The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - December 2, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest

Advertisement



New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies

Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Thrust to weight ratios -- F-35, Rafale, Typhoon, SU-30 and others.
dwightlooi    8/16/2008 7:48:12 PM

 

There has been much contention and in certain cases misunderstandings as to the weights, thrust and fuel capacities of various aircrafts. I hope this chart clears things up a little.

 

 

Weapons load is held constant at 2200 lbs which is the approximate average for a typical A2A combat load of 6 AAMs, cannon ammunition & expendable countermeasures. T/W ratio is given at both 50% fuel and a constant 4000 lbs of fuel (a reasonable lower-bound combat reserve).





 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Bluewings12       8/16/2008 8:07:05 PM
It is exactly what I said , thanks Dwight :-)
 
Nobody has the Typhoon 's thrust and the Rafale is a good second .
Bronze medal for the F-35 and good stuff from the old Viper .
 
Cheers .

 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       8/16/2008 8:23:23 PM
 

So? the Rafale will be expecting massive orders from nations all around the world any day now?

 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       8/16/2008 8:30:32 PM
This is not what we 're talking about Fishy , don 't be so bitter .
To answer your question , no I don 't expect Rafale to sell well even if we have some windows right now ...
 
Cheers .

 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       8/16/2008 8:43:11 PM

----This is not what we 're talking about Fishy---

It is what I am talking about.   Why don?t you speak of the matter with me? It will be fun; I promise.

---don 't be so bitter ----

Bitter?   My momma always told me I was so sweet. 

---To answer your question , no I don 't expect Rafale to sell well even if we have some windows right now---

This is due to the anti-French sentiment around the world right? I mean, why even buy ANY OTHER AIRCRAFT when there is such an amazing aircraft as is the Rafale?

I mean; it has a toaster oven! A TOASTER OVEN FOR GOD?S SAKES!   How can you go wrong?!

 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       8/16/2008 8:58:11 PM
Well , you say that is going to be fun if I follow you but sorry , I do not share your feeling Fishy (and I 'm trying) .
 
Cheers .
 
 

 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       8/16/2008 9:03:39 PM
Can you make toast while dropping bombs in an F-22, a Viper, Eagle, HuGBug, Flying STD?
 
Hell NO!
 
The Rafale is God-LIKE and has no equal!  
 
Had George Lucus known of the Rafale, Star Wars would have turned out quite differently!
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       8/16/2008 9:07:25 PM
"Further datas have to be computed but against Rafale , all resistance is futile"
 
Cheers .

 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       8/16/2008 9:11:05 PM
Exactly!   So why even bother to develp new aircraft?!   The Rafle is the end-all-be-all of aircraft!   Hell, we do not even need to develope NEW TANKERS!
 
 
Just strap tanks on the Rafale and PRESTO:  a CHEAP tanker with tractor beam and Death Star Laser of Death!
 
Quote    Reply

The Lizard King    Also   8/22/2008 11:40:05 AM
While some aircraft are faster on paper, the internal carriage of its standard combat load allows the F-22 to reach comparatively higher performance with a heavy load over other modern aircraft due to its lack of drag from external stores.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       8/22/2008 8:38:33 PM
I hope this chart clears things up a little.
 
I hope this chart has a source?
 
As Reagan was known to say... "Trust but verify".
 
Curious.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Shooter2K       9/22/2008 11:04:36 PM
Your chart bairly scratches the surface of the qualities of these planes! Further data should include the realitive persistance at range from base. The fuel fraction and SFC required to stay in the air X hours?
So it would look like fuel fraction, radius of action with X load, (2,200 lbs! by your standard.) Number of drop tanks/MARs required to reach a radius of some distance like 600 miles with Y amount of loiter time as fuel?
You see that plains are such diverse traid offs, one engine or two, high bypass ratio for efficiant cruise or low ratio for faster cruise, low aspect ratio for supersonic drag or high AR for efficiant cruise, etcetera!
 
So what range can each go to with 1 hour of loiter time with out MAR/dropping tanks, as they have to cary them both ways to have them for the next mission, with how many and what type of missiles and how many Mk-84s or six pacs of Mk-82s, OR how many missiles can it tote 600 miles and loiter 1/2 hour before returning home WO MAR?
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       9/23/2008 4:21:00 AM
If the purpose of that chart was to compare radius of action or amount of fuel carried or something else other than the clearly labeled purpose of comparing thrust to weight ratios, then I'd agree with you.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Shooter2K       9/24/2008 6:04:36 PM
But that is the entire point! T/W is a useless paramiter WO more detailed info on the other variables such as T/D in cruise, some thing the ECDs are not very good at and SFC times fuel fraction or how many hard points are wet and thus are sterilised when range is required. OR how efficiant are the installed power plants at part throttle? All of these things have a bearing on how the T/W effects the plane at least as much as the raw numbers!
 
Quote    Reply

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy