I think f22 is too large for us. What is defined as long range and at what profiles. Typhoon sitting at 40K ft plus can take a gd payload a long way. At 200 ft not so much.mrclark303 wrote: ↑12 Sep 2022, 20:28I'm guessing something along F22 lines in size, long range is going to be vital to the British and Japanese.SW1 wrote: ↑12 Sep 2022, 18:54 Yeah they won’t compromise the design by placing niche and largely irrelevant requirements on the design.
The operations the aircraft will be required to do will largely dictate size and features on the a/c. Twin engines and large radar seem to feature so far. G rating at set altitude at given distance from base will largely dictate size. CAP duration 100nm may also drive fuel req depending on aar trade offs.
I’d be less keen on large internal fuel and payload bays, instead I would design in conformal tanks from the beginning that could be configured for other things or removed altogether for those less interested in range.
Designing an airframe large enough to retain the extensive avionics, the now vital high power generation ancillary equipment, fuel and large mixed AA/AG weapon loads internally, plus a possible direct energy weapon, in a stealthy package, dictates a large airframe by necessity.
Why all internal particularly a large air to ground load? Why all the sensors on a single platform, the very nature of a teaming system would be to move away from such things.