Possible steps to counter the rising threat from IAF ?

[Hasnain2009]

TWR = Thrust/(Weight*9.807)

TWR = 81300/(8620*9.807)

TWR = 81300/(84536.34)

TWR= 0.9617

Guys check this out, official web of PAC is showing engine thrust 84.4

Pakistan Aeronautical Complex....

No we should again calculate TWR of JF-17!!


TWR = 84400/(8620*9.807)

TWR = 84400/(84536.34)

TWR= 0.998

 

[Hasnain2009]

let me complete this copied crap....

ie THRUST WEIGHT RATIO = THRUST/WEIGHT X 9.807 satisfied??

Lets calculate the twr of MKI with above formula!!

TWR=THRUST/WEIGHT X 9.807

Weight = 17,700kg +fuel 9400kg = 27,100kg

TWR=262,000/(27,100 X 9.807)

TWR=262,000/(265769.7)

TWR=0.98581591505728455877400621666051

 

[adm_havemercy]

guys plz stick to the topic

 

[adm_havemercy]

what do you think about gripen . does pak has any chance of getting them .

 

[pakpower]

Hi

Why dont you guys discuss the details & Comparison between J-10B & SU 30MKI instead of JF-17.

I think discussion on J-10B & SU-30MKI will be interesting.

 

[mean_bird]

what do you think about gripen . does pak has any chance of getting them .

Well Grippen was offered, even with ToT, but PAF didn't go for it...mainly for its US components (engine).

Also, the JF-17 is now in competition with Grippen so I do not see PAF going for Grippen.

 

[Hasnain2009]

Hi

Why dont you guys discuss the details & Comparison between J-10B & SU 30MKI instead of JF-17.

I think discussion on J-10B & SU-30MKI will be interesting.

Yeah u are right!!

But we dont know the specification of FC-20, we will start another thread for discussion when we get FC-20!!

 

[hj786]

Firstly learn some lessons about air to air missiles and ramjet propulsion from elsewhere and post some solid reason why it cant be used as AAM.

hints: MBDA meteor, r-77M1 and read something about IDEAS-2008 and procurement of AAM to PAF.

Hint: first, learn some lessons about REALITY. Your brag-mos is nowhere near an air-to-air missile such as Meteor or R-77M1. Only in your dreams can it shoot down a Saab 2000 flying and manoeuvring at 400 mph while being jammed by an Erieye AESA radar. YOU provide proof that it can be used as AAM, or stop trolling with your imaginary scenarios.

Seems like this Aircraft guru hasn't got a mere knowledge about TWR.

Seems like this aircraft guru hasn't got "a mere knowledge" about
a) the difference between a cruise missile and an air to air missile.
b) how to calculate Thrust to Weight ratio, according to previous posts. Advice: check Newton's Second Law, then learn about algebra.

Mirage 2000C TWR = 0.91 (source http://www.military-heat.com/76/dassault-mirage-2000/)
JF-17 TWR = 0.95 (earlier posts calculate 0.96)

Mirage 2000C combat TWR = 0.89 (source: http://www.airtoaircombat.com/detail.asp?id=3)
JF-17 combat TWR = 0.91 (source: http://www.airtoaircombat.com/detail.asp?id=111)

Ironman thinks JF-17's TWR sucks even though it is better than Mirage 2000, which InAF have ~60

pls keep your inside information and dont scare me ok..

Please keep your trolling, I will keep my inside information, and don't type bullsh*t to me, ok?

so then... Wanna Join Circus????

I can't join your circus, the positions are filled very nicely by you.

 

[ironman]

Guys check this out, official web of PAC is showing engine thrust 84.4

Pakistan Aeronautical Complex....

No we should again calculate TWR of JF-17!!


TWR = 84400/(8620*9.807)

TWR = 84400/(84536.34)

TWR= 0.998

But according to Klimov website its 8300 kgf..
Klimov :: Production :: Aircraft Program :: RD-33 family

So 8300 kgf = 81.395195 knm.

 

[ironman]

Hint: first, learn some lessons about REALITY. Your brag-mos is nowhere near an air-to-air missile such as Meteor or R-77M1. Only in your dreams can it shoot down a Saab 2000 flying and manoeuvring at 400 mph while being jammed by an Erieye AESA radar. YOU provide proof that it can be used as AAM, or stop trolling with your imaginary scenarios.

Please give me some time.

Seems like this aircraft guru hasn't got "a mere knowledge" about
a) the difference between a cruise missile and an air to air missile.
b) how to calculate Thrust to Weight ratio, according to previous posts. Advice: check Newton's Second Law, then learn about algebra.

Mirage 2000C TWR = 0.91 (source Dassault Mirage 2000)
JF-17 TWR = 0.95 (earlier posts calculate 0.96)

Mirage 2000C combat TWR = 0.89 (source: AirToAirCombat.Com: Dassault Mirage 2000-5 in Detail)
JF-17 combat TWR = 0.91 (source: AirToAirCombat.Com: Chengdu FC-1 in Detail)

Ironman thinks JF-17's TWR sucks even though it is better than Mirage 2000, which InAF have ~60

TWR calculation.

Thrust X(Number of Engines/Total Weight of the Aircraf ) X Gravitational Constant.

Is TWR plays a major role to compare combat competency??
so then compare it with LCA.

Please keep your trolling, I will keep my inside information, and don't type bullsh*t to me, ok?

I can't join your circus, the positions are filled very nicely by you.

If I hurt your feelings in any manner i'm extremely sorry for that. When I doubted about the TWR of Jf-17 you called me a clown instead of checking the reality.. so I have to defend myself..

I just received a mail from my friend:
In a hadith narrated by `Abdullah bin `Amr (pbuh), "Allah's Messenger (pbuh) neither talked in an insulting manner nor did he ever speak evil intentionally. He used to say, 'The most beloved to me among you is the one who has the best character and manners'" (Al-Bukhari).

There are also so many quotes in hindu purana's too about good manners.. Everyone just says I'm proud of being a muslim or being a hindu.. How it can make him proud while not practicing it?? ... so I give up..

 

[adm_havemercy]

Hint: first, learn some lessons about REALITY. Your brag-mos is nowhere near an air-to-air missile such as Meteor or R-77M1. Only in your dreams can it shoot down a Saab 2000 flying and manoeuvring at 400 mph while being jammed by an Erieye AESA radar. YOU provide proof that it can be used as AAM, or stop trolling with your imaginary scenarios.


Seems like this aircraft guru hasn't got "a mere knowledge" about
a) the difference between a cruise missile and an air to air missile.
b) how to calculate Thrust to Weight ratio, according to previous posts. Advice: check Newton's Second Law, then learn about algebra.

Mirage 2000C TWR = 0.91 (source Dassault Mirage 2000)
JF-17 TWR = 0.95 (earlier posts calculate 0.96)

Mirage 2000C combat TWR = 0.89 (source: AirToAirCombat.Com: Dassault Mirage 2000-5 in Detail)
JF-17 combat TWR = 0.91 (source: AirToAirCombat.Com: Chengdu FC-1 in Detail)

Ironman thinks JF-17's TWR sucks even though it is better than Mirage 2000, which InAF have ~60

Please keep your trolling, I will keep my inside information, and don't type bullsh*t to me, ok?

I can't join your circus, the positions are filled very nicely by you.

t/w ratio below 1 is ok for mirage since its a strike aircraft . but for a dogfighter like jf-17 its not good .

 

[zombie:-)]

BRAHMOS is not AAM but ASM

after the areal release of brahmos it will lose altitude and when it is very close to the ground then alone it will fire its engine and follow its flight profile

 

[hj786]

If I hurt your feelings in any manner i'm extremely sorry for that.

