Mr Optimistic
On the wetted surface theory elucidated above, a simple unknotted toy balloon will be thrust about the place and this is calculable, in theory, by looking at the unbalanced pressure acting on the inside wall. So the front of a rubber toy balloon produces thrust. Are you sure a good intake design is not more about reducing losses ?
A good intake design is ALL about minimising losses, remember without a good intake, nomatter how good the Olypus 593 was, the 68% total thrust that came from the intake would not have been fully realised, the poorer the inlet design, the greater the losses of the powerplant as whole are. But a poor engine design will also not allow the intake to do it's work either, it is total co-dependance, the reduced losses translating into greater overall thrust and SFC. Try and think of it all as a powerplant, rather than intake, engine and nozzle; each of these components provide the thrust forces, but as we have said before, without the engine itself every part of this powerplant provides equal thrust: ZERO.
As far as having a problem with the whole thrust thing, the intake mounting assembly was designed to absorb and transmit the thrust forces from the intake assembly to the airframe, I'm afraid this is fact my friend.
Dude
