Why there is no fuel tank in Su-24’s wing? forgot?
How large the fuselage is not only depands on the gap between the engine nacelles but also depands on the size of engine. meanwhile,
how many fuel the fuselage carry not only depands on the size of fuselage but also the size of engine.
I think in relative terms (cost per unit in relation to domestic gross product), the F-111 was cheaper, not because it was so economical but because the USA was so much more wealthy. It was by the way a huge technology program and introduced turbo-fan engines and swing wings.
Arh yes, F-111 is cheaper, compare with the speciality of US is to produce some aircraft like B-2 which only US wealthy enough to buy.:D
The cheaper price of F-111 was mentioned here not because it would spend less money on any aspect, but we took away the too large advantage somebody wrongly conceived from it:cool:
After the assessments I did I find the ~2800km ferry range with two drop tanks quite realistic. The mission radius for lo-lo-lo seems very realistic, too. Data-wise, the Wikipedia article on the Su-24MK looks as one of the better ones.
The most unreliable information source is normally the operator of an aircraft.
Most reliable are normally “merged” information sources, like Wikipedia and some other web resources (quite OK is vectorsite).
In general, most “sources” copy from each other. Some include wishful thinking. Sometimes people cannot see the difference between a mission radius and a range, and often the values given are “best” values. A real mission includes lots of reserves and allowances. The 330nm for the Suchoi 24MK in a lo-lo-lo mission profile are not a bad figure, by the way.
Since most “sources” copied from each other, the ~2800km ferry range more seems to be such copy so the reliability didn’t increase any little.
There will be no result if we insist own data.
I am pretty convinced an F-111F can beat the 330nm mission radius with 4 2000lbs bombs. That is actually the payload the F-111F of the 48th TFW carried in 1986.
I can’t see any vantage of the F-111F from the combat radius data you given compare with the Su-24. The 42000lbs bombs comes from that famous photo all we have seen ever before, but what the base will tell us F-111 can load 42000lbs bombs and achieve 330nm combat radius simultaneously?
Aircraft are best compared by operating empty weight or by maximum take-off weight. In these terms the Suchoi 24 fails miserably against the older F-111, in terms of
– range
– radius
– war load.
Any claims about smaller fuel volume are academic. One rather has to ask why the similarly heavy (in terms of OEW) has substantially less fuel volume.
……
You lost “B” in F-111. That has to be FB-111.
Neither range or radius Su-24 gained with 2x3000liter external fuel tanks are almost equal to F-111 without EFT, meanwhile, Su-24 still can load 5 missiles (3 under fuselage, 2 under wing each), how many missile F-111 can load at this time?
22300kg was adapted by Wiki, the range is clearly wrong, which should be combat radius.
On internet, which one is more logical and reasonable should be judged by self brain.
Tactical and technical data:
Crew. — 2
The number of engines – 2
Type engines – 2 hAL-21
Maximum takeoff weight, kg – 39700 Max weight 39700kg
Maximum speed, km / h – 1320 (max speed 1320km h)
Service ceiling, m – 11500
Range, km – 2500
The maximum bomb load, kg – 7500
Dimensions: length – 24.5 m, height – 6.2 m, the magnitude of the wing-17.7 m.Maximum speed km / h – 2320 Max speed 2320 km / h
Maximum speed from land km / h – 1400 Max speed a sea level 1400km / h
Service ceiling, m – 17500
The maximum flight range, km – 1300
Flight range Peregonochnaya km – 4270
Run, m – 900
Mileage, m – 850
translated from what MiG took from Russain web
That “unreliable” data is given by Sukhoi and in line with restrictions from fix inlet.
The Mirage 2000N with fixed inlet is max Mach 1,4 f.e..
Lockheed official web gave the EW data of Rapator as 19700kg, will you believe it?
Aircraft changed, officer lied always;)
The Wiki has already given the most reasonable answer. The VG inlet version of Su-24 Fencer A has top speed above 2 M but the fix inlet version of Su-24 get the lower top speed down to 1.6M. Such decrease also appeared on some other aircraft. The 1.3M is an unreliabe data for depreciative purpose.
Before Soviet collapsed, NATO guessed EW of Su-24 as 17000kg~19000kg, after that, we got more accurate data as 22300kg of M version, some indecated 21tons more or less as basical version I thought. Considering the size of Su-24, these EW data are reonable. According to the size, 17883liter as internal fuel also maybe more reasonble that 11883liter, the “7” probably was erroniously read as “1”.
He refers to the fact that using my very primitive assessment the Suchoi achieve 2136/2839 = 75% of the F-111’s range.
Have fun with relative numbers.
The statements
The Suchoi 24 achieves 25% less range than the F-111.
or
The F-111 achieves 33% more range than the Suchoi 24.
are equal.
People not used to math easily get tricked by relative numbers with unknown basis. Very popular with media and politicians, as you can basically let look any number very small or very huge, depending on the point you want to make.As I said, my calculation does not have any direct connection to reality, it only displays the effect of SFC and slightly different fuel load on range for similar weights and L/Ds.
The SFCs I gave, however, resemble the reality pretty good.
SFC of AL-21 as a turbojet over 1.1 won’t surprise anybody, compare with TF30 originally was a turbofan.
Frank there is a Su-24 variant that carries a lot of fuel, the is the Su-24 tanker version.
the most interesting of all is thet Sukhoi data does not agree with most of russian webpages that claim 9800kg of internal fuel or 13000 liters
[/B]
Same phenomenon appeared in almost of all of official web of aircraft Ltd. You can see there is a gap between 2775 and 3055. The gap at least is not as bigger as the gap between variant version of Aardvark. The smallest range of F-111 I saw was 3700km. Maybe different version lead to different internal fuel capacity.
My results basically support each statement he did. I didn’t plug in realistic weight data and used the fuel capacities you used. Including the effect of drop tanks would make the case even less desirable for the Suchoi 24.
Making a real missions assessment something that clearly exceeds the limit of what you do for an internet forum where many of the people not get the concept of SFC or L/D.
The SFC has already been considered in my calculation, but the L/D ratio was presumed as similar.
For our “translation experts”, which never got the idea, that some mistakes can happen even in Russian books and websites, when ignoring some important details.
Ever heard of US gallon and IMP, when it comes to gallons?!
One is ~3,79 l , when the other is ~4,55 l.
Kg can not be mistaken.Sukhoi gives an official 11100 kg of internal fuel for the Su-24MK.
A typical specific weight of fuel is ~0,78 kg per litre, when it can between 0,75 till 0,8.
11100*0,78 = 14230 litre
11100*0,77 = 14416 litre
11100*0,76 = 14605 litreOur “translation expert” Gordon gives 3188 gallon.
The US value of that is 12083 litre or 9424 kg.
The British value of that is 14505 litre or 11168 kg at 0,77 specific by rounded value of IMP.
Just for the benefit of the others.
Dear Sens:
The fuel capacity I used previously was 11883 liter (excharge to 9764kg)~almost .82kg/L
Now the key is a comparison of the size of AL-21 engine, if you see what I mean.:)
MiG, I’d prefer accept the result Schorsch given. The final data s/he given was more closer to my opnion and reach the reality much more. I can’t see why it is impossible that the range of Su-24 by internal fuel only is 75% of Aardvark.
Sens won’t like the result you given, absolutely
:D:p:diablo: