Modern multirole fighter assessment

[500]

No, to the F18SH or the Rafale, that calculated with your formular but with a realistic ammount of fuel would be ahead or even equal to the F35.

External tanks add lots of drag. F-35 can also carry them.

 

[sancho]

External tanks add lots of drag. F-35 can also carry them.

As explained earlier, the point is not drag or if the F35 can carry more fuel too, BUT how much fuel is realistic with a 2t payload! A Su 35 would never fly with 11.5t fuel for just 2t payload, unless it would be a very long range mission. Similarly a normal 4th to 4.5th gen fighter would not fly with such a load ONLY on internal fuel. That's why you need to add a realistic ammount of external fuel for these fighters to compare all fighters, with the same payload in the same mission!

I have made some new calculations based mainly on your specs (made some corrections of errors, which are marked) and your formula, but as said, added realistic ammount of fuel (2 x external fuel tanks) for the fighters that can't fly with such loads and internal fuel only:

As you can see, the result is very different and gives a far better picture of the combat range differences of the fighters with the load you have chosen.

 

[500]

1) I counted internal fuel of F-16E with CFT.
2) I counted payload for F-35 1,8 t instead of 2 t, since it has built in 200 kg target pod.
3) Internal fuel and empty weight of the EF2000 which I used are from the official brochure.
4) Not fair to compare internal fuel with external because it has much more drag also u forgot the empty weight of drop tanks.
5) Both F-35, F-22 and F-15 can carry external fuel tanks as well.


P.S. Actually typical carriage of are 3 tanks not 2: EF2000 external fuel carriage is 3 1000-L tanks = 2360 kg of fuel, F-16 (300 gal + 2 370 gal) = 3090 kg of fuel, Rafale - 2940 kg (supersonic) and 4710 kg subsonic tanks.

 

[sancho]

4) Not fair to compare internal fuel with external because

That's why I didn't compared internal vs full external fuel, but a typical external fuel load with a 2t weaponload to compare the range of all fighters at an equal base. Your comparison clearly was benefiting only those that carry fuel internally in any role, which made your results so way off the reality and known combat ranges.

 

[500]

That's why I didn't compared internal vs full external fuel, but a typical external fuel load with a 2t weaponload to compare the range of all fighters at an equal base. Your comparison clearly was benefiting only those that carry fuel internally in any role, which made your results so way off the reality and known combat ranges.

As I said u cant compare internal fuel qantity with external. Internal gives much bigger range boost.

Plus F-35 can also carry external fuel if needed 2 426 gal = 2530 kg.

 

[sancho]

As I said u cant compare internal fuel qantity with external.

Which nobody is doing, the comparison I made was for "equal ammount of fuel", for a standard 2t weapon load. For fighters that don't carry most of the fuel internally, that means adding standard ammount of external fuel!

Standard config of Rafale in CAS:

1 x LDP
4 x 250Kg LGB
4 x MICA
=> around 1650Kg

+ 2 x 2000l / 3200Kg external fuel


EF standard CAS config with PW IV

1 x LDP
4 x 250Kg LGB
4 x AIM 120
2 x IRIS-T
=> around 1984Kg

+ 2 x 1000l / 1600Kg external fuel

So calculating with 2t weaponloads, without at least the standard external fuel makes no sense, UNLESS you want to "create" scenarios in favour for the F35, but that's up to you of course.

 

[500]

Which nobody is doing

You compared here the external fuel with internal only:

http://s1.directupload.net/images/140611/m23qb88n.png

the comparison I made was for "equal ammount of fuel", for a standard 2t weapon load. For fighters that don't carry most of the fuel internally, that means adding standard ammount of external fuel!

Once again F-35 can also can carry external fuel. External fuel is something that is flexible and can change. Internal u cant change.

