
Hello All,
I have received a lot of interest on this comparison, and it is honestly still going. Each aircraft has over 500 data points that must be looked up, cross checked, and calculated. Due to the time this is taking I figured I would go ahead and make the thread and let people know of my progress/limitations I am having.
Just to re-cap, I am comparing certain kinematic parameters for the Viper, the Viper with CFT, the Mudhen/Beagle/Strike Eagle, and "Stubby". All aircraft will have similar payloads (the F-35 will, when clean, have two fewer AAMs) and similar mission sets for both A2A and A2G. These missions are a 500nm CAP/Interdiction, in which loiter time will be measured, and Escort/Deep Strike, in which max range will be measured. Each mission will be calculated once with no external tanks, once with tanks retained, and once with tanks dropped. These again will all be calculated for both an Optimum cruise profile, in which cruise speeds and altitudes will be measured, and for an Operations Limited 20,000ft and 0.8M flight profile. In each case, the Structural G, Lift G, and Thrust (Sustained) G, available at the given cruise speed/altitude is calculated once at the 500nm point. The 0.8-1.2 level acceleration is also recorded to show excess transonic power available.
My calculations for the Stubby's performance is based on all the data that has been publicly released (most helpful of which was the statement of fuel burn at a given speed/alt), all data I have gathered over the last 14 years about dynamic trust, fuel burn, and wave drag, combined with my education as an Aerospace Engineer.
So Far my calculations show a few things to say I am on the right track, under the Op Limit case, Stubby has a radius of just under 600nm (remember, the range estimates are calculated using a "specific flight profile" among other assumptions) and an ability to sustain ~1.25M without Afterburner.
Currently my biggest logjam is decided where to put the Drag Divergence number for the Stubby as it greatly determines the Optimum Cruise speed. The F-16C and F-15E have a difference of ~0.06M when clean in this regard, with the Beagle being the higher of the two. The F-35 has a smaller frontal area than the Beagle, similar Mil Thrust, smaller wetted area, and when I look at all the various "bumps" on the F-35 I notice that as one decreases another grows trending to what is possibly a perfectly smooth (granted not the thinnest) area ruling.
More to come!
I have received a lot of interest on this comparison, and it is honestly still going. Each aircraft has over 500 data points that must be looked up, cross checked, and calculated. Due to the time this is taking I figured I would go ahead and make the thread and let people know of my progress/limitations I am having.
Just to re-cap, I am comparing certain kinematic parameters for the Viper, the Viper with CFT, the Mudhen/Beagle/Strike Eagle, and "Stubby". All aircraft will have similar payloads (the F-35 will, when clean, have two fewer AAMs) and similar mission sets for both A2A and A2G. These missions are a 500nm CAP/Interdiction, in which loiter time will be measured, and Escort/Deep Strike, in which max range will be measured. Each mission will be calculated once with no external tanks, once with tanks retained, and once with tanks dropped. These again will all be calculated for both an Optimum cruise profile, in which cruise speeds and altitudes will be measured, and for an Operations Limited 20,000ft and 0.8M flight profile. In each case, the Structural G, Lift G, and Thrust (Sustained) G, available at the given cruise speed/altitude is calculated once at the 500nm point. The 0.8-1.2 level acceleration is also recorded to show excess transonic power available.
My calculations for the Stubby's performance is based on all the data that has been publicly released (most helpful of which was the statement of fuel burn at a given speed/alt), all data I have gathered over the last 14 years about dynamic trust, fuel burn, and wave drag, combined with my education as an Aerospace Engineer.
So Far my calculations show a few things to say I am on the right track, under the Op Limit case, Stubby has a radius of just under 600nm (remember, the range estimates are calculated using a "specific flight profile" among other assumptions) and an ability to sustain ~1.25M without Afterburner.
Currently my biggest logjam is decided where to put the Drag Divergence number for the Stubby as it greatly determines the Optimum Cruise speed. The F-16C and F-15E have a difference of ~0.06M when clean in this regard, with the Beagle being the higher of the two. The F-35 has a smaller frontal area than the Beagle, similar Mil Thrust, smaller wetted area, and when I look at all the various "bumps" on the F-35 I notice that as one decreases another grows trending to what is possibly a perfectly smooth (granted not the thinnest) area ruling.
More to come!
"Spurts"
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer