If they’re useless why are they still on production aircraft the? Why even bother to produce aircraft with them? If it was a majority downside for high speed maneuvering people wouldn’ produce canarded aircraft, theres obviously a benefit that you’re simply electing to ignore
1 Like
Because Irkut still needs to make planes in order to stay in production, they don’t want to close down the production line. If it wasn’t for the su30 they’d be useless, only other plane they make is the yak 130. Knappo makes the actually useful planes in the su34, su35 and su 57
1 Like
You’re mixing up low-speed / high-AoA controllability with supersonic control authority. They are governed by very different aerodynamics.
Case in point, even the regular F-15C/E retain high speed controllability. It’s in fact one of its great strength.
At high supersonic speeds, control comes mainly from:
- Tailplane authority
- Dynamic pressure (q) which is extremely high at Mach 1.5+
- Control surface size and leverage
- Structural stiffness and hinge moment capability
In fact, at high supersonic speeds, canards become less influential relative to the tail to the point of mattering very little.
Full-authority FBW and the all-moving tails are what give the Rafale, Eurofighter, and Gripen great control at Mach 1.5, NOT their canard. The F-15 also turns so well at these speeds despite having no canard because of huge all-moving stabilators, strong static stability, and massive wings + body lift.
I’m so confused……
1 Like
Edited as I remembered afterward that they’re not fixed on these. I was thinking of the Viggen, Kfir, and such. Though the rest of the post still stands.
if i am right there is 3 different canard in plane
-
normal fixed canard like the viggen and kfir, help creat more wing span area who help the plane stay in control in low speed
-
delta canard like the euro plane such as rafale / eft / gripen, i think these are the main control surface who help the aircraft having good control at higher speed without losing speed
-
flanker canard who we all know and love, basicly a help in both way as low speed (300kmh and less )control and subsonic speed (500 -800kmh)
i might be wrong so feel free to correct me
1 Like
Yes. I’ll go through the 3 one by one.
Fixed:
This is pretty much correct except one thing.
They act as lift augmenters and vortex generators. their main purpose is low-speed lift, stall delay, and short takeoff/landing.
They help low-speed controllability, but not by “adding wingspan”. They work by energizing airflow over the main wing.
Euro Delta Canard:
A lot to go through that isn’t correct.
They are not the main control surface at high speed, nor do they exist to preserve energy at high speed. At Mach 1.3+, tailplanes/elevons dominate control, not canards.
Canards here mainly provide:
- Trim optimization
- Lift balancing
- Stability shaping for relaxed-stability designs(In understandable words, the aircraft’s ‘natural’ aerodynamics are intentionally imperfect, and software + control surfaces fix that in real time.)
- Low-speed and transonic agility
Flanker canards:
Pretty much correct.
They significantly improve low-speed and high-AoA control, post-stall maneuvering, and nose-pointing authority in subsonic fights
At high supersonic speeds, they similarly play a secondary role to the tailplanes.
2 Likes
Aren’t the canards of the Viggen mobile, just not monoblock? IIRC there’s control surfaces at the trailing edge of the canards.
The viggen is probably an edge case because the canards are really large and designed like old elevator designs, they must generate consequent lift…
yes they can move and creat more lift but i think only for pitch up and not down.
160km is the range for aim120d. aim120d-3 is the most modern aim120 variant
its alot of top tier players rn. they all get top tier bombing in premiums and when they get to top tier just stay at multipath and shoot missiles with 0 thought
2 Likes
Is F-15EX also going to be in bomber line?
Makes sense I guess
Under the F-15E yeah I presume, makes the most sense tbf.
F-22 under the GE later on, possibly? (as rank IX ofc)
1 Like
F-35A in first line, F-22A in second line, F-35C in third line, F-35B in fourth line and Advanced Eagles in fifth line
I don’t look forward to Gen 5 lobbies where it’s just gonna be F35s and F22s on each team, I think we should stop asking for more slop content and look for real solutions, Air RB is an actual bloody mess and until as a community we start complaining about real gameplay problems rather than which nation is crushing everyone this update and which nation is suffering, we won’t see any QoL changes. Gen 5s won’t fix top tier Air RB for America, it might feel good to stomp everything with an F22 for a while but eventually it will all fade under the crushing weight of this gamemode’s failures.
4 Likes
I think that game play problem would be fixed with new aerial warfare mode. Beside that community won’t get together. 5th gen would be more beneficial for US, Russian and Chinese mains, how would you convince them to oppose addition of 5th gen and instead start complaining about Air rb gameplay. Few of them would agree but not all. Anyways we still have an entire year before thry add 5th gen. They would have this year to fix air rb gameplay mode
5th gen won’t work the best under current gameplay beside the F-22 and Su-57 (cannot say anything about J-20/J-35). At end they would just be dogfight Eurofighter and rafale and i can only see F-22 and Su-57 performing well against them and win, though even F-22 and Su-57 won’t have an easy time against rafale and Eurofighter in dogfight
That’s on the assumption gaijin doesn’t fumble that horrifically like heli pve, or just forget it exists entirely like world war mode.
Well SEAD event was quite promising. But they could fumble just like they did with BR changes