Can Volvo RM-12 Jet Engine Replace Thunder's RD-93 ?`

[Kompromat]

Hello all:

As you all know that Chinese Company Geely Automobiles has bought out Swedish Volvo & Volvo Aero is its Subsidary which manufectures RM-12 Turbofan Jet Engine which is the Powerplant for JAS-39 Gripen Fighter jet.

RM-12 is a derivative of GE-404 which is the powerplant for F-18 hornet.

By China having as the owner of the Company can they award a contract along with GE to CAC & PAC to power JF-17 Thunder with this Engine ?

Specs

General characteristics

Type: Afterburning turbofan
Length: 154 in (3,912 mm)
Diameter: 35 in (889 mm)
Dry weight: 2,282 lb (1,036 kg)
Components

Compressor: Axial compressor with 3 fan and 7 compressor stages
Bypass ratio: 0.34:1
Turbine: 1 low-pressure and 1 high-pressure stage
Performance
Maximum thrust:

11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) military thrust
17,700 lbf (78.7 kN) with afterburner
Overall pressure ratio: 26:1

Specific fuel consumption:

Military thrust: 0.81 lb/(lbf·h) (82.6 kg/(kN·h))
Full afterburner: 1.74 lb/(lbf·h) (177.5 kg/(kN·h))
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 7.8:1 (76.0 N/kg)

It will also Imrove thunder's speed (Possibly from current Mach 1.8 to Mach 2) and payload capacity .

Share your Ideas Please.

Regards: BB

 

[ANG]

Hi, you simply cannot slap a new engine into the JF-17. Moreover, the PAF selected the RD-93 to avoid a US engine in the first place. I personally hope the JF-17 gets the Chinese engine instead. Thanks!

 

[razgriz19]

no its impossible as this engine produce lower thrust than the current engine on jf-17!

 

[Imran Khan]

chines engine yes we have to use .in future you have just reqest and supply will be there. forget whites they are worship money as we see french.

 

[ANG]

Hi, following up on my previous post on a potential Chinese engine. This is a quote from the web". Also scroll down in the link and gloss over the section on engines. Thanks!

"The Guizhou Aero Engine Group of China has been developing a turbofan designated WS-13 Taishan to replace the Klimov RD-93 since the year 2000. It is believed to be based on the Klimov RD-33 but incorporates many new technologies to boost performance and reliability. Thrust output of 80-86.36 kN (19,391 lb), life span of 2,200 hours and thrust to weight ratio of 7.8 are expected. An improved version of the WS-13 Taishan developing a thrust of around 100 kN (22,450 lb) is also reportedly under development.[78]"

International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > October Surprises In Chinese Aerospace

 

[Kompromat]

Hi, following up on my previous post on a potential Chinese engine. This is a quote from the web". Also scroll down in the link and gloss over the section on engines. Thanks!

"The Guizhou Aero Engine Group of China has been developing a turbofan designated WS-13 Taishan to replace the Klimov RD-93 since the year 2000. It is believed to be based on the Klimov RD-33 but incorporates many new technologies to boost performance and reliability. Thrust output of 80-86.36 kN (19,391 lb), life span of 2,200 hours and thrust to weight ratio of 7.8 are expected. An improved version of the WS-13 Taishan developing a thrust of around 100 kN (22,450 lb) is also reportedly under development.[78]"

International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > October Surprises In Chinese Aerospace

Quite usefull i must say but what about RM-12 ?

Forget for a second that its an American Engine , do you consider it to be Inferior to RD-93 why if so ?

 

[Dazzler]

The airframe of jf-17 was designed on plug and play concept i.e. it is able to accommodate different engines as they become available with very little modification. Four engines can be easily accommodated in it.

