Thrust to Weight Ratios of all Fighter Planes

July 25, 2012 6:39 pm 10 comments

Thrust to Weight Ratios of all Fighter Planes

Note: Individual engines’ SFC(Specific Fuel Consumption) & Individual aircrafts’ standard Air-Air payload weight, based TWR cannot be determined due to unavaliability of SFC data for Older Engines. Even in the case of some Newer Engines, SFC data is not avaliable.

It’s unclear whether the 35,000lbf thrust for F119(F-22′s engine) is the actual thrust output. It’s known that a Flat nozzle reduces the thrust of an engine anywhere between 14% to 17%. Further it’s mentioned in official sources that the engine is of 35,000lbf Class, meaning the 35,000lbf number is not the precise engine output, and the actual output is somewhere around it. Generally, in official publications, when an engine output is mentioned in the form of ‘Class’, the actual output is less than the number given. It could be that the engine can very well produce 35,000lbf with normal nozzles during testing, but the mating of Flat Nozzle(instead of the normal Round one) reduces the thrust, hence the ‘Class’ designation for the engine’s output. For an engine thrust decrease of 14%, F-22′s TWR would drop down to 1.18. Given the fact that the F-35′s engine, which is a derivative of the F-22′s engine, but newer & bigger than the F119 engine, has a thrust of 39,900lbf with round nozzles, it’s likely the 35,000lbf fig for F119 is also for round nozzles. F-35′s engine F-135, just recently got its thrust upgraded to 43,000lbf. To further illustrate the data sheet’s/brochure’s failure of mentioning the loss of thrust for Flat Nozzles, the F-117′s F404-GE-F1D2 engine which is a non-afterburning, flat nozzle engine[1], is mentioned as having the same 10,600lbf[2] non-afterburning thrust as the F404-GE-400 engine[3]. F404-GE-F1D2 is basically a non-afterburning F404-GE-400 engine with a flat nozzle.[4]

Data from Official Company & Military sites

Weight in lb, and Thrust in lbf.

3505 kg = 7727 lb

Not all of them are Fighter Planes.

Some of the Fighters’ data couldn’t be obtained, and hence could not be included in the below list.

TWR or T/W ratio = (Max Thrust of Engine[s] / (Empty Weight + (3.505 Tonnes of Fuel & Weapons, or only Internal Fuel)))

1.30 – Su-35S
1.29 – F-15K
1.26 – Su-27S
1.25 – Eurofighter
1.24 – Mig-35 (T/W = 1.45 during Emergency Thrust*)
1.23 – Su-27SK & J-11A
1.19 – Mig-29M/M2 (T/W = 1.39 during Emergency Thrust*)
1.19 – F-15C
1.18 – F-22A (T/W = 1.37 with Round nozzles?)
1.16 – Su-30MKK

1.16 – Rafale C
1.16 – F-35A
1.15 – Mig-29B (9-12)
1.14 – Su-30MKI
1.13 – Mig-29 (9-13), S, SD, SE & SM
1.11 – F/A-18E (F/A-18F: 1.09)
1.10 – Rafale M
1.10 – Mig-29 BM & SMT (T/W = 1.15 during Emergency Thrust*)
1.09 – F-16E Block 60
1.09 – Mig-29K (T/W = 1.28 during Emergency Thrust*)

1.09 – F-18C
1.09 – J-8III(or J-8C)
1.08 – F-35B
1.08 – F-14 B & D
1.06 – F-16C Block 52 (Block 50: T/W = 1.055)
1.05 – J-8IIm
1.04 – AV-8B+ Harrier II
1.03 – F-2A (F-2B: 1.02)
1.03 – JH-7
1.02 – F-16A Block 10

1.01 – F-35C
1.01 – J-8II & J-8IIb & J-8IId
1.00 – J-10A
1.00 – Harrier GR7A
0.99 – Su-34 & Su-32FN & Su-27IB
0.99 – Sea Harrier FA2 & FRS51
0.99 – F-16A Block 20
0.97 – Su-15T
0.95 – MiG-23 P, ML, MLA & MLD
0.94 – Gripen NG

0.94 – F-4E
0.94 – J-8
0.93 – Mirage 2000-5
0.93 – Su-15TM
0.93 – F-101B
0.92 – Harrier GR7
0.92 – E E Lightning F6
0.91 – F-16C Block 25
0.91 – Yak-28 I & P
0.91 – F-111F

0.91 – Su-24
0.90 – Su-15
0.88 – Mirage-2000 C & H
0.87 – F-14A
0.87 – Mig-23 MF & MS
0.87 – Su-24 M, MK & M2
0.86 – F-CK-1
0.86 – LCA (T/W = 0.91 during Emergency Thrust****)
0.86 – Su-9
0.84 – Su-11

0.84 – Su-17M
0.83 – Tornado F3 Air Defence Variant
0.83 – Tornado GR1
0.83 – Su-20
0.82 – JF-17 (T/W = 0.86 during Emergency Thrust*)
0.82 – Su-22
0.81 – Gripen A
0.81 – Su-7B
0.81 – F-20
0.80 – Gripen C

0.80 – Mig-27K
0.80 – Su-7BM
0.79 – Mig-21 Bis (T/W = 1.11 in Emergency Thrust mode**)
0.79 – JA-37 Viggen
0.79 – Mig-27
0.79 – Su-17M2
0.78 – Mig-23BN
0.78 – Su-7 BKL & BMK
0.78 – Javelin FAW MK9
0.77 – Mig-23S

0.77 – J-7IIIa
0.76 – Mig-27 D & ML
0.76 – Mig-23M(E)
0.76 – F-106A
0.76 – F-7MG & F-7BG & F-7PG & J-7E & J-7G (WP-7N: T/W = 0.69)
0.76 – Q-5D
0.75 – Kfir C.7
0.75 – Kfir C.2
0.75 – AJ-37 Viggen
0.75 – J-7III

0.74 – Mig-21SM
0.73 – Su-17
0.73 – Mig-21MF
0.73 – Su-17M3
0.73 – Mig-19S*** (MTOW T/W = 0.86)
0.72 – Yak-27K
0.72 – Su-17M4
0.72 – F-104G
0.71 – Mig-19P*** (MTOW T/W = 0.84)
0.71 – Mig-21PF

0.71 – Supermarine Scimitar F.1
0.71 – Cheetah C
0.70 – Mig-21M
0.70 – Su-25SM
0.69 – Jaguar GR1
0.69 – J-35F Draken
0.69 – Mig-21F
0.69 – Mig-21 F-13
0.69 – J-7II
0.69 – Su-25 or Su-25T

0.68 – F-105F/G
0.68 – Mirage 50
0.68 – F-7M(or F-7MP or F-7MB) & F-7P
0.67 – F-1
0.67 – F4D-1/F-6 Skyray
0.66 – Mirage F-1
0.66 – F-8P
0.64 – F-102A
0.63 – Sea Vixen FAW.2
0.63 – Su-25TM or Su-39

0.62 – Yak-27
0.61 – Yak-38M (TWR during STOVL/VTOL takeoff: 1.20)
0.61 – Mirage-5A
0.61 – J-32B Lansen
0.60 – A-4S1
0.59 – Mirage-III E & D
0.58 – Yak-38 (T/W during STOVL/VTOL takeoff: 1.16)
0.58 – IAI Nesher
0.58 – F-5E Tiger-II
0.56 – F-100D

0.56 – A-6E
0.55 – A-7E
0.51 – Super Étendard
0.50 – F3H-2 Demon
0.49 – A-10A
0.49 – F-11A
0.49 – AMX
0.47 – Étendard-IV M
0.46 – F-89D
0.46 – Super Mystère B.2

0.46 – Hunter F 6
0.45 – Marut Mk.1
0.43 – Yak-25
0.43 – F-94C/F-97A
0.43 – F9F-8/F-9J Cougar
0.41 – A-37B
0.37 – Mystère IVA
0.37 – FJ-4 Fury
0.36 – F7U-3M
0.34 – F-84F

