F-35 internal fuel, range

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

That statement comes from the high level understanding that Range=(Fuel*Velocity)/(Drag*TSFC). So if range and fuel are "close enough to be equal" and TSFC is "close enough to be equal" then Velocity/Drag must also be "close enough to be equal". The reality is more nuanced, but I can say I understand where the statement came from.

[eagle3000]

You had me until you posted the photo the the Rafale landing on an aircraft carrier with that load. It's a dummy load. Although I am not certain, it it highly unlikely the Rafale can sustain the impact of a carrier landing fully loaded like that. Usually, Navy aircraft need to dump fuel and stores to meet the maximum landing weight.

It's a nice PR pic, but it probably means Dassault made a ton of PR photos that aren't based in reality.

You're funny.
The Rafale M is loaded with 4 fuel tanks and a a buddy/buddy refuelling pod. Obviously the tanks are empty when landing.
The heavy strike configuration of 3 2000l tanks plus 2 cruise missiles has been used operationally.

Operation Chammal over Syria/Iraq.

[marsavian]

Exactly Spurts. I didn't think I was saying anything too controversial using LM's own numbers even though it goes against widely held popular belief. F-35 have similar thrust/weight when fully loaded in fuel for Air to Air as well as actual values in the same ballpark. I assumed similar lift and subsonic fuel consumption so the only real unknown that would affect range/fuel would be the drag of the clean F-35 vs the drag of Typhoon with 3 EFTs, both being their fully loaded fuel configuration, and LM say that Typhoon in this EFT configuration can match the clean F-35 range with slightly less fuel which is telling me that their drag in these configurations are similar. Further validation can be derived from the fact that Typhoon with 3 EFT can hit Mach 1.8 which again is in clean F-35 ballpark numbers.

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

Further validation can be derived from the fact that Typhoon with 3 EFT can hit Mach 1.8

refresh my memory on this one please

[optimist]

The load has to include 2x 2k bombs and enough fuel to duplicate the f-35 mission parameters , including what speed and G. It is my understanding that the Typhoon can't carry 3 tanks and 2x 2k bombs.

The Rafale would be subsonic with this load, wouldn't it?

[marsavian]

Further validation can be derived from the fact that Typhoon with 3 EFT can hit Mach 1.8

refresh my memory on this one please

https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewe ... 8/evidence

Hon. Ken Dryden:

Right. There are two other areas I want to talk about—I asked about one of these, but there wasn't the time for you to answer—concerning the appropriateness of this aircraft for Canada's purposes and the fact that the nature of the need for the U.K. or Germany would be different, because it's more point to point, whereas Canada's need is over a larger area. How would you respond concerning the appropriateness of the airplane?

Mr. Christian Worning:

Certainly one element that I would look at is the element of safety in a two-engine design.

The other element is that because of the layout of the aircraft, we are looking at an airplane that has about the same internal fuel fraction as an F-22, in its air defence role when the airplane is clean.If we put extra fuel tanks on the airplane—they are supersonic fuel tanks, and the airplane will fly at Mach 1.8 with three tanks—we're now looking at the same fuel fraction as an F-35. So I don't think you would see any big differences in the spectrum or the ranges and endurance that we could cover.


Hon. Laurie Hawn:

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to pick up on a couple of those things. Mr. Worning, how much internal fuel does the Eurofighter hold?

Mr. Christian Worning:

Well, it's 30%, but it's about five tonnes.

Hon. Laurie Hawn:

The ballpark...10,000 pounds? Okay.

Mach 1.8 with three tanks...for how long?

Mr. Christian Worning:

I have done above Mach 1.6 for a total of 15 minutes with three tanks on, but that was with heavy manoeuvring in between.

[optimist]

That's a bit misleading isn't it? Fuel fraction isn't range and again the load doesn't include 2x 2k bombs

[marsavian]

The mission being discussed in the last three pages for which radius estimates were given was air to air.

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

of note, Rafale has three different sizes of tanks. Is it three 1250L? three 2000L? two 2000L and a 3000L? If I remember my conversions right, that is anything from 6,700lb external and 12,500lb external.

[mozza]

Rafale has 2 sort of EFT the 2000L ones and the supersonics ones (1250L) he can fly with CFT too but no one ordered it (1150L).

[optimist]

The mission being discussed in the last three pages for which radius estimates were given was air to air.

who did that? Why stop there, have a recon mission or ferry. The base f-35 mission profile is with 2x 2k guided bombs and 2 bvr missiles and all sensors and targeting equipment up to M1.6 and 9G on internal fuel. If the others can't do it, they can't do it. I think the F-35 is being kind, to allow the others drop tanks in the first place. It is going to look even sillier when the f-35 has its drop tank included for apple to apple. As you would know, there are 2 wet 5k hardpoints.

Another way of asking it, how far can they carry 2x 2k bombs? If they want to try and compete, let's use the same parameters. If the f-35 tried to duplicate a mission requiring M2.0, it can't. As it seems the Typhoon with 3 long range tanks and 2x 2k bombs. Am I right in thinking the Typhoon can't even carry this load? Regardless of how far. The same applied to the Gripen.

[eagle3000]

Rafale has 2 sort of EFT the 2000L ones and the supersonics ones (1250L) he can fly with CFT too but no one ordered it (1150L).

True. Note: even though the fat 2000 l tanks are called subsonic tanks, they're good for Mach 1.4.

[optimist]

of note, Rafale has three different sizes of tanks. Is it three 1250L? three 2000L? two 2000L and a 3000L? If I remember my conversions right, that is anything from 6,700lb external and 12,500lb external.

At least the Rafale can carry 3 tanks and 2x 2k and 2 BVR missiles. I think with that and sensors and pods it will be subsonic, but will be happy to be corrected with official data.

Rafale has 2 sort of EFT the 2000L ones and the supersonics ones (1250L) he can fly with CFT too but no one ordered it (1150L).

True. Note: even though the fat 2000 l tanks are called subsonic tanks, they're good for Mach 1.4.

With the 3 tanks 2x 2k bombs and 2 BVR missiles and pods? I assume it will need the largest tanks it can carry, to get near the range. I think it would be subsonic.

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

Is this wrong then?

[optimist]

Is this wrong then?

rafaleweaponoptions.jpg

Given there are picture of Rafale with 3 tanks and 2x 3k cruise missiles, It might be.