Vanessa1402
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 10 April 2021
- Messages
- 136
- Reaction score
- 67
Korea are moving so fast with their development
KAI KF-21 Boramae (KFX Korean Indigenous Fighter program)
South Korea's Hanwha shows off prototype aircraft engine - Breaking Defense
At the Farnborough Air Show, a company exhibit showed off the proposed engine not just on aerospace systems, but as part of the powerplant for naval vessels.
KF-21EX(KAI new roadmap 2040)
aviationweek.com
weapon bay、AI computer、add VLO(means some where didn't have VLO)、EOTS、EODAS、MADL analogue......
KAI Tweaks KF-21EX Design To Reduce Cost | Aviation Week Network
KAI is studying how to modify the design of the KF-21EX, the future Block 3 version of its KF-21 fighter, to ensure the program remains cost-effective.
aviationweek.com
weapon bay、AI computer、add VLO(means some where didn't have VLO)、EOTS、EODAS、MADL analogue......
Last edited:
FighterJock
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 29 October 2007
- Messages
- 5,155
- Reaction score
- 5,089
That is exactly what I imagined what the Block 3 Boramae would look like.
Scott Kenny
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 15 May 2023
- Messages
- 9,200
- Reaction score
- 10,260
I suspect that was mostly the conformal carriage of AAMs that wasn't VLO. The overall airframe is roughly correctly shaped for at least LO if not VLO.KF-21EX(KAI new roadmap 2040)
KAI Tweaks KF-21EX Design To Reduce Cost | Aviation Week Network
KAI is studying how to modify the design of the KF-21EX, the future Block 3 version of its KF-21 fighter, to ensure the program remains cost-effective.
weapon bay、AI computer、add VLO(means some where didn't have VLO)、EOTS、EODAS、MADL analogue......
- Joined
- 24 November 2008
- Messages
- 1,454
- Reaction score
- 2,085
Paywall... Does the article say anything about the internal loadout? The pic seems to suggest 4x Meteor.KF-21EX(KAI new roadmap 2040)
KAI Tweaks KF-21EX Design To Reduce Cost | Aviation Week Network
KAI is studying how to modify the design of the KF-21EX, the future Block 3 version of its KF-21 fighter, to ensure the program remains cost-effective.
weapon bay、AI computer、add VLO(means some where didn't have VLO)、EOTS、EODAS、MADL analogue......
View attachment 735532
4x Meteor(or equivalent)s or 2x Meteors and 2x SDB(or equivalent)s
I'm Kim Minseok.
I don't comment here, but I will occasionally reply to basic questions.
The South Korean Air Force has not yet approved the KF-21EA. The agency for defense development researchers who got the illustration didn't have enough budget, so they had to photoshop a commercial forged KF-21 CG.
Additionally, ADD's KF-21EA concept must compete with KAI's KF-21EX concept.
You are completely misrepresenting it. If the purpose of this comment was a strategy to call me out,
you succeeded.
The only public information about the KF-21SA is a single PowerPoint slide, viewed by only a few dozen people. I am the only journalist "physically" present who has taken pictures and noticed the details.
The KF-21SA is not a hardware change but a proposal to make phases 1 and 2 of KAI's Next Aerial Combat System (NACS) an international co-development.
NACS1 and NACS2 will include low-orbit satellite communications and MUM-T.
There is only one difference, which concerns the range of the KF-21.
The Indonesian Air Force's IF-X has a larger external fuel drop tank than the ROKAF's KF-21. That's all.
Hello Maxi, I haven't expected to see you here.
One thing I want to point out, it seems like your comment contradicts your article that was published on Bizhankook. In that article you've mentioned that the EA variant is part of KAI proposal, but now you sound like EA is not part of the KAI's NACS proposal.
What is actually the case? Have you made a mistake in your Bizhankook article?
In the article I clearly stated that the KF-21EA was developed by ADD.
The photo description was originally written 'KF-21EA, a derivative of the KF-21 being developed by KAI'.
This means that the KF-21 was developed by KAI, not that the KF-21EA is being developed by KAI.
I didn't write the photo description, but I think you might be confused.
There's no confusion when it is literally written in the caption that the model is "'KF-21EA' being developed by KAI".
Obviously I was not aware that the caption wasn't written yourself, nor that the caption was changed.
Anyways, then it should mean only the EX and SA variants are part of NACS proposal. It also probably means that within ADD they'll still have their own ideas of KF-21 block iii and post-KF-X next-gen fighter separate from NACS alongside the EA variant they are pitching.
Would be great if things get sorted out by the government/air force soon enough.
Last edited:
Tbh, I don't like the KF-21 project. KF-21 was meant to be a cheap fighter jet that could replace Korean F-16 fleets.
KF-21 isn't cheap nor is significantly more capable than legacy fighter jets such as Rafale. Please don't tell me the RCS of KF-21 is much better than Rafale - it isn't that much different given that both aircraft are RO.
The aircraft isn't that much better than F-16V on paper either, yet I am sure KF-21 inherently costs more to maintain due to the dual-engine set up.
It is a predictable outcome as KF-21 shares almost all shortcomings of F-18 E/F which has a pair of the identical engines, GE F414.
For instance, F-18 E/F had a chronic issue of having a short combat range and USN invested a lot of money into the platform to solve the problem. Now, I am hearing that KF-21's ferry range is only 2900km (or 1565NM) with two drop tanks and I was thinking what's point of KF-21 then? The whole argument of going for a twin-engine was that ROKAF wanted a combat aircraft with significantly improved combat range & paylaod over Korean F-16.
The whole project, at least to me, is screaming a colossal failure and overall the project seems like a poor attempt to re-invent a wheel eg. F-18 E/F.
As a few Korean pundits said about 15 years ago, Korea should have just bought a license of F-16XL from LM with ToT and called it KF-X. It would have been much more practical platform for Korea and F-16XL-based KF-X would have been a more attractive aircraft in the export market.
It is shame that Korea went with this 'Korean' Super Hornet because 1) Republic of Korea Airforce pilots wanted a twin-engine jet for it being 'safer' than a single-engine jet 2) The public which was alarmed by development of LO/VLO combat aircraft of neighbouring countries urged the Korean government & KAI to develop a LO/VLO aircraft to match the competition when the country was clearly ready for it 3) KAI wanting to design & develop own combat aircraft after T-50/FA-50 to keep its engineers busy with one more national project.
And now ADD & KAI fight over which direction that KF-21's development should take in place without any clear instruction from the Korean government which wants to advertise KF-21 as a 'potential' 5th+gen aircraft, yet isn't particularly interested in developing a LO/VLO fighter jet as ROKAF doesn't think a stealth combat aircraft is the future. The whole situation sucks so hard, yet the Korean public thinks KF-21 will be a smashing hit like FA-50 once KF-21 becomes a VLO/LO when KF-21 will only evolve into a LO/VLO aircraft only after mid-2030s.
KF-21 isn't cheap nor is significantly more capable than legacy fighter jets such as Rafale. Please don't tell me the RCS of KF-21 is much better than Rafale - it isn't that much different given that both aircraft are RO.
The aircraft isn't that much better than F-16V on paper either, yet I am sure KF-21 inherently costs more to maintain due to the dual-engine set up.
It is a predictable outcome as KF-21 shares almost all shortcomings of F-18 E/F which has a pair of the identical engines, GE F414.
For instance, F-18 E/F had a chronic issue of having a short combat range and USN invested a lot of money into the platform to solve the problem. Now, I am hearing that KF-21's ferry range is only 2900km (or 1565NM) with two drop tanks and I was thinking what's point of KF-21 then? The whole argument of going for a twin-engine was that ROKAF wanted a combat aircraft with significantly improved combat range & paylaod over Korean F-16.
The whole project, at least to me, is screaming a colossal failure and overall the project seems like a poor attempt to re-invent a wheel eg. F-18 E/F.
As a few Korean pundits said about 15 years ago, Korea should have just bought a license of F-16XL from LM with ToT and called it KF-X. It would have been much more practical platform for Korea and F-16XL-based KF-X would have been a more attractive aircraft in the export market.
