Yahoo25Yahoo25, the Chengdu webpage you gave me did not mention 3600KM, it had another kanji, i can read Japanese and few chinese kanjies since japanese is related to Chinese, in fact they are the base, also i can read Portuguese, Spanish , Italian and English so i can look for many webpages in different lenguages,
but let`s suppose Golden Dragon is right and the range is 3500KM and it can carry four SD-10 the FC-1 still will be less capable to the F-16 and therefore much less capable than the Su-30MKI, look the FC-1 top speed Mach 1.6 the Su-30 as minimun is Mach 2.0 it is at least a 400km difference as many webpages have reported (others claimed even Mach 2.35) , it is the most agile fighter besisdes the F-22 and still carries twelve AAMs the double of AAms, no point to see a Su-30MKI is at least the equivalent to two FC-1s but the FC-1 is only 8.5Gs capable so it is basicly not a macht to a Su-30MKI in dogfights, less capable in detection range still the FC-1 has no real advantages specially because the Russian know that the AA-12 is not top notch and they need a Meteor kind AAM and the Su-30MKI will be a likely candidate. okay the Chinese and pakistanies can also buy the Meteor or R-77 ramjets but the Su-30MKI only has the radar detection capability to use it along side the J-11, i only respect the J-10 becasue that is really a true new fighter that looks goods in paper not only is aesthetically pleasing as the FC-1, that by the way i like also you want to deny with inflight refueling the Su-30 will stay in the air 10 hours and has a range of 8000km and has two time the weapons load so it means in fact two sorties of a FC-1 and that even at 3500km range the FC-1 will carry only two SD-10 .
Do you even understand the logic behind FC-1 program that you ask the same questions again and again?
If it is 80 to 85% as capable as F-16 in range and weopons and hard points than price of one F-16 is equal to 2.5 FC-1 interms of unit. So for the price of one F-16 you got 250% capability with same standard of avionics,BVR and WVR missiles.( i will give edge to AIM-120). And top speed of FC-1 is based on initial specification not the revised it is more likely to be Mach 2 versus Mach 1.9 of Su-30.
And how is new F-16 less capable than Su-30. F-16 with CFT has same range as Su-30, higher TWR, Better engine uptime, better weopons, smaller RCS and lower maintainance cost and with datalinks and new EW suite any F-16 can shoot down Su-30 with ease.
It is official news from horse mouth. Notice the emphasis on 1/4th price tag, efficiency and fuel consumption.
The serial production of the aircraft will start in 2007 and China has already placed order for a large number of aircrafts, Chief Project Director of JF-17, Air Vice Marshal Shahid Lateef told journalists. In addition to China, other regional countries are also interested in buying this aircraft, which carries a one fourth price tag as compared to its other contemporaries but is far better in efficiency and fuel consumption
Yahoo25RD-93 is no upgrade of RD-33. Just all the anc. added and rearranged to run it as single engine. Most of the performance achivements through better parts are eaten-up. To keep hydraulics, electricity for example, have to be done by a single engine and that is not for free, when it comes to fuel consumption. 🙂
Do you have any source which says it is not a new engine. You can look at AFM april issue where it is clearly mentioned that RD-93 is RD-33 with improvement to RD-33 MTBO and fuel consumption and i have other local reports also to support this. The major reason PAF not going for J-10 currently is Russian engine even russia allow its export to PAF. Western aircrafts are still better even if they come with embargo. the only reason i am comparing FC-1 with Su-30 is because both are using engines from same source otherwise comparing russian with west is complete obsurdity.
Agentstvo Voyennykh Novostey news agency web site, Moscow, in English 19 Apr 00/BBC Monitoring/(c) BBC
Text of report in English by Russian news agency Agentstvo Voyennykh Novostey web siteMoscow, 19th April: The state unitary Klimov plant is exhibiting its RD-93 engine at the sixth international Engines 2000 exhibition, which is currently taking place at the local All-Russian Exhibition Centre here.
The engine has been developed for the new Chinese multipurpose (FC- 1) Super-7 fighter, designed by the Aircraft Industrial Group and the Russian Mikoyan design bureau, Aleksandr Sarkisov, the designer general of the plant, told the Military News Agency.
The RD-93 is a modification of the well-known RD-33 engine which powers MiG-29 Fulcrum fighters. Weighing 1,055 kg, the new engine develops a draught of 5,040 kgf (unforced mode) and 8,300 kgf at full force.
