F-35A vs KF-X

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

maro.kyo

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2017, 10:51

Unread post01 Mar 2019, 17:17

steve2267 wrote:
maro.kyo wrote:Yet another reply in which you argue what that is basically the same opinion as to mine. Are you doing so on purpose?
Didn't I just say that :
1) I'm skeptical towards the positive commercial outcome of the KF-X overseas
2) The possibility of it being a better deal than a legacy fighter like SH is going to be unlikely
3) Those possibilities largely depend on when the production of legacy fighters will end

Now if you're going to post yet another reply which basically draws the same line in a same direction to what I say, I can say nothing else but that it defeats the whole point of discussing something. Its very unproductive to argue the same thing just written in a slightly different manner don't you think?



Yes, I agree. Evidently I did not think we were on the same page. My most humble apologies.


It's not a big deal as long as we can stay in peace and have a constructive discussion :wink:
My posts are quite long as well, and I acknowledge that my English skills are still lacking.
Also knowing what those Su-57, TF-X and AMCA fanboys have done, I guess the whole forum is a bit under stress regarding any kind of new aircraft development program.
LCD Panel a warp gate to ultramundane
Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1046
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post28 Sep 2019, 17:33

I wonder what the thing will look like and if they kept to its semi-stealthy design shown on early small scale display models...
Image
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... on-461123/
Seoul has completed the critical design review (CDR) of the Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) KF-X fighter, setting the stage for the rollout of a prototype in the first half of 2021.
***
Work leading up to the CDR included wind tunnel tests, the refinement of systems, and analysis.

“In this detailed design review meeting, reviewers composed of government and civilian experts, including the Air Force, reviewed about 390 technical data [points] to ensure that the military requirements were properly reflected in the design,” says DAPA.
***
The achievement of the aircraft CDR follows the CDR of the aircraft’s active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar earlier this year. The prototype of the radar was developed by Hanhwa systems with assistance from Israel’s Elta Systems. ADD will help with airborne tests of the radar.

The KF-X will be powered by two General Electrics-built F414 engines, variants of which power the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the Saab Gripen E.

Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1046
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post15 Oct 2019, 20:46

I do not think that this aircraft is supposed to be a direct competitor to F-35 or other 5th gen designs out there. I do believe its semi-stealthy design (better observable stealth characteristics over current 4.5 or 4.5+ gen aircraft) would make it very appealing to other countries should this aircraft ever make it into production...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ed-461464/
Image

Although the aircraft resembles Lockheed's F-35A, it lacks several of the US type’s stealth qualities. The port for its 20mm cannon is exposed, for example, and the infrared search and track (IRST) sensor protrudes in front of the cockpit canopy, similar to on the Typhoon.


More reading about the KF-X
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... it-461492/
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5710
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 00:07

Why make a Stealth Fighter only to carry external stores all of the time. That is like putting "lipstick on a pig".... :?
Offline
User avatar

zerion

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 654
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2014, 01:47
  • Location: Everywhere like such as...

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 00:12

Corsair1963 wrote:Why make a Stealth Fighter only to carry external stores all of the time. That is like putting "lipstick on a pig".... :?

They are planning on redesigning it with weapon bays later or something :shrug:
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5710
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 00:56

zerion wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Why make a Stealth Fighter only to carry external stores all of the time. That is like putting "lipstick on a pig".... :?

They are planning on redesigning it with weapon bays later or something :shrug:


That is just as perplexing! Why not just develop the KFX with internal Weapon Bays from the start???
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2299
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 05:41

That thing is already in the F-22 size range. It is not a mid-size fighter, so no internalized bay is a ridiculous design.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23306
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 05:47

South Korea’s future fighter program at risk, even as development moves along 15 Oct 2019 Jeff Jeong

https://www.defensenews.com/2019/10/15/ ... ves-along/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5710
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 06:59

madrat wrote:That thing is already in the F-22 size range. It is not a mid-size fighter, so no internalized bay is a ridiculous design.



Yes, what's the advantage of stealth. If, you must carry all of your weapons and part of your fuel externally??? Just doesn't make sense...
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2165
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 10:39

Corsair1963 wrote:
zerion wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Why make a Stealth Fighter only to carry external stores all of the time. That is like putting "lipstick on a pig".... :?

They are planning on redesigning it with weapon bays later or something :shrug:


That is just as perplexing! Why not just develop the KFX with internal Weapon Bays from the start???


I must say that what I just read here about this KF-X is for me a very negative WoW! :roll:

Yes, I agree with you. Such decision is perplexing indeed even because a "Block I" without internal weapons would IMO be a quite different aircraft compared to a potential "Block II" with internal weapons (since "adding" an internal weapons bay would involve massive airframe changes), this instead of a "potential Block II" being a more recent version of the "Block I".

But hey, it's their money (but IMO, still a very stupid decision nonetheless).
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
Offline

eagleowl

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2012, 22:59

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 11:57

ricnunes wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
zerion wrote:They are planning on redesigning it with weapon bays later or something :shrug:


That is just as perplexing! Why not just develop the KFX with internal Weapon Bays from the start???


I must say that what I just read here about this KF-X is for me a very negative WoW! :roll:

Yes, I agree with you. Such decision is perplexing indeed even because a "Block I" without internal weapons would IMO be a quite different aircraft compared to a potential "Block II" with internal weapons (since "adding" an internal weapons bay would involve massive airframe changes), this instead of a "potential Block II" being a more recent version of the "Block I".

But hey, it's their money (but IMO, still a very stupid decision nonetheless).

The airframe changes are already there, structurally a belly IWB can be added. KAI (rightly) made a cost-saving decision to not design it yet and postpone all the work with designing ejectors, integrating weapons (CFD work, fit tests, flight tests), etc as they aren't being paid for it. Blame Korean MoD/Korean AF for their (bizarre) ROC that didn't require stealth in the first place if you want.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3446
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 12:50

madrat wrote:That thing is already in the F-22 size range. It is not a mid-size fighter, so no internalized bay is a ridiculous design.


Spot on!

And given the known engines it's going to use, it will be dramatically under-powered. Any amount of external stores is only going to exacerbate that. If they do switch to an internal bay, I can't imagine it'll carry much.

The only way this thing works is if it's VLO AND has some whizbang avionics. I have more confidence the Koreans can deliver on the latter vs. the former, but they'll need both to find a buyer. History shows not many countries are interested in buying something that's 2nd tier (or perceived as 2nd tier).

See Gripen :mrgreen:
Offline

eagleowl

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2012, 22:59

Unread post16 Oct 2019, 13:20

mixelflick wrote:
madrat wrote:That thing is already in the F-22 size range. It is not a mid-size fighter, so no internalized bay is a ridiculous design.


Spot on!

And given the known engines it's going to use, it will be dramatically under-powered. Any amount of external stores is only going to exacerbate that. If they do switch to an internal bay, I can't imagine it'll carry much.

The only way this thing works is if it's VLO AND has some whizbang avionics. I have more confidence the Koreans can deliver on the latter vs. the former, but they'll need both to find a buyer. History shows not many countries are interested in buying something that's 2nd tier (or perceived as 2nd tier).

See Gripen :mrgreen:

Is it? The KF-X has an empty weight and internal fuel capacity closer to the Legacy Hornet/Eurofighter/Rafale, and lower than the F-22A, F-15C/D or F-15E, F-18E/F. Twin F414s should be able to push the KF-X around decently albeit not as sportily as the F-16. F-18E/F does have a reputation for being somewhat underpowered but some of that has to do with design considerations (wieght for structural strength and wing planform for low speed AoA during landings) for carrier ops doesnt it? The internal bay is also not F-35 sized and won't have much for more than AAMs and the occasional SDB-1or2 so (kinematic) performance shouldn't be an issue.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1727
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post17 Oct 2019, 01:18

kf-x.png
Got this from a post on CDF. Original source per image. Looks familiar?
Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1046
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post17 Oct 2019, 04:45

Comparing the given figures of the F-22 and F-35 to the KF-X, the KF-X appears to be closer to the F-35A in size. However the fuselage of the KF-X doesn't appear to be as "girthy" as the F-35A.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests