Search results

Personally, i think high supersonic speed for aircraft is quite overrated. They cant sustain those speed for long and they have tremendous amount of IR signature when doing so

Unless you get a different inlet , different engine (basically get new aircraft ), LCA wont get to Mach 2.5.

Because going faster is not that easy. It is a matter of trade-off. If you want to go fast , you normally need a variable inlet and a low bypass engine. Variable inlet is heavier and require more maintenance, low bypass engine have lower thrust and less fuel efficient. And going fast, you need...

When did they said they got LCA to Mach 2.5 with the F414 or did you just come up with that idea because you think more static thrust mean more speed ? Absolute nonsense, there is not a single aircraft flying today or in the next 20-30 years is rated for Mach 2.5 at all altitude, and i mean...

That not how it work, engine with higher static thrust rating doesn't get you to higher speed. Otherwise ,later F-16 and F-15 would be much faster than early version.

Expanded inlet only increase amount of air into the engine.General that would increase thrust at subsonic speed and static thrust. But to increase top speed , you will need abilities to create multiple shock to slow air down before it reach the turbine. And a fixed inlet will normally stopped...

Those figures seem overly optimistic to be honest. 20% improve in transonic acceleration is a massive improvement

Top speed mostly affected by inlet performance with a fixed inlet , it wont be able to go much faster than Mach 2