Possible configuration of the Boeing F-47 NGAD

[Reddington777]

I mean thats pretty much what the two chinese stealth fighters look like. The intake, bays and engine sections of the fuselage has similar design to what the F-22 has but the wing shape and smoothing over the rest of the fuselage and nose is different.

There's little reason to deviate from the internal layout of the F-22 and the boxy underside of the fuselage is stealthy enough as is. The intakes, armaments and engines go in more or less the same place as they had on the F-22. Its mainly the nose section and wings that change.

 

[Seragina]

Here:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1922357672487080412

View: https://x.com/OfficialCSAF/status/1922357672487080412

Long-range and more payload has been stated many times before to congress arms committee.
Besides this deficit has been pretty much discussed almost right then when the F35 just came into service. People already talked about missileers and having bombers carry them...

 

[Seragina]

> When it comes to Air Mass Flow the smallest CS perpendicular to air flow is taken, not area of angled wedge inlet lip or outermost edges. So imagine a wedge intake like F-14/15/Su-3X with frontal CS as 1x1=1sqm, angled wedge edge area as 3 sqm, then 1x1 sqm matters.

Ofc cross section are always perpendicular who would do it otherwise.
Besides my statements referred to the aircraft section not the intake cross section which I stated and wrote on the image was divided into 33% and 66%.

Compared to original F-22 for example, a SLIT like narrow intake might look like following:
IDK if any X/Y jet with such intake.


What do mean by SKEW duct?

here for illustration (quick and dirty):

 

[Seragina]

I thought the benefit of the third stream from adaptive engines was a) higher bypass for cruise efficiency b) power generation c) cooling and for less conventional things like fluidic thrust vectoring or novel control effectors. Given the rumors the first spiral of F-47 won’t have a three stream engine, we probably have to wait some time for the more fully realized version (hopefully not as long as Block 4 F-35!).

The confusion we have is due to people & reporters not understanding what's been said.

The AETD demonstrator engine was projected too bee to big and costly for the F35, hence, was canceled.
If you look at the image

https://aviationweek.com/sites/default/files/styles/crop_freeform/public/2020-07/df-ngadtech_usairforce_promo.jpg

they modified an existing engine with big pipes and a huge nozzle section.
This modification exceeded any available or alloecateable space on legacy ACs. The additional mechanics for the planned nozzle also required more space and extended further behind the ACs. This would have broken their design center of mass etc.
That's why they said legacy engines won't get a 3rd stream. A complete redesign probably would have worked but it still wouldn't have worked for the new nozzle.

As for NGAP I've no doubt it will have it all and more. So conservatively I would assume a proportional area increase in diameter with thrust increase. Currently that's +20% or 42000 lbf class.

 

[Training_Dummy]

That’s not at all my understanding and I wouldn’t read anything into a non-production rig like that. AETP generated XA100/101 which would fit F-35A and C but not B. Hence the costs extend not only from designing for and implementing a new powerplant, but having to sustain and maintain two different engines for now five distinct flavors of F-35. Hence the ECU and PTM upgrade as being far more budget doable, despite it being more incremental in improvement.