Given the high level of gas-dynamic resistance to outside perturbation, including when applying of board weapons, the RD-93 does not in any way limit the piloting of the plane and missile launching. Older models often got surged.
Another peculiarity of the new model is fast draught growth, which is essential for a high-manoeuvrability frontline interdictor.
According to Sarkisov, the RD-93 might also be sold to other countries.
Credit: Agentstvo Voyennykh Novostey news agency web site, Moscow, in English 19 Apr 00
Yahoo25i said that kanji in 3600 is not for KM, you can babelfish it but that kanji as far as i know is not for KM and that is the Chengu web page, the babelfissed link has also many inaccuracies that even they explain the mistakes.
I think chengdu didnot put range on its page. this 3600kg seems to me weopon load.
these are the original specification of S-7 from a pak news source but i think these are little out dated interms of range and 85% capability of American F-16.
Super Seven is a light weight, multi-role day-night, all weather fighter with max TO weight 12,700kg, max speed 1.6M, ceiling 16,500m, max weapon load 3,900kg, range 3,000km.
It uses Russian RD-93 turbofan engine, which is an upgrade of RD-33, this RD-93 turbofan engine is also used in Russian MiG-29 it is claimed to 80-85% as capable as American F-16 and highly aerial maneuverability as its key features. RD-93 engine used in FC-1 is build in China with Russian license
Yahoo25Show me that 3600Km is written in Chinese in the link you gave me, i found a different kanji but not kilometers, i gave you that link so you can see the Chinese character for km
These are already babelfished posted.so how i can i turn it back. And what about that People daily english article? which i posted in previous pages.
Yahoo25here some thing about Gripen. JAS-39A is limited to 3600KG weopon load and 12.5Ton Maximum takeoff weight. JAS-39C is now 5300KG weopon load and 14Ton Maximum takeoff weight. So There is upgrade potential left in FC-1 in terms of hard points and weopon load while Su-30 is at limit of its take of weights.
http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/gripen/basic_data.html
Data for JAS 39A Gripen is basically the same, but with a max take off weight of 12500 kg payload is correspondingly lower at 3600 kg (about same as Viggen it is replacing).
Data for the two seaters JAS 39B and D is basically the same as above. JAS 39B corresponds to JAS 39A and JAS 39D to JAS 39C. The main differences are: Length 14.8m, no internal gun and a different empty weight.
——————————————————————————–
Yahoo25Sorry i did not find the chinese kanji for km in 3600. if you check this link the kani for kilometers is in the link 3500KM in Chinese? yopu will find a range of 2500km with the chinese kanji for KM and range written so if some one can read chinese can confirm it.
Note the important point that combat radius is bigger than 1200KM.
Why you simply not search this forum instead of some outside fan sites.
http://forum.airforces.info/showthread.php?t=24155&page=1&highlight=FC-1
The owlet dragon airplane installs a thrust force to be big, the fuel consumption province high thrust ratio 涡fan engine, uses under two sides ribs to let in air, the nose may hold the heavy-caliber radar antenna. Entire machine altogether has 7 外挂点, may be hanging many kinds of empty, the open area weapon, and may outside hang 3 auxiliary oil tanks, always outside hangs the ability 3,600 kilograms, the normal total weight is 9,100 kilograms, the maximum range is 3,500 kilometers, the combat radius is bigger than 1,200 kilometers, had already achieved the third generation fighter aircraft synthesis fighting efficiency, has had the ability which contends with with now the advanced fighter aircraft. (Author: Zou Wen, Meng Mei, Zhang Xiaohong)
Day government office morning paper on April 11, 2004
Edition: Long Xin
Yahoo25so an F-16 weights 33,000kg so it is a heavy fighter and so it might weight 22,000kg in normal take off as a Flanker
Read the Flight International dec 2003 issue. Block60 can drop more weopons than any Flanker currently can and has more range in most operational situations.
F-16Blk60 empty weight 9300KG. weopon load 9000KG, Fuel 4300KG approximatel.
You all the time ask for sources from me why you havent addressed this questions untill now.
What is turn around time for Su-30 after mission? Gripens claims very quick turn around.
Combat radius of Su-30 when it is at takeoff weight of 38 Tons and Flight profile?
How much time it will take to refuell a 10 Ton fuel requirement as compared to 2.2 Ton requirement in the Air?
If one of the engine is not functioning properly the whole aircraft is grounded.