0.33 – J-29F Tunnan
0.33 – P-80C
0.32 – Supermarine Attacker F.1
0.31 – F2H-3 Banshee
0.30 – Ouragan M.D.450B
0.30 – F3D-2 Sky Night
0.29 – Venom FB.1
0.29 – F-84G

Pure Interceptors
1.30 – Mig-31M
1.30 – Mig-31BM
1.28 – Mig-31B
1.27 – Mig-31FE
1.27 – Mig-31E
1.22 – Mig-31
1.21 – Mig-25M
1.00 – Mig-25 P & PD
0.93 – Mig-25BM
0.74 – Tu-128

Empty Weight – Thrust – Aircraft

41,447 – 31,967 X 2 – Su-35S
37,500 – 29,160 X 2 – F-15K
36,111 – 27,557 X 2 – Su-27S
24,251 – 20,000 X 2 – Eurofighter
24,251 – 19,841 X 2 – Mig-35 (23,148lbf – Emergency Thrust*)
37,192 – 27,557 X 2 – Su-27SK & J-11A
25,573 – 19,841 X 2 – Mig-29M/M2 (23,148lbf – Emergency Thrust*)
31,700 – 23,450 X 2 – F-15C
43,340 – 30,100 X 2 – F-22A(35,000lbf – Thrust with round nozzle)
39,903 – 27,557 X 2 – Su-30MKK

20,948 – 16,620 X 2 – Rafale C
29,300 – 43,000 X 1 – F-35A
24,030 – 18,300 X 2 – Mig-29B (9-12)
40,565 – 27,557 X 2 – Su-30MKI
24,692 – 18,300 X 2 – Mig-29 (9-13), S, SD, SE & SM
32,082 – 22,000 X 2 – F/A-18E (F/A-18F: 32,795lb)
22,478 – 16,620 X 2 – Rafale M
25,573 – 18,300 X 2 – Mig-29 BM & SMT (19,180lbf – Emergency Thrust*)
22,000 – 32,500 X 1 – F-16E Block 60
28,550 – 19,841 X 2 – Mig-29K (23,148lbf – Emergency Thrust*)

24,700 – 17,700 X 2 – F-18C
22,509 – 16,535 X 2 – J-8III(or J-8C)
32,000 – 43,000 X 1 – F-35B
43,600 – 27,800 X 2 – F-14 B & D
19,700 – 29,160 X 1 – F-16C Block 52 (Block 50: 420lb & 240lbf more)
21,671 – 15,422 X 2 – J-8IIm
14,865 – 23,400 X 1 – AV-8B+ Harrier II
21,000 – 29,600 X 1 – F-2A (F-2B: 21,235lb)
31,967 – 20,515 X 2 – JH-7
15,600 – 23,830 X 1 – F-16A Block 10

34,800 – 43,000 X 1 – F-35C
21,671 – 14,815 X 2 – J-8II & J-8IIb & J-8IId
20,394 – 28,000 X 1 – J-10A
15,708 – 23,400 X 1 – Harrier GR7A
49,163 – 28,219 X 2 – Su-34 & Su-32FN & Su-27IB
14,052 – 21,450 X 1 – Sea Harrier FA2 & FRS51
16,285 – 23,830 X 1 – F-16A Block 20
22,818 – 14,770 X 2 – Su-15T
22,553 – 28,660 X 1 – MiG-23 P, ML, MLA & MLD
15,653 – 22,000 X 1 – Gripen NG

30,328 – 17,845 X 2 – F-4E
20,470 – 13,219 X 2 – J-8
16,000 – 22,045 X 1 – Mirage 2000-5
23,970 – 14,770 X 2 – Su-15TM
28,495 – 16,900 X 2 – F-101B
15,708 – 21,450 X 1 – Harrier GR7
28,042 – 16,360 X 2 – E E Lightning F6
18,238 – 23,770 X 1 – F-16C Block 25
21,980 – 13,448 X 2 – Yak-28 I & P
47,481 – 25,100 X 2 – F-111F

46,738 – 24,692 X 2 – Su-24
22,531 – 13,669 X 2 – Su-15
16,538 – 21,384 X 1 – Mirage 2000 C & H
40,104 – 20,900 X 2 – F-14A
24,008 – 27,558 X 1 – Mig-23 MF & MS
49,163 – 24,801 X 2 – Su-24 M, MK & M2
14,300 – 09,500 X 2 – F-CK-1
14,462 – 19,100 X 1 – LCA (20,200lbf – Emergency Thrust****)
16,920 – 21,164 X 1 – Su-9
18,876 – 22,267 X 1 – Su-11

21,605 – 24,692 X 1 – Su-17M
31,970 – 16,410 X 2 – Tornado F3 Air Defence Variant
31,065 – 16,005 X 2 – Tornado GR1
21,936 – 24,692 X 1 – Su-20
14,520 – 18,300 X 1 – JF-17 (19,180lbf – Emergency Thrust*)
23,027 – 25,353 X 1 – Su-22
14,595 – 18,097 X 1 – Gripen A
18,453 – 21,164 X 1 – Su-7B
13,150 – 17,000 X 1 – F-20
14,991 – 18,097 X 1 – Gripen C

26,252 – 27,558 X 1 – Mig-27K
18,629 – 21,164 X 1 – Su-7BM
12,037 – 15,654 X 1 – Mig-21 Bis (21,829lbf – Emergency Thrust**)
27,866 – 28,100 X 1 – JA-37 Viggen
24,317 – 25,336 X 1 – Mig-27
23,369 – 24,692 X 1 – Su-17M2
24,692 – 25,336 X 1 – Mig-23BN
19,599 – 21,164 X 1 – Su-7 BKL & BMK
23,955 – 12,300 X 2 – Javelin FAW MK9
21,583 – 22,487 X 1 – Mig-23S

11,629 – 14,815 X 1 – J-7IIIa
25,573 – 25,336 X 1 – Mig-27 D & ML
22,046 – 22,487 X 1 – Mig-23M(E)
24,420 – 24,500 X 1 – F-106A
11,667 – 14,650 X 1 – F-7MG & F-7BG & F-7PG & J-7E & J-7G (WP-7N: 13,450lbf)
14,054 – 08,269 X 2 – Q-5D
17,130 – 18,750 X 1 – Kfir C.7
16,061 – 17,901 X 1 – Kfir C.2
27,006 – 25,970 X 1 – AJ-37 Viggen
11,861 – 14,650 X 1 – J-7III

11,574 – 14,308 X 1 – Mig-21SM
21,164 – 21,164 X 1 – Su-17
11,795 – 14,308 X 1 – Mig-21MF
26,014 – 24,692 X 1 – Su-17M3
12,009 – 07,165 X 2 – Mig-19S*** (MTOW: 16,667lb)
15,443 – 08,318 X 2 – Yak-27K
26,810 – 24,692 X 1 – Su-17M4
14,082 – 15,600 X 1 – F-104G
12,507 – 07,165 X 2 – Mig-19P*** (MTOW: 17,042lb)
11,354 – 13,492 X 1 – Mig-21PF

23,962 – 11,250 X 2 – Supermarine Scimitar F.1
14,550 – 15,900 X 1 – Cheetah C
11,795 – 13,613 X 1 – Mig-21M
20,723 – 09,921 X 2 – Su-25SM
15,432 – 08,040 X 2 – Jaguar GR1
17,339 – 17,262 X 1 – J-35F Draken
10,624 – 12,654 X 1 – Mig-21F
10,739 – 12,654 X 1 – Mig-21 F-13
11,850 – 13,219 X 1 – J-7II
20,944 – 09,921 X 2 – Su-25 or Su-25T

28,393 – 24,500 X 1 – F-105F/G
15,763 – 15,870 X 1 – Mirage 50
11,629 – 13,219 X 1 – F-7M(or F-7MP or F-7MB) & F-7P
14,017 – 07,305 X 2 – F-1
16,024 – 16,000 X 1 – F4D-1/F-6 Skyray
16,314 – 15,873 X 1 – Mirage F-1
19,700 – 18,000 X 1 – F-8P
19,350 – 17,200 X 1 – F-102A
27,954 – 11,240 X 2 – Sea Vixen FAW.2
23,677 – 09,921 X 2 – Su-25TM or Su-39

15,395 – 07,165 X 2 – Yak-27
16,535 – 14,770 X 1 – Yak-38M (Lift Engines: 07,165lbf X 2)
14,550 – 13,669 X 1 – Mirage-5A
16,535 – 14,680 X 1 – J-32B Lansen
10,250 – 10,800 X 1 – A-4S1
15,540 – 13,669 X 1 – Mirage-III E & D
15,476 – 13,448 X 1 – Yak-38 (Lift Engines: 06,724lbf X 2)
16,061 – 13,669 X 1 – IAI Nesher
09,558 – 05,000 X 2 – F-5E Tiger-II
20,638 – 16,000 X 1 – F-100D

25,630 – 09,300 X 2 – A-6E
19,781 – 15,000 X 1 – A-7E
14,220 – 11,265 X 1 – Super Étendard
21,287 – 14,400 X 1 – F3H-2 Demon
29,000 – 09,065 X 2 – A-10A
13,810 – 10,500 X 1 – F-11A
14,837 – 11,030 X 1 – AMX
13,007 – 09,703 X 1 – Étendard-IV M
24,200 – 07,400 X 2 – F-89D
14,087 – 09,920 X 1 – Super Mystère B.2

14,121 – 10,146 X 1 – Hunter F 6
13,658 – 04,856 X 2 – Marut Mk.1
12,610 – 04,409 X 2 – Yak-25
12,708 – 08,750 X 1 – F-94C/F-97A
11,866 – 08,500 X 1 – F9F-8/F-9J Cougar
06,211 – 02,850 X 2 – A-37B
12,941 – 07,734 X 1 – Mystère IVA
13,210 – 07,700 X 1 – FJ-4 Fury
18,210 – 04,600 X 2 – F7U-3M
13,830 – 07,220 X 1 – F-84F

10,681 – 06,070 X 1 – J-29F Tunnan
08,420 – 05,400 X 1 – P-80C
08,426 – 05,100 X 1 – Supermarine Attacker F.1
13,183 – 03,250 X 2 – F2H-3 Banshee
09,132 – 04,991 X 1 – Ouragan M.D.450B
14,989 – 03,400 X 2 – F3D-2 Sky Night
09,200 – 04,856 X 1 – Venom FB.1
11,470 – 05,560 X 1 – F-84G

Pure Interceptors
48,281 – 36,376 X 2 – Mig-31M
48,115 – 36,376 X 2 – Mig-31BM
45,569 – 34,171 X 2 – Mig-31B
49,383 – 36,376 X 2 – Mig-31FE
46,297 – 34,171 X 2 – Mig-31E
48,104 – 34,171 X 2 – Mig-31
41,667 – 29,762 X 2 – Mig-25M
41,447 – 24,684 X 2 – Mig-25 P & PD
45,415 – 24,684 X 2 – Mig-25BM
54,013 – 22,706 X 2 – Tu-128

# Data from Official Company & Military sites, Aerospaceweb.org, Airwar.ru, Globalsecurity.org, Fas.org, Warfare.ru, Wikipedia.org & its References, and Other Sources.
# Weight in lb, and Thrust in lbf.
# 3505 kg = 7727 lb
# Not all of them are Fighter Planes.
# Some of the Fighters’ data couldn’t be obtained, and hence could not be included in the above list.
# Individual engines’ SFC(Specific Fuel Consumption) & Individual aircrafts’ standard Air-Air payload weight, based TWR cannot be determined due to unavaliability of SFC data for Older Engines. Even in the case of some Newer Engines, SFC data is not avaliable.
# It’s unclear whether the 35,000lbf thrust for F119(F-22′s engine) is the actual thrust output. It’s known that a Flat nozzle reduces the thrust of an engine anywhere between 14% to 17%. Further it’s mentioned in official sources that the engine is of 35,000lbf Class, meaning the 35,000lbf number is not the precise engine output, and the actual output is somewhere around it. Generally, in official publications, when an engine output is mentioned in the form of ‘Class’, the actual output is less than the number given. It could be that the engine can very well produce 35,000lbf with normal nozzles during testing, but the mating of Flat Nozzle(instead of the normal Round one) reduces the thrust, hence the ‘Class’ designation for the engine’s output. For an engine thrust decrease of 14%, F-22′s TWR would drop down to 1.18. Given the fact that the F-35′s engine, which is a derivative of the F-22′s engine, but newer & bigger than the F119 engine, has a thrust of 39,900lbf with round nozzles, it’s likely the 35,000lbf fig for F119 is also for round nozzles. F-35′s engine F-135, just recently got its thrust upgraded to 43,000lbf. To further illustrate the data sheet’s/brochure’s failure of mentioning the loss of thrust for Flat Nozzles, the F-117′s F404-GE-F1D2 engine which is a non-afterburning, flat nozzle engine[1], is mentioned as having the same 10,600lbf[2] non-afterburning thrust as the F404-GE-400 engine[3]. F404-GE-F1D2 is basically a non-afterburning F404-GE-400 engine with a flat nozzle.[4]

* Klimov States that Thrust as “Take-off emergency mode”
** The conditions for 21,829lbf Emergency Thrust are limited to 3 Minutes and Altitude less than 4000m.
*** Empty weight + 7727 lb exceeds max takeoff weight. Except Mig-19 all other less MTOW(Maximum Take-Off Weight) fighter planes are omitted.
**** Official tejas.gov.in Website claims the Thrust of F404-GE-IN20 as 20,200lbf which contradicts with the manufacturers’ claim of 19,100lbf. Most likely the 20,200lbf figure is for Emergency Thrust. Also Tejas has gotten heavier by about 60kgs thus bringing its TWR to 0.86 from 0.87 .

10 Comments

  • Author’s names is missing

  • This is a superb article – must have taken a lot of effort to compile these figures and get them together ? i hope the author will start a thread to discuss this in the forum …great job Sir .

  • Great article and nice compilation.

  • If the F-35 had only one engine, would the thrust be half, or more than half of the value given in the table? I have heard that the Pentagon wanted just one engine, but was overruled by Congress in budget considerations.

  • E.R.SAKTHI VEL

    What is the rationale for 3.505 ton weight.This table is meaning less.TWR is calculated as empty weight+half fuel capacit in litres*.803 specific weight for fuel(for weight in KG)+ couple of air to air missiles.
    This is the combination with which fighters go into dog fight.So the basic criteria for calculation is wrong

  • Congratulations for a rather tedious labour undertaken. It provides a start, statistical basis for evaluation, discussion and eventually a priority frame setting. One point I miss though (as a layman on this subject, sorry). Are all things equal when we bring in the performance dynamics scale of each fighter under different, fluctuating atmospheric conditions? Do the TWR data remain value-free or say “value-neutrally stable” whether the dogfight is taking place in the thin Himalayan air or over a tropical, moisture dense, windy forest near Bangladesh or elsewhere?. Will not the metallic quality of the fighter say something or has it no significance for TWR at all? I understand Russians are experts in titanium alloys. Possibly a titanium-aluminium plus plus combination perhaps?

    Secondly, the stealth technology value seems to have been overlooked in this fighting potential issue. Why should stealth tech not applied to a bomber-fighter category and not for bombers alone? It may not be academically appropriate if I bring in an analogy from a summer sunny day event that I watched with amusement. Sitting under a tree shade on a park bench here in Vienna, I threw repeatedly very small pieces of bread crumbs for 2 types of birds to pick – one was sparrow and the other dove. The doves around, almost a troop battalion size, outnumbered the few sparrows perched on tree branches, but the doves were stably footed on ground. The moment I threw the sparrows were superbly“fast” in picking these crumbs with a fly-dive from a longer distance, infuriating the frustrated doves moving only as fast as they could, but alas with nil bounty. It was a 95% sparrow win.

    Now applying this to fighters, India’s LCA Tejas can perform exceedingly well and better, if stealth technology is injected into its production line, plus the engine and sub-technologies improved substantially to fly past with enhanced mobility and manoeuvrability. From the Republic Day pics the Tejas looks quite slim. A titanium alloy or other titanium compound metal combination would presumably make it harder and faster, and with stealth capability, it could principally perform “smart” wonders like the sparrow. I would much appreciate an expert’s feedback on this.

    George Chakko [Former UN-correspondent, now retiree] Vienna, Jan. 29, 2013

  • Just some added info. The F-119 engines were naver tested with round nozzles.

    The PW5000 (developmental designation for what would become the F119) ran with various iterations of square nozzles, but no round ones. Any performance numbers released are from a production configured engine with square nozzles.

    Its possible that with Round nozzles the F-22′s engine may produce around 39,000 lbs of thrust. Here is a lync that may support that.
    http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/212_spring2007.web.dir/brian_herring/Slide4.htm

    14%-17% decreese in thrust was the result of Russian square nozzle designes but may not be the result of PW’s nozzle dessign.

    In any case, I think it would still be good if we calculated the F-22′s thrust with its advertised 70,000lbs max thrust than speculating what the actual thrust may be.

    It makes this article much less beleivable than it should be.

  • (edited)
    Just some added info. The F-119 engines were never tested with round nozzles.

    The PW5000 (developmental designation for what would become the F119) ran with various iterations of square nozzles, but no round ones. Any performance numbers released are from a production configured engine with square nozzles.

    Its possible that with Round nozzles the F-22′s engine may produce around 39,000 lbs of thrust. Here is a link that may support that.
    http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/212_spring2007.web.dir/brian_herring/Slide4.htm

    14%-17% decrease in thrust was the result of Russian square nozzle designs but may not be the result of PW’s nozzle design.

    In any case, I think it would still be good if we calculated the F-22′s thrust with its advertised 70,000lbs max thrust than speculating what the actual thrust may be.

    It makes this article much less believable than it should be.

  • Comment

    The U.S. govt. has ended F-22 Raptor production. It was too expensive and had oxygen system problems leading to pilot death(s). It was also considered not an easy aircraft to manoeuvre with. The less expensive and more versatile F-35 (a further development of F-22) is what merits focus now. F-22’s field performance record is meagre too. One complete fleet is based in Japan and was probably used in the recent reconnaissance operations vis-a-vis China. But field performance data are not accessible. They were also not on dogfight combat missions.

    The engine nozzle architecture (whether square or round) evaluation is meaningful only in conjunction with the total aerodynamic performance of the aircraft. The dead weight performance in Lockheed Martin’s or partner Boeing’s aerodynamic chambers should have been the decider for a decision to go in for either square or rounded nozzles. Here too the sub-technologies’ system performance data are not available. Presumably no company will release those in view of close watch from competitors. Indications so far are that F-35’s TWR values must have been high and impressive. A piece costs over $ 270 mil. Raptor’s initial price of $370/piece was too high even for the USAF’s domestic demand.

    In addition, F-22 Raptor’s additional capabilities have been cited: ground attack, electronic warfare, and signals intelligence roles. These are areas where India sadly needs technology boost. The key lies in avionics. F22 Raptor used a CIP (Common Integrated Processor) from Raytheon with 10.5 billion instructions/sec. using sensor fusion (multiple data from different systems fused into common view for the pilot to operate in an easy “un-overwhelmed” manner. It had 1.7 million lines of code for radar data processing, had WiFi access point, could transmit data at 548 megabits/sec. and receive at gigabit speed. This is supposedly faster than the Link 16 system used elsewhere. As mentioned before (in one of my previous communications to DFI), unless India develops vertically integrated, advanced, microelectronic foundry lines from crystal growth to advanced chip production, it will never have a sustainable, reliable, defence high-quality production base, be it IAF, Navy or Army. When I confronted an ISRO chairman long years past on this deficit, he readily conceded that we neglected this area.

    George Chakko, Vienna, March 9, 2014

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: