
zero-one wrote:wrightwing wrote:
I suspect the agility requirements will be lower priority to range, payload, speed, signature reduction, and situational awareness.
That's my problem with the whole 1 size fits all design, you need range, speed, stealth and deep magazines and you would like to squeeze in some agility and speed too,
some of these cannot co exist. Range and deep magazines require size and weight which is the enemy of agility and speed. Since Agility and speed may be less required, your PCA will probably be a step backwards in performance over the aircraft it will eventually replace.
If PCA is a 7.5 g aircraft but can supercruise twice as far, accelerate much better, and with 1,000 nmi combat radius, is it really overall step backward in performance from F-22? Nothing sustains 9 g unless you're at low altitude anyways.
zero-one wrote:I don't have enough information on the P-80, but i guess there will be speeds where the P-80 has the upper hand. However I would also guess that the Su-27 has the advantage in most of the flight envelope.
If PCA will be at a disadvantage against the F-22 in most parts of the envelope then it will be an issue. Specially with the proliferation of Stealthy adversaries. The need to kill them before they get within range goes through the roof.
To me a very large aircraft that can go to China and back in one tank of gas from Hawaii with a very deep magazine seems to be an accurate description of the B-1, even the B-1 would need tankers for that, so it'll be bigger than a B-1. How that can be done while maintaining anywhere close to fighter like kinematics. It will most likely be a stealthy subsonic bomber like plane with dozens of missiles.
When people say more range it doesn't mean intercontinental, I don't know why you keep saying that. They're looking for a big leap over what F-22 can do, something like 1,000 nmi combat radius. You can do that and still have good maneuverability with advances in aerodynamics, but it's not something an F-22 derivative can do.