Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 72

Thread: Modern fighters combat radius;

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,535

    Modern fighters combat radius;

    The F35 thread made me want to centralise info about the combat radius of the different planes, mainly Eurocanards, SH, F35, and maybe the latest Mig 29 variants and Mig 35.

    I would like you to provide source with your data. And to specify weapons load and flight profile if possible;

    I'll start with Rafale:

    http://www.dassault-aviation.com/fr/...ristiques.html

    Dassault says 1000NM+ in penetration mission. It seems quite a lot but it's consistent with the range given by Toan here : http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-6094.html . Note that the 1000 NM range is given for ETs + CFTs in toan's post, while Dassault doesn't specify loadout. Would dassault mention range with CFTs even though they are not fielded yet?

    Anyway I have just sent an email to dassault to see if they can give any details on the 1000NM range.

    Fox 1 quotes 800NM for 4 GBU + 4 air air missiles + 3 2000L ETs, which is consistent with toan's number for such a configuration.

    So what we know from official sources so far:

    Rafale:
    - Max range in penetration mission : 1000+ NM (source Dassault aviation website)
    - 4 GBU12+ 4 AAMs + 3 2000L Tanks : 800 NM (Source fox 1)

    Gripen NG:
    - 700NM+30 min on station with 4 MRAMS + 2 SRAMS with unspeficied external tanks. (source Gripen NG pdf for Holland)

    F18E/F:
    - 500+ NM combat radius (source boeing website)

    Nic
    Last edited by Nicolas10; 7th April 2010 at 17:37.
    "allah akbar": NATO's new warcry.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578

    gripen

    Gripen C range
    Combat radius: 800 km internal fuel (431nm)
    Combat radius: 1,550 Km with external fuel (837nm)
    Ferry range: 3,200 Km(1727nm)

    Gripen NG Range
    Range is increased an average of 40% over the JAS 39C as both the internal and external fuel capability is expanded.
    Combat radius: 1,300 Km + 30 minutes on station with A2A weapons. (702nm)
    Range (one-way): 2,500 Km on internal fuel(1350nm)
    Ferry range (one-way): 4,075 Km with external fuel(2200nm)
    Combat Radius estimate: 1,800 km with A2A weapons(972nm)

    One drop tank (450 Gal) gives the Gripen NG an extra range of approximately 1000 km.



    Courtesy of signatory who gathered the info..

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...13&postcount=1

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Sign View Post
    Gripen NG Range
    Range is increased an average of 40% over the JAS 39C as both the internal and external fuel capability is expanded.
    Combat radius: 1,300 Km + 30 minutes on station with A2A weapons. (702nm)
    Range (one-way): 2,500 Km on internal fuel(1350nm)
    Ferry range (one-way): 4,075 Km with external fuel(2200nm)
    Combat Radius estimate: 1,800 km with A2A weapons(972nm)
    How is it possible to have a combat radius of 702nm, but a range(one way) of only 1350nm? Also, I presume the 972nm range is with external tanks?

    One drop tank (450 Gal) gives the Gripen NG an extra range of approximately 1000 km.
    That sounds pretty optimistic. That would be over 1 mpg, which I highly doubt.


    Courtesy of signatory who gathered the info..

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...13&postcount=1[/QUOTE]

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by wrightwing View Post
    How is it possible to have a combat radius of 702nm, but a range(one way) of only 1350nm? Also, I presume the 972nm range is with external tanks?



    That sounds pretty optimistic. That would be over 1 mpg, which I highly doubt.


    Courtesy of signatory who gathered the info..

