aircraft are optimised for certain flight regimes - closely linked to the engines used
Totally agree here.
turboprops and propellers - move a lot of air a little bit … they fly best at 5-600 kts …. so almost every turboprop on Earth consequently has straight wings
True, except for the worlds fastest propeller driven aircraft, the Tu-95 Bear, which needs swept wings because of the speeds it can operate at require swept wings... but basically your point that turboprop designs are not expected to be supersonic is valid.
turbofan high bypass designs are optimal at high subsonic speeds .and surprise surprise every airliner on Earth has a wing optimised for that speed range about 30 degrees angle …. they all look the same now too
Agree... a high bypass jet engine trades volume of air for exhaust speed so gets high thrust but no good for supersonic flight speeds.
next turbojets and low bypass military jet engines are optimal for supersonic …. and most military jets are similar looking too ….
are you detecting a pattern yet ? wind tunnels do not change ….
Actually wind tunnels are designed for an enormous variety of aerodynamic shapes and engine types... the shape of the Tu-160 needs to be able to operate at the aircrafts top speed of mach 2, but it also has to take off and land at much much much lower speeds... in fact the landing speed of a Blackjack is almost always subsonic...
so here we have a flying wing design that is the same as all other USA and NATO designs …. and they are all high subsonic designs
Bullshit... the wing angle for this drone is exactly the same wing angle of the Su-57 sitting next to it... and the Su-57 is supersonic.
The only flying wing manned aircraft operating anywhere in the world at the moment is the B-2 and it does not have the same wing sweep angle that this drone has.
45 degree angles thick wings ….
your hypothesis is that somehow Russia is using the same basic universal design and they can by some miracle make it perform in a flight range that nobody else can ? it will go supersonic
This drone is not a strategic bomber like the B-2, it is a drone that is supposed to operate with the Su-57 in combat and that is the flight envelope it is supposed to operate within.
Modern fighters rarely spend very long periods at top speed because it dramatically reduces their flight range, but altitude and a supersonic flight speed does improve the flight performance of any missile fired so a high altitude drone that accelerates past the speed of sound to launch some R-77s or R-37s can get a decent reach with its AAMs without the Su-57 it is operating with needing to burn up fuel or use up its own weapons.
the reason they are using the engine from the Su-35 is it currently available and it is already used in an Su-57 control system
its called expedience and practicality
If you are correct and it is a subsonic long range PAK DA replacement then why the fuck is it so small... what other countries have strategic bombers smaller than a Flanker?
Why isn't its engine a high bypass turbofan like a PD-35 or something equivalent?
Why a medium bypass turbofan with powerful afterburner?
this Okhotnik won't be built for minimum 4-5 yrs … by then the Su-57 will have the more compact and variable cycle Iz-whatever-30 ….
it will be built in mass production with that engine …
The first Su-57s are already built and in the future will likely change engine a couple of times and it will be the same for any drone designed to operate with it.
most current USA UAVs use high bypass civil and military designs …. some even from business jets
Russia doesn't have engines like that right now …
If the drone is going to operate with the Su-57s then it makes sense not to develop a whole new engine class for it... just put whatever the Su-57 is using at the time into it.
you can nitpick every single word I say as you always do …. I'm talking about a huge body of aerodynamic evidence that says this flyingwing will fly just like the others …. just like all the wings on turboprops look the same … just as all the jet airliners look the same … etc etc
I think if you look at a turboprop like a C-130 or An-12 and a turbofan like a 737 or whatever you will see the Turboprop aircraft have straight wings... the exception is the Bear and Bear related aircraft like the Tu-116 and Tu-126 which also have swept wings because of their top speeds require swept wings... just like jet airliners with turbofans.
What I don't understand is WTF turboprops has anything to do with the Su-57, the S-70 drone or the PAK DA strategic flying wing...
my vote says …. the air in wind tunnels in Russia is no different to the air in France or the USA …
I'm a pragmatic realist
And if they were the same why would the Europeans want to use Russian wind tunnels?
I would also point out that the Russians and Soviets have used wind tunnels for testing cars and ships at low speeds right up to rockets and hypersonic missiles and aircraft shapes... and I can tell you there is more than one wind tunnel at the TsAgi in Russia...
The initial info you refer to are coming from an official source?
PiBo doesn't normally make things up...