It is shame that Korea went with this 'Korean' Super Hornet because 1) Republic of Korea Airforce pilots wanted a twin-engine jet for it being 'safer' than a single-engine jet 2) The public which was alarmed by development of LO/VLO combat aircraft of neighbouring countries urged the Korean government & KAI to develop a LO/VLO aircraft to match the competition when the country was clearly ready for it 3) KAI wanting to design & develop own combat aircraft after T-50/FA-50 to keep its engineers busy with one more national project.
And now ADD & KAI fight over which direction that KF-21's development should take in place without any clear instruction from the Korean government which wants to advertise KF-21 as a 'potential' 5th+gen aircraft, yet isn't particularly interested in developing a LO/VLO fighter jet as ROKAF doesn't think a stealth combat aircraft is the future. The whole situation sucks so hard, yet the Korean public thinks KF-21 will be a smashing hit like FA-50 once KF-21 becomes a VLO/LO when KF-21 will only evolve into a LO/VLO aircraft only after mid-2030s.
kqcke for you
PUMA PUMA PUMA
- Joined
- 3 November 2022
- Messages
- 1,122
- Reaction score
- 1,431
Hard to say tought given an Air to Air only load it may be smaller but then again the diffrence between an RCS of 1m² and 0.5m² isn't that mutch (those numbers are only an example nothing more)
And more cost to integreate the new engine into the existing ecosystem.
There were some solutions (CFT, EPE and EDE) tought not 1 of them was actualy brought into service.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 29 November 2010
- Messages
- 1,738
- Reaction score
- 3,398
Actually, the KF-21 was meant to replace the F-4 and F-5
It´s also doubtful that a Rafale could have a lower RCS with any meaningful weapon load. Idem for the F-16XL...
Moreover. thinking that a well funded R&D project of the early 2000 from a modern aerospace nation could not outmatch an early 1980 design from another is a risky assumption. Especially when discussing RCS at similar budget.
----------//-----------------------------
Edited (forgot the negative term).
Moreover. thinking that a well funded R&D project of the early 2000 from a modern aerospace nation could not outmatch an early 1980 design from another is a risky assumption. Especially when discussing RCS at similar budget.
----------//-----------------------------
Edited (forgot the negative term).
Last edited:
- Joined
- 3 January 2006
- Messages
- 1,125
- Reaction score
- 748
Looking back, the F/A-18E was very much of product of the fiscal and politic restraints of the immediate Post-Cold War Period. Similarly, the KF-21 is a constrained design, although in this case the limitations are in part technical. Both programs came to fruition because they didn’t exceed the bounds of politics will.
Don’t get me wrong, it would have been far cheaper in the long run to have built an entirely novel aircraft with Gen. 4.5 technology around the new F414 engines and intakes than funding both the Super Hornet AND the later F-35C. Something akin to the KF-21 with conformal weapons carriage and stealth shaping, if not full RAM coatings, was entirely possible for the USN within the same or a slightly extended timescale as the eventual F/A-18E. The overall development budget would have been affordable. Congress would not have gone along with it due to the thorny politics surrounding naval aviation.
That's because every single point you are making are wrong, and your basic knowledge about the KF-X programme itself is very lacking, to say the least. First and foremost, KF-X was only meant to replace block 32 Falcons within ROKAF. It was never meant to replace the block 52 aircraft which is the vast majority and are being upraded to the Viper standard.
Sorry but it's already cheaper than every single 4.5th and 5th gen jets out in the market, bar maybe the F-16, and F-16 already costed $62.5 million per aircraft, flyaway, by 2020. Those are pre-inflation-hike cost figures.
Unfortunately, the only DoD/AF contract with LM for the production of new F-16s after the start of the war in Ukraine is that for the FMS to Bulgary for the second batch of F-16s, and that contract figure is incomplete. So we'll never know how much the F-16 costs per aircraft flyaway atm.
Though I don't see the case where an aircraft that costed $62.5 million flyaway in early 2020 would be cheaper today than an aircraft that has been contracted for $79 million weapon systems/procurement cost in 2024.
And you make all those stupid presumptions based on what? I've never knew we had a senior level Raytheon/NG/Thales/ avionics engineer in the forum
Comparing the two jets which are going to be operated by two wholly different entities for different conops and requirements is already stupid enough, and add to that claiming that it has the shortcomings of Super Hornet and is a grand failure is just a whole new level of ignorance.
Yeah, and that would've ended up just like FS-X/F-2 or even worse. KAI and the Korean Governement is fully aware of the hassle that is IP management when it comes to joint projects with US defence contractors thanks to KTX-2/T-50. Go educate yourself first before making all these ridiculous claims.
Who says that ROKAF doesn't think stealth is the future? If anything they are thinking the right opposite. And obviously, there is no input from the Korean goverment at the moment on how the follow-up programme after the KF-X should proceed since
1) the F-16U upgrade is still ongoing and there is more than 15 years left until the first F-16U retires
2) KF-21 isn't even inducted into ROKAF service, let alone isn't the development complete
Suppose we had someone who was saying that the French should develop a next generation fighter asap and have a clear idea about what it should be during the 2000s, when Rafale was still in its Standard F1 form, everyone would've called that person crazy, and what you're saying aren't that far off. You sound like that one guy on F-16.net who was so bitter about the fact that there are countries who are dare developing a fighter jet instead of going all-in for the F-35.
Last edited:
Scott Kenny
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 15 May 2023
- Messages
- 9,200
- Reaction score
- 10,260
No, it was to replace F4s and F5s.
The primary threat country for South Korea is 60km from their capital. Long range not required.
I'm not going to talk about the price of the KF-21 and its annual operating and maintenance costs.
KAI will announce this when they export. They want others to know the price of the KF-21.
Instead, I'll show you something fun: compare the KF-X, which was proposed to South Korea by Company L in 2013, and the KF-21, which was actually built by KAI.
Talk of the F-16XL has never been considered anywhere in the South Korean government or military, and if it were,
I would need proof.
KAI will announce this when they export. They want others to know the price of the KF-21.
Instead, I'll show you something fun: compare the KF-X, which was proposed to South Korea by Company L in 2013, and the KF-21, which was actually built by KAI.
Talk of the F-16XL has never been considered anywhere in the South Korean government or military, and if it were,
I would need proof.
Attachments
Colonial-Marine
UAVs are now friend, drones are the real enemy.
- Joined
- 5 October 2009
- Messages
- 1,395
- Reaction score
- 1,175
I think this is comparable to the thrust increase offered by the improved F414 that GE was trying to sell the USN. Of course, the Navy in their infinite wisdom turned down that offer despite how central the Super Hornet has become to a carrier's air-wing. It should provide a comfortable margin for the increased weight the KF-21EX will have over the earlier KF-21.
Graugrun
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 821
- Reaction score
- 1,087
South Korea’s KF-21 fighter radar being tested by Paramount in South Africa
https://www.defenceweb.co.za/aerosp...ar-being-tested-by-paramount-in-south-africa/
Attachments
- Joined
- 6 August 2007
- Messages
- 3,466
- Reaction score
- 4,005
Strangely, the KF-21 is specifically mentioned in the current United States Munitions List, Category VIII (22 CFR 121.1)
i.e. "Items we are exporting for the KF-21 without restrictions are still export controlled".
i.e. "Items we are exporting for the KF-21 without restrictions are still export controlled".
- Joined
- 6 August 2007
- Messages
- 3,466
- Reaction score
- 4,005
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,558
- Reaction score
- 2,354
(LEAD) S. Korea approves cutting Indonesia's contribution for joint KF-21 fighter project to 600 bln won | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: RECASTS lead; UPDATES throughout with more details) SEOUL, Aug. 16 (Yonhap) -- So...
Korea agree to cut our contribution from 20% down to just 7%, Guess we wont be receiving that 5th prototype.
Could you explain to us why Indonesia chose Rafales over KF-21s? Aside from maybe credits I truly can't see Rafale being superior/more advantageous in any areas.(LEAD) S. Korea approves cutting Indonesia's contribution for joint KF-21 fighter project to 600 bln won | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: RECASTS lead; UPDATES throughout with more details) SEOUL, Aug. 16 (Yonhap) -- So...m-en.yna.co.kr
Korea agree to cut our contribution from 20% down to just 7%, Guess we wont be receiving that 5th prototype.
