• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

KFX Korean Indigenous Fighter programme

Wyvern

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 25, 2020
Messages
342
Reaction score
292
Hope this hasn't been posted already.

 

helmutkohl

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
206
Reaction score
200
Hope this hasn't been posted already.

there is a post right above you that shows the same thing
although i was hoping maybe hte flight global link might have new pics but paywall.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,898
Reaction score
1,498

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,898
Reaction score
1,498
What I find fascinating with non-US stealth jets (be them chinese, russians, or SEA allies): they all look like variations in shape and engines, of F-22 / F-35.
The Chinese got the "big strike F-22" with their J-20 (plus canards)
FC-31 looks like a F-35 "done right / uncompromised by VSTOL" (JAST ? did I said JAST ?)
This one from Korea looks like "F-35 met a Superbug and stole its powerplant"
Same for the Japanese demonstrator...

The irony is that F-22s are too few (180) when F-35 is, well, the F-35 (no intend to start any flame war).
 

GARGEAN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
425
Reaction score
144
What I find fascinating with non-US stealth jets (be them chinese, russians, or SEA allies): they all look like variations in shape and engines, of F-22 / F-35.
You REALLY sure about that? Maybe should look at T-50 a bit more closely?
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,898
Reaction score
1,498
Or maybe you could read again what I wrote to understand better.

NON US STEALTH JETS - T-50 is trainer, attack, and non-stealth, so out of this.
 

NUSNA_Moebius

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
162
Reaction score
25
I think he means the Su-57 that was originally designated as the T-50 during initial prototyping. It's easily the least US-like of the 5th gen jets assuming it's RCS haracteristics are even up to snuff to meet 5th gen standards. Basically a stealthified Su-27 type planform.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,898
Reaction score
1,498
AAAAAAH ok.
T-50 from Russia.
NOT
T-50 from South Korea.

Of course there are always exceptions to any rule (and annoying people, too).
 
Last edited:

helmutkohl

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
206
Reaction score
200
What I find fascinating with non-US stealth jets (be them chinese, russians, or SEA allies): they all look like variations in shape and engines, of F-22 / F-35.
The Chinese got the "big strike F-22" with their J-20 (plus canards)
FC-31 looks like a F-35 "done right / uncompromised by VSTOL" (JAST ? did I said JAST ?)
This one from Korea looks like "F-35 met a Superbug and stole its powerplant"
Same for the Japanese demonstrator...

The irony is that F-22s are too few (180) when F-35 is, well, the F-35 (no intend to start any flame war).
In general its safer to be reactionary than revolutionary.
saves them time by following an existing design rather than trying to change it with a new idea.

of the non-US jets, I think the Su-57 is probably the most unique.. but also the one that has the most people questioning its stealthiness

of all jets, the X-32 is by far the most unique flying 5th gen design..and a concept I wish some one else could explore more.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
705
of the non-US jets, I think the Su-57 is probably the most unique.. but also the one that has the most people questioning its stealthiness
Sorry to disagree, but that would certainly be the J-20: it is unique as a concept and has a unique mission.

The 57 is amazing, yes, sparkling also... But it does what fighter aircraft had done since the good old fashioned Fokker DR1
;)
 
Last edited:

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,898
Reaction score
1,498
strawman...
You sure you know what that means?..
Anyways getting too offtopic.
Yes, i know. You joyfully picked just one small mistake among my many examples, just to be a PITA. And you keep going.

Just as you were in the CdG thread, incidentally... some resent related to this maybe ?
 
Last edited:

NUSNA_Moebius

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
162
Reaction score
25
Basically a stealthified Su-27 type planform.
Are we really going there again?
Pancake, tunnel, wide-spaced engines. LERX switched for Levcons and all other major surfaces changed to trapezoidal. It's a clear evolution from a familiar configuration.

The YF-23 is the most unique flown stealth fighter configuration so far. Not hard to believe that in numerous key areas it still remains the most effective design flown. F-35 and X-32 are unique in being the only single engine designs flown so far and packing in so much into such a small space in the actual F-35 variants remains impressive. But that was at severe costs on many fronts.....

We could argue the F-22 is an evolved F-15 configuration but that's only looking at the outside. Lockheed looked at alot of configs before settling on the central box design that has become so ubiquitous. It's understood and other countries have alot of access to F-22 photos that can serve as inspiration and influence.
 

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
524
Reaction score
218
So basically i crafted myself a KFX C-107. This hopefully be close to what would be built, still however fidelity would be limited to resolution of the reference image available to me. It's not going to need paints,textures etc, as it's for RCS approximation purpose. Then like many others i throw it to POFACETS. Set frequency to 10 GHz (X-band).
dbmmy29-b588320d-3ef6-4580-8eca-aa5fed0c411a.png

The Frontal aspect RCS appears to be quite promising (Perhaps it would be bit higher considering POFACETS actually underestimate curved surface RCS and it cannot do duct). The value in order of 0.1 sqm appears to be achievable in frontal aspect.

kfx-empty.png

Also for additional interest i did another approximation this time to see the RCS fluctuation at frontal aspect.

C107VHFtoX.jpg

One can see the fluctuation of RCS from frequency to frequency. It's quite jagged but show although kind of weak, dependence between wavelength and RCS. The POFACETS however or at least in my settings (PEC-no RAM) the increase or fluctuation caused by creeping and surface wave, this become important in lower frequency (where target feature is as large or smaller about half wavelength). But at high frequency regime where the feature of the target (e.g wing) is at least 10 times larger than impinging wave, it would be minor.

That however is just one of the caveat. The other is that POFACETS works for Specular RCS. Specular RCS is also known as "spike" It is the strongest RCS contributor, basically it is the "antenna mainlobe" of the feature being exposed to radar. Getting those spikes away from potential threat aspect is priority, so the enemy radar is presented with weaker lobes. However as the frequency decreased the power of the specular RCS decreases But the width of the "spike" increased.


Considering the limitation of the software i decided not to include the engine so the inlet and the exhaust is one big gaping hole basically. If i put anything inside there would be "unexplainable" spike arising from within the plane. Nonetheless I would love if anyone can point out on a "standard" on how RCS approximation can be done. Like everyone basically only "match" the size of the target with wavelength of the threat radar and maybe materials if the software supports. But none said on whether the inlet/exhaust should be blocked or can be left open so that the Resulted RCS graph is *only* from the external shaping of the target.
 

helmutkohl

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
206
Reaction score
200
I don't speak any Bahasa, but based on a google translate of this Indonesian article..

it seems Indonesia MoD is very pessimistic about this project
they feel they:
  • don't benefit much. Korea controls most things
  • the numbers of Indonesian engineers was very limited by the Korean side
  • not enough tech transfers
  • locally, not enough infrastructure to accommodate this project
 

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
524
Reaction score
218
I don't speak any Bahasa, but based on a google translate of this Indonesian article..

it seems Indonesia MoD is very pessimistic about this project
they feel they:
  • don't benefit much. Korea controls most things
  • the numbers of Indonesian engineers was very limited by the Korean side
  • not enough tech transfers
  • locally, not enough infrastructure to accommodate this project
Yeah but can't cancel them outright as that would constitute breach of agreement.

It always amuse me tho how our media always try to portray Korea dont want to share anything etc... Well We only have like 15% of shares nothing more and that's fine. It is not like we would have the necessary or even considering our politics to actually invest on the industry. You can see the minister seems to contradict himself that Despite having "small" amount of transfers of technology. He then mentioned that We would need additional Infrastructure. Yes.. about 185 M USD would be needed., and that only for the Aircraft.

Imagine if the Korean shares say... AESA Radar technology... who's gonna build it back here in Indonesia ? There is no real foundry or factory here making Semiconductor RF Equipment, as far as i know. If we desire to make that. I did a rough calculations that over 485M USD FY2020 is required for a Foundry facility having annual capacity of 30000 Wafer for TR modules. If we turned it all into Radar we would be able to produce about 30 AESA radars annually. But then.. what else can use anything produced from there ? That's the big question.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
705
Well, if you start and prove that local production can be reliable and affordable, the risk is that some private industry would want to piggyback on that.
Not bad...
 

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
524
Reaction score
218
This is Indonesian KFX Facility building... or a part of it which would be an assembly line. Still empty atm tho.

In the other part of the building however there is a big Autoclave for processing composite materials.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Wyvern

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 25, 2020
Messages
342
Reaction score
292
Is the KFX anywhere near construction as of now?
 

aonestudio

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
145
Reaction score
224

GARGEAN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
425
Reaction score
144
Wonder if SK considered cooperation with Russia for that project at any stage. They took that route successfully few times already after all.
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
1,022
Reaction score
351
KM-SAM, ballistic missiles, some place projects.
While there has been some contact/ technology sharing re: SAM technology not aware of any (at least open) Russian involvement re: South Korea’s ballistic missiles. Indeed there has been Russian opposition to South Korea’s enhancement of their ballistic missiles with allegations of Russian assistance to North Korea re: there ballistic missile (including ICBM) programs.
 

trose213

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
110
Reaction score
27
KM-SAM, ballistic missiles, some place projects.
While there has been some contact/ technology sharing re: SAM technology not aware of any (at least open) Russian involvement re: South Korea’s ballistic missiles. Indeed there has been Russian opposition to South Korea’s enhancement of their ballistic missiles with allegations of Russian assistance to North Korea re: there ballistic missile (including ICBM) programs.
South Korea financed the S-350 development as the KM-SAM. The L-SAM has S-400 tech and possibly S-500. The Hyunmoo-2 is essentially an Iskander.
 

aonestudio

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
145
Reaction score
224
o_O

Very few details have emerged about the AESA radar, which officials have described as a “state-of-the-art system capable of detecting and tracking more than 1,000 targets simultaneously”.

 

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
524
Reaction score
218
o_O

Very few details have emerged about the AESA radar, which officials have described as a “state-of-the-art system capable of detecting and tracking more than 1,000 targets simultaneously”.

Too bad :x.

Anyway, power aperture wise. My estimates of tracking capacity at 165 km range vs 3 sqm RCS would be 36 Targets. This is a great figure. As the range closer the "tracking capacity" increases. 1000 targets track of same RCS could be attained at 71 Km.
 

Frogfigther

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Aug 30, 2020
Messages
8
Reaction score
45
war-20200830-235056-002.jpg
Old KF-X model(maybe C106?) RCS Data without RAM/RAS application from KAI.
war-20200830-235143-010.png
And KF-X Prototype radar's TRM count. It has 1088 TRMs and its power is about 15~18 W.
war-20200831-000040-000.png
South Korean military forum guessed it will have about 120+ km tracking range vs 1 sqm RCS.
war-20200831-010555-002.jpg
Also their ultimate goal is to enhance its radar performance to be comparable to AN/APG-81.

Sources
 
Last edited:

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
524
Reaction score
218
I wish they put frequency information for that RCS measurement. Assuming X-band tho. Mine seems close (-12 dBsm)
 

Frogfigther

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Aug 30, 2020
Messages
8
Reaction score
45
I wish they put frequency information for that RCS measurement. Assuming X-band tho. Mine seems close (-12 dBsm)
Unfortunately, the conditions for the analysis was not disclosed. However, the author who found the data thinks it was under X-band RF, and think its overall RCS figures will be distributed around 0.1 ~ 0.01 sqm w/ RAM/RAS/FSS Radome application.
 
Last edited:
Top