JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 4]

[ziaulislam]

one thing is for sure..among russian engines rd-33 is most used and most cheapset and easiest to maintain...
western counterparts are atleast 4 times expensive..

india didnt considered russian engine for LCA from the begining..

lastly we all know that russain engines are inferior in qaulity control then their western counter parts

 

[SQ8]

If that is the case, we could have gone for Russian engines for our own fighter engine needs.

Btw: wts ur old name here? Oscar?

Not necessarily.. it depends on the thrust(and pockets/budget) the user prefers to have.
The Mig-29 series is limited to the Rd-33.. which is what the IAF and the IN will both use.

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

let us not praise RD-93 that much because we dont know what was the actual reason of JF-17 Crash and also P.Shamim raised negative point that PAF is not satisfied by RD-93 performance. (from Pakdef)

 

[VCheng]

Not necessarily.. it depends on the thrust(and pockets/budget) the user prefers to have.
The Mig-29 series is limited to the Rd-33.. which is what the IAF and the IN will both use.

let us not praise RD-93 that much because we dont know what was the actual reason of JF-17 Crash and also P.Shamim raised negative point that PAF is not satisfied by RD-93 performance. (from Pakdef)

Does anybody have the latest MTBO and MTBF numbers for the RD-33 and -93 as supplied to China and Pakistan, for comparison to comparable western designs?

 

[SQ8]

let us not praise RD-93 that much because we dont know what was the actual reason of JF-17 Crash and also P.Shamim raised negative point that PAF is not satisfied by RD-93 performance. (from Pakdef)

Could you quote him?
Because I have heard otherwise(in comparison to the Chinese alternative).

 

[Aamir Hussain]

this is not the good thing to point out sir.
Neighbours are increasing day by day and we are decreasing. we cannot rely on two similar platform F-16, JF-17 at all. we must have something different. we cannot end up that program like this, there are 300+ pages in FC-20 thread, we spent alot time on it

The program by 2019 will see PAF deploying JF-17 as the work horse for Air Superiority/point defense, the F-16 (All Blocks) for deep interdiction and limited intercept at mid - mid profile. The J10B or P will be the Hi-Hi fighter with Air superiority at BVR ranges.

F-16 has limitations at BVR ranges as it was envisaged as a dog fighter and not an ideal platform in a BVR scenario (Which was not there when it was designed).

JF-17 will be fielded in greater numbers as copmared to the other two planes. The force will be a mix of high perfromance - high cost and mid perfrmance - mid cost fighters.

 

[SQ8]

Does anybody have the latest MTBO and MTBF numbers for the RD-33 and -93 as supplied to China and Pakistan, for comparison to comparable western designs?

An average of 600 hours with "average" use.. has varied from being as low as 300 for early Rd-33's.. to being touted as 1000+ for the newer 33MK's fitted on the 29K.
In comparison.. the PW-100 on the F-16 routinely manages a MTBO of 1500 hours+ and can be streamlined to over 2000 hours.
Also.. a RD-33 will most likely need to be thrown away after 4000 hours whereas a PW-100 can take it close to twice that.

 

[VCheng]

An average of 600 hours with "average" use.. has varied from being as low as 300 for early Rd-33's.. to being touted as 1000+ for the newer 33MK's fitted on the 29K.
In comparison.. the PW-100 on the F-16 routinely manages a MTBO of 1500 hours+ and can be streamlined to over 2000 hours.
Also.. a RD-33 will most likely need to be thrown away after 4000 hours whereas a PW-100 can take it close to twice that.

So not much has improved then.

(Thank you for the figures which are in line with what I have.)

 

[SQ8]

So not much has improved then.

(Thank you for the figures which are in line with what I have.)

Vodka and manufacturing has never mixed well.

 

[VCheng]

Vodka and manufacturing has never mixed well.

Seriously though, the real issue is advanced high-temperature metallurgy and manufacturing.

 

[SQ8]

Seriously though, the real issue is advanced high-temperature metallurgy and manufacturing.

Well.. it is surprising as at one point the Russians led the world in metallurgical research.Their subs such as the Alfa and mike classes are testament to that.

However.. when compared to the stage Chinese Engine manufacturing is the RD-93 is the better choice.
Had relations with the US been more stable, there was a choice earlier in the design to opt for the PW F-100 as well.
But that would have also driven up the cost along with putting a noose around the PAF's neck.

 

[rockstarIN]

An average of 600 hours with "average" use.. has varied from being as low as 300 for early Rd-33's.. to being touted as 1000+ for the newer 33MK's fitted on the 29K.
In comparison.. the PW-100 on the F-16 routinely manages a MTBO of 1500 hours+ and can be streamlined to over 2000 hours.
Also.. a RD-33 will most likely need to be thrown away after 4000 hours whereas a PW-100 can take it close to twice that.

This will suffice why IAF didnt go for Russian stuff for own fighters whereas Made in India engine was always desirable and was in mind, but.

 

[BATMAN]

so if the JFT is providing comparable capability = or more than F-16 Blk -15 - 30 - 40, then why persue the FC-20 whose performance is considered 'similar' by western analysts?

Exactly!

In present shape, J-10B has no advantage over IFR fitted JFT, inducted in large numbers.

RD-93 has proved to be a much better engine than its usually bad reputation.

Not many people know that bulk of the pre-mature failure incidents of RD-33, which earned it over hyped bad publicity were assembled and maintained by bharatis.

At least we cannot blame vodka.

 

[sancho]

In this case it has been a surprise.. the Rd-93 is becoming fairly popular among its maintainers.
The PAF like it a lot.. Im sure the IAF would have a word to two about that from their exp with it.

Depends on what engines you compare it, PW 100 are the old F16 engines, but RD93 is more comparable to the RD33-3 series engines, even a bit more modern. That means you must compare it with later versions of the F16 engine too.
The main difference is, that the F16 is a medium class fighter with engines that also powers heavy class fighters, while the JF 17 is a light class fighter, with smaller engines, that's why it shouldn't be surprising that the F16 is more costly to operate.
Do you have any data about the cost difference of JF 17 and F7?

wasnt the RD93 a derivative of RD33 which powers the MiG-29's

Yes, RD33 for twin engine fighters, SMR-95 for single engine and RD93 is a varient of it:

Universal platform

The RD-33 engine family includes the following versions:

RD-33 series series 3, an engine with a longer service life;
RD-33B/NB, an engine without the afterburner for various types of aircraft;
SMR-95, an engine for upgrading foreign 2nd and 3rd generation jet fighters;
RD-93, a version for the FC-1 airplane;.
RD-33MK (Sea Wasp), an improved version of RD-33 for new MiG-35 jet fighters and MiG29K shipborne fighters.

Klimov :: Production :: Aircraft Program :: RD-33 family

Klimov :: Production :: Aircraft Program :: SMR-95

 

[VCheng]

Well.. it is surprising as at one point the Russians led the world in metallurgical research.Their subs such as the Alfa and mike classes are testament to that.

However.. when compared to the stage Chinese Engine manufacturing is the RD-93 is the better choice.
Had relations with the US been more stable, there was a choice earlier in the design to opt for the PW F-100 as well.
But that would have also driven up the cost along with putting a noose around the PAF's neck.

Not just metallurgy, high temperature close tolerance metallurgical design and manufacturing is a different ballgame.

You have also mentioned one of the many reasons why I keep arguing pn PDF to form a closer alliance with parties such as USA to get tangible benefits like transferred technologies rather than just renting yourselves out as cheap mercenaries.