Really? Are you sorry for coming in here and trolling with your MY BRAHMOS WILL KILL YOUR AWACS claim?
Are you sorry for trolling that JF's TWR without any payload is 0.91? Proof that this is false information:

According to Pakistan Aeronautical Complex webpage Pakistan Aeronautical Complex....
The picture states:
TOGW(2X Tip Missiles) 9100 kg (Take Off Gross Weight?)
Max. Take Off Weight 12700 kg
Internal Fuel Weight 2300 kg
Max.External Stores Weight 3720 kg

Looking at the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex.... page: "Weights: empty 6,411 kg (14,136 lb); Normal Take-Off Weight 9,072 kg (20,000 lb); Max Take-Off Weight 12,474 kg (27,500 lb)"
Some small errors between figures on each page, nevertheless:
Assuming Empty Weight = 6411 kg, internal fuel weight = 2300kg,
Take off weight with no missiles = 6411 + 2300 = 8711 kg, additional weight is 9100 - 8711 = 389kg, 389/2 = 195 kg for each wing-tip missile. AIM-9 weighs about 85kg, PL-9C weighs about 115kg, so this agrees with the statement on the previous page that 9100kg includes full internal fuel and 2 wing-tip missiles. Therefore:
Weight including full internal fuel + 2 missiles = 9100 * 9.81 = 89271 N

Thrust depends on which claim you believe. According to PAC:
RD-93 a/burner thrust = 84.4 kN = 84400 N
According to Klimov website:
"Principal specifications of RD-33: Full afterburning performance...: 8300 kgf"
using google, 8300 kgf = 81 395.195 N

TWR with full internal fuel + 2 missiles = 81395.195/89271 = 0.91 according to Klimov RD-33 principal thrust.
TWR with full internal fuel + 2 missiles = 84400/89271 = 0.945 = 0.95 according to PAC's RD-93 thrust figure.

Either way, ironman you said that 0.91 is with no payload, this post proves that is wrong, that TWR includes two missiles. Even then, you can't be sure what the thrust figure for RD-93 is, the Klimov website only mentions RD-33 "principal" figures.

adm, something that might interest you: http://www.*********************/air-force/ws10a-25-252.html (replace stars with "sinodefenceforum")

this is kind of interesting, my translation could be bad here
(Chinese script)
it has a snippet in there that states the goal of 2009 for Guizhou Liyang, is to ensure that development and mass production work needed for the new engine (which I'd assume has to be WS-13) is complete. So, I'm guessing some form of production will start in 2010.

It could also be the WS-12, there was talk a few weeks ago of a major JH-7 upgrade but I guess the WS-13 is a big priority for Guizhou Liyang since I haven't heard of any new RD-93 orders from Russia in awhile.

You probably know WS-13 is JF-17's new engine and it was reported to be undergoing final stages of testing a couple of years ago (somebody correct me if I'm wrong on that). Wasn't it also reported some time ago that Russians were offering RD-93B with 10% greater thrust than RD-93?
TWR of JF with RD-93B = ((81395.195*0.1)+81395.195)/89271 = 1.00295409
If we assume WS-13 will have 10% greater thrust than Klimov RD-33 as well, then a simple engine change gives JF a good TWR for dogfighting, whether the new engine is Russian or Chinese. If we take into account the planned weight reduction through use of carbon composites, TWR increases further.

 

[mean_bird]

Gentlemen,

Let me clear this confusion once and for all.

Thrust-to-weight ratio is exactly what it states i.e THRUST / WEIGHT.


THRUST = Force = mass m1 (in kg) and acc. a(m/s&#178 = m1.a (in Newtons)

WEIGHT = Force = mass m2 (in kg) and acc. due to gravity g = m.g (in Newtons)

According to PAC website,

empty weight of JF-17 = 6,411 kg
Internal Fuel = 2,300 kg

therefore,
Total weight = 8,711 kg

Thrust of the engine = 84.4 N

TWR of JF-17 = 84400/ (8711*9.8066) = 0.99

If you don't want to go into all that, then TWR is simply thrust (in kgs or lbs) / mass (in kg or lbs)

If your TWR ratio (after taking drag into consideration) is greater than one, you can accelerate vertically , otherwise you can't because you will start loosing speed.


For all those doubting and multiply the g instead of dividing, here's the reference. You cannot have a better reference than NASA itself

Thrust to Weight Ratio

 

[Hasnain2009]

But according to Klimov website its 8300 kgf..
Klimov :: Production :: Aircraft Program :: RD-33 family

So 8300 kgf = 81.395195 knm.

Yeah but its for RD-33, we got modified RD-93!!