Who on earth said PAF will get only single engine fighters?

[sancho]

Yes, but the tonnage the aircraft carry.. along with the operating costs are also different.. are they not?

Of course, my point was only on the performance with heavier loads and extended range / endurance.

I heard about rafale with the 'same' (a2a&a2g) capabilities while its radar is on a2g mode and Spectra for a2a operations. @sancho can explain

The advantage of Rafale is, that it uses many different sensors to aquire target data, which then can be transfered to the weapons, be it A2A or A2G. It doesn't even need it's radar to do that, but can use FSO and SPECTRA instead, that coupled with the capabilities of MICA and AASM makes it very effective to attack many different targets pretty much at the same time. So when you needed 3 x fighters in strike and 3 x escorts in the past, with 1 or 2 attack runs to destroy several ground targets, you basically need only 2 x Rafales and a single pass, while being able to counter enemy fighters in BVR.
But as Oscar said, when it gets into close combat, Rafale has to get rid of unnecessary payloads too.

 

[Manindra]

Thats not the point.

F-35 Single engine emits power probabaly same as dual engine fighter & its thrust to weight ratio is amazing.

Pratt & Whitney F135 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dazzler]

This "crap" serves well because it does not face the war. Our Jaguars are also ground attack aircraft but dare to call them crap because in war if they deployed with good fighter for cover then they create hovoc on enemy instalations but I hate their few hardpoints & low payload & fuel capacity. Their pilots would have habit to enquire about one thing during purchase any machines, "Kitna deti hai"

so which war did "your jags" participated in?

in case you dont know, A-5 was the sole "battlefield nuke" career for many years, it was deeply modified to carry a variety of weapons, avionics included a hud, mission computer, EW sensors, INS & GPS and could carry a decent payload.

 

[SQ8]

All 5th gen planes are going to be double engine,otherwise they can't match performance.So if PAF stays with this philosophy past 2020 its sunk.Till then they will manage.

Incorrect assumption again. The most procured 5th Gen will be a single engine plane.

 

[Manindra]

so which war did "your jags" participated in?

in case you dont know, A-5 was the sole "battlefield nuke" career for many years, it was deeply modified to carry a variety of weapons, avionics included a hud, mission computer, EW sensors, INS & GPS and could carry a decent payload.

RAF use them in first gulf war & IAF used them in Kargil . A-5 is chinese version of Su-19. even your countrymen call its Junk. How much payload A-5 can carry. In my knowledge A-5 & jaguar both have very poor payload capacity. Jaguar does not have Radar but Laser Range Finder. Negative side of Jaguar are it is underpowered , less payload , less range , less hardpoint.

 

[sancho]

Incorrect assumption again. The most procured 5th Gen will be a single engine plane.

That however has nothing to do with performance, since the single engine requirement was mainly caused by a common design for the 3 varients and not with high performance in mind. But when you look around, most other stealth fighter designs are twin engine once, to increase the power needed to counter the high basic weight of internal fuel, weapons, or systems that currently will be carried externally or if required only. So it's not wrong to belive that PAF might go for a twin engined stealth fighter in future, unless the performance requirements will be downgraded. The increased costs to operate twin engined fighters here hardly makes a difference, because the maintaining a stealth fighter, it's advanced materials and coatings alone will be very costly. The F22 is said to cost $44000 per hour, the F35 is estimated over $30000, while the F18SH currently is only at $15000. So for PAF it would be a big step wrt operational costs anyway, one more reason why more cost-effective JF 17s today makes sens, while more expensive F16s and J10s doesn't.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

What sancho said,i meant in context of air to air.Twin engine will give superior performance usually.

 

[ARSENAL6]

My car has more power than those twin engines combined. It's even disgrace to call that crap an airplane, let alone a twin engine fighter bomber.

SO your car is a saturn V rocket ?

 

[Armstrong]

SO your car is a saturn V rocket ?

Nah mate, the last time @Hyperion gave me a ride...it was on a mule ! When we were getting late, he fed the mule chilli & voila the mule now had Nitro to speed things up - Maybe he was talking about that !

 

[Beast]

Those African nations don't have large air forces, Pakistan does.



Not an assumption, the Chinese actually offered to sell the J-11b to Pakistan, and the Chinese have already stated that they're willing to give Pakistan more soft loans.

Nonsense. China has make a pact with Russian. J-11B flanker series is only for domestic use. China will not export any of its flanker lineage like J-11B, J-16.

 

[Armstrong]

Nonsense. China has make a pact with Russian. J-11B flanker series is only for domestic use. China will not export any of its flanker lineage like J-11B, J-16.

You won't ? But I thought I was like your little brother.....I feel so unloved right now !

So whats up, my friend - Hows life treating you in Australia ?

By-the-way I don't think China is restricted by Russia in exporting the flankers seeing that China claims that whereas the J-11s maybe inspired from the Sukhoi Flankers....they are completely different designs with only similarities in terms of the airframe otherwise China would be paying royalties to the Russians for manufacturing the J-11s & its many derivatives, which I think it doesn't !

 

[Beast]

You won't ? But I thought I was like your little brother.....I feel so unloved right now !

So whats up, my friend - Hows life treating you in Australia ?

By-the-way I don't think China is restricted by Russia in exporting the flankers seeing that China claims that whereas the J-11s maybe inspired from the Sukhoi Flankers....they are completely different designs with only similarities in terms of the airframe otherwise China would be paying royalties to the Russians for manufacturing the J-11s & its many derivatives, which I think it doesn't !

Nah... Thanks for your concern. I already left Australia for another destination nearer to China.

China has not offer any self build flanker for export. J-11b are strictly out of bound in even attending China own airshow like Zuhai. China is not restricted by Russia but feels that its her obligation not to export any Russia lineage product.

And only aircraft which attended foreign airshow is acknowledge to be offer for foreign customer like JF-17 and L-15.

 

[MilSpec]

Incorrect assumption again. The most procured 5th Gen will be a single engine plane.

Would most procured translate to most lethal remains to be seen, as far as most procured, that might change when PMF/FGFA, J31, j20 comes to fruition.

 

[SQ8]

That however has nothing to do with performance, since the single engine requirement was mainly caused by a common design for the 3 varients and not with high performance in mind. But when you look around, most other stealth fighter designs are twin engine once, to increase the power needed to counter the high basic weight of internal fuel, weapons, or systems that currently will be carried externally or if required only. So it's not wrong to belive that PAF might go for a twin engined stealth fighter in future, unless the performance requirements will be downgraded. The increased costs to operate twin engined fighters here hardly makes a difference, because the maintaining a stealth fighter, it's advanced materials and coatings alone will be very costly. The F22 is said to cost $44000 per hour, the F35 is estimated over $30000, while the F18SH currently is only at $15000. So for PAF it would be a big step wrt operational costs anyway, one more reason why more cost-effective JF 17s today makes sens, while more expensive F16s and J10s doesn't.

What sancho said,i meant in context of air to air.Twin engine will give superior performance usually.

I disagree with the assumption that the F-35 is single engined only to the services requirements. The US Navy has a twin engine requirement for over water operations.. none of the other two services had this requirement or need but they still had performance on their mind. It ludicrous to think that the USAF and Marines decided to go with lesser performance out of a single engine.

The F/A-18E has two engines that produce 98 Kn.. the F-35 has one that produces 191Kn both at AB.. Yet the F-35 carrying two bombs and two AA missiles... flies farther than the F-18 and has better T/W in that configuration.

You CANNOT value performance as a measure of the number of engines a fighter has. Simply because by that logic a ten engined fighter should be able to out do anything in the air.. regardless of how much power those engines produce.
The reason why all these large 5th gen projects are going for Twin engines is simply because at this stage there is no single engine powerful enough besides the F-135 and F-136 to produce the thrust needed to get an aircraft that carries all those avionics, weapons and RAM shaping measures and so on .. aloft by itself. Hence , you develop two engines that give it enough thrust to perform those tasks.

 

[MilSpec]

I disagree with the assumption that the F-35 is single engined only to the services requirements. The US Navy has a twin engine requirement for over water operations.. none of the other two services had this requirement or need but they still had performance on their mind. It ludicrous to think that the USAF and Marines decided to go with lesser performance out of a single engine.

Can F35 supplant f22??