JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nomi929

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

I'm just not sure what Western engine they can fit in there? M-88 was the only one that is small enough, but then it's lighter than RD-93, so you will have to do more flight tests. WS-13 is the obvious answer, but it's going to be even less reliable than RD-93 in the beginning.

Here is some clips of PAF ACM Tanvir Mehmood Ahmed interview with Dawn News.

Part 1:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Part 2:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


P.S: Sorry for Video Quality. Recorded from my Mobile. :D
 

Munir

Banned Idiot
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

RD93

Length: 4,230 mm (166.54 in)
Maximum diameter: 1,040 mm (40.94 in)
Weight, Dry: 1,055 kg (2,326 lb)
Complete power plant: 1,217 kg (2,683 lb)
Specific Fuel Consumption
Maximum augmented: 52.40 mg/Ns (1.85 lb/h/lb st)
Maximum dry, S/L: 21.8 mg/Ns (0.77 lb/h/lb st)
Full augmented power (H=0, M=0, Sin=1):
thrust, kgf 8300
Max. non-afterburning power (H=0, M=0, Sin=1):
thrust, kgf 5040

Let me see M-53 info

Diameter 800 mm
Length 5070 mm
Thrust non afterburning 6400
Thrust full afterburning 9,707 Kg (21,400 lb)
Weight, Dry: 1,515 kg
fuel consumption dry 0.90 lb

What do i miss? If they can stuck a longer engine into the F16 then this is a not a big deal, I think.
 
Last edited:

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

RD93

Length: 4,230 mm (166.54 in)
Maximum diameter: 1,040 mm (40.94 in)
...

Let me see M-53 info

Length 5070 mm
Diameter 800 mm
....


What do i miss? If they can stuck a longer engine into the F16 then this is a not a big deal, I think.


Maybe You all are blind ! But that's the problem ! :confused: ... a smaller engine with less diameter could be adjusted into a largeer airframe with some modifications and so on ... but an engine with a larger diameter couldn't be mounted into a smaller airframe without a complex redesign of the rear-fuselage.

In the case You mentioned they put a J79 (the original F-4 Phantom engine) into an F-16 and not an F100 or F110 into an F-4.

This would be as You try to fit an F100/110 into a Gripen or two of them into a F/A-18 !

Or did I misunderstod Your statement ???

Deino
 

araz

New Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Maybe You all are blind ! But that's the problem ! :confused: ... a smaller engine with less diameter could be adjusted into a largeer airframe with some modifications and so on ... but an engine with a larger diameter couldn't be mounted into a smaller airframe without a complex redesign of the rear-fuselage.

In the case You mentioned they put a J79 (the original F-4 Phantom engine) into an F-16 and not an F100 or F110 into an F-4.

This would be as You try to fit an F100/110 into a Gripen or two of them into a F/A-18 !

Or did I misunderstod Your statement ???

Deino

Deino
M53 diameter is 800 mm against 1053 mm diameter of RD93. So it is less in diameter than RD93. However it is longer(5070mm)than RD93(4230 mm). Idont know the implications of the length of th engine but the diameter should not be a problem
Araz
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Deino
M53 diameter is 800 mm against 1053 mm diameter of RD93. So it is less in diameter than RD93. However it is longer(5070mm)than RD93(4230 mm). Idont know the implications of the length of th engine but the diameter should not be a problem
Araz



AHRG ... What a fool am I ???? :mad: Sorry, but in my opinion the RD-33 was always smaller in diameter ! Could it be that these specifications are different ? For the M.53 ist is the "inlet diameter" and for the RD-93 the maximum ?

Sorry for that. :eek:

Deino
 

Munir

Banned Idiot
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Deino, No problem. I have posted thousands of posts and surely more then a few with wrong data/logic. Still you have a point about the length... And the weight... But then again, if I knew something about this replacement options I would not say something simple like my post...
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

Deino, No problem. I have posted thousands of posts and surely more then a few with wrong data/logic. Still you have a point about the length... And the weight... But then again, if I knew something about this replacement options I would not say something simple like my post...



Thanks a lot !!

Deino ;)
 

challenge

Banned Idiot
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

dimension and data for general electric F-101 (F-18 hornet)?
according to website, during the ealry 80's China sought to purchase GE F-101 from the US,but was turn down,instead US offer a very old J-65 engine.the technology was basically late 40's and early 50's technology power the basic A-6 intruder aircraft.
 

Pointblank

Senior Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

dimension and data for general electric F-101 (F-18 hornet)?
according to website, during the ealry 80's China sought to purchase GE F-101 from the US,but was turn down,instead US offer a very old J-65 engine.the technology was basically late 40's and early 50's technology power the basic A-6 intruder aircraft.

General Electric's F404 engine has a length of 154 inches (3,912mm) and a width of 35 inches (889 mm) and produces 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) military thrust, 17,700 lbf (78.7 kN) with afterburner. The more powerful GE F414 has the exactly same dimension as the F404, and produces 14,000 lbf (62 kN) at military thrust, 22,000 lbf (98 kN) with afterburner.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

An article there talking about export of K-8/JF-17. One of the highlighted area suggests that JF-17 will be ordered by PLAAF. This is published by HKB (aviation daily) in China, so it's a pretty good source, but not sure if that comment is an official statement or just the author's opinion on the matter.
 

Attachments

  • JF-17-Article-Oct18.jpg
    JF-17-Article-Oct18.jpg
    223.9 KB · Views: 53
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top