JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[messiach]

Yes.

is that english?

No but DEEC does reduce responce time to 5s. I think i have suggested somewhere development of annular ignition chamber utilizing extremely high operative temperatures reducing smoke. DEEC like controls are essential requirement for Hi-T ignition chambers.

Also, is it correct to say that DEEC is better because it gives the flexibility for manual override, if and when needed?

DEEC like variants exists. Essential req. for smokeless tubofan amongst other things. Its a 70s phenomenon jointly collaborated by PW, lawrence-livermore & Nasa.

Lastly, is DEEC included on RD-93 by default or is it a Pakistani addition? I am asking because from Google it seems DEEC is a pretty much American innovation, so how come we have it on a Russian engine?

We'll see when we reach the bridge.

Many thanks, madam. Is it correct to deduce that Pakistan's NG fighter may be twin engine?

 

[MastanKhan]

Yes.


No but DEEC does reduce responce time to 5s. I think i have suggested somewhere development of annular ignition chamber utilizing extremely high operative temperatures reducing smoke. DEEC like controls are essential requirement for Hi-T ignition chambers.


DEEC like variants exists. Essential req. for smokeless tubofan amongst other things. Its a 70s phenomenon jointly collaborated by PW, lawrence-livermore & Nasa.

Hi,

One time I worked at a dealership right close to Lawrence livermore lab---there were quite a few strange ( security ) characters were coming looking for test drives and talking to me---.

 

[Dazzler]

Are you sure about PL-9C? Because PAF opted for PL-5E.

Thanks, yep That's a pl5e-2, not 9c. The pl9c is not used on jf-17, instead, they opted for a heat seeker having smilar characteristics but with reduced weight.

 

[The Accountant]

Hi,

Can you guide me to the original post to see why this reaction.




Sir,

Pragmatism does not build nations---.

The Battle Belongs To Us---The Victory Belongs To Allah

Post 2994

 

[messiach]

Up, close and personal with security establishment. Dancing with danger.

Hi,

One time I worked at a dealership right close to Lawrence livermore lab---there were quite a few strange ( security ) characters were coming looking for test drives and talking to me---.

 

[MastanKhan]

Up, close and personal with security establishment. Dancing with danger.

Hi,

It was just another job in car sales for me---and then I realized---dammmnnn---this is Lawrence Livermore Lab right next door---. Young kids coming in---you talk to them---chat with them--they are PhD's---under 30 years old---wallah.

 

[grey boy 2]

HD pictures taken in August

 

[Myth_buster_1]

HD pictures taken in August

If pak and china have some dignity they should store these thunders until Myanmar stops genocide against innocent civilians.

 

[Khadim e Darul Ehsaan]

Block2 kamra airbase , equipped with hot missiles

 

[Khadim e Darul Ehsaan]

If pak and china have some dignity they should store these thunders until Myanmar stops genocide against innocent civilians.

Thats what i was thinking , thy can do buisness with many others but atleast not do with myanmar , being muslim country ,its morally donot suite us, our govrmnt is also behaiving as a dumb and deaf person , if we cannot help muslims of myanmar then we shouldnot atlaest give myanmar these fighter jets and other related weapons too, who knows they will tomorrow start using same weapons against muslims

 

[gambit]

What's the difference between FADEC and DEEC?

@gambit @F-22Raptor @Oscar @messiach @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Gomig-21

EEC is Electronic Engine Control. The 'D' is the digital upgrade.

Full Authority Digital Engine Control ( FADEC ) is essentially the engine is out of all manual input from the cockpit. Be careful in understanding the word 'input' here. Throttle is a command, not an input.

In the old days, the pilot has to monitor factors like altitude, airspeed, fuel mixture, elevation at takeoff/landing, and barometric pressure, then uses the throttle according experience. With FADEC, the engine, or more precisely the 'brain' of the engine, does all of that. All the pilot does is command -- throttle. The engine then take all those factors and adjust engine parameters to accommodate that command.

There are no direct connections from cockpit to engine such as rigid mechanical linkages like push-pull rods or flexible mechanical linkages like cables. The throttle have an advanced version of the potentiometer or transducer, to use those electronic devices loosely as examples, that sends throttle position to the EEC, which then with the mentioned factors tries to make the engine as efficient as possible according to throttle setting. Hence, the phrase 'Full Authority'.

If the EEC fail, the engine will not run. If the engine got battle damage or ingest something that damaged it, for a couple examples, the EEC will to its best to accommodate throttle command. All the cockpit will know is that something is wrong thru fluctuating rpm, unfamiliar noises, oil pressure drops, etc. But there is nothing the cockpit can do.

 

[Hassan Guy]

EEC is Electronic Engine Control. The 'D' is the digital upgrade.

Full Authority Digital Engine Control ( FADEC ) is essentially the engine is out of all manual input from the cockpit. Be careful in understanding the word 'input' here. Throttle is a command, not an input.

In the old days, the pilot has to monitor factors like altitude, airspeed, fuel mixture, elevation at takeoff/landing, and barometric pressure, then uses the throttle according experience. With FADEC, the engine, or more precisely the 'brain' of the engine, does all of that. All the pilot does is command -- throttle. The engine then take all those factors and adjust engine parameters to accommodate that command.

There are no direct connections from cockpit to engine such as rigid mechanical linkages like push-pull rods or flexible mechanical linkages like cables. The throttle have an advanced version of the potentiometer or transducer, to use those electronic devices loosely as examples, that sends throttle position to the EEC, which then with the mentioned factors tries to make the engine as efficient as possible according to throttle setting. Hence, the phrase 'Full Authority'.

If the EEC fail, the engine will not run. If the engine got battle damage or ingest something that damaged it, for a couple examples, the EEC will to its best to accommodate throttle command. All the cockpit will know is that something is wrong thru fluctuating rpm, unfamiliar noises, oil pressure drops, etc. But there is nothing the cockpit can do.

Sooo paf should go for FADEC then...

 

[gambit]

Also, is it correct to say that DEEC is better because it gives the flexibility for manual override, if and when needed?

Not necessarily.

Many were apprehensive when fly-by-wire came out and their apprehension came precisely because of a PERCEIVED need to have a manual control reserve, or back up, in the flight control system.

Static flight has more potential and unplanned variables than what the engine faces. A gust of wind at takeoff is always a potential and unplanned. Now add in flight maneuvers and those variables changes in magnitudes of difference. And yet, we now placed absolute trust in fly-by-wire even to the point of carrying passengers. The Airbus A380 can carry several hundreds people and how many of them know that the jet is fly-by-wire ?

A manual back up for an EEC-ed engine is a perceived need, not necessarily a valid one.

Sooo paf should go for FADEC then...

When am in combat, I need to be a killer, not an engine manager.

 

[CriticalThought]

EEC is Electronic Engine Control. The 'D' is the digital upgrade.

Full Authority Digital Engine Control ( FADEC ) is essentially the engine is out of all manual input from the cockpit. Be careful in understanding the word 'input' here. Throttle is a command, not an input.

In the old days, the pilot has to monitor factors like altitude, airspeed, fuel mixture, elevation at takeoff/landing, and barometric pressure, then uses the throttle according experience. With FADEC, the engine, or more precisely the 'brain' of the engine, does all of that. All the pilot does is command -- throttle. The engine then take all those factors and adjust engine parameters to accommodate that command.

There are no direct connections from cockpit to engine such as rigid mechanical linkages like push-pull rods or flexible mechanical linkages like cables. The throttle have an advanced version of the potentiometer or transducer, to use those electronic devices loosely as examples, that sends throttle position to the EEC, which then with the mentioned factors tries to make the engine as efficient as possible according to throttle setting. Hence, the phrase 'Full Authority'.

If the EEC fail, the engine will not run. If the engine got battle damage or ingest something that damaged it, for a couple examples, the EEC will to its best to accommodate throttle command. All the cockpit will know is that something is wrong thru fluctuating rpm, unfamiliar noises, oil pressure drops, etc. But there is nothing the cockpit can do.

Since DEEC is 70s technology, I suppose its software doesn't benefit from the latest and greatest advancements made in engine control? In that sense, FADEC being newer would give better performance in terms of fuel consumption, engine life etc. Is this correct?

Also, would you mind if I enlist your help on a rather difficult conversation I have had with somebody on another thread? I would want you to go through some lengthy posts and basically comment, that's all. If you don't mind?

 

[khanasifm]

View attachment 422956

Topic is jf not India not Pakistan not Bangladesh etc