 

[500]

I decided to include the external fuel. I calculated points with external fuel and then made average between internal and external for final range points:

And here is a new rank with external fuel calculation:

Final Rank:

1. F-22 ----------------------- 99
2. F-35A --------------------- 86
3. Su-35 --------------------- 79
4. Typhoon (AESA) ------ 79
5. F-15SG ------------------- 77
6. Su-30MKI (AESA) ---- 75
7. Rafale (AESA) --------- 73
8. Typhoon ------------------ 72
9. Rafale --------------------- 69
10. MiG-35 (1018 mod) - 69
11. J-10B (AESA) --------- 69
12. F-18E -------------------- 68
13. F-2A ---------------------- 67
14. F-16E -------------------- 67
15. Su-30MKI --------------- 66
16. Gripen NG -------------- 65
17. MiG-35 (680 mod) --- 62
18. J-10A --------------------- 62
19. JF-17 (AESA) --------- 60
20. Gripen ------------------- 56
21. JF-17 --------------------- 56

 

[sancho]

You compared here the external fuel with internal only:

Once again, fighters like the F 35 or the Flanker are designed to carry the same ammount of fuel internally, that normal fighters carry with internal AND external fuel! That's why you have to add external fuel for a Rafale or F18Sh, when you calculate with full internal fuel of the F35 or Flanker, it's not so hard to understand!

F35 - 8.2t internal
Rafale - 4.7t intern + 3.2t external = 7.9t

That's what's called equal base for a calculation

And now calculating the F35 with full internal + external fuel makes still no sense, because you again give it several tons more fuel, which hardly makes it surprising that it retain advantages.

 

[500]

Once again, fighters like the F 35 or the Flanker are designed to carry the same ammount of fuel internally, that normal fighters carry with internal AND external fuel! That's why you have to add external fuel for a Rafale or F18Sh, when you calculate with full internal fuel of the F35 or Flanker, it's not so hard to understand!

F35 - 8.2t internal
Rafale - 4.7t intern + 3.2t external = 7.9t

That's what's called equal base for a calculation

And now calculating the F35 with full internal + external fuel makes still no sense, because you again give it several tons more fuel, which hardly makes it surprising that it retain advantages.

F-15 with CFT has more internal fuel than Su-27/30, nevertheless it still usually carries external tanks as well.

F-15E - Google Search

Big amount of internal fuel is big advantage and you cant neglect it.

 

[Informant]

@500 What is the difference between Israeli F-15 and KSA F-15? Better armaments?

 

[500]

@500 What is the difference between Israeli F-15 and KSA F-15? Better armaments?

Israeli F-15I = F-15E with Israeli EW.
Saudi F-15S = F-15E with downgraded radar.
Saudi F-15SA = F-15E with upgraded AESA radar.

F-15SA > F-15I > F-15S

 

[Informant]

Israeli F-15I = F-15E with Israeli EW.
Saudi F-15S = F-15E with downgraded radar.
Saudi F-15SA = F-15E with upgraded AESA radar.

F-15SA > F-15I > F-15S

Ahan thanks. Any new upcoming threads?

 

[Mav3rick]

@500 You have invested a lot of time and effort on this and other similar threads. However, I personally believe that you can only get the actual potency of a fighter by also incorporating the types of air to air weapons and ECM/ECCM (Jamming/anti-Jamming) equipment that they carry on board. And if you are really that interested, you may also include territorial support in terms of SAM sites + ground based ECM/ECCM as well as AEWACS & support air to air refuellers.

 

[Storm Force]

AT 500

Regarding fighter ranking

Gives me great heart amd confidence in the IAF decision making SU30MKI the bedrock of their current fleet and adding the very potent rafale.

Free from USA sanctions too

1. F-22 ----------------------- 99
2. F-35A --------------------- 86
3. Su-35 --------------------- 79
4. Typhoon (AESA) ------ 79
5. F-15SG ------------------- 77
6. Su-30MKI (AESA) ---- 75
7. Rafale (AESA) --------- 73
8. Typhoon ------------------ 72
9. Rafale --------------------- 69
10. MiG-35 (1018 mod) - 69
11. J-10B (AESA) --------- 69
12. F-18E -------------------- 68
13. F-2A ---------------------- 67
14. F-16E -------------------- 67
15. Su-30MKI --------------- 66
16. Gripen NG -------------- 65
17. MiG-35 (680 mod) --- 62
18. J-10A --------------------- 62
19. JF-17 (AESA) --------- 60
20. Gripen ------------------- 56
21. JF-17 --------------------- 56