Internal fuel capacity of world 4th ~ 5th Gen fighters

[Sine Nomine]

Fuel is heart and soul of every mission assigned to a Jet Fighter.
Engine runs on fuel and Fighters runs on Engine..
Below is Internal fuel capacity of 4th ~ 5th Gen fighters

Su-35BM: 39.6% ~ 41.1%（Empty weight: 16,500 ~ 17,500 kg，Internal fuel: 11,500 kg）

MIG-31: 39.4%（Empty weight: 21,825 kg，Internal fuel: 14,200 kg）

F-35A: 38.9%（Empty weight: 13,170 kg，Internal fuel: 8,382 kg）

F-35C: 38.5%（Empty weight: 14,548 kg，Internal fuel: 9,111 kg）

Su-30MK: 34.9%（Empty weight: 17,700 kg，Internal fuel: 9,500 kg）

Rafale: 31.4% ~ 33.6%（Empty weight: 9,500 ~ 10,220 kg，Internal fuel: 4,680 ~ 4,800 kg）

F-18E: 32.2%（Empty weight: 14,288 kg，Internal fuel: 6,780 kg）

EF-2K: 30.9%（Empty weight: 11,150 kg，Internal fuel: 4,996 kg）

JAS-39NG: 30.6%（Empty weight: 7,100 kg，Internal fuel: 3,130 kg）

F-35B: 30.3%（Empty weight: 14,588 kg，Internal fuel: 6,352 kg）

F-22A: 29.3%（Empty weight: 19,660 kg，Internal fuel: 8,165 kg）

MIG-35: 28.6%（Empty weight: 12,000 kg，Internal fuel: 4,800 kg）

Tejas: 27.0%（Empty weight: 6,500 kg，Internal fuel: 2,400 kg）

JF-17: 26.3%（Empty weight: 6,450 kg，Internal fuel: 2,300 kg）

JAS-39C: 25.0%（Empty weight: 6,800 kg，Internal fuel: 2,268 kg）

F-CK-1A: 24.5%（Empty weight: 6,492 kg，Internal fuel: 2,111 kg)

JFT uses RD-93 a varient of RD-33
SFC SFC
(dry) (dry)
[lb/lbf hr] [lb/lbf hr]
0.740 2.050



Many issues come to my mind when looking at the naked OEW and internal fuel numbers.

1. The OEW figures are normally wrong, the Sukhois are heavier, the "official" numbers often exclude some items. Cheating on OEW is due practice everywhere around the world.
2. As was stated before, fuel carried is one thing. Fuel consumed is another. The fuel consumption depends on:
   • basic air frame drag (which is largely the same for all 4th generation aircraft)
   • normal mission layout, a fighter carries significantly less load than a bomber
   • requirements on operational safety (aircraft carrier)
3. As I said repeatedly, more internal fuel is not always better. An air combat fighter is designed to have lowest when entering combat. The F-16 was designed with requiring 9g performance at 50% internal fuel. A closer look at the numbers unveils that such low internal fuel would basically cut the burner time to one minute, assuming the pilot wants to eat dinner at his base instead of having a C-ration in the woods.
4. Internal weapons cut the drag, while that doesn't change the overall picture too much when looking at cruise ranges. The drag of externally carried missiles below ~M.85 is acceptable. Everything counts in large amounts though: look at a Sukhoi 27 with full missile armament
   http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...7_armament.jpg ... sukhoi is draggy
5. A clean aircraft at 30k ft and ~M.8 (optimum range Mach) will see the engine operating close to idle, especially aircraft with a clear supersonic ability. The SFC (specific fuel consumption) jumps up significantly. Carrying external tanks causes more drag, but the effect of operating in a more efficient engine regime compensates that to some extent. Generally the penalty in subsonic (up to M~.85) drag for drop tanks is quite low, about 10% of zero lift drag for a 300gal drop tank.
6. The fuel burn also depends on type of engine (though quite similar for all considered aircraft) and altitude/speed profile. Though an F-18 might fly for 2 hours on internal fuel and cover over 1500km of distance, going into burner for a minute easily eats up 15 minutes normal flying time.
7. When you wanna see the specifications of a true fighter, look up YF-16. Nothing ever came close, the Euro fighter maybe.

I found it on internet so shared it...
@Oscar @MastanKhan @That Guy @Gufi @Bratva @syedali73 @levina @sancho

 

[truthseeker2010]

Fuel is heart and soul of every mission assigned to a Jet Fighter.
Engine runs on fuel and Fighters runs on Engine..
Below is Internal fuel capacity of 4th ~ 5th Gen fighters

Su-35BM: 39.6% ~ 41.1%（Empty weight: 16,500 ~ 17,500 kg，Internal fuel: 11,500 kg）

MIG-31: 39.4%（Empty weight: 21,825 kg，Internal fuel: 14,200 kg）

F-35A: 38.9%（Empty weight: 13,170 kg，Internal fuel: 8,382 kg）

F-35C: 38.5%（Empty weight: 14,548 kg，Internal fuel: 9,111 kg）

Su-30MK: 34.9%（Empty weight: 17,700 kg，Internal fuel: 9,500 kg）

Rafale: 31.4% ~ 33.6%（Empty weight: 9,500 ~ 10,220 kg，Internal fuel: 4,680 ~ 4,800 kg）

F-18E: 32.2%（Empty weight: 14,288 kg，Internal fuel: 6,780 kg）

EF-2K: 30.9%（Empty weight: 11,150 kg，Internal fuel: 4,996 kg）

JAS-39NG: 30.6%（Empty weight: 7,100 kg，Internal fuel: 3,130 kg）

F-35B: 30.3%（Empty weight: 14,588 kg，Internal fuel: 6,352 kg）

F-22A: 29.3%（Empty weight: 19,660 kg，Internal fuel: 8,165 kg）

MIG-35: 28.6%（Empty weight: 12,000 kg，Internal fuel: 4,800 kg）

Tejas: 27.0%（Empty weight: 6,500 kg，Internal fuel: 2,400 kg）

JF-17: 26.3%（Empty weight: 6,450 kg，Internal fuel: 2,300 kg）

JAS-39C: 25.0%（Empty weight: 6,800 kg，Internal fuel: 2,268 kg）

F-CK-1A: 24.5%（Empty weight: 6,492 kg，Internal fuel: 2,111 kg)

JFT uses RD-93 a varient of RD-33
SFC SFC
(dry) (dry)
[lb/lbf hr] [lb/lbf hr]
0.740 2.050



Many issues come to my mind when looking at the naked OEW and internal fuel numbers.

1. The OEW figures are normally wrong, the Sukhois are heavier, the "official" numbers often exclude some items. Cheating on OEW is due practice everywhere around the world.
2. As was stated before, fuel carried is one thing. Fuel consumed is another. The fuel consumption depends on:
   • basic air frame drag (which is largely the same for all 4th generation aircraft)
   • normal mission layout, a fighter carries significantly less load than a bomber
   • requirements on operational safety (aircraft carrier)
3. As I said repeatedly, more internal fuel is not always better. An air combat fighter is designed to have lowest when entering combat. The F-16 was designed with requiring 9g performance at 50% internal fuel. A closer look at the numbers unveils that such low internal fuel would basically cut the burner time to one minute, assuming the pilot wants to eat dinner at his base instead of having a C-ration in the woods.
4. Internal weapons cut the drag, while that doesn't change the overall picture too much when looking at cruise ranges. The drag of externally carried missiles below ~M.85 is acceptable. Everything counts in large amounts though: look at a Sukhoi 27 with full missile armament
   http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...7_armament.jpg ... sukhoi is draggy
5. A clean aircraft at 30k ft and ~M.8 (optimum range Mach) will see the engine operating close to idle, especially aircraft with a clear supersonic ability. The SFC (specific fuel consumption) jumps up significantly. Carrying external tanks causes more drag, but the effect of operating in a more efficient engine regime compensates that to some extent. Generally the penalty in subsonic (up to M~.85) drag for drop tanks is quite low, about 10% of zero lift drag for a 300gal drop tank.
6. The fuel burn also depends on type of engine (though quite similar for all considered aircraft) and altitude/speed profile. Though an F-18 might fly for 2 hours on internal fuel and cover over 1500km of distance, going into burner for a minute easily eats up 15 minutes normal flying time.
7. When you wanna see the specifications of a true fighter, look up YF-16. Nothing ever came close, the Euro fighter maybe.

I found it on internet so shared it...

No F-16 block 52, J-10?