1. PW F100

2. Snecma M-53 pxx

3. RD 93, 33 MK

4. WS-13

Kilmov RD-93 was not a preferred option initially but American/Canadian PW engine was not available and Chinese WS-13 is still not in service. M-53 remains only viable candidate but is twice as expensive as RD-93 and WS-13. Not to forget that its technology is decades old now and other options offer more sophisticated technology such Crystal Blades and FADEC options. (Full Authority Digital Engine Control) coupled with a similar or higher thrust.

 

[Kompromat]

The airframe of jf-17 was designed on plug and play concept i.e. it is able to accommodate different engines as they become available with very little modification. Four engines can be easily accommodated in it.

1. PW F100

2. Snecma M-53 pxx

3. RD 93, 33 MK

4. WS-13

Kilmov RD-93 was not a preferred option initially but American/Canadian PW engine was not available and Chinese WS-13 is still not in service. M-53 remains only viable candidate but is twice as expensive as RD-93 and WS-13. Not to forget that its technology is decades old now and other options offer more sophisticated technology such Crystal Blades and FADEC options. (Full Authority Digital Engine Control) coupled with a similar or higher thrust.

Thanks Nabil but My question still remains , if China Can get RM-12 would it be viable to Thunder ?

This is what this thread is aimed at.

 

[Ruag]

As you all know that Chinese Company Geely Automobiles has bought out Swedish Volvo & Volvo Aero is its Subsidary which manufectures RM-12 Turbofan Jet Engine which is the Powerplant for JAS-39 Gripen Fighter jet.

Lol... Geely didn't buy the entire Volvo Group, but one of its former subsidiaries -- Volvo Cars from Ford Motors. Volvo Group had sold its subsidiary Volvo Cars to Ford Motors in 1999.

Volvo Aero is still a subsidiary of the Volvo Group and none of them have got anything to do with Geely.

 

[Kompromat]

Lol... Geely didn't buy the entire Volvo Group, but one of its former subsidiaries -- Volvo Cars from Ford Motors. Volvo Group had sold its subsidiary Volvo Cars to Ford Motors in 1999.

Volvo Aero is still a subsidiary of the Volvo Group and none of them have got anything to do with Geely.

Post me your source because as far i know the "Volvo" is being soled to Geely with its subsidaris.

 

[Ruag]

Post me your source because as far i know the "Volvo" is being soled to Geely with its subsidaris.

Here man ---

Ford Confirms Sale Of "Volvo Cars" To China's Geely - WSJ.com


Rothschild quartet helped China's Geely snare "Volvo Cars"


Geely has bought Volvo Cars, not the entire AB Volvo Group.

This is Volvo Aero --

Volvo Aero - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

..which is subsidiary of AB Volvo --

Volvo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Both of them are in no way associated with Ford Motors and Geely.

 

[ptldM3]

It will also Imrove thunder's speed (Possibly from current Mach 1.8 to Mach 2) and payload capacity .

Share your Ideas Please.

How will a weaker engine improve speed and payload?

 

[Kompromat]

How will a weaker engine improve speed and payload?

But Russki what we need to consider is that with RD-93 Thunder has a speed of Mach 1.8 (or At leas this is what we are being told.)

With a weaker Engine Gripen has a speed of Mach2 .

How do you compare ???

 

[ptldM3]

But Russki what we need to consider is that with RD-93 Thunder has a speed of Mach 1.8 (or At leas this is what we are being told.)

With a weaker Engine Gripen has a speed of Mach2 .

How do you compare ???

It's not always about the engine, look at the Mirage F-1 it's engine is extreemly weak (13,240 lbf) with afterburner but it is able to acheive mach 2.3.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

I think the main thing with engine swaps will be the weight and how the weight of the new engine is distributed over the frame of the JF17thunder, will it effect the aero dynamic properties of the plane while in flight

Planes go thru the testing phase to perfect the balance and weight distribution etc and other properties

If the new engine is a perfect match in size and alo the weight is very close to the old engine etc perhaps the answer is yes

Otherwise , the plane will have to get tested again (re integration testing for the new engine) before the quality assurance department will approve the new engine ...