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...13&postcount=1
    the combat radius is have one external tank, the one way have none.
    the 972nm is with one external tank.

    the extra 1000km is done with a new tank tested on the Demo aircraft, with no other draggy stuff.
    i found this inhouse document on the subject
    http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/wp-content/S...nNG_170409.pdf (page 6)
    Last edited by Sign; 7th April 2010 at 10:40.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by Sign View Post
    Gripen C range
    Combat radius: 800 km internal fuel (431nm)
    Combat radius: 1,550 Km with external fuel (837nm)
    Ferry range: 3,200 Km(1727nm)

    Gripen NG Range
    Range is increased an average of 40% over the JAS 39C as both the internal and external fuel capability is expanded.
    Combat radius: 1,300 Km + 30 minutes on station with A2A weapons. (702nm)
    Range (one-way): 2,500 Km on internal fuel(1350nm)
    Ferry range (one-way): 4,075 Km with external fuel(2200nm)
    Combat Radius estimate: 1,800 km with A2A weapons(972nm)

    One drop tank (450 Gal) gives the Gripen NG an extra range of approximately 1000 km.



    Courtesy of signatory who gathered the info..

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...13&postcount=1

    BTW, the internal fuel increase doesn't translate in the same combat radius increase.

    But, as always, the posts of Gripen fans are the funniest...
    ________
    party Cam
    Last edited by dynamo; 20th April 2011 at 23:28.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by dynamo View Post

    BTW, the internal fuel increase doesn't translate in the same combat radius increase.

    But, as always, the posts of Gripen fans are the funniest...

    they havent got the same profile/ordinance/external tank/s . The NG loadout is specifide above, A-to-A and one small ext tank(290usgal=1100L) , the gripen C isnt. But it probably got max external fuel(3*1100L).
    Its allways nice to amuse you
    Last edited by Sign; 7th April 2010 at 12:43.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,535
    Sources please!
    "allah akbar": NATO's new warcry.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    Sources please!
    the sources is there..thou the source first specifide..

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    5,266
    http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/wp-content/N...BRIEFAug08.pdf Page 6

    But this pic sums it up.



    F-18E


    Range: Combat: 1,275 nautical miles (2,346 kilometers), clean plus two AIM-9s (#1)
    Ferry: 1,660 nautical miles (3,054 kilometers), two AIM-9s, three 480 gallon tanks retained.

    http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_di...&tid=1200&ct=1

    #1 Is combat range/combat load = 2 winders !?
    Last edited by obligatory; 7th April 2010 at 12:34.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,535
    Full missile load is pretty vague, besides there's no info on the tanks that are carried...
    "allah akbar": NATO's new warcry.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    Full missile load is pretty vague, besides there's no info on the tanks that are carried...
    All 3 EFTs, you can bet ! :diablo:
    ________
    Sick from wellbutrin
    Last edited by dynamo; 20th April 2011 at 23:28.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    5,266
    SAAB define 4 MR + 2 SR AAM's as "full load".

    It is irrelevant if whatever fighter uses 1 big or 24 small tanks.
    the missile will require about five times the G capability of the target to complete a successful intercept.
    -Robert L Shaw

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by dynamo View Post
    All 3 EFTs, you can bet ! :diablo:
    if you look a little deeper you see the following
    "Combat radius (incl 30
    min on station)
    Ex. 4 RR + 2 IR + 1 ext fuel 1300km"
    At the moment of presentation i think only one tank existed, the 1100L one. the 1740L isnt operational? am i right?
    Last edited by Sign; 7th April 2010 at 12:59.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,535
    I'm looking for cold hard fact from official sources. Official releases (manufacturer or air force). I'll add them to the original post as they come.

    Nic
    "allah akbar": NATO's new warcry.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,412
    Quote Originally Posted by wrightwing View Post

    One drop tank (450 Gal) gives the Gripen NG an extra range of approximately 1000 km.

    That sounds pretty optimistic. That would be over 1 mpg, which I highly doubt.

    Perhaps you have made an elementary mistake here? The gallon as measured by the US is not the same as the gallon as measured by the UK.
    US gallon = 3.8 litres
    Imperial gallon = 4,5 litres

    This is why the rest of the entire planet has metricated.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    I'm looking for cold hard fact from official sources. Official releases (manufacturer or air force). I'll add them to the original post as they come.

    Nic
    I found all the data on NG from saab slides(page 6).
    http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/wp-content/N...BRIEFAug08.pdf

    the new 1000km (450gal) tank
    page 6
    http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/wp-content/S...nNG_170409.pdf

    the gripen C data is harder to find in original. Can anybody else?

    Theres a lot of data lying around in:

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...13&postcount=1
    but i not been able to find it

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    435
    It would be more useful simply to compare un-refuelled combt radius, rather than including range.

    Every combat aircraft needs to be capable of performing a mission. Combat radius shows in a simplistic way, without taking into account such variables as weather conditions, flight profiles, altitudes flown at, varying climb rates (high readiness alert missions etc) nor weapons/sensor loads, specifically.

    Range is simply a metric of how far an aircraft can fly, not a usefulnumber as to how far an aircraft can go and fight... If you wish to compare military aircraft in such a way, despite the futility of such, as I've just described with SO many variables that HAVE to be considered, then official, open source information on combat radius, is the best to use, IMHO...

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,042
    Quote Originally Posted by wilhelm View Post
    Perhaps you have made an elementary mistake here? The gallon as measured by the US is not the same as the gallon as measured by the UK.
    US gallon = 3.8 litres
    Imperial gallon = 4,5 litres

    This is why the rest of the entire planet has metricated.
    It doesn't matter which gallon that you use.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Simonds View Post
    It would be more useful simply to compare un-refuelled combt radius, rather than including range.

    Every combat aircraft needs to be capable of performing a mission. Combat radius shows in a simplistic way, without taking into account such variables as weather conditions, flight profiles, altitudes flown at, varying climb rates (high readiness alert missions etc) nor weapons/sensor loads, specifically.

    Range is simply a metric of how far an aircraft can fly, not a usefulnumber as to how far an aircraft can go and fight... If you wish to compare military aircraft in such a way, despite the futility of such, as I've just described with SO many variables that HAVE to be considered, then official, open source information on combat radius, is the best to use, IMHO...
    How do you "interpolate" so much different data? the data availble are sparse att best.
    even measuring milage on a car is a problem...

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,535
    From Sign's pdf I only deduce that:

    Gripen NG range is supposed to be 1300km + 30 min on station (?) (700NM) with 6 AAMs + External tank(s). Note that it isn't specified how many tanks.

    It would be nice to have ranges for the Eurofighter. All I've seen seem to be prospective ranges.

    As for the SH, Boeing only states 500NM+ combat radius, which doesn't mean much.

    Nic
    Last edited by Nicolas10; 7th April 2010 at 17:35.
    "allah akbar": NATO's new warcry.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    From Sign's pdf I only deduce that:

    Gripen NG range is supposed to be 1300km + 30 min on station (?) (700NM) with 6 AAMs + External tank(s). Note that it isn't specified how many tanks.

    It would be nice to have ranges for the Eurofighter. All I've seen seem to be prospective ranges.

    As for the SH, Boeing only states 500NM+ combat radius, which doesn't mean much.

    Nic
    30min on station is an extra?! 200nm?!

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Sign View Post
    Gripen C range
    Combat radius: 800 km internal fuel (431nm)
    Combat radius: 1,550 Km with external fuel (837nm)
    Ferry range: 3,200 Km(1727nm)

    Gripen NG Range
    Range is increased an average of 40% over the JAS 39C as both the internal and external fuel capability is expanded.
    Combat radius: 1,300 Km + 30 minutes on station with A2A weapons. (702nm)
    Range (one-way): 2,500 Km on internal fuel(1350nm)
    Ferry range (one-way): 4,075 Km with external fuel(2200nm)
    Combat Radius estimate: 1,800 km with A2A weapons(972nm)

    One drop tank (450 Gal) gives the Gripen NG an extra range of approximately 1000 km.



    Courtesy of signatory who gathered the info..

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sho...13&postcount=1
    None of that claims do make some sense to stay polite.

    A Gripen can stay airborn for ~ 1 hour on internal fuel high up and cover a total distance of ~800 km by that. All that with minimum use of burner during take-off with two AAMs and at subsonic speeds. At low level the Gripen is down to ~40 minutes mission time. on internal fuel only.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Simonds View Post
    It would be more useful simply to compare un-refuelled combt radius, rather than including range.

