CHENGDU REPORTEDLY ACHIEVES MILESTONE IN JF-17 BLOCK-III DEVELOPMENT

[Ultima Thule]

This how one reaches wrong conclusion using logical jumps between correct facts. You failed to realize that if the engine could provide such thrust, the intake would have been modified accordingly. The main thing limiting it is the engine. You need to learn a lot before telling someone to go research a topic.

TWR of F35 enough to go beyond MACH 2 its DSI that makes F35 which makes it under the MACH 2 and tell me one thing sir how many jets which have fixed/DSI intakes which can go beyond MACH 2

First of all, Mach 2.2+ is not used for combat but rather for reconnaissance. Since the advent of hypersonic SAMs, the era of Mach 2+ recon is essentially over.

But covering distance IS NOT the only reason. Increasing range and lethality of missiles is another valid aim.

As you say SAMs is becoming hypersonic,so how can it be possible to defeat those hypersonic SAMs with relying only speed where jet traveling only at MACH 2 main weapons to countering those SAMs /AAMs is ECM ECCM EW and chaff and flares not speed @CriticalThought

 

[CriticalThought]

TWR of F35 enough to go beyond MACH 2 its DSI that makes F35 which makes it under the MACH 2 and tell me one thing sir how many jets which have fixed/DSI intakes which can go beyond MACH 2

As you say SAMs is becoming hypersonic,so how can it be possible to defeat those hypersonic SAMs with relying only speed where jet traveling only at MACH 2 main weapons to countering those SAMs /AAMs is ECM ECCM EW and chaff and flares not speed @CriticalThought

Now back up your claims with hard numbers. Show numerically that T/W ratio of F-35 is enough to reach Mach 2.

 

[araz]

Same Article states that,it is not good enough for Mach 2+,from Article.
"Historically, inlet complexity is a function of top speed for fighter aircraft. Higher Mach numbers require more sophisticated devices for compressing supersonic airflow to slow it down to subsonic levels before it reaches the face of the engine. (Jet engines are not designed to handle the shock waves associated with supersonic airflow.)
These compression schemes involve the conversion of the kinetic energy of the supersonic airstream into total pressure on the compressor face of the engine. Speeds over Mach 2 generally require more elaborate compression schemes. The F-15 inlet, for example, contains a series of movable compression ramps and doors controlled by software and elaborate mechanical systems. The ramps move to adjust the external and internal shape of the inlet to provide the optimum airflow to the engine at various aircraft speeds and angles of attack. Doors and ducting allow excess airflow to bypass the inlet."

Sir Your own Post #102 Answers it very well.

1-
2-If even speed in upto Mach 3 still it's invalid infront of Missiles approaching Mach 4 in blink of an eye,a weapon which is today deployed by every AF against fighters.
3-Airwar isn't Dogfight only today,in which Turn Rate,Climb Rate and Speed would be used as means of escaping,you can't outmaneuver even a 3rd grade missile locked on to you by these means,only way forward is ECCM and better Missile coupled with sensor fusion.
4-According to my Raw knowledge Fighter Fuselage takes a lot of toll due to turbulence,caused by high winds and high speed.
In Nutshell as you said Sir,either speed should be so high that you are able to outflank Missiles or it only should be enough for gaining max tactical advantage,under your doctrine.For the time being we are not capbale of making platforms reaching Mach 5 or 6 offcourse without tearing themselves apart,so Enough speed coupled with load of Counter Measures is best.

Sir itna tou sharminda o gunahgar na kee jiyeh,hun log to aap ke shagirdi kai kabil bhe nahi

NaaMarey bhai. We are all here to learn from one another. Dont let that aspect go. You are far too mind to this humble man and I am not wrothy of such accolades. Where I learn from you I will appreciate it.
A

 

[Ultima Thule]

Now back up your claims with hard numbers. Show numerically that T/W ratio of F-35 is enough to reach Mach 2.

You can calculate yourself sir MTOW is 70000 lbs and engine thrust is 43000 lbs, with full fuel weight it has a T/W ratio is 0.87 and with 50% it has a T/W ratio is 1.07 which have enough to go beyond MACH 2

 

[CriticalThought]

You can calculate yourself sir MTOW is 70000 lbs and engine thrust is 43000 lbs, with full fuel weight it has a T/W ratio is 0.87 and with 50% it has a T/W ratio is 1.07 which have enough to go beyond MACH 2

See this was a test of your aerodynamics knowledge. I haven't checked ur numbers, because your sequence of logical deductions is wrong. The speed of the aircraft DOES NOT depend on T/W ratio, it depends on the Lift to Drag ratio which is a function of the shape of the aircraft. Furthermore, at supersonic speeds, factors such as boundary layer flow separation and shock wave pressure determine max speed. Holding everything else constant, and assuming the airframe can bear the load, you do need to increase thrust, even though the weight might be low.

You are thinking about this from a wrong angle.

 

[The-Hack]

You can calculate yourself sir MTOW is 70000 lbs and engine thrust is 43000 lbs, with full fuel weight it has a T/W ratio is 0.87 and with 50% it has a T/W ratio is 1.07 which have enough to go beyond MACH 2

JF-17 has the T/W ratio of block 1 & 2 between 0.82 to 0.86......... what possible options for block 3 to attain 2.0+ speed........................... WS-13 is just around 0.87 or maybe some points up............ but this is not enough for mach 2............. what's other feasible options for PAF???

See this was a test of your aerodynamics knowledge. I haven't checked ur numbers, because your sequence of logical deductions is wrong. The speed of the aircraft DOES NOT depend on T/W ratio, it depends on the Lift to Drag ratio which is a function of the shape of the aircraft. Furthermore, at supersonic speeds, factors such as boundary layer flow separation and shock wave pressure determine max speed. Holding everything else constant, and assuming the airframe can bear the load, you do need to increase thrust, even though the weight might be low.

You are thinking about this from a wrong angle.

JF-17 has the L/D ratio of 0.593......... is the further increment in this ration is necessary for more speed or lowering this ratio???

 

[Ultima Thule]

See this was a test of your aerodynamics knowledge. I haven't checked ur numbers, because your sequence of logical deductions is wrong. The speed of the aircraft DOES NOT depend on T/W ratio, it depends on the Lift to Drag ratio which is a function of the shape of the aircraft. Furthermore, at supersonic speeds, factors such as boundary layer flow separation and shock wave pressure determine max speed. Holding everything else constant, and assuming the airframe can bear the load, you do need to increase thrust, even though the weight might be low.

You are thinking about this from a wrong angle.

And you think F35 has a low L/D ratio then you're wrong, there no L/D ratio available on the net for F35

 

[The-Hack]

And you think F35 has a low L/D ratio then you're wrong, there no L/D ratio available on the net for F35

we can calculate this ratio from formula............. quite easily

And you think F35 has a low L/D ratio then you're wrong, there no L/D ratio available on the net for F35

The L/D ratio of F-35 is 0.6545

 

[Ultima Thule]

JF-17 has the T/W ratio of block 1 & 2 between 0.82 to 0.86......... what possible options for block 3 to attain 2.0+ speed........................... WS-13 is just around 0.87 or maybe some points up............ but this is not enough for mach 2............. what's other feasible options for PAF???

As per WIKIPEDIA T/W ratio of JF with full fuel load is 0.99 and with 50% is above 1

 

[The-Hack]

As per WIKIPEDIA T/W ratio of JF with full fuel load is 0.99 and with 50% is above 1

hahaha........... you are right... can you see the T/W ration of WS-13 engine??? terrible for me.................... or hilarious

hahaha........... you are right... can you see the T/W ration of WS-13 engine??? terrible for me.................... or hilarious

7.8 T/W ratio

 

[Ultima Thule]

we can calculate this ratio from formula............. quite easily


The L/D ratio of F-35 is 0.6545

Source
And in which site you take lift and drag variables of F35
You know the L/D variables of f35

 

[The-Hack]

Source
And in which site you take lift and drag variables for F35
You know the L/D variables for f35

no sir, i am a student.................... can you tell me about Lift and drag coefficients, please???

 

[Ultima Thule]

hahaha........... you are right... can you see the T/W ration of WS-13 engine??? terrible for me.................... or hilarious


7.8 T/W ratio

There is no WS-13 on JF and this T/W ratio is with RD-93
and what 7.8 T/W for

 

[The-Hack]

Source
And in which site you take lift and drag variables for F35
You know the L/D variables for f35

the lift coefficients of F-35 A&B starts from 0 to 1.6 while the drag coefficients of F-35 A&B starts from 0 to 0.3
Now coming towards the L/D ratio..................... which is starts from 4 to 5.3333

There is no WS-13 on JF and this T/W ratio is with RD-93
and what 7.8 T/W for

can you read this 7.8 T/W ratio???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guizhou_WS-13

 

[Ultima Thule]

no sir, i am a student.................... can you tell me about Lift and drag coefficients, please???

Here it is
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/ldrat.html

the lift coefficients of F-35 A&B starts from 0 to 1.6 while the drag coefficients of F-35 A&B starts from 0 to 0.3
Now coming towards the L/D ratio..................... which is starts from 4 to 5.3333

I want to know from where do you get those variables of F35
Give your sources bro