If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
John Cook wrote: On 6 Mar 2004 17:09:52 -0800, (Jake McGuire) wrote: Range is proportional to the logarithm of weight fraction, so assuming that lift/drag are fairly similar and that the engines are of comparable technology, the F-22 should be able to cruise 50% further on internal fuel than the EF2000. Its a bit closer than that! Aside from the weight fraction, the F-22 is a *much* cleaner airframe when carrying weapons. The EF2000 has conformal missiles, but it still has a lot of extra hardware hanging out there in the airstream with a normal load, and when you add on wing tanks, it gets very important. Using 2x1000L drop tanks raises the EF2000's weight fraction to 1.55, so the F-22 should still be able to cruise 17% further disregarding its lift/drag advantage (no external tanks). The conformal fuel tanks that are slated for tranche 3 look better value they have a capacity of approximately 1,500 litres each could extend the range of the aircraft by 25%, with 'surprising little aerodynamic effect'. ....and the expanded wing for the "bomber" version of the F-22 should have a *major* addition in fuel-carrying capability, for even less effect. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|