    Every combat aircraft needs to be capable of performing a mission. Combat radius shows in a simplistic way, without taking into account such variables as weather conditions, flight profiles, altitudes flown at, varying climb rates (high readiness alert missions etc) nor weapons/sensor loads, specifically.

    Range is simply a metric of how far an aircraft can fly, not a usefulnumber as to how far an aircraft can go and fight... If you wish to compare military aircraft in such a way, despite the futility of such, as I've just described with SO many variables that HAVE to be considered, then official, open source information on combat radius, is the best to use, IMHO...
    Transfer- or ferry-range is the maximum possible under the most favourable conditions and demonstrated by test-pilots only.
    For a combat mission with a limited weapons-load that value is halved most of the time and will be reduced further when not just a hi-hi-hi profile only.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    US/EU/RU
    Posts
    4,726
    Reminds me of the first jet-fighterbomber spec sheet: Hitler's 1000-1000-1000. Meaning 1000 kg over 1000 km with 1000 km/h.

    I think these days a realistic assumption for a fighter bomber would be 2000 pounds of PGM one hour out, one hour back, which would be 500nm. Allows for tactical deviations and some burner time. Boeing's website seems honest.

    Regarding all those rather optimistic data above - compare F-15E: 2000nm ferry range on max int/ext fuel. And that thing has legs.
    "Distiller ... arrogant, ruthless, and by all reports (including his own) utterly charming"

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Distiller View Post
    Reminds me of the first jet-fighterbomber spec sheet: Hitler's 1000-1000-1000. Meaning 1000 kg over 1000 km with 1000 km/h.

    I think these days a realistic assumption for a fighter bomber would be 2000 pounds of PGM one hour out, one hour back, which would be 500nm. Allows for tactical deviations and some burner time. Boeing's website seems honest.

    Regarding all those rather optimistic data above - compare F-15E: 2000nm ferry range on max int/ext fuel. And that thing has legs.

    +1
    Going by the F-15E, those other specs seems a bit optimistic.


    Thanks

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,144
    Regarding the Super Hornet from the Wallace ppt:
    CAP: 380 nm with 2 h loitering (3 x tanks, 4 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9)
    Ship attack: 805 nm/1135 nm (3 x ET, ATFLIR, 1 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9, 2 x AGM-84)
    Maritime Patrol: 300 nm with 2.3 h/3.2 h loitering (same config)

    No idea why there are two values for the ship attack/maritime missions, maybe dependent on wheather 330 G or 480 G tanks are used.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,535
    Scorpion you are mistaken, you are our resident expert on the EF not on the SH.
    "allah akbar": NATO's new warcry.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Sens View Post
    None of that claims do make some sense to stay polite.

    A Gripen can stay airborn for ~ 1 hour on internal fuel high up and cover a total distance of ~800 km by that. All that with minimum use of burner during take-off with two AAMs and at subsonic speeds. At low level the Gripen is down to ~40 minutes mission time. on internal fuel only.
    i found a source on the subject from the swedish DEFENCE UNIVERSITY Essay on C-level, thou in swedish, page 39.
    http://www.annalindhbiblioteket.se/p...bsson_2016.pdf

    JAS-39 har en aktionsradie på ca 800 km utan komplettering av bränsle.
    This means
    JAS-39 have a cruising radius of approx. 800km without extra fuel.

    This would mean 1600km ferry range on gripen C without extra tanks, this means 56% better ferry range on internal for the NG.
    Last edited by Sign; 7th April 2010 at 22:18.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Sign View Post
    This means
    JAS-39 have a cruising radius of approx. 800km without extra fuel.
    Doesn't sound like combat radius.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Sign View Post
    i found a source on the subject from the swedish DEFENCE UNIVERSITY Essay on C-level, thou in swedish, page 39.
    http://www.annalindhbiblioteket.se/p...bsson_2016.pdf



    This means
    JAS-39 have a cruising radius of approx. 800km without extra fuel.

    This would mean 1600km ferry range on gripen C without extra tanks, this means 56% better ferry range on internal for the NG.
    I can read 400 km radius at first.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES