CGI - Possible configuration of the Boeing F-47 NGAD

[jwp023]

Hello, new to the site. Done plenty of similar research on configurations, checking internal volumes, et cetera. I've put together many variants of my own speculative design on Instagram. I am really just commenting here to say I am stunned by Reddington's initial wing planform guess, way before this thermal leak. The lambda and double chevron thing at the aft. Almost exact geometry. I've never seen a guess so good. Attached, just for fun, are some renders of the model I put together.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

This is exactly what I imagined. Nice job.

 

[insidersource]

That outer wing tip would also have enough ground clearance where it could fold straight down for a carrier version. This also allows for a much lighter folding mechanism compared to the traditional upwards folding wing tip. The lift created during flight would naturally cause it to stay in the up/locked position. That is extremely smart engineering.

 

[jymp]

This is exactly what I imagined. Nice job.

Close to what I'd imagine too, try it with the intakes on top of the fuselage ?

 

[FighterJock]

Air intakes on top of the fuselage? That would be counter productive to supermaneuvrability.

 

[Reddington777]

I dig the ventral intake and DSI

 

[FlyGuy369]

Better send this off to Bandai Namco and get it in the next ace combat!

 

[Scott Kenny]

Hello, new to the site. Done plenty of similar research on configurations, checking internal volumes, et cetera. I've put together many variants of my own speculative design on Instagram. I am really just commenting here to say I am stunned by Reddington's initial wing planform guess, way before this thermal leak. The lambda and double chevron thing at the aft. Almost exact geometry. I've never seen a guess so good. Attached, just for fun, are some renders of the model I put together.

I'd love that as a 3d print file...

Now I just need to come up with Check Your Six stats for the beast.

 

[EmoBirb]

Air intakes on top of the fuselage? That would be counter productive to supermaneuvrability.

Which is of little relevance for modern network centric warfare. The F-47 ideally never has to conduct WVR combat.

When you have a squadron of sensors and weapons carriers that fly out, as well as carrying potent sensors and long range missiles yourself, your aircraft can be a literal pig in the air.

 

[PocketAce]

There are also Ollysaerospace's renders on Insta:

 

[quellish]

Which is of little relevance for modern network centric warfare. The F-47 ideally never has to conduct WVR combat.

Well, life can be full of little short ranged surprises.

 

[skyblue]

When you have a squadron of sensors and weapons carriers that fly out, as well as carrying potent sensors and long range missiles yourself, your aircraft can be a literal pig in the air.

By that logic, the B-21 with a flock of CCAs would be sufficient. A whole lot of analyses has determined it isn't.

 

[insidersource]

This image perfectly highlights why the landing gear appears so tall in the night vision video.
The wing tip in this rendering is far too close to the ground to handle a cross wind landing. This design needs a very tall landing gear. Also consider the Boeing demonstrator was designed for the Navy that rendering has insufficient clearance for a tail hook. The height of the landing gear would probably have to double.

 

[EmoBirb]

By that logic, the B-21 with a flock of CCAs would be sufficient. A whole lot of analyses has determined it isn't.

There's quite a difference between a not-so-maneuverable supersonic fighter jet and a subsonic strategic bomber. I'm unsure why I have to even point this out.

 

[quellish]

Also consider the Boeing demonstrator was designed for the Navy that rendering has insufficient clearance for a tail hook.

Please provide your evidence that supports these statements.

 

[insidersource]

Please provide your evidence that supports these statements.

Here is some flight math for you.
https://code7700.com/flight_math.htm#wingtiphit

There are clear design rules for engine and wing tip clearance. Countless examples where fitting new larger diameter engines had ground clearance issues. These engines are also half way down the wing. The wing tip in this rendering is extremely close to the ground. Even a slight 5 degree bank angle has it hitting the ground.

You keep requesting evidence for things that are so blatantly obvious. I beg you to not reply to this message as the evidence has been provided. The artist can tweak their rendering if they want.

 

[red admiral]

You keep requesting evidence for things that are so blatantly obvious. I beg you to not reply to this message as the evidence has been provided.

You haven't provided any "evidence" that's related to tail hook location and / or geometry.

 

[MihoshiK]

People still cluttering up a thread by arguing with someone who is not an insider, and has no sources. The Ignore button exists for a reason.

 

[donnage99]

That outer wing tip would also have enough ground clearance where it could fold straight down for a carrier version. This also allows for a much lighter folding mechanism compared to the traditional upwards folding wing tip. The lift created during flight would naturally cause it to stay in the up/locked position. That is extremely smart engineering.

if your design relies on lift whether partially or not as a factor to lock the wings in position then changing of lift force (L) would also be a factor - not exactly a bright idea from mechanical, structural, or aerodynamic point of view.

 

[insidersource]

if your design relies on lift whether partially or not as a factor to lock the wings in position then changing of lift force (L) would also be a factor - not exactly a bright idea from mechanical, structural, or aerodynamic point of view.

That is incorrect.

The vast majority of the wing structural loads is an upwards force. With the traditional wing fold mechanism if the locking mechanism failed the wing tip can fold upwards as that is the direction it usually folds.

With this wing mechanism if the locking mechanism failed the wing tip can't go further upwards as the wing pivot joint would not allow it. The wing pivot only allows it to fold downwards.

The locking mechanism on the F-47 would only need to handle downward forces. These are a tiny fraction of the load. Aircraft only get a high angle of attack in the positive direction. They do not get a negative angle of attack that would cause a downward force on the wing.

