Thrust to Weight Ratios of all Fighter Planes

[Azatavrear]

Thrust to Weight ratio figures for aircraft (not engine itself) is given in a standard day (59 deg F and 29.92 inhg) measured at sea level.
As the aircraft gains altitude the thrust of an engine decreases (due to less air molocules in altitude) while its weight remains constant (not counting fuel burn).

TTW ratio is important but it is not eveything.

 

[xMustiiej70]

Good thing that F35 don't need aircraft performance to be the best fighter.

 

[Manticore]

the aerodynamics of the fighter also play an important role, other than the thrust to wt ratio..

Delta aircrafts have lower wingloading thus higher ITR.Swept winged have higher wingloading thus lower ITR.
Delta aircrafts are less aerodynamic so bleed more energy on turns, hence lower STR whereas swept winged planes have a higher STR since they bleed less energy.

The disadvantages, especially marked in the older tailless delta designs,[interceptors] are a loss of total available lift caused by turning up the wing trailing edge or the control surfaces (as required to achieve a sufficient stability) and the high induced drag of this low-aspect ratio type of wing. This causes delta-winged aircraft to 'bleed off' energy very rapidly in turns, a disadvantage in aerial maneuver combat and dogfighting.-- modern delta winged, also use canards aswell

http://dc201.*******.com/img/VAU1iZDQ/0.028808484240299914/Delta_wing_-_Wikipedia_the_fre.png

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...8-combat-aircraft-designs-26.html#post1561981

 

[Pak47]

i wonder how old this post is, but.. here i go..

With Rd-93 at 18,300 max thrust is 0.93
With Ws-13 at 18,968 max thrust its 0.97
With Ws13 improved with 22,000 we could see a thrust to weight above 1.0

 

[MiG-21]

WE HAVE A PROBLEM IN DEVELOPING ENGINE OF LCA.
HERE T/W RATIO OF LCA IS 0.87(I SUPPOSE THIS IS THE RATIO BY KAVERI ENGINE)
ALSO MIRAGE-2000H HAS T/W RATIO 0.88. IAF INITIALLY INTRESTED IN THIS PLANE FOR MMRCA COMPETITION.
DON'T YOU GUYS THINK IAF IS BIASED ABOUT OUR INDEGENOUS TECHNOLOGY AS THEY WANT LCA'S T/W RATIO >1 WHILE THEY WERE INTRESTED IN MIRAGE-2000H?

Unfortunately no. Kaveri engine was never tested with the Tejas. The Thrust to weight in that list is of the new GE F-404-IN-20 engine on Tejas Mark 1.

IAF was interested in the 2000-5 version. It has a slightly higher TWR. See the list.
Also LCA is a new fighter which is still incomplete and in development yet to achieve its promised specifications(eg: it can only do 6Gs now compared to the promised 9Gs), while the Mirage proved itself in Kargil. That factor might have played an important part.

French fighters generally have a low TWR, Compare Mirage-III and earlier MiG-21 f-13 version, or the latest- Eurofighter and Rafale. Although with Rafale, the French have almost closed the Gap.

0.98 - J-10A
And still it can climb vertically?

J-10 can have a TWR greater than 1 if, for example, is loaded with only 1 tonne of fuel. In an airshow it's highly unlikely they will be loaded with more than what's needed for a few minutes display.

i wonder how old this post is, but.. here i go..

With Rd-93 at 18,300 max thrust is 0.93
With Ws-13 at 18,968 max thrust its 0.97
With Ws13 improved with 22,000 we could see a thrust to weight above 1.0

Wikipedia hasn't been updated in a long time. In any case, 0.93 is under different conditions than the one in this list.

------
Edit: 0.86 - ****-1
lol.. that must be Taiwan's fighter. I guess the forum mistook it for *F()ck* and covered/masked that word.

Edit2: LCA's TWR is disappointing. That's with the new GE-IN-20 engine! Hope the Mark 2 with F414 GE engine fixes this dis-advantage.

Edit3: What the hell.. Su-15 and MiG-23 have higher TWR than LCA! Sukhoi-15!!!! When the world has moved on to Sukhoi-30....
Sukhoi-9 and Sukhoi-11 have higher TWR than JF-17. hehe

With Emergency thrust MiG-21 Bis beats almost everything! Extremely useful for Scramble and Intercept missions. No wonder MiG-21 Bis are still soldiering on.

Edit4: Nice! High T/W(TWR/Thrust to Weight Ratio) & Low W/S(wing loading). I was wondering why F-35 has a low TWR in the list. It is primarily a Joint Strike Fighter afterall. That's good enough for it.

http://www.eurofighter.com/fileadmin/web_data/downloads/efworld/ef_world_2-2010b_Low.pdf

Edit5: 0.45 - Marut Mk.1
Look at that! India's first home grown fighter, with a little help from kurt ofcourse.

 

[Pakistanisage]

JF-17's Thrust to weight ratio is disappointing,and that alone drops it from my "Cool list"...

Let's keep in mind that JF-17 is a low cost fighter designed to provide a low cost platform for multi role solution. The T/W would further improve with planned use of composite designed airframe.

Also, keep in mind that you cannot compare single engine aircrafts with dual engined fighters ( most fighters with 1.10+ T/W ratio are dual engined fighters). Besides, Thrust Weight ratio is not the only criteria for judging the performance capability of an aircraft. Criteria such as avionics, manueverability, electronic jamming capability and various other traits are crucial too.

