JSRwasn’t referring just to the Su-30s, but the AF acquisition as a whole. A number of it is simply a jobs creation program when in reality some of the other air frames can do the same job with out requiring the need for a new airframe with its logistics and maintenance needs. Reflects the bigger problem of plants doing their own things. Fortunately the army seems to be moving in a better direction with the Armata and Kurganets series.
They simply not job creation programe. you cannot stretch legs for long range missions in Su-30 like you can do in Su-34. Su-34 has bigger tail string, wider nose and hump to carry more electronics. Su-34 also designed for bigger pods and fuel tanks.
Su-35 more light weight and sleek fighter with more power and fuel than Su-30. Su-30 is the compromised between the two to makeup the numbers. It wont performed the specialized roles for large airforce.
JSRSurprisingly even the very modern RD-33MK on the MiG-29K has been packing up in-flight.
that must be Indian maintaince procedure as India has never maintained modern engine like RD-33MK which is on par with 117S.
in single engine JF-17 the older RD-93 performance is so good that they ordered 100 more.
JSRNon AESA F-16 weighs 9.2tons. with only 2.7 tons of internal fuel. this thing need CFT permanently.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/f16/F-16Specifications.html
F-16 was never designed to be that heavy & powerfull engine from start on small airframe. there isn’t much difference between Rafale and F-16 nose.
I think nose size is bigger to take advantage higher powered engine.
JSRF-15E weighs 32,300lbs (basic weight with lubricant, unrecoverable fuel, ect) without CFT (37,000lbs with CFT). 20 ton class has to do with the loaded weight. Andraxxus has the right numbers.
There is now where to support those numbers. some thing built in 1980s but not current standards.
JSRThis is with extra thrust.
http://www.salut.ru/ViewTopic.php?Id=2189
24.12.2013FSUE “Gas-Turbine Engineering RPC “Salut” has successfully completed the first phase of engine longevity and performance bench tests in view of future deliveries of a new version of AL-31FN Series 3.
The AL-31FN Series 3 engine was run in the climatic test chamber of the Central Institute of Aviation Engine Studies in pursuance of a contract with PRC. The new engine variant has improved life-time (250 hours extension) and thrust (additional 1000 kg/f) performance versus its predecessor.
The test preparation and supervision work was assumed by Salut’s Direction of R&D Activity.
JSRThanks for the link.. But there is no indication about the FN series 3 having increased performance.. Mind the remark about pre-turbine gas temperature being increased by 25K, the performance increase would hardly be noticeable. I think they are more focused on MTBO here…
As Salyut website says: Thrust growth and jet nozzle with thrust vector control are potential if modernized into the AL-31FN-M1 arrangement.
That is older version at 12,700kg. one tonne above it 13.7ton thrust for J-10B.
JSRYou understand I was talking about an entirely different twin engined airframe?
F-15E = 14300 kg, 50% fuel = 3900 kg, 4xAIM-9M = 340 kg. Total = 18540kg.
Thrust/Weight with GE-129 = 1.44 with GE-132 = 1.56
Thrust/Wing Area = 4678 N/m2 with GE-129J-10A = 9750 kg, 50% fuel= ~2200kg, 4xPL-9 = 460 kg. Total = 12410 kg.
Thrust/Weight with AL-31FN = 1.01
Thrust/Wing Area = 3184 N/m2.I find it funny to think F-15 needs more power. Now how J-10’s competitors do (saving the long numbers to myself);
F-16 block 50 = 1.10 T/W, 4736N/m2
F-16 block 60 = 1.20 T/W, 5166N/m2
MiG-35 = 1.19 T/W, 4647 N/m2
Rafale = 1.28 T/W, 3309 N/m2Comparing tiny differences between drag of F-16, MiG-29/35 would be inconclusive as their Thrust/wing area is too close, and their Cd multiplier would be decisive. In these numbers you will easily see design choices; Its easily concievable F-16, MiG-29 and Rafale are similar performers; F-16 and MiG-29 data is very close. Rafale has worse T/D but excellent T/W to overcome it. However, unless J-10 has 61% drag coefficient of F-16 (which is impossibility to me), its way behind when compared by T/D. Its also behind in T/W, so I again call it underpowered.
Assuming Cd is same between Rafale and J-10, To have same kinematic performance of Rafale (inverse T/W relation to T/D) J-10 needs some 152 kN thrust from its engine.
Added some others for comparison:
Typhoon = 1.32 T/W, 3515 N/m2
Su-35 = 1.20 T/W, 4580 N/m2
F-22 = 1.31 T/W, 3997 N/m2
F-35 = 1.09 T/W, 4473 N/m2
MiG-23MLD = 1.05 T/W, 3400 N/m2
JF-17 = 1.05 T/W, 3463 N/m2French= see the numbers above, and tell me they do need upgrade?
Turkey= Seriously, no one sane enough will not even suggest such upgrade; thrash hundreds of working engines, spend billions of $, just to gain 2 deg/s in maneuverability and 10-15 km in range. Plus with planned order of 116 F-35s, damn right we don’t have the money or time to upgrade our F-16 fleet.
F-15E only 14.3 tons? The Non-AESA F-15K is 20 ton class on Boeing site. your numbers are all inaccurate. your order for 116 F-35 only on paper nothing signed. Chinese never published J-10B weight of 9.7tons. and they are already getting upgraded engines.
JSR@ JSR
considering China still struggles to make comparably reliable copies of cfm56, which a 40+ years old snecma design, I doubt anyone here will be impressed by chinese engines technology (still in copying stage most of the time anyway)
the point is not engine tech alone but money & technical labor to implement it on large fleet. Both France and Turkey are multi decade operators of Rafale and F-16 but when time for engine upgrades comes they simply don’t have money to implement it. so its case of sour grapes. as long as Chinese can built millions of mobile phones. they will not have problem in ordering thousands of upgraded engines.
JSRAnd that is probably the reason why Chinese are satisfied with the power the Al-31FN is providing for the time being. Not only it would be a price jump per se, but someone would also have to pay for development of an “Al-31FNM2”. Funny that you claim that no one needs more power than GE-129 provides but the Al-31F with practically identical power rating is suddenly not good enough..
Chinese are not satisfied with thrust that’s why this continuous upgrades happening. Delta canard plane has much more agility that’s why certifying engine for that airframe takes more time. Its not simple design like F-16/M2K.
http://www.salut.ru/ViewTopic.php?Id=2325
Salut has completed a range of works to provide for supply to its Customer (PRC) of the AL-31FN series-3 engines, intended for J-10 aircraft.
April 10, 2014 the AL-31FN series-3 engine’s design documentation was approved for full-scale engine production and assigned a code letter “O1”.Salut has completed a range of works to provide for supply to its Customer (PRC) of the AL-31FN series-3 engines, intended for J-10 aircraft.
JSRCould be. There can be also another reasons. If i were to speak for Turkey; Turkey already produces/assembles GE-129/129B engines locally, and Turkey operates a sizeable fleet with -129 (163 aircraft IIRC). 30 additional F-16’s were mostly due to delays in JSF production, so parts commonality within fleet and manufacturing concerns may have taken priority above individual aircraft performance. I believe similar concerns apply to all countries who had F-16 before their recent orders.
As for F-15E, who really needs more power than GE-129 anyway? Price tag could also play part in this.
so turkey cant afford the upgrade of engine despite one of largest operator of F-16 for decades.
whats the point of talking against J-10 when it got new engine within 10 years of operations and built at higher rate.
This far better performance than none engine upgrade Rafale/EF/F-18E.
JSRI know. The -132 is fully qualified for F-16C/D and F-15E, yet no one seems to want it. Could be price tag?
Most of new tech developed in west comes with steep price tag unless Chinese parts involved. Italy and Australia spending billions on creating JSF overhaul and base upgrade when there operational squadron is decade away. India can’t even ask for Rafale overhaul for those 36 rafales. such big climb down.
JSRThe option is till there. Its not like the -132 equipped Viper hasn’t been exported.
14.5 Ton option is also there for J-10 during overhaul. it also improve fuel consumption.
http://www.salut.ru/ViewTopic.php?Id=1459
Vladislav Masalov, Director General of Salut, said that the full-scale deliveries of upgraded engines could be started as early as 2013. “The AL-31F M2 engine can be a not so expensive solution for re-engining of Su-27, Su-30 and Su-34 fleet now operated by the Russian military and is likewise deliverable to foreign customers,” noted Director General. The technical specifications and requirements of Su-27SM and Su-34 aircraft call for the engines with increased thrust and improved fuel consumption with the AL-31F M2 fulfilling these requisites. The installation can be performed without any rework of the aircraft and take place in field conditions.
AL-31F M2 engine is a by-pass turbojet derived from the AL-31F propulsion system. The engine thrust at special power setting is 14 500 kgf. The specified life of the upgraded engine exceeds 3 000 hours. The engine features minimal differences with Series 3, 20 and 23 while offering enhanced propulsion performance characteristics with reduced specific fuel consumption, including at unaugmented power settings. Does not require airframe rework if installed on Su-27, Su-30 and Su-34 aircraft to replace the older engine Series. The upgrading can take place when overhauling the earlier versions of engines. The re-engining makes for improved flight and operational performance of aircraft through enhancement of parameters and abolishing the oxygen-charging system. A better control accuracy and diagnosing efficiency are to provide additional benefits
JSREvery where fleet availability is 50% or below. so whats the point of so long life expensive engine when rest of aircraft cant keep u with it.
http://theforeigner.no/pages/news/f-16s-cost-the-military-dearly/
Over half of Norway’s 57 aircraft are hangared for maintenance, modernisation, or rebuilds on a rolling basis, according to Aftenposten.If a several billion kroner bill for these operations alone wasn’t enough, each plane also costs 70,000 kroner per flight hour in upkeep and fuel.
http://www.janes.com/article/47093/netherlands-commits-to-first-operational-f-35s
The country already struggles to find aircraft to deploy abroad from its current fleet of 60 Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcons. For example, in order to deploy Dutch F-16s to Jordan to take part in the strikes in Iraq against the Islamic State, a planned Dutch participation in the next rotation of the NATO Response Force (NRF) had to be cancelled.
JSRThe point is IAF operating world largest fleet of TVC fighters with all license and documentation and RMAF still went with Sukhoi for maintainance. Procedures in India most likely outdated.
RMAF Su-30MKM is lighter weight at 17.7 tons.
http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2013/06/malaysia-invests-in-sukhoi-fighter.html
In late March, Sukhoi won a three-year contract called “The supply of articles, services and technical assistance for Su-30MKM aircraft” worth RM300 million (more than U.S.$100 million), three times the allocation over the previous three-year period. Respective documents were signed by MOD secretary general Datuk Dr. Haji Ismail Haji Ahmad, with Sukhoi deputy general director for marketing Alexander Klementiev and director for after-sales support Vyacheslav Lozan
The increased spending is meant to boost combat readiness of the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) Su-30MKM fleet from the current level of 65 to 70 percent to 85 percent in the “near term” and eventually increase this to 100 percent
JSRyou do realize India got license for AL-31 engines and the license is most likely based on 1980s tech and equipment as it takes decades for India to sign contract. Russia has moved forward by miles from these standards.
India M2K fleet is also not operable due crashes, spare mismanagement and slow upgrades.
Sign In
