F-35 internal fuel, range

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1367
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post31 Jul 2019, 13:41

spazsinbad wrote:OOoohh youse guys are hilarious. I'd reckon 'QS' has a good handle on it all. And it is goodnight from him - with ONE stent.


438 KTAS @ 32kft = Mach 0.75
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1741
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post01 Aug 2019, 01:38

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:320kt TAS is way too slow for tactical aircraft max range cruise. 320 is closer to the IAS.

Alt 30,000ft
320KTAS-----494KTAS
200KCAS-----320KCAS
0.543M-------0.838M

Alt 36,000ft
320KTAS-----541KTAS
180KCAS-----320KCAS
0.558M-------0.943M

Alt 40,000ft
320KTAS-----585KTAS
164KCAS-----320KCAS
0.558M-------1.020M

Best LOITER was given as 32,000ft, 0.75M (438KTAS, 271KCAS), with about 4,600pph in the F-35A with this stated to give a total of 4 hours of fuel. Obviously you don't get to use all 18,400lb of fuel in loiter but as you get lighter you burn less fuel and go up in altitude.


Absolutely agreed. The question is whether its theoretically possible for the C to have 2.5 hrs (or close to) TOS. Of course it can with the assumptions of higher altitudes with a very low loiter speed for max end. The assumption of 320 kts is of course valid for the question. As already mentioned, its not going to happen in actual ops but that's not the question here.

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Also, you are using an F-35B chart to infer information about the F-35C. Their climb/cruise/descent profiles will be vastly different due to the wing. Even so, the 1,304nm you are assuming for cruise would be closer to 2.4hr endurance using 320KCAS at 36,000ft.


No other publicly available chart available. All 3 variants are using the same engine so fuel use rates should roughly be about the same. Agreed wing affects climb and descent rates but difference on range won't be materially far off.

What I like about the chart is it explains the fuel burn rate is based on a training profile for a sortie (minus actual ops). So theoretical max endurance fuel burn rates will probably be a slightly lower consumption figure.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5729
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post01 Aug 2019, 01:49

Anyway you look at it the F-35 has exceptional range for a Tactical Fighter. This will only improve with time. As they're developing even more fuel efficient engines. Including newer models of the F135 plus the ACE Engines. (XA100 and XA101)



Plus, external Fuel Tanks and CFT's.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 792
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post01 Aug 2019, 03:45

I tend to think CAP distances will grow beyond the outer defense zone mean of 200 nm
and more towards 300+ nm by virtue of the fact that the escort AAW weapons are no
longer horizon limited and are much, much longer ranged e.g. SM-6 Block IB.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2669
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post01 Aug 2019, 23:04

“The question is whether its theoretically possible for the C to have 2.5 hrs (or close to) TOS. Of course it can with the assumptions of higher altitudes with a very low loiter speed for max end.”

Actually, the question was 2.5hrs at what distance from the launch point. We have to assume a TAS icw the #/nm number; assuming 8.5nm/minute (510KTAS) that’s ~96#/min or -5700#/hr. That’s 11.4K# just from to/from ~500nm, leaving 3.3K to burn on station.

If we go to 400nm, we get another ~2K to burn on station, or 5.5K total (1.2hrs).

If we go to 300nm, we get a total of roughly 8K to burn on station (or 1.7hrs).
Offline
User avatar

doge

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 300
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post10 Aug 2019, 09:58

Greg Ulmer says the F-35 has the best Range of the 4th or 5th gen fighters. 8) Best...!! :shock: (Get bigger and bigger...! :doh: )
Greg Ulmer, vice president and general manager of the F-35 Ligthning II fighter program at Lockheed Martin.
From RIAT 2019 @1:00~
A lot of people talk about the range and payload for the airplane.
The airplane performs exceedingly well in terms of range.
Probably, it has some of the best range in terms of even 4th or 5th gen aircraft.

Offline
User avatar

doge

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 300
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post28 Sep 2019, 23:06

The-war-zone was receiving comments about the Range from Lockheed !!! :bang: (Damn it!!!!! :evil: )
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... good-thing
Lockheed Eyes Giving F-35s More Gas With Drop Tanks And That's A Very Good Thing
The external tanks could give F-35s significantly valuable extra range and loiter time for certain key missions and circumstances.
BY JOSEPH TREVITHICK AND TYLER ROGOWAYJUNE 14, 2019

These discussions and engineering studies date to at least Fall of 2018, when The War Zone reached out to Lockheed Martin to inquire about just this issue - whether there were any new plans regarding adding drop tanks to the F-35. In response, they had sent us the following statement:
    The F-35, as configured today with internal fuel, exceeds the highly capable specified range performance. In fact, the F-35As range and loiter time are already greater than most existing 4th generation aircraft when flying identical mission profiles and weapons loadouts, even with 4th generation aircraft using maximum external fuel tanks. This range is the result of the F-35’s superior engine fuel efficiency and significantly reduced aerodynamic drag with internal fuel and weapons carriage compared to 4th generation fighters that require external weapons, sensor pods and fuel tanks for the majority of mission sets.

