zt台风飞飞再谈推力矢量:没那么恐怖

来源:百度文库 编辑:超级军网 时间:2024/04/29 14:20:23
http://www.acewings.com/cobrache ... 105&whichpage=5
“推力矢量仅仅是提供一个射击机会,而且会自损能量!”
“多年以来,我们和东方的推力矢量战机(大MKI又躺枪)多次切磋,取得了很让他们丢脸的交换比!”
“台风有专属头瞄!和猛禽斗狗几次之后我们觉得是不相上下的!现在说推力矢量和头瞄哪个更管用还为时尚早!”
We have all been around long enough to recognize there is not a single sensor able to turn the night into day, nor a unique aerodynamic design feature capable of ensuring by itself air dominance if implemented.

The effectiveness of an air superiority fighter relies on the successful combination of a range of design elements including thrust-to-weight ratio, wing loading, avionics and weapons integration. Furthermore, : appropriate tactics and valuable aircrew training must be developed to exploit the full potential of the weapon system.

Typically, when time comes to decide how to achieve the required “nose pointing capability” for high thrust-to-weight ratio airplanes three solutions are on the table:

- extremely high short term sustained Angle of Attack values (characteristic of twin tailed airplanes);
- High Off-Bore-Sight Weapons, preferably supported by Helmet Cueing;
- Thrust Vectoring.

Thrust Vectoring is one of the design elements that can contribute to create a certain advantage during close air combat by generating impressive pitch and yaw rates, but only in a limited portion of the flight envelope at velocities well below “corner speed”.

However, Thrust Vectoring can also transform in a few seconds an energy fighter in a piece of metal literally falling off the sky, making it an easy prey for those who have been able to conserve their energy.

Moreover, Thrust Vector operation requires the pilot to “create the opportunity” for its usage, spending valuable time in manoeuvring the aircraft to achieve a suitable condition and managing the activation of the Thrust Vector Control.

If you are “defensive” and your aircraft has Thrust Vectoring, you can possibly outturn your enemy, but that most likely won’t prove to be a great idea: an energy fighter like the Typhoon will conveniently “use the vertical” to retain energy and aggressively reposition for a missile or gun shot. Also the subsequent acceleration will be extremely time (and fuel) consuming, giving your opponent the opportunity to tail chase you for ever, exploiting all its short range weapon array.

If you are “neutral”, when typically vertical, rolling and flat scissors would accompany the progressive energy decay, similarly performing machines would remain closely entangled, negating the opportunity for Thrust Vector activation.

If you are “offensive”, probably stuck in a never ending “rate fight”, Thrust Vector could provide the opportunity for a couple of shots in close sequence. Make sure nobody is coming to you from the “support structure”, otherwise that could be also your last move.

Talking of twin tailed aircraft, Angles of Attack in excess of 30-35 degrees are capable of creating drag conditions unsustainable no matter the engine/airframe matching, and developing energy decays intrusive of the tactical flying but also of the flight control system protections. Roll rates would also deteriorate at the higher values of AoA and target tracking ability would quickly decay.

Eurofighter has decided to develop for the Typhoon High Off-Bore-Sight Weapons, supported by Helmet Cueing, to retain energy and target tracking ability while manoeuvring WVR (Within Visual Range) at relatively high but sustainable Angles of Attack. For those who may require some additional AoA, the “Strakes” package is progressing well and soon it will be offered to Typhoon’s Customers. Nevertheless, Strakes is not purely about extreme AoA, but also suitable Roll Rates and manageble energy characteristics. Because in the European way of doing things, an all round balanced solution counts more than a single eye opening performance.

It is a fact that against Eastern produced fighters provided with Thrust Vectoring, throughout the years the Typhoon has showed an embarasing (for them) kill-to-loss ratio.

It is a fact that after some initial encounters between the Raptor and the Typhoon, the situation appears of absolute equity. Too early to say if it is the Helmet Cueing or the Thrust Vector, or how much tactics and training are a player in all this. For sure, we are facing two impressively capable machines.
http://www.acewings.com/cobrache ... 105&whichpage=5
“推力矢量仅仅是提供一个射击机会,而且会自损能量!”
“多年以来,我们和东方的推力矢量战机(大MKI又躺枪)多次切磋,取得了很让他们丢脸的交换比!”
“台风有专属头瞄!和猛禽斗狗几次之后我们觉得是不相上下的!现在说推力矢量和头瞄哪个更管用还为时尚早!”
We have all been around long enough to recognize there is not a single sensor able to turn the night into day, nor a unique aerodynamic design feature capable of ensuring by itself air dominance if implemented.

The effectiveness of an air superiority fighter relies on the successful combination of a range of design elements including thrust-to-weight ratio, wing loading, avionics and weapons integration. Furthermore, : appropriate tactics and valuable aircrew training must be developed to exploit the full potential of the weapon system.

Typically, when time comes to decide how to achieve the required “nose pointing capability” for high thrust-to-weight ratio airplanes three solutions are on the table:

- extremely high short term sustained Angle of Attack values (characteristic of twin tailed airplanes);
- High Off-Bore-Sight Weapons, preferably supported by Helmet Cueing;
- Thrust Vectoring.

Thrust Vectoring is one of the design elements that can contribute to create a certain advantage during close air combat by generating impressive pitch and yaw rates, but only in a limited portion of the flight envelope at velocities well below “corner speed”.

However, Thrust Vectoring can also transform in a few seconds an energy fighter in a piece of metal literally falling off the sky, making it an easy prey for those who have been able to conserve their energy.

Moreover, Thrust Vector operation requires the pilot to “create the opportunity” for its usage, spending valuable time in manoeuvring the aircraft to achieve a suitable condition and managing the activation of the Thrust Vector Control.

If you are “defensive” and your aircraft has Thrust Vectoring, you can possibly outturn your enemy, but that most likely won’t prove to be a great idea: an energy fighter like the Typhoon will conveniently “use the vertical” to retain energy and aggressively reposition for a missile or gun shot. Also the subsequent acceleration will be extremely time (and fuel) consuming, giving your opponent the opportunity to tail chase you for ever, exploiting all its short range weapon array.

If you are “neutral”, when typically vertical, rolling and flat scissors would accompany the progressive energy decay, similarly performing machines would remain closely entangled, negating the opportunity for Thrust Vector activation.

If you are “offensive”, probably stuck in a never ending “rate fight”, Thrust Vector could provide the opportunity for a couple of shots in close sequence. Make sure nobody is coming to you from the “support structure”, otherwise that could be also your last move.

Talking of twin tailed aircraft, Angles of Attack in excess of 30-35 degrees are capable of creating drag conditions unsustainable no matter the engine/airframe matching, and developing energy decays intrusive of the tactical flying but also of the flight control system protections. Roll rates would also deteriorate at the higher values of AoA and target tracking ability would quickly decay.

Eurofighter has decided to develop for the Typhoon High Off-Bore-Sight Weapons, supported by Helmet Cueing, to retain energy and target tracking ability while manoeuvring WVR (Within Visual Range) at relatively high but sustainable Angles of Attack. For those who may require some additional AoA, the “Strakes” package is progressing well and soon it will be offered to Typhoon’s Customers. Nevertheless, Strakes is not purely about extreme AoA, but also suitable Roll Rates and manageble energy characteristics. Because in the European way of doing things, an all round balanced solution counts more than a single eye opening performance.

It is a fact that against Eastern produced fighters provided with Thrust Vectoring, throughout the years the Typhoon has showed an embarasing (for them) kill-to-loss ratio.

It is a fact that after some initial encounters between the Raptor and the Typhoon, the situation appears of absolute equity. Too early to say if it is the Helmet Cueing or the Thrust Vector, or how much tactics and training are a player in all this. For sure, we are facing two impressively capable machines.
矢量推力的意义在于超音速配平和机动,是用于BVR的,亚音速狗斗中的作用并没有头瞄大。
MKI、F22,和台风演习过的灰机一贯是这个下场
壮哉,TVC+头瞄
涡轮 发表于 2013-2-26 16:02
MKI、F22,和台风演习过的灰机一贯是这个下场
不过台风输的更惨
我们都在足够长的时间来认识还没有一个单独的传感器能够把黑夜变成白昼,也没有一个独特的空气动力学设计功能可确保本身如果实现空中优势。

的有效性的一个空中优势战斗机依靠成功的组合一系列设计元素包��推力重量比、翼载荷,航空电子设备和武器集成。此外,适当的策略和价值:机组训练必须开发利用潜力的武器系统。

通常,当时间来决定如何实现所需的“鼻子指向能力”为高推力重量比飞机三个解决方案在桌子上:

——非常高的短期持续攻角值(特征的双跟踪飞机);
——高了瞄准线武器,最好由头盔提示;
——推力矢量。

推力矢量技术是其中的一个设计元素,可以有助于创建一个特定的优势在近距离空中作战产生令人印象深刻的倾斜和偏航率,但只有在有限的一部分飞行包线在速度远低于“角落速度”。

然而,推力矢量也可以变换在几秒钟一个能源战斗机在一块金属字面上掉下来的天空,使它一个简单的猎物对那些已经能够节约能源。

此外,推力矢量操作要求飞行员“创造机会”作为其用法,花费宝贵的时间在操纵飞机达到一个合适的条件和管理激活的推力矢量控制。

如果你是“防御性”和你的飞机有推力矢量,你可能到货你的敌人,但这很可能不会被证明是一个好主意:能源战斗机像台风将方便地”使用垂直“保留能量和积极地重新定位为一个导弹或发炮。也随后的加速度将极其时间(和燃料)消费,给你的对手机会的尾巴永远追你,利用所有的短射程武器阵列。

如果你是“中性的”,当通常垂直,轧制和扁平剪刀将伴随进步能源腐烂,同样执行机器将保持紧密纠缠,否定了推力矢量的机会激活。

如果你是“攻势”,可能困在一个没有结局的“汇率战”,推力矢量可以提供机会几个镜头近距离序列。确保没有人来你从“支持结构”,否则,也可能你最后的举动。

讨论双跟踪飞机、攻角和超过30 - 35度有能力创造阻力条件不可持续的无论发动机/机身匹配,和发展的能量衰侵入的战术飞行而且飞行控制系统的保护。卷利率还会恶化在更高的价值和目标跟踪的AoA的能力将快速衰减。

欧洲战斗机已经决定发展为台风高了瞄准线武器,由头盔暗示,保留能量和目标跟踪能力而操纵视距内作战(在视觉范围)在相对较高但可持续的角度攻击。对于那些可能需要一些额外的AoA,“侧视图”一揽子计划进展顺利,很快它将提供给台风的客户。不过,也不是纯粹为极端的侧视图,但也适合辊农产品协定的利率和manageble能量特征。因为在欧���的做事方式,全面平衡解决方案数量超过一个单一的眼睛打开性能。

这是一个事实,对东部生产战斗机提供推力矢量,在整个年台风已经显示一个embarasing(为他们)杀死损失比率。

这是一个事实,经过了最初相遇的猛禽战斗机和台风,情况出现绝对的股本。太早说如果是头盔暗示或推力矢量,或多少的战术和训练是运动员在这一切。当然,我们正面临着两个令人印象深刻的机器能力。
台风就是在美国人面前捡个漏,,,真还得瑟上了,,,,
台风还和MKI玩过啊?
playfish 发表于 2013-2-26 15:59
矢量推力的意义在于超音速配平和机动,是用于BVR的,亚音速狗斗中的作用并没有头瞄大。
正解!没有推力矢量就不能超音速巡航!
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 16:59
正解!没有推力矢量就不能超音速巡航!
协和有TVC?
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 16:59
正解!没有推力矢量就不能超音速巡航!
是超音速机动吧
2013-2-26 17:03 上传

彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 16:59
正解!没有推力矢量就不能超音速巡航!
多么神奇的论点。
继J8枪挑F22之后-台风炮秒猛禽..........
thomas1987 发表于 2013-2-26 17:00
协和有TVC?
协和是民机,解决方法不一样!


台风真是好意思!!在低空绕圈联F16都干不过,真心的悲剧。

台风真是好意思!!在低空绕圈联F16都干不过,真心的悲剧。
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 17:07
协和是民机,解决方法不一样!
那就不存在没有TVC就不能超巡的问题了,真正的说法应该是没有TVC,就没有超音速机动能力,TVC提供的是超音速条件下的配平手段,对达到超巡本身并没有太大意思
正解!没有推力矢量就不能超音速巡航!
协和,sr71有矢推?

thomas1987 发表于 2013-2-26 17:09
那就不存在没有TVC就不能超巡的问题了,真正的说法应该是没有TVC,就没有超音速机动能力,TVC提供的是超音 ...


配平阻力是超巡状态下最大的阻力,协和是通过从后往前喷油解决这个问题的,但是军机不可以,只能用TVC
thomas1987 发表于 2013-2-26 17:09
那就不存在没有TVC就不能超巡的问题了,真正的说法应该是没有TVC,就没有超音速机动能力,TVC提供的是超音 ...


配平阻力是超巡状态下最大的阻力,协和是通过从后往前喷油解决这个问题的,但是军机不可以,只能用TVC
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 17:16
配平阻力是超巡状态下最大的阻力,协和是通过从后往前喷油解决这个问题的,但是军机不可以,只能用TVC

米格25,SR-71,协和这些都没有TVC,但都可以长时间保持超音速飞行,但是他们不能在超音速状态下做高G机动,因为他们没有TVC,TVC最主要的作用是在超巡状态下提供另一种配平手段,让超音速机动变成可能,但要进行超音速飞行的话,主要发动机推力大,升阻比够好都可以,TVC并不是必须的
ZQSMA 发表于 2013-2-26 17:03
多么神奇的论点。
超音速重心后移,配平力矩加大,也不能说没有作用
thomas1987 发表于 2013-2-26 17:23
米格25,SR-71,协和这些都没有TVC,但都可以长时间保持超音速飞行,但是他们不能在超音速状态下做高G机 ...
    呵呵,其实你没明白我的意思。超音速状态下会引起气动焦点后移,为了保持巡航飞行状态,需要平尾偏转来配平,这样就是产生很大的配平阻力,F-22通过减小机翼和平尾的距离来较小配平的力臂,另一方面通过TVC来代替平尾偏转消除配平阻力。协和通过从后往前喷油来平衡气动焦点的后移。而米格25根本就不是真正的超巡,只是带的油多,可以长时间加力飞行。而SR-71的情况比较特殊,在超音速状态下是“冲压”模式,同一般战斗机不同。
    所以超音速飞行很容易,但要保证在超音速状态下巡航就必须尽量减小超音速阻力,尤其是配平阻力,所以TVC必不可少。
aegisangel 发表于 2013-2-26 17:30
超音速重心后移,配平力矩加大,也不能说没有作用

作用是有,不过不是必须的,仅仅就超巡而言,尤其是这东西和飞机自身设计有关,静不安定设计的飞机对于超音速飞行导致气动焦点后移带来的配平阻力上升并不一定会超过亚音速状态,一口咬死必须TVC太过了。
不过台风输的更惨
忘了加个前提,是台风飞飞的口水中的下场
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 17:35
呵呵,其实你没明白我的意思。超音速状态下会引起气动焦点后移,为了保持巡航飞行状态,需要平尾偏转 ...
F22的平尾是大而且靠后,这样能够达到较大的配平效率,尽可能小的偏转角度达到配平效果,另一方面TVC也是重要配平手段,这都没问题

但是并不能说没有TVC就不能超巡,我不管你超巡是怎么达到的,开不开家里,反正就气动设计这方面,长时间超音速飞行就成,那么米格25这种二代机也能做到,无非配平阻力大点,平尾偏转角度大点而已,长时间保持超音速飞行时没问题的,这就是说,有没有TVC和能不能保持长时间超音速飞行之间是没有必然关联的。TVC对减少配平阻力,提高超巡效率当然有好处,但不能说没有TVC就不能超巡,这是不对的

应该说没有TVC就没有超音速机动能力,单靠平尾配平,超音速下平尾偏转角度已经到了极限,没有操作余量去控制机动,这时候就是TVC发挥作用的时候的,这也是为什么米格25,SR-71这些都能够长时间超音速,但却不能超音速机动的原因
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 17:35
呵呵,其实你没明白我的意思。超音速状态下会引起气动焦点后移,为了保持巡航飞行状态,需要平尾偏转 ...
好像这位对配平这个词的理解和我们不一样啊
是,我的表述有问题,你的说法是对的
好像这位对配平这个词的理解和我们不一样啊
我只是一知半解,诚恳向你请教陪平的意思
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 17:07
协和是民机,解决方法不一样!
这话题好像世纪先锋论坛的F-16无敌神教发过
“台风有专属头瞄!和猛禽斗狗几次之后我们觉得是不相上下的!现在说推力矢量和头瞄哪个更管用还为时尚早!”
========================================================================
如果台风遇到f22时,能够幸运的将f22拖进狗斗时间的话,能捞几分算几分吧~~~~!!!
thomas1987 发表于 2013-2-26 17:09
那就不存在没有TVC就不能超巡的问题了,真正的说法应该是没有TVC,就没有超音速机动能力,TVC提供的是超音 ...

为什么超音速机动必须要有TVC?舵面力臂长点,面积大点,效率高点,静不稳定度再多放宽点照样可以做到啊。
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 17:48
我只是一知半解,诚恳向你请教陪平的意思
配平,字面理解,保持飞机姿态平衡吧;
飞机在不同速度、高度、温度甚至载荷情况下,升力和阻力(及其中心点位置)都不一样,需要气动面或者矢推的动作来保持或者恢复平衡;

门外汉,字面理解。
dsandy1 发表于 2013-2-26 17:58
为什么超音速机动必须要有TVC?舵面力臂长点,面积大点,效率高点,静不稳定度再多放宽点照样可以做到啊 ...
总得有个极限不是?舵面面积和力臂又不是可以无限增加的,静不稳定度也不是单纯的越大越好,综合起来TVC还是比较现实和合适的技术手段
彭总关帝神 发表于 2013-2-26 17:48
我只是一知半解,诚恳向你请教陪平的意思
这里有所涉及:
http://www.afwing.com/intro/f22/1.htm

----------
(摘)
......
  而配平能力则往往容易被人忽略。机翼的高升力是拉出大过载的基础,但升力越大,产生的俯仰力矩也越大。如果飞机自身不能提供足够的俯仰配平力矩,那么要么进入上仰发散状态而失控,要么被机翼升力产生的低头力矩压回去,无法拉到需要的迎角。特别是在超音速条件下,飞机焦点大幅度后移,机翼升力产生的低头力矩相当大,进行超音速机动需要更强的配平能力。以超音速性能著称的米格-25,就是由于配平原因而无法进行较大过载的超音速机动——该机超音速平飞时,平尾偏转就已接近极限,能用于超音速机动的余量相当小,所以虽然机体可以承受更大的载荷,但 M2 时的最大盘旋过载仅有 3G。

  要解决配平问题,一是大幅放宽静稳定度,将飞机焦点前移。这样超音速飞行时飞机焦点虽然仍会后移,但距离重心近,产生的低头力矩相对较小。不过,这样一来飞机在亚音速大迎角机动时同样会面临配平问题——这次是配平机翼产生的抬头力矩。被媒体过分渲染的近耦鸭式布局,由于鸭翼距离重心较近,配平能力不足,F-16 的总师哈瑞·希尔莱克就曾说过:“鸭翼最好的位置是在别人的飞机上。”广为人知的 LAVI 战斗机就始终未能解决大迎角配平问题。因此,在当年 ATF 方案论证时虽然出现过不少鸭式布局方案(老航迷们应该还记得 80 年代采用鸭式布局的“YF-22”的想象图),但 F-22 最终还是选择了具有较强配平能力的正常式布局,纵向静稳定度也大幅放宽。解决配平的另一个途径是采用推力矢量控制(TVC)技术。采用 TVC,其主要优点有:在气动操纵面基础上又增加了一个配平手段,配平能力自然大幅增强;高速飞行时气动操纵面偏转将产生极大阻力,而采用 TVC 可以起到同样的操纵效果却无需偏转操纵面;TVC 并不仅仅是偏转推力矢量而产生法向分力,强大的发动机喷流将在后机身形成引射作用,产生新的“升力”增量,同时参与配平。F-22 的超音速机动性大幅提高,TVC 技术功不可没。
......

thomas1987 发表于 2013-2-26 18:01
总得有个极限不是?舵面面积和力臂又不是可以无限增加的,静不稳定度也不是单纯的越大越好,综合起来TVC还 ...


那不就和你说的超巡的配平一样了么?只不过是程度的问题,并不代表TVC是必须。除非你能证明超音速状态下TVC提供的俯仰力矩远高于舵面,以至于采用传统舵面在现有技术条件下几乎无法达到。

个人认为TVC唯一能确确实实做而传统舵面做不了的,就只有过失速状态下的姿态调整。
thomas1987 发表于 2013-2-26 18:01
总得有个极限不是?舵面面积和力臂又不是可以无限增加的,静不稳定度也不是单纯的越大越好,综合起来TVC还 ...


那不就和你说的超巡的配平一样了么?只不过是程度的问题,并不代表TVC是必须。除非你能证明超音速状态下TVC提供的俯仰力矩远高于舵面,以至于采用传统舵面在现有技术条件下几乎无法达到。

个人认为TVC唯一能确确实实做而传统舵面做不了的,就只有过失速状态下的姿态调整。
tvc和头瞄间有一定要取舍么 还是22技术冻结时 头瞄还不成熟
zeroshana 发表于 2013-2-26 18:13
tvc和头瞄间有一定要取舍么 还是22技术冻结时 头瞄还不成熟
无疑后者;
不是头瞄不成熟,西方看不上简单的头瞄,直接发展复杂的头盔显示器,同时取代平显和头瞄;
结果到F35,才成为标配,仍然有信息处理复杂(比如全向光电周视处理具备“看穿”座舱能力时)导致的延时问题难以彻底解决。
ZQSMA 发表于 2013-2-26 17:37
作用是有,不过不是必须的,仅仅就超巡而言,尤其是这东西和飞机自身设计有关,静不安定设计的飞机对于 ...
应该说超机动
aegisangel 发表于 2013-2-26 19:56
应该说超机动
实际依旧要看具体机型,哪怕是超音速机动,比如是M1.5还是M2.5?这个区别可就大了。
ZQSMA 发表于 2013-2-26 19:58
实际依旧要看具体机型,哪怕是超音速机动,比如是M1.5还是M2.5?这个区别可就大了。
1.5是三代机典型吧?四代机哪个不是告诉接近,发射然后脱离的?

T50那个奇葩你当我没说