Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

F/A-22 may be the first fighter with AESA arrays of lateral-side, the USAF has the upgrade plan to incorporate it into F/A-22 after 2010. However, it depends on whether the USAF could get the money for this from Congress and Pentagon at that time...

It seems that the first company who got the idea to combine AESA radar and mechanical motor for a wider searching / tracking / missile-guiding angle is Ericsson. The company's plan of AESA radar is name NOAR, which means "Not only a radar". Ericsson hopes this new radar will be able to enter service and replace Gripen's PS-05A radar after 2013.

I think the capability and the angle of searching / tracking / missile-guiding for the designs of AESA arrays of lateral-side or Conformal Smart Skin AESA Array should be much better than the combination of AESA radar and mechanical motor. However, the later one should be much cheaper and more suitable for those European countries whose defensive budgets per year are less than the defensive budget per month of USA.

F-16.net Sponsor

Forum Veteran Joined: Nov 07, 2003 - 09:12 PM Posts: 901

toan wrote:

http://www.iee.org/oncomms/pn/radar/Roulston.pdf

interesting read! Unfortunately it is only presentation slides. Thanks for sharing again.

F/A-22, F/B-22, F-35A, F-35B, F-35C, F-15E+, F-16E, F/A-18 E/F, EF-2000, Rafale B/C/M, and Su-35

A. Empty weight:

FA-22: 19,489 kg (IDR)
FB-22: 22,000 kg (IDR)
F-35A: 12,250 kg (http://www.defence.gov.au/jsf/factsheet_jsf.asp)
F-35B: 13,608 kg
F-35C: 13,888 kg
F-15E: 16,555 kg (with CFT and F-100-PW-229)
F-15E+: 16,790 kg(with CFT and F-110-GE-132)
F-16E: 9,980 kg
F-18E: 13,860 kg
EF-2K: 11,150 kg
Rafale B: 9,670 kg
Rafale C: 9,400 kg
Rafale M: 9,900 kg
Su-35: 18,400 kg

B. Internal Fuel:

FA-22: 8,323 kg
FB-22: 16,000 kg
F-35A: 8,165 kg+
F-35B: 6,300 kg
F-35C: 8,901 kg
F-15E/E+: 5,920 kg + CFT
F-16E: 3,160 kg + CFT
F-18E: 6,532 kg
EF-2K: 4,996 kg + CFT
Rafale B: 4,240 kg + CFT
Rafale C: 4,500 kg + CFT
Rafale M: 4,500 kg + CFT
Su-35: 10,250 kg

C. Wing Surface Area:

FA-22: 78.03 m2
FB-22: 110.00 m2
F-35A: 42.74 m2
F-35B: 42.74 m2
F-35C: 57.60 m2
F-15E/E+: 56.50 m2
F-16E: 27.87 m2
F-18E: 46.45 m2
EF-2K: 50.00 m2
Rafale B/C/M: 45.70 m2
Su-35: 62.00 m2

D. Comparison of air-combat weight, T/W ratio, and wing-load among these fighters at the "fair" condition (with the same kind and the amount of AAM weapons + roughly equal combat radius):

FA-22: 6,500 kg internal fuel + AIM-120*4 + AIM-9X*2
FB-22: 7,000 kg internal fuel + AIM-120*4 + AIM-9X*2
F-35A/B/C: 5,000 kg internal fuel + AIM-120*4 + AIM-9X*2
F-15E/E+: 7,000 kg (internal + CFT) fuel + AIM-120*4 + AIM-9X*2
F-16E: 4,000 kg (internal + CFT) fuel + AIM-120*4 + AIM-9X*2
F-18E: 6,000 kg internal fuel + AIM-120*4 + AIM-9X*2
EF-2000: 4,996 kg internal fuel + AIM-120*4 + ASRAAM*2
RAFALE B/C/M: 4,500 /4,240 kg internal fuel + MICA EM*4 + MICA IR*2
Su-35: 6,700 kg internal fuel + R-77*4 + R-73M2*2

E. Air-combat weight:

FA-22: 27,000 kg
FB-22: 30,000 kg
F-35A: 18,300 kg
F-35B: 19,650 kg
F-35C: 19,950 kg
F-15E: 24,750 kg
F-15E+: 25,000 kg
F-16E: 15,000 kg
F-18E: 20,950 kg
EF-2K: 17,150 kg
Rafale B: 14,900 kg
Rafale C: 14,800 kg
Rafale M: 15,300 kg
Su-35: 26,250 kg

F. Wing-load (E/C):

FA-22: 346.0 kg/m2 (Score: 1.000)
FB-22: 272.7 kg/m2 (Score: 1.269)
F-35A: 428.2 kg/m2 (Score: 0.808 )
F-35B: 459.8 kg/m2 (Score: 0.753)
F-35C: 346.4 kg/m2 (Score: 1.000)
F-15E: 438.8 kg/m2 (Score: 0.789)
F-15E+: 442.5 kg/m2 (Score: 0.782)
F-16E: 538.2 kg/m2 (Score: 0.643)
F-18E: 451.0 kg/m2 (Score: 0.767)
EF-2K: 343.0 kg/m2 (Score: 1.009)
Rafale B: 326.0 kg/m2 (Score: 1.061)
Rafale C: 323.9 kg/m2 (Score: 1.068 )
Rafale M: 334.8 kg/m2 (Score: 1.033)
Su-35: 423.4 kg/m2 (Score: 0.817)

G. T/W ratio, sea-level(AB thrust / Maximal military thrust):

FA-22: 1.270 / 0.857 (F-119, 37,800 Ib / 25,500 Ib *2), Score: 1.000 / 1.000
FB-22: 1.210 / 0.789 (F-135, 40,000 Ib / 26,100 Ib *2), Score: 0.953 / 0.921
FB-22: 1.300 / 0.789 (F-135, 43,000 Ib / 26,100 Ib *2), Score: 1.024 / 0.921
F-35A: 0.991~1.065 / 0.647 (F-135, 40,000 ~ 43,000 Ib / 26,100 Ib *1): Score: 0.780~0.839 / 0.755
F-35B: 0.923~0.992 / 0.603 (F-135, 40,000 ~ 43,000 Ib / 26,100 Ib *1): Score: 0.726~0.781 / 0.703
F-35C: 0.909~0.977 / 0.594 (F-135, 40,000 ~ 43,000 Ib / 26,100 Ib *1): Score: 0.715~0.769 / 0.692
F-15E: 1.067 / 0.652 (F-100-PW-229, nowadays, 29,100 Ib / 17,800 Ib *2): Score: 0.840 / 0.761
F-15E+: 1.161 / 0.689 (F-110-GE-132, peace time, 32,000 Ib / 19,000 Ib *2): Score: 0.914 / 0.804
F-15E+: 1.234 / 0.689 (F-110-GE-132, war time, 34,000 Ib / 19,000 Ib *2): Score: 0.972 / 0.804
F-16E: 0.968 / 0.575 (F-110-GE-132, peace time, 32,000 Ib / 19,000 Ib *1): Score: 0.762 / 0.671
F-16E: 1.029 / 0.575 (F-110-GE-132, the war time, 34,000 Ib / 19,000 Ib *1): Score: 0.810 / 0.671
F-16E: 1.119 / ????? (F-110-GE-XXX, post-2010 ?, 37,000 Ib / ?????Ib *1): Score: 0.881 / ?????
F-18E: 0.953 / 0.606 (F-414-GE-400, nowadays, 22,000 Ib / 14,000 Ib *2): Score: 0.750 / 0.707
F-18E: 1.148 / 0.729 (F-414-GE-???, post-2015?, 26,500 Ib / 16,850 Ib *2): Score: 0.904 / 0.851
EF-2K: 1.071 / 0.714 (EJ200, peace time, 20,250 Ib / 13,500 Ib *2): Score: 0.843 / 0.833
EF-2K: 1.130 / 0.821 (EJ200, the war time, 21,370 Ib / 15,525 Ib *2): Score: 0.890 / 0.956
EF-2K: 1.178 / 0.821 (EJ200, small revision, 22,275 Ib / 15,525 Ib *2): Score: 0.927 / 0.956
EF-2K: 1.222 / 0.857 (EJ230, post-2010 ?, 23,100 Ib / 16,200 Ib *2): Score: 0.962 / 1.000
EF-2K: 1.400 ~ 1.428 / 0.926 (EJ270, post-2015 ?, 27,000 Ib / 17,500 Ib *2): Score: 1.102 ~ 1.124 / 1.081
RAFA B: 1.027 / 0.685 (M88-2, nowadays, 16,870 Ib / 11,245 Ib *2): Score: 0.809 / 0.799
RAFA B: 1.209 / 0.806 (M88-3, post-2010, 20,250 Ib / 13,500 Ib *2): Score: 0.952 / 0.940
RAFA C: 1.038 / 0.692 (M88-2, nowadays, 16,870 Ib / 11,245 Ib *2): Score: 0.817 / 0.807
RAFA C: 1.222 / 0.815 (M88-3, post-2010, 20,250 Ib / 13,500 Ib *2): Score: 0.962 / 0.951
RAFA M: 1.000 / 0.667 (M88-2, nowadays, 16,870 Ib / 11,245 Ib *2): Score: 0.787 / 0.778
RAFA M: 1.177 / 0.785 (M88-3, post-2010, 20,250 Ib / 13,500 Ib *2): Score: 0.927 / 0.916
Su-35: 1.104 / 0.648 (AL-37FU, nowadays, 31,970 Ib / 18,740 Ib *2): Score: 0.869 / 0.756
Su-35: 1.244 / 0.829 (AL-41F1, post-2015?, 36,000 Ib / 24,000 Ib *2): Score: 0.980 / 0.967

Forum Veteran Joined: Apr 16, 2005 - 03:16 PM Posts: 800

Quote:

F-16E: 4,000 kg (internal + CFT) fuel

Unless I'm wrong it should be more like 4500 kg ( 3160 kg of internal fuel + 1400 kg in the CFTs).

http://www.defense-update.com/products/c/F-16-CFT.htm

Also, are you sure that the empty weight of the F-22 is 19,489 kg? I've never seen a figure so high. I've always heard it was in the order of 15 000kg.

At 19,489 kg, it would have a t/w ratio not even higher than that of an F-15, which I highly doubt.

I'm also confused about the Raptor's empty weight. I have been doing some research, but some sites say it's in the 30,000lb class, while others say it's in the 40,000lb class. It is very strange, is the actual empty weight classified to hide its real t/w ratio or something?

I wanted to make a "fair" comparison for the fighters' Wing-load and T/W ration when they are under roughly the same condition (Roughly the same payload, and roughly the same combat radius). Therefore, the fighters like F/A-22, Su-35, F/A-18E/F, F-15E/E+, and F-16E didn't carry 100% internal fuel or 100% CFT fuel when I made the comparison.

If I made the comparison among these fighters at the condition that all of them are with their 100% internal fuel and (if they have) 100% CFT fuel, it would be obviously unfair to the large fighters with much more fuel and much more range.

As for F-16E........I think 4,000 kg fuel (internal fuel + CFT fuel) should be enough to let F-16E have roughly the same range as Rafale and EF-2000 with 100% internal fuel. However, I didn't take the CFT's weight of F-16E into account at that time. Therefore, the performence data of F-16E I mentioned above may be still a little over-estimated.............

Last edited by toan on Jun 07, 2005 - 08:17 PM; edited 1 time in total

About F/A-22's empty weight:

http://www.afa.org/magazine/april1995/0495f22.asp
This artilcle of 1995 mentioned the empty weight of F-22 had been 40,000 Ib class at that time.

and

http://www2.acc.af.mil/library/factsheets/fa-22.html
I think the information from this web-site (Air Combat Command) is very persuative.................

and

http://www.pogo.org/m/dp/dp-fa22-Riccioni-03082005.pdf
The article from POGO this year, which may be the biggest enemy for F/A-22 in USA. Although most of its opinion towards F/A-22 should be originated from prejudice. I think some of its information is still trustable, such as the empty weight and fuel fraction for Raptor today.

Page3:
The 26 percent increase in gross weight led to a wing loading and thrust-to-weight ratio that are totally comparable to those of the F-15C... The weight increase caused a decrease in fuel fraction from a very proper 36 percent to 29 percent—a little low even for a subcruising fighter.

The internal fuel of F/A-22 today should be around 8,300 kg.

The orignal target of fuel fraction for F/A-22 is 36% (range: 35.5% ~ 36.5%), which means that the original target of empty weight for F/A-22 should be around: 8,300 / (0.355~0.365) * (0.645~0.635) = 14,440 kg ~ 15,080 kg

However, the real fuel fraction for F/A-22 today is about 29% (range: 28.5% ~ 29.5%), which means that the emmpty weight for F/A-22 today should be around: 8,300 / (0.285~0.295) * (0.715~0.705) = 19,835 kg ~ 20,822 kg theoretically.

Some possible reasons for the empty weight of F/A-22 today:

1. Because of the requirement of high speed (1.5~1.7+ Mach) and long-time supercruise, the Raptor can't use as high percentage of carbon fibre composite as the NG fighters like EF-2000 and Rafale for its structure. The percentage of CFC for the structural weight of NG fighters:

Rafale 50%

Typhoon 40%

Gripen 30%

Raptor 25%

2. Raptor has to carry massive fuel (8,300 kg) and a certain amount of weapons (2,270 kg+) internally, and it is obvious that the internal weapon bays will add a certain amount of additional structural weight comparing to just using the simple external pylons.

3. USAF demands a very strong structure for F/A-22: the important areas of F/A-22 should be able to resist the direct hit of 30 mm bullet. However, in the most situation, the stronger the structure is, the heavier it will be.

At 19,489 kg, it would have a t/w ratio not even higher than that of an F-15, which I highly doubt:

A:

Oh, really???

Comparison of air-combat weight, T/W ratio, and wing-load between F-15C and F/A-22 at the "fair" condition (with the same kind and the amount of AAM weapons + roughly equal combat radius):

* FA-22: 6,500 kg internal fuel + AIM-120*6 + AIM-9X*2
* F-15C: 6,103 kg internal fuel + AIM-120*6 + AIM-9X*2

1. Empty weight:
* FA-22: 19,489 kg (IDR)
* F-15C: 12,973 kg

2. Air-combat weight:
* FA-22: 27,350 kg
* F-15C: 20,500 kg

3. Wing Surface Area:
* FA-22: 78.03 m2
* F-15C: 56.50 m2

4. Wing-load (2/3):
* FA-22: 350.51 kg/m2
* F-15C: 362.93 kg/m2

4. T/W ratio:
* FA-22: 1.254 / 0.846 (F-119, 37,800 Ib / 25,500 Ib *2): Score: 1.000 / 1.000
* F-15C: 1.056 / 0.646 (F-100, 23,770 Ib / 14,590 Ib *2): Score: 0.842 / 0.764

And don't forget, F/A-22 still has another two much more critical advantages:

1. Stealth:
The minimal frontal RCS of the two fighters: Size of marble to house fly (F/A-22) v.s Size of a metal ball with the radius of about 1.8 m2 (F-15C)

2. Drag performance.

The Eurofighter has 13 weapon points, so it can carry 6 Meteor/AMRAAM misiles + 4 Iris-T short range misiles + 3 External tank (2x1500 L + 1x1000). Or 8 BVR misiles + 2 shot Range misiles + 3 external tanks.

This plane is a very maneuverable fighter. the Typhoon has the best Cost Effectiveness compared to 4th planes generation, except Vipers.

Now i´m going to study, after i will continue.

Forum Veteran Joined: Apr 16, 2005 - 03:16 PM Posts: 800

toan,

Maybe you're right.. I'm really surprised that it's so heavy!

The numbers here are closer to what I thought:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f22/

Empty 34,000 lb (15,420 kg)
Fuel Capacity internal: 25,000 lb (11,340 kg)

You'll note that they say "Last modified 02 April 2005 ".

Anyways, concerning the F-22 program, it's clear to me that if only 180 aircraft or even less are built, it's a huge waste of money..

Forum Veteran Joined: Apr 16, 2005 - 03:16 PM Posts: 800

kilo111 wrote:

The Eurofighter has 13 weapon points, so it can carry 6 Meteor/AMRAAM misiles + 4 Iris-T short range misiles + 3 External tank (2x1500 L + 1x1000). Or 8 BVR misiles + 2 shot Range misiles + 3 external tanks.

This plane is a very maneuverable fighter. the Typhoon has the best Cost Effectiveness compared to 4th planes generation, except Vipers.

Now i´m going to study, after i will continue.

The rafale seems to be about as cost effective as the typhoon from what I can see. Even if it's a bit less capable, which is not even sure, it's cheaper too - about 50-55 million instead of 65-70 million or something like that, flyaway cost.

Viperalltheway wrote:

toan,

Maybe you're right.. I'm really surprised that it's so heavy!

The numbers here are closer to what I thought:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f22/

Empty 34,000 lb (15,420 kg)
Fuel Capacity internal: 25,000 lb (11,340 kg)

You'll note that they say "Last modified 02 April 2005 ".

Anyways, concerning the F-22 program, it's clear to me that if only 180 aircraft or even less are built, it's a huge waste of money..

A:
Yes, I know this kind of estimation for the empty weight and internal fuel of F/A-22, and I had had roughly the same kind of opinion until Mr. MP JAY corrected me in this Web-site recently......

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-2403.html

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... 8f1cf3aca7

Forum Veteran Joined: Apr 16, 2005 - 03:16 PM Posts: 800

Yeah but it seems to me that when sombody says "Empty Weight: 40,000-pound class " it means that he doesn't know..

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

EF-2000 versus other fighters of 3rd and 4th generation