    That said, we have had discussions with customers regarding extended range opportunities to further enable select mission profiles beyond today’s requirement, which can improve operational flexibility and reduce demand on aerial refueling assets. Lockheed Martin, along with government and industrial partners, have completed engineering studies for options to further extend the F-35’s range, which can be accomplished with external tanks, increased fuel efficiency and other opportunities. As a result of the studies, we have strong options should our customers make a decision to add extended range options to their program requirements in the future.

We pushed for more information in subsequent discussions going into the Winter, but there was none available at the time. The fact that the F-35 is as far along in its lifecycle and production run as it is, but still doesn't have a wing tank option had long seemed like a great missed opportunity to us at The War Zone.

(Cool down... 8) )
So...What is the Range, Radius, and Loiter time for the 4th Gen fighters with Maximum Fuel Tanks? :devil:
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1741
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post01 Oct 2019, 03:29

Don't understand the maths here. 4 hrsx438 kts = 3000+ nm range still boggles my mind.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4484
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post01 Oct 2019, 04:31

4hr×438ktas=1752nm=2015sm=3224km
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1741
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post01 Oct 2019, 08:08

Range of legacy F-15 is 3000nm. The claim of the F-35 is per below.
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets ... -15-eagle/

the F-35As range and loiter time are already greater than most existing 4th generation aircraft when flying identical mission profiles and weapons loadouts, even with 4th generation aircraft using maximum external fuel tanks.


Isn't that the general consensus of F-16.net that the F-35 has a greater range than the F-15? I seem to be the only one who thinks otherwise.
Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1054
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post01 Oct 2019, 09:23

weasel1962 wrote:Range of legacy F-15 is 3000nm.
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets ... -15-eagle/

Isn't that the general consensus of F-16.net that the F-35 has a greater range than the F-15? I seem to be the only one who thinks otherwise.


That is the ferry range.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1741
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post01 Oct 2019, 09:32

So the ferry range of the F-35 is 3000+nm?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23335
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post01 Oct 2019, 09:57

Latest LM Fast Facts says: 01 Sep 2019 https://www.f35.com/assets/uploads/docu ... 9_2019.pdf (1.1Mb)

Range (internal fuel)
F-35A >1,200 nm / 2,200 km (USAF profile)
F-35B >900 nm / 1,667 km (USMC profile)
F-35C >1,200 nm / 2,200 km (USN profile)
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

doge

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 300
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post01 Oct 2019, 10:45

I was suddenly driven by the desire to list them...(Uncontrollable! :drool: ) That is... a summary of comments about the Range so far! 8)
F-35A's Range is more than 30% longer than F-16. (By Norway)
F-35A's Range is broadly similar the F-16 with EFTx3 + CFT. (By LM's Steve Over)
F-35A's Range is more than twice that of F-15C with EFTx2. (By Lt. Col. Scott “CAP” Gunn)
F-35A's Range is longer than F-15E. (By Lt. Col. Christine Mau)
F-35A's on-station time of 2.5 hours. (By LM's test pilot Tony "Brick" Wilson)
F-35A's Range is longer than Rafale, Typhoon, F/A-18E, (Gripen E?). (By Swiss's Lightning)
F-35A's Range is longer than the 4th Gen jets with maximum EFT(CFT also?). (By LM's drop tank comment.)
F-35A's Range is BEST among the 4th/5th Gen jets. (By LM's Greg Ulmer)

It's...Fuel Monster!!!!!! :drool: They don’t try to reveal the real max numbers... But, It’s obvious that the Range is really very very very looooonger!! 8) Mysterious Nautical mile, Kilometers!!

I named it...
is The "King of Fuel Monsters"!!!!!!!!!! :doh:
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3272
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post01 Oct 2019, 16:25

weasel1962 wrote:So the ferry range of the F-35 is 3000+nm?

The ferry range isn't operationally relevant. When range comparisons are made, they're referring to combat radius and loiter time. F-15s don't ferry with ordnance and various pods.
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests