Do canards really affect RCS negatively or not?

Do canards really affect RCS negatively or not?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, some more than others

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Depends on the country who does It

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why not just make the canards out of a radar transparent material like fiberglass or something?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Not the canard themselves, but the axis around which they rotate do.

      That would make the solid axis RCS problem worse.
      Canards were envisioned for both the ATF and the JSF.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >solid axis RCS problem
        IDK what that is.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          NTA but I think he means the Solid Axel.
          The bit that connects the Canard to the hull is under a lot of mechanical strain so you can't make it out of weaker material like fiberglass.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >the ATF
        What?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          He's talking about the YF-22 and YF-23.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >ATF
        >All Terrain Fighter

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That's what the J-20 does. The first problem with your plan is that you can't make a very large canard if you do that. There aren't any radar transparent materials that can hold integrity if a large canard is made out of them. The other problem is that the radar will still be able to see the canard root that anchors it to the plane, which means you still need to figure out how to stealthify the canards root.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >boeing

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    according to the Implessive team and some western sources: not particularly thanks to materials and computers but you are not going to get a publicly available answer this decade.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's pretty wild how all of these next generation designs have evolved all the way back to a 1950's design.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      den e så jävla cooool

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Do canards really affect RCS negatively or not?
    if the jet is "implessive" and from China *YES*, and they are absolutely cope bug shit

    if the jet is a .jpg concept from America,
    then canards are based, red-pilled and ~~*we*~~ always loved them right guys!
    hahaha look ~~*everyone*~~ point and laugh at the loser who doesnt
    >*plop*plop*plop*sexooooo canards!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      could you try that in English, rajesh?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >J20 canards = "implessive"
        >NGAD canards = based and redpilled 6th gen sexooo
        so easy, even an underpaid airperson can understand it

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          what are you talking about, rajesh? has your cow urine been extra nasty today?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >anti-china americans drowned in their own /k/oolaid
          So many such cases, so many...

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, there are ways to mitigate it(The j20 for example which has them angled causes side rcs and AOA rcs to increase drastically, but flat frontal aspect it has a minimal impact).

      But ultimately it affects it to some degree, if they're pure inline and sideline flat(best case scenario and what this bullshit display showed), you'll still get and increase from high aspects or vertical scanning in alt difference. Canards are not the best for stealth, but there's ways to make it work TM depending on the expected mission/flightstyle.

      >J20 canards = "implessive"
      >NGAD canards = based and redpilled 6th gen sexooo
      so easy, even an underpaid airperson can understand it

      have a nice day

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >have a nice day
        you first airperson
        falcons lead the way!

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >helmetard spreads to other threads
          Really gonna go the warriortard route?

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Depend of type of canards, the one in your pic is the same style as the J20 where the canards are on the same axis as the wings, so it doesn't affect rcs much.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Compared to what? A flying wing? Yes. A conventional design with horizontal stabilizers? No.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >canards affect RCS negatively
      >but not if you call them stabilizers and put them in the back
      this thinking is hillarious

      basically this

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      A bit however other planes like the F-22 have fully moving tail surfaces which are basically the same thing but on the back and it does fine.

      No, canards are worse. They are much smaller than tail surfaces and therefor have to actuate more to have effect. A tail surface shouldn't be creating reflective angles, a canard must create reflective angles. The only offending issue with tail surfaces is that when they actuate, the leading edge will no longer be in planeform alignment, but canards are always not in planeform alignment because they are tilted.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >No, canards are worse. They are much smaller than tail surfaces and therefor have to actuate more to have effect.
        You don't seem to know the first thing about aerodynamics or the kinematics of an airplane. They are smaller because they can be because they have more leverage because they are further from the center of mass. The center of mass is slightly in front of the main landing gear, which in supersonic airplanes is in the aft half.
        Compare how much the control surface need to actuate in these videos:

        #t=3m22s

        #t=10s

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Uh, you're posting videos where you seem to think that canard that is moving at least 20 degrees is moving less than that F-22, which is at most moving 10 degrees.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    A bit however other planes like the F-22 have fully moving tail surfaces which are basically the same thing but on the back and it does fine.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I'm a bigger fan of the Lockheed NGAD tbh

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      fricking scifi looking motherfricker, imagine how based it would be if this actually won

      https://i.imgur.com/VvegU3K.jpg

      Do canards really affect RCS negatively or not?

      yes
      but maybe those are pop-out canards? that would mitigate the problem

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I'm sorry but this flying triangle thing looks like shit

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >abloobloo it doesn't look like a traditional plane give me money
        >t. boring aerospace

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >It can go mach 3!
      >Surface temperature is as hot as a mojave dashboard, can be seen glowing for 1800 miles

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >AWACs and wingman drones mean strikes are conducted from 2400 miles away while moving at untouchable speeds
        Pshh... Nothing personnel, brownoid.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Every mechanical control surface inherently needs a break between itself and the fuselage/wing in order to move, that break is what fricks up RCS because it sometimes forms a right angle while pointing at the radar.

    The same plane with canards will always be less stealthy than if it didn't have them

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    When a canard moves it presents a larger surface area from the frontal aspect. If you look at a jet from the front, the vertical stabilizers are thin and harder to see. When you look from the side they are much larger and easier to see. Shaping and angles are real important. A J-20 without canards will always be stealthier than a J-20 with canards, it's just no one can tell you how much of a difference it really makes.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    /k/ has always been allied with canards

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The tail on the J-20 has always seemed more obviously sketchy to me.

    They have added additional lower vertical stabiliser surface on the bottom, like you commonly see on 4th gen and 3rd gen aircraft.
    This is usually done because at supersonic speeds you lose directional stability and therefore need more vertical stabiliser.

    However on a 5th gen aircraft you would think they would design without this, since it would obviously negatively impact signature and can be fixed in other ways, especially in an age of CFD and CAD.
    No US 5th gen design or proposal has this.

    IMO if there is good evidence that the J-20 LO is half assed then that would be it.
    Canards do negatively impact LO, but they aren't a deal breaker and there are very obvious reasons why you would want canards.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *