Also when you look at the following pic, you can see that a size limitation is needed because of the gears. The payload can't be too long because of the front gear and not too big in diameter because of the rear gears:
That's why I think the only way to integrate Ra'ad would be like right?
But it says "thrust range of the engine 79 - 98kN, not that RD93 has 98kN!
RD 93 was developed based on RD33 versions and before RD 33 MK with 90kN, so it's more likely that it is based on the RD 33 - 3 series and the thrust specs at Pac Kamra confirms this basically:
Pakistan Aeronautical Complex
19000 lb -> around 84kN AB thrust
The next upgrade of RD 93 will be based on RD 33MK changes, so might offer above 90kN thrust then, but afaik the goal is still to wait for WS 13 to improve and not to buy more Russian engines right?
As far as i know, Ra'ad in its current design can be fully accommodated on the center line hard point without any issues.
If the above picture is considered a true mock up of the original missile, i don't see any issue with its width or length in getting it fitted to the center line hard point. Getting it operational on 3 & 5 is the best effective usage of JF-17.
2 Ra'ad CMs, 1 800L center line fuel tank, 2 BVRs at 2 & 6 and 2 WVR at 1 & 7, best configuration for a ground attack mission.
The length of JF-17 weapons is:
SD-10: Length 12.89 ft (3.93 m) (ref PL-12 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
GBU-10 Paveway II: Length: 14 ft 4in (4.34 m) (ref GBU-10 Paveway II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )
MAR-1 : Length 4.03 metres (13.2 ft) (ref MAR-1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )
Ra’ad: Weight 1,100 kg Length 4.85 m (ref Ra'ad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )
Now comes the question of centerline fueltank’s length. It is less than 5m. Considering the 5.43m the length of 360 gallons F-16 fuel tank. (ref http://airrefuelingarchive.files.wor...eling-tank.jpg )
Based on the available information, Pylon 3/5 aren’t heavy enough to support a 1000kg pay load. Which leaves centerline station as the only option for Ra’ad. Current version of Ra’ad is both heavy and lengthy. As stated by Taimi Khan, If PAF wants ALCM capability on JF-17 then AWC has to come up with its smaller size derivate.
JF17 need more hard points for sure or dedicated like F16 on side or blelow intake
Ra'ad on JF-17?
No hard-point can carry it. The wings would snap off!
The only possible, and available option is the center point. The same as Mirage.
And in the upcoming years, as Ra'ad develops to cover a larger ranger, the weight of the ALCM may differ.
The weight of JF-17 is 6,411 KG. The maximum take-off weight is 12,474 KG. The fuel weights 2,268 KG.
Means, 3,795 KG is available, which can easily carry 3 Ra'ad ALCM. But the problem is, will the Thunder be able to get 1,200 KG on it's wings? (Imagining a PL-5E too).
The C-802/3 weights 715 KG and we saw two of them on the wings.
Last edited by Last Hope; 03-22-2012 at 08:20 PM.
Found the presentation. It says "3 store stations > 1000kg"
They can carry MORE THAN 1,000kg!
and here Pakistani JF-17 Thunder Fighter Jet Detailed:Official Presentation Part II ~ Pakistan Military Review
Last edited by Tempest II; 03-22-2012 at 09:33 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)