F-35A vs KF-X

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

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3697
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post15 Jan 2021, 00:02

irt wrote:




A T/W of .77 at max takeoff weight is good. On full internal fuel this jet will have a similar T/W as the F22 or the Typhoon have on full internal fuel, that is not the definition of a underpowered jet. The Superbug and Gripen are underpowered.

And how pray tell do you know the T/W ratio, for a plane that doesn't exist yet? They haven't even flown an X-35 equivalent prototype, much less a production prototype yet. Once later models add weapons bays, that's going to add considerable weight. Are they getting uprated motors at that point?
Offline

irt

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2018, 21:16
  • Location: Sweden
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post15 Jan 2021, 00:32

wrightwing wrote:
irt wrote:




A T/W of .77 at max takeoff weight is good. On full internal fuel this jet will have a similar T/W as the F22 or the Typhoon have on full internal fuel, that is not the definition of a underpowered jet. The Superbug and Gripen are underpowered.

And how pray tell do you know the T/W ratio, for a plane that doesn't exist yet? They haven't even flown an X-35 equivalent prototype, much less a production prototype yet. Once later models add weapons bays, that's going to add considerable weight. Are they getting uprated motors at that point?


I don't know what the actual numbers will be... I said in my other post "all available data/info". Sure they can fail and the plane gains 5 tons of empty weight when the plane is finished. But how can you say a plane that doesn't exist yet will be underpowered when you don't know what its weight will be? If they meet their target weight it will not be underpowered.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3697
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post15 Jan 2021, 01:44

irt wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
irt wrote:




A T/W of .77 at max takeoff weight is good. On full internal fuel this jet will have a similar T/W as the F22 or the Typhoon have on full internal fuel, that is not the definition of a underpowered jet. The Superbug and Gripen are underpowered.

And how pray tell do you know the T/W ratio, for a plane that doesn't exist yet? They haven't even flown an X-35 equivalent prototype, much less a production prototype yet. Once later models add weapons bays, that's going to add considerable weight. Are they getting uprated motors at that point?


I dont know what the actual numbers will be... I said in my other post "all avaiable data/info". Sure they can fail and the plane gains 5 tons of empty weight when the plane is finished. But how can you say a plane that dosnt exist yet will be underpowered when you dont know what its weight will be? If they meet their target weight it will not be underpowered.

I have no idea if it'll be underpowered. I was challenging your claim that it will have a better T/W ratio than everything except F-22/Typhoons.
Offline

irt

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2018, 21:16
  • Location: Sweden
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post15 Jan 2021, 12:20

wrightwing wrote:
irt wrote:




A T/W of .77 at max takeoff weight is good. On full internal fuel this jet will have a similar T/W as the F22 or the Typhoon have on full internal fuel, that is not the definition of a underpowered jet. The Superbug and Gripen are underpowered.

And how pray tell do you know the T/W ratio, for a plane that doesn't exist yet? They haven't even flown an X-35 equivalent prototype, much less a production prototype yet. Once later models add weapons bays, that's going to add considerable weight. Are they getting uprated motors at that point?


I dont know what the actual numbers will be... I said in my other post "all avaiable data/info". Sure they can fail and the plane gains 5 tons of empty weight when the plane is finished. But how can you say a plane that dosnt exist yet will be underpowered when you dont know what its weight will be? If they meet their target weight it will not be underpowered.[/quote]
I have no idea if it'll be underpowered. I was challenging your claim that it will have a better T/W ratio than everything except F-22/Typhoons.[/quote]

If they (KAI) can deliver what they claim (~12ton empty weight) , then the block 1 and 2 will have simiar T/W to the Typhoon and the Raptor.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4291
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post15 Jan 2021, 17:50

irt wrote:
mixelflick wrote:I can say that because sure, it'll have a good thrust to weight ratio - flying clean or lightly loaded. So does the F-16, Flanker and many other jets. Start hanging weapons and fuel tanks off it though, and it drops well below 1:1. And since it isn't really a 5th generation jet, the first 2 iterations will be carrying LOTS of stuff externally. Bombs, rockets, fuel tanks, sensor pods etc..


What jet stays above 1:1 fully fueled and with a heavy combat load? Please tell us..
A T/W of .77 at max takeoff weight is good. On full internal fuel this jet will have a similar T/W as the F22 or the Typhoon have on full internal fuel, that is not the definition of a underpowered jet. The Superbug and Gripen are underpowered.


Where did I claim there was one? I didn't, but don't let the facts get in the way of your (losing) argument...

As other posters have pointed out, you're pulling T/W and other stats out of your a$$. And therein lies your real problem: You think this is a real airplane. It isn't. Not yet anyway. When it does finally fly and they expand the envelope, then you might have something to talk about.

Until then, it's a paper airplane that flies only in your mind...
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2985
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post15 Jan 2021, 19:51

irt wrote:If they meet their target weight it will not be underpowered.


And that's the real problem!

For instance Saab which has some considerable experience in designing fighter aircraft (Draken, Viggen and Gripen) failed the target weight for the Gripen E by a considerable margin: 7000 kg planned/target weight empty versus 8000 kg real empty weight and this was supposed to be a 'safe' and 'easy' program (an upgrade of an existing design)!
The F-35 itself is another case where the target weight was not met but since it's an extremely well funded program the F-35 was subjected to a big program to reduce its weight (called SWAT if I'm not mistaken) and even thou after this program the F-35's empty weight still ended up being a bit above its 'target weight'.

Resuming and what I mean with the above is that the target weight is almost never met, this for the vast majority of fighter aircraft programs. So why on hell would KAI which doesn't have the experience to design fighter aircraft be able to meet the target weight for its very first designed fighter aircraft is beyond me...
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

basher54321

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2161
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7150
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post18 Feb 2021, 01:02

I still think the KF-X is a missed opportunity for India..... :? :?
Previous

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests