JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread

phrozenflame

phrozenflame

Junior Member
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
You have to keep in mind that AESA radar itself has different tiers. Most military enthusiasts only know about GaAS vs GaN or more TR elements is better, but they don’t know the advantage that signal processing, such as digital phase array, can impart. The latest variant of KLJ-7A may have benefited from both advances in material and signal processing compared with older but nominally more powerful AESA, and the smaller frontal RCS profile of the JF-17 could make it a difficult foe when flown by skilled pilots.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
You raise a very valid point. Do we have information about the sub-components used in KLJ-7A?
 
by78

by78

General
Block-3, pilot wearing HMD.

53422381812_94c03d5ee5_h.jpg
 
F

Firetrap

Just Hatched
Registered Member
TheFuture_NoMore said:
View attachment 122998

From the same PDF site - Apparently the JF17C's in PAF service is now operating the RD-93MA with an extra 5,000lb of thrust.
Click to expand...

I hate to be the party pooper but I think the 5,000lb extra thrust mentioned seems a bit too high. Working from the base RD93's 19,000lb, this would be around 24,000lb..... which is a lot! I welcome any more thrust so happy to be proven wrong as any enhancement is a good thing.

I have read figures from sometime around 2 years back that talked about 10-15% increase in thrust and overall efficiency improvements which could mean potential thrusts of circa 21,000 or 22,000.

Wouldn't it be awesome if some insider could just find out for us :)
 
TheFuture_NoMore

TheFuture_NoMore

New Member
Registered Member
Firetrap said:
I hate to be the party pooper but I think the 5,000lb extra thrust mentioned seems a bit too high. Working from the base RD93's 19,000lb, this would be around 24,000lb..... which is a lot! I welcome any more thrust so happy to be proven wrong as any enhancement is a good thing.

I have read figures from sometime around 2 years back that talked about 10-15% increase in thrust and overall efficiency improvements which could mean potential thrusts of circa 21,000 or 22,000.

Wouldn't it be awesome if some insider could just find out for us :)
Click to expand...

The PAF do operate the RD-93 at a higher engine thrust value than the specs, in return for a lower MTBO and overall lifespan of the engine ( ie half ), so it is possible to generate that level of extra thrust if you are prepared to accept a smaller engine lifespan, more maintenance and higher fuel consumption in exchange for extra engine thrust if your tactical and operational use of the aircraft dictates that.

Given when the RD-93 series was originally designed to what is possible now, it is possible there was quite a lot of headroom in the design and associated changes for it to be 'mutated' into a variant that can produce the extra thrust that has been indicated.
 
Z

zbb

Junior Member
Registered Member
Firetrap said:
I hate to be the party pooper but I think the 5,000lb extra thrust mentioned seems a bit too high. Working from the base RD93's 19,000lb, this would be around 24,000lb..... which is a lot! I welcome any more thrust so happy to be proven wrong as any enhancement is a good thing.

I have read figures from sometime around 2 years back that talked about 10-15% increase in thrust and overall efficiency improvements which could mean potential thrusts of circa 21,000 or 22,000.

Wouldn't it be awesome if some insider could just find out for us :)
Click to expand...

In another image in the post you quoted, it says the thrust of RD-93MA is 22,400lb with after burners.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top