F-47, recently confirmed as the sixth-generation fighter by the United States, has a canard configuration due to its peculiar appearance and is often mockingly referred to as the "Strange Duck." Some question its negative impact on stealth performance. However, the effect of the canard design on stealth is far less than imagined, and under optimization, it can coexist with stealth requirements. The success of China's J-20 validates this point, while the decision by Chengdu Aircraft and Shenyang Aircraft to abandon the canard reveals the trade-offs involved in different design philosophies. All of this stems from comprehensive considerations including radar scattering control, aerodynamic needs, and stealth technology.

The canard layout places small front wings at the front of the fuselage, which, due to its protruding structure, is often considered to increase the radar cross-section (RCS) and weaken stealth capabilities. Stealth fighters like the F-22 and F-35 reduce reflections through smooth shapes and internal weapon bays, making the canard appear contradictory and thus mocked. However, this intuition overlooks the complexity of modern stealth designs; the success of the J-20 and the choice of the J-36 further demonstrate that the canard is not the enemy of stealth.

The truth about the minimal impact of the canard on stealth:

The key to stealth lies in guiding radar waves away from enemy receivers rather than simply reducing exposed areas. The canard, through precise geometric design (such as inclination angles and edge treatments), can scatter reflection waves toward non-threatening directions. The canard of the J-20 forms a specific angle with the fuselage and, combined with optimized nose design, effectively reduces the frontal RCS. If F-47 adopts similar technology, the reflection of the canard can also be controlled within an almost negligible range.

Modern fighters widely use radar-absorbing materials and stealth coatings; the surface of the J-20's canard employs advanced absorbing materials, significantly weakening radar reflections. The small size of the canard means its contribution to the overall RCS is limited in the full aircraft design. If F-47 borrows this technology, the influence of the canard can also be suppressed. By comparison, the vertical tail, due to its size and vertical characteristics, has a much greater impact on all-around stealth than the canard.

The canard is not a dead end for stealth but has room for optimization. For instance, the J-20's canard smoothly transitions with the fuselage, reducing mirror reflections. The canard located near the nose, combined with forward stealth optimization (for enemy forward-facing radar), even exposes risks lower than certain defects in traditional layouts. If F-47 follows this path, the "prominence" of the canard can be completely resolved.

So some may ask: if the canard is so good and China has such experience, why did Chengdu choose to abandon the canard in its next-generation fighter? Mainly to pursue extreme stealth: although the canard can be optimized, it still slightly increases reflection risks on the sides and rear. Additionally, abandoning the canard allows more space for larger main wings, increasing internal fuel capacity and weapons load, thereby enhancing range and endurance. This is crucial for long-range strike missions, especially when facing vast areas like the Pacific or South China Sea. However, this does not mean the canard layout is outdated; it simply reflects different design priorities.

In general, the canard layout is far from obsolete. The J-20 proves its compatibility with stealth and maneuverability, while Europe's "Rafale" and Russia's Su-57 also demonstrate the potential of the canard. What truly poses a serious threat to all-around stealth are the vertical tails, as their vertical surfaces are difficult to completely hide reflective signals.

The value of the canard lies in aerodynamic performance. The J-20 uses the canard to enhance lift and agility, gaining advantages in air combat. If F-47 pursues similar goals, the canard may be a carefully considered choice rather than a design flaw. Compared to the J-36 sacrificing maneuverability for range, the canard layout represents another tactical approach.

Stealth performance is the result of a system engineering effort, not determined by a single component. The J-20 minimizes the disadvantages of the canard, and F-47 could achieve the same using modern technology; its impact would be completely negligible.

Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7491965203043598886/

Disclaimer: The article expresses the views of the author alone, and you are welcome to show your attitude by clicking the "Top/Downvote" button below.