Yahoo25could you give the source
below is the company website. you have to babelfish pages. It gives the updated measurement. I have already given that peoples daily article of 3500KM range and 1200 radius and i have stated earlier that design freeze of FC-1 will be achieved next year and on that basis 16 aircraft will be produced after those evaluation serial production will commence so nothing is definite yet but long range is assured from this point.
http://www.cac.com.cn/showInfoDetail.asp?iid=548
Yahoo25listen to yourself man, that can’t possibly make a 400km difference there and back. So what if Gripen uses Canards? lol
wow, I cannot believe this guy. I am stopping all arguement with him right now.
Obviously who are advertizing the product knows better. Canards adds weight thats why MKI is limited to Mach 1.9 versus Mach 2 of MKK. So it is better that you stopped argument about this.
Yahoo25The Su-27 is as capable as the F-15, but the F-15 has a better combat record because China, Ukraine Russia and India who are the main Flanker users have not been warring and Israel and the US have been fighting in several wars.
The J-11 has not been tested neither the Su-30MKI or the SU-27 of Russia or Ukraine.No nation will field few heavy weight fighter, the relation will be as much 1:3 just by price and the Su-30MKI or Su-27 can take on multibogeys engagements simply because they will carry more BVRAAMs eight AA-12 versus two or max four SD-10s in the FC-1 or six SD-10s in the J-10 which in the later is a more complex and therefore expensive.
The Su-30MKi will stay in the air longer and therefore more missiles are needed but also it gives better combat persistance.
The J-10 is perhaps a better LWF but also it is growing as the F-16 into a medium weight fighter.
Stealth is the latest technology to be incorparated and in that many think the F-35 is in another league but the F-35 is the top light weight fighter due to stealth but the Su-30MKI is a seriuos adversary to the J-10 or JAS-39 due to better combat persistance and less need to go to gunfights but the Eurofighter or Rafale have the best of both worlds and in that they will be as light as the JAS-39 or J-10 but more powerful and better armed
You are making again wrong comparisions. If you are comparing latest F-16 and Rafale to Flankers than F-16 or Rafale is not medium weight. F-16BLK60 can lift 9000KG weopons and with CFT has as much range as Flanker and can can carry 8 BVRs and engine produces 90% of thrust in non afterburning phase as afterburning of F-16A which gives alot cruising advantage. Similar is the case of Rafale. 9500KG weopon load and 14 weopon stations, CFT and upto 12 BVRs. So both are in heavy weight categories in terms of weopon load and range relative to Flanker.
Yahoo25Gripen ferry range is 3000KM while FC-1 is 3500KM
http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/gripen/basic_data.html
Range: 3000 km ferry range
Yahoo25just looking the Fc-1 pictures we know that the max range of the jet will be with three fuel tanks, two PL-5 and two SD-10, so it is not a Mystery and the SU-30MKI carries no fuel tanks and an Air to AIr configuration of AA-10, AA-11 and AA-12 will be the lightest so you argument the jet will achieve it`s max range with four SD-10 is not logic only with three fuel tanks it will reach it`s max range of 2700KM
You are posting out dated pictures and mockups of FC-1. It has nothing to do with present fighter. When range of Su-30 is 3000KM and radius is 1500KM than with 3 tanks FC-1 range is now 3500KM and radius should be 1750KM not 1200KM. and there is 550KM radius difference between 1750KM and 1200KM not range so two external tanks are not needed.
Yahoo25It’s common sense, the Gripen with similar sizes and weights carries the same fuel load and has a range of 800km, how can an FC-1 have 400 more km of range? It’s impossible.
Gripen is heavier by atleast 300KG from the current FC-1(production model of FC-1 is going to use composites to further reduce weight), Gripen uses canards and RD-33 is a little more efficient than F404. the key quality of RD-93 over older RD-33 is fuel efficiency and MTBO. It is given in AFM interview of April 2004.
Yahoo25Do you have the weapon load for the operational radius? operational can mean three fuel tanks, two SD-10 and Two PL-5
It can also mean 4 SD-10, 2 PL-5 and one external fuel tank. So only this thing should be left to future when actual weopons tests starts with differenent configuration of BVR, WVR etc.
and do you have any data of Su-30 operational radius of 1500KM at what flight, speed and weopons? It is too much subjective.
Yahoo25apperantly you’re an idiot, go back to PDF.
So from where 1200KM and 600KM figures come from? Flug site has clearly posted Combat Radius above 1200KM and 700KM or should i high light this for you to see.? Flogger had tried to misrepresent facts from a website but he failed.
Sign In