The only downward forces on the wing would be from rolling and this would be a single digit percentage of the upwards load when at a high angle of attack.

The downward folding mechanism could probably be 10-20% of the weight of the upwards folding mechanism.

 

[targetpractice]

Friends, please can we not have another thread turn into page after page of frustrated responses to the one troll?

Just hit ignore.

 

[jwp023]

I'd love that as a 3d print file...

Now I just need to come up with Check Your Six stats for the beast.

I've had a lot of people reach out to me for this, and other stuff too, seems people like the model, which is cool. I've spent the last few days making a larger variant; the one shown is too small to meet range requirements for a US variant but would be perfect for a European variant. Larger variant attached; I also redid the nozzles and a good amount of the empennage to fit a model I made of the XA103 more accurately. I'm not sure how to handle the gear and am working on that now. There doesn't seem to be quite enough room to do F-22 style, since the engines are further apart here. Either will have to go F-35-style (maybe even retracting backwards), or somehow get them to go between the engines, not sure how that would work.

 

[jwp023]

I've had a lot of people reach out to me for this, and other stuff too, seems people like the model, which is cool. I've spent the last few days making a larger variant; the one shown is too small to meet range requirements for a US variant but would be perfect for a European variant. Larger variant attached; I also redid the nozzles and a good amount of the empennage to fit a model I made of the XA103 more accurately. I'm not sure how to handle the gear and am working on that now. There doesn't seem to be quite enough room to do F-22 style, since the engines are further apart here. Either will have to go F-35-style (maybe even retracting backwards), or somehow get them to go between the engines, not sure how that would work.

There is a chance it could get away with this, kind of F-22 gear but flipped across the longitudinal axis

 

[jwp023]

There is a chance it could get away with this, kind of F-22 gear but flipped across the longitudinal axis

 

[donnage99]

That is incorrect.

The vast majority of the wing structural loads is an upwards force. With the traditional wing fold mechanism if the locking mechanism failed the wing tip can fold upwards as that is the direction it usually folds.

With this wing mechanism if the locking mechanism failed the wing tip can't go further upwards as the wing pivot joint would not allow it. The wing pivot only allows it to fold downwards.

The locking mechanism on the F-47 would only need to handle downward forces. These are a tiny fraction of the load. Aircraft only get a high angle of attack in the positive direction. They do not get a negative angle of attack that would cause a downward force on the wing.

The only downward forces on the wing would be from rolling and this would be a single digit percentage of the upwards load when at a high angle of attack.

The downward folding mechanism could probably be 10-20% of the weight of the upwards folding mechanism.

I got what you’re saying the first time. When I said “changing of lift force” it doesnt imply mean there’s significant downward force

 

[insidersource]

Either will have to go F-35-style (maybe even retracting backwards), or somehow get them to go between the engines, not sure how that would work.

It retracts backwards. The landing gear doors are open in the night vision video. They are clearly to the rear. Here's the Boeing MQ-28.



The night vision video suggests the landing gear doors are about 50% longer than the MQ-28 relative to the aircraft length. A taller gear is required due to the downward tips being at the back of aircraft.

The F-22, F-35 and Su-57 all have bulges due to how their landing gear retracts. The F-47 being a delta wing the thickest part of the wing is aft of the landing gear. Retracting to the rear is obviously the best solution. There is a nice empty space beside each engine.

 

[quellish]

The F-47 being a delta wing the thickest part of the wing is aft of the landing gear.

Do you have a photo of this “F-47 delta wing”?

 

[Rbyn512]

Also consider the Boeing demonstrator was designed for the Navy

Where'd you get this from?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

He pulled it out of his ass, just like every other post he ever made.

@insidersource is banned from the forum for being an insufferable troll.

 

[Hull down]

He pulled it out of his ass, just like every other post he ever made.

@insidersource is banned from the forum for being an insufferable troll.

surreal to finally see it happen lol

 

[FlyGuy369]

Okay update time:

Been grinding really hard at this for some time. It is a large aircraft, around 70ft, engine spec is 110K lbs thrust w/ab. Had to pay my homage to the X-36 with the paint job! Got all of the control laws finally dialed in from what materials and resources I could study. Everything from canard function to X-36 flight test footage. This is just a very basic model with more to come!

 

[Low IQ Techie]

Quick edit of F-22

 

[Reddington777]

He pulled it out of his ass, just like every other post he ever made.

@insidersource is banned from the forum for being an insufferable troll.

End of an era.

It was like watching divest being banned from r/noncredibledefense.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

He wasn't generally breaking rules as such, just....

 

[Scott Kenny]

He wasn't generally breaking rules as such, just....

Talking out of his ass more than I do.

 

[jwp023]

did a lot of work over the last few days, using the two published images, among many many other constraints, im now significantly more confident in this design. aligns basically perfectly with both the renders, and the infrared video as well

 

[jwp023]

Quick edit of F-22

whats the stuff on the canopy?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

whats the stuff on the canopy?

Rainbow sparkles.

 

[Low IQ Techie]

whats the stuff on the canopy?

The original artist uses those marks to depict large glass surface like canopy.

 

[Desertfox]

did a lot of work over the last few days, using the two published images, among many many other constraints, im now significantly more confident in this design. aligns basically perfectly with both the renders, and the infrared video as well

I love the "Revenge of the X-32" vibes it gives.