Dollar for Dollar, JF-17 is an excellent addition to PAF arsenal and experience gained in thsi project will propel the PAF into a production capability which should be appreciated.

 

[Mav3rick]

1.8 is huge...........
I think its near to 0.8 thurst to weight ratio

0.76 (Empty) without afterburner
1.30 (Empty) with afterburner

0.55 (Loaded) without afterburner
0.95 (Loaded) with afterburner

 

[MiG-21]

^(Loaded[with only full fuel]) with afterburner is 0.93. 0.95 was before the weight increase.

 

[Chogy]

That "5th gen" checklist seems, to me, to be written by armchair types.

The need for Supermanueverability is dying, ops above 50,000' mean little in these days of AIM-120 and SA-20 and Patriot missiles that can almost fly into outer space, and extreme T/W ratio is no longer the huge benchmark it once was.

Stealth
Sensors/networking
Weapons

All trump.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

That "5th gen" checklist seems, to me, to be written by armchair types.

The need for Supermanueverability is dying, ops above 50,000' mean little in these days of AIM-120 and SA-20 and Patriot missiles that can almost fly into outer space, and extreme T/W ratio is no longer the huge benchmark it once was.

Stealth
Sensors/networking
Weapons

All trump.

agreed but still TVC is touted as a must have in modren jets F-22 has it too.


Supermanueverability aside but a good (subjective term sorry) T/W ratio will make the mission much easier. I guess you agree with that but just wanted to point out that all these joyful acrobatics like cobra etc mean nothing much to new missiles

 

[MiG-21]

The US Airforce when they submitted RFP for the ATF(F-22 vs F-23), maneuverability, TWR was also a criteria. I guess they don't want another Vietnam on their hands(putting all the eggs in the missiles basket, with no internal guns, kinda situation). The IAF too faced an exact situation in the 1965 war IIRC. All those long range missiles(especially the active ones), no one knows how they would perform in an highly intense jamming, EW, Towed decoys, conventional decoys environment. There is also the fact that the F-22 has an Internal Gun! And the fact that, kill probability of Semi-Active beam riding missiles is more than the active ones, because the aircraft's radar is much harder to jam than the missile's small onboard radar.

Put all these pieces together and you get a clearer picture.

It's never safe to put all your eggs in a single basket.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

The US Airforce when they submitted RFP for the ATF(F-22 vs F-23), maneuverability, TWR was also a criteria. I guess they don't want another Vietnam on their hands(putting all the eggs in the missiles basket, with no internal guns, kinda situation). The IAF too faced an exact situation in the 1965 war IIRC. All those long range missiles(especially the active ones), no one knows how they would perform in an highly intense jamming, EW, Towed decoys, conventional decoys environment. There is also the fact that the F-22 has an Internal Gun! And the fact that, kill probability of Semi-Active beam riding missiles is more than the active ones, because the aircraft's radar is much harder to jam than the missile's small onboard radar.

Put all these pieces together and you get a clearer picture.

It's never safe to put all your eggs in a single basket.

you have a valid point about F23 vs F22 and why F22 was selected over black widow but going for guns is not a unanimous decision.
The group advocating the adoption of F22 cited the same reasons you put across vs what Chogy is saying.
Unlike the 60s , now you got the off bore locking missiles that are far better than guns who don’t have to make the similar amount of effort to get the lock like in the case of F4s etc.

Opponents of guns say it takes weight and is ineffective and that space/ weight could have been used for avionics/ sensors or extra missile. You only get 1 to 2 bursts from guns anyway don’t you after that it’s a dead weight of the cannon whether you hit or miss.

 

[MiG-21]

Whether it is an unanimous decision or not, the fact is the decision was taken to incorporate a gun, and that decision was chosen, and so currently it has a gun. So does the Eurofighter and Rafale.

Unlike the 60's Jamming, EW, Decoys, Countermeasures have also improved. You can't count one factor in and leave others out. Yes missiles are the primary weapon of choice, but guns, are here to stay, just for backup.

You can get much more than 1 or 2 bursts from a gun. It mostly depends on the burst rate chosen.

 

[Chogy]

We haven't had a true air to air gun kill since 1982 or so, the Bekaa valley campaign. And in Desert Storm, it wasn't the super-reliable AIM-9 that scored the most kills, it was the AIM-7. Pilots chose the AIM-7 because it allowed them to stand off and take the shot.

No one is going to drive through 2 or 3 missile envelopes to close to gun range. Missiles do work. There is no blanketing ECM/IRCM that is going to totally negate those systems. The "no gun" decision in Vietnam was premature, but the time has arrived. I will maintain forever that the gun in the F-22 is a waste of space and weight.

 

[The enlightened]

We haven't had a true air to air gun kill since 1982 or so, the Bekaa valley campaign. And in Desert Storm, it wasn't the super-reliable AIM-9 that scored the most kills, it was the AIM-7. Pilots chose the AIM-7 because it allowed them to stand off and take the shot.

No one is going to drive through 2 or 3 missile envelopes to close to gun range. Missiles do work. There is no blanketing ECM/IRCM that is going to totally negate those systems. The "no gun" decision in Vietnam was premature, but the time has arrived. I will maintain forever that the gun in the F-22 is a waste of space and weight.

What about DFRM jamming.