Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Two options for A-4 Skyhawk Conformal Fuel Tanks; combined weight of 600kg with 884.52kg max of fuel:

post-59028-0-74371400-1363035792_thumb.jpg

Edited by dtmdragon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beautiful "long legs" warrior! The bottom one looks good!

Edited by Coupi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the other responses that the bottom one looks better.

 

However, aerodynamically, the bottom one would produce more parasite/form drag due to cross section and induced drag due to increased lift. While the top one would produce much less form drag its lift would be negligible so induced drag would be much less. As an added bonus, the interference drag at the wing root/fuselage interface would be much less delaying separation at high angles of attack possibly giving a higher Cl max and hence lower stall speed.

 

Also, the top one would be easier from a plumbing perspective.

 

So, practically: the top one. Aesthetically: the bottom.

 

Dels

Edited by Dels
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As above whats wrong with the Hump... though the bottom one is the most attractive stick a F404 engine with AB in there as well... as the original didn't have too much get up and go...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the wing root they will have less affect on the CG moment. (weight X arm) in the roll axis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys hit the nail on the head with why I put the CFTs in the wing root as it makes much more sense aerodynamically. The bottom pic with the CFTs higher up on the fuselage was an after though when I tried to make it look a bit more 'sexy' lol. The down side of the CFTs in the wing roots is the spoilers need to be bolted shut as they hit the CFTs. I chose not to reinstate the old avionics hump and convert it to a fuel tank as I wanted to do something a bit different. Engine wise I am thinking of a non afterburning version of the Super Hornets General Electric F414 which is what Singapore did with the General Electric F404 for their A-4SU Super Skyhawks. Radar will be the A/NAPG-66 with the MLU upgrade or Elta EL/M-2032 since they are both already cleared for the A-4 and work with the AIM-120. One of the cannons will be removed to make way for a ECM Jammer and the remaining cannon will be replaced with a 27mm Mauser BK-27 Cannon.

Edited by dtmdragon
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the other responses that the bottom one looks better.

 

However, aerodynamically, the bottom one would produce more parasite/form drag due to cross section and induced drag due to increased lift. While the top one would produce much less form drag its lift would be negligible so induced drag would be much less. As an added bonus, the interference drag at the wing root/fuselage interface would be much less delaying separation at high angles of attack possibly giving a higher Cl max and hence lower stall speed.

 

Also, the top one would be easier from a plumbing perspective.

 

So, practically: the top one. Aesthetically: the bottom.

 

Dels

 

^^ This is precisely what I was thinking, but with much less cursing. :smile:

Edited by SayWhatt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't the wing root tanks obstruct the flight control surfaces? The dorsal tanks appear inspired by the Typhoon, and while not the prettiest, they at least appear functional. :) Looking forward to seeing these in-game. Moar CFTs! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bottom ones, really? As Dels says aerodynamically the upper ones...

 

A-4 with humps on the back is the right A-4 :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gave my KAHU a General Electric F404 w/burner, more fuel would be good! Every mission I fly a must have to keep that centerline tank on till its empty. I was never looking to break speed records with the burner, just extra thrust to keep the speed up for ACM in the A to A and A to G cause when you whip this little pony car around she bleeds air speed like a stuffed pig. However I did a lot of testing and data tweaking could only get MACH 1.19 clean level flight at angles 20. Replaced the twin 20 mm cannon with a single GAU-19 that fires out the port gun. The GAU-19 is an electrically driven gatling gun that fires the .50 BMG (12.7×99mm). I chose this weapon for it's rate of fire and the endless types of .50 cal rounds anti armor, explosive, the list goes on. Also updated some the war computers and radar.

FA-4K SuperKAHUhawk2.JPG

Edited by MAKO69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bottom ones, really? As Dels says aerodynamically the upper ones...

 

A-4 with humps on the back is the right A-4 :wink:

 

What about a conformal fuel tank on the belly. After all the plane has some long legs, 1 conformal tank could be made to fit a little wider and shallower than than the proposed 2 on either side. The CG would not be affected like the top 2 or spine tanks and air flow at the wing root would not be affected either. You could probably still hang a centerline 300 us gal. fuel tank on a shorter pylon and or bombs to boot. Look at the BAC lightnings hard non conformal Gut tank for my idea and thoughts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why not use the CFT´s and a re-shaped avionic hump for the ECM so you got enough room for the 30mm canons the israelis used or for additional ammo.

and if you like you can also add additional CM Dispensers and a FLIR station. and if possible maybe a one piece windshield?

 

i would also go with a low viz grey paint without the black nose. the black nose paint was removed from the falcons because it was very good visible.

 

but in th end it´s you choice

Edited by dast24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about a conformal fuel tank on the belly. After all the plane has some long legs, 1 conformal tank could be made to fit a little wider and shallower than than the proposed 2 on either side. The CG would not be affected like the top 2 or spine tanks and air flow at the wing root would not be affected either. You could probably still hang a centerline 300 us gal. fuel tank on a shorter pylon and or bombs to boot. Look at the BAC lightnings hard non conformal Gut tank for my idea and thoughts.

 

This idea was also proposed for the super Phantom... I like the idea though it would have to by requirement reduce the storage capacity on the belly pylon.also into that conformal you could mount the guns and replace the internal guns with the ECM etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, does it actually help? Though I don't think the Skyhawk needs it, its pretty damn maneuverable without them....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About to 'flight test' them tonight. There is a photo floating around of the New Zealand Airforce A-4K Kahu upgrade prototype with canards. It was a prank pulled on some visiting Australian Airforce pilots by the RNZAF ground crew who made some fake ones up out of cardboard!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used the canard FM data from the Kfir C2 and wow what an effect on turning rate and low speed handling!

 

Here is the photo:

 

post-59028-0-00506500-1364459796_thumb.jpg

Edited by dtmdragon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used the canard FM data from the Kfir C2 and wow what an effect on turning rate and low speed handling!

 

Here is the photo:

 

A-4Kcanards.jpg

 

The KIWI's did that as a practical joke on the Aussies when they deployed to Australia right?

 

Maybe, does it actually help? Though I don't think the Skyhawk needs it, its pretty damn maneuverable without them....

 

I think they would help, the elevator on the Scooter is not an all moving tail unit like the Hornet, Tomcat, Eagle, and Falcon.

 

How about canards?

A-4KIII.JPG

 

An all moving tail unit may be easier and have the same results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The KIWI's did that as a practical joke on the Aussies when they deployed to Australia right?

Yes they made them out of cardboard

Edited by dtmdragon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..