculated to be tail-less F/A-XX with canards.

Almost same model w/o canards have been depicted as NGAD, sometimes with rudders.

Comparing it with F-22, equalized at cockpit, looks like following:

 

[Yasar_TR]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1922919999406223595

upgraded new f35 coming.
plus
twin engined F35 = F55
a new upgraded f22 to come as well
all from the mouth of Mr Trump

 

[Zafer]

If they can find the right price they want to make new planes.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Here is the V2 with wing lengthened, leading edge angle increased.
The canard had to be shortened, maintaining planform design. With TVC nozzles, big canards may not be required.
I made the nose narrower, triangular to lessen drag & RCS.
Comparison with V1 is also shown.
The day i'll get a light weight, old, stable version of some 3D CAD S/w for my old laptop, i'll start translating these into 3D.
Feedbacks are welcome, i'm making a V3 also.

View attachment 74516

Version 3a & 3b with Lambda wing getting popular & nose triangular & double delta.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

I should have posted this before F-47 announcement when advertisements about the preliminary NGAD design speculations of delta, cropped diamond wings were floating. So Versions 4, 5 related to that.
And then V6c like SR-72, Darkstar.