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,558
- Reaction score
- 2,354
It's for different squadrons tbh. KF-21 were slated to replace our aging Hawks. While Rafales are coming to re-equip our 14th Fighter squadron and formation of new fighters squadrons. F-15's are planned to finally replace the retired Su-27/30's at some 2030's.
It were also supposed to aid our own local manufacturer to gain some leap in capability. We are mature in aerostructure, but not so much in the others.
The main issue lies in political support tbh in our side. That our govt seems to have no real idea or push on Research and Development field. Over expectation about technology transfers without proper preparation in our side (which should also include negotiation with US on licensed technology, yes even it's Korean program, we were supposed to negotiate the permission of the licensed techs to US too) As a result our clearance were incomplete. This result in "laziness" in actually financing the program.
SSB and TAI usually offer very generous package deals when it comes to Southeast Asian countries, why not wait a couple of years more and replace Hawks and Flankers with KF-21&Kaan?
While it might be costly this way, it's not like those other deals are much cheaper in comparison so you at least get access to superior technology and aircraft. And I can't comment on what kind of a ToT deal the South Koreans offer but Turkey is much more relax on this topic (almost too relax, they really should tighten the regulation!); they're even transferring some unknown BVR missile tech to Pakistan.
https://quwa.org/pakistan-air-force-news/pakistan-calls-for-joint-aam-development-with-turkiye-2/
Last edited:
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,558
- Reaction score
- 2,354
Considering that we rely on foreign banks to help financing the deal, what Turkiye can offer in terms of financing ? The last time i checked with our ex-janes contributor Alman Helvas, Turkiye's financing comes with hefty interest rate of 10%. Use of foreign banks is also difficult due to Turkish economy inflation, they consider it high risk. Some deals may went through but for aircraft.. especially Kaan which nowhere in production status is very risky.
French in Rafale deal in other hand was able to not just aid financing for 42 aircrafts but 70 if taken. The interest rate is also lower afaik 1-2%. While our hawks are kinda fragile now, almost like Indian MiG-21's.
US F-15 are coming with FMS which a G2G deal, beside the aircraft it also helps us balance our trade surplus with US.
What Indonesian gov wanna do with that prototype anyway?(LEAD) S. Korea approves cutting Indonesia's contribution for joint KF-21 fighter project to 600 bln won | Yonhap News Agency
(ATTN: RECASTS lead; UPDATES throughout with more details) SEOUL, Aug. 16 (Yonhap) -- So...
Korea agree to cut our contribution from 20% down to just 7%, Guess we wont be receiving that 5th prototype.
Selfie pencitraan again?
Rafale has less string attach (much less ITAR components for example). We can operate them much more freely.
alberchico
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 14 January 2014
- Messages
- 668
- Reaction score
- 1,374
Korea’s KF-21 shortlisted for Philippine fighter jet deal
South Korea’s homegrown fighter jet KF-21 is competing against US defense firm Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-16 for the Philippine government’s m
amp.kedglobal.com
FighterJock
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 29 October 2007
- Messages
- 5,155
- Reaction score
- 5,089
Prototype No. 5 is looking good.
WatcherZero
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 22 May 2023
- Messages
- 691
- Reaction score
- 1,509
That and Indonesia received $3.9bn in foreign loans to buy the Rafales whereas it would have had to contribute itself to the South Korean development from its own resources.
5th prototype is supposed to be used to develop Indonesian tweaks for their specification. Things like software accommodation and possibly for integration testing for Indonesia-specific armaments in the future. There are often cases where countries get offset deals that enable such local modifications, mainly that of SMS to a certain degree. ROKAF for example integrated JDAM to their first batch of F-16s (b32) with their own codes.
So to speak, the prototype itself really isn't all that meaningful. That aircraft is no different from procuring another plane from a normal serial production lot. What actually matters is the localization support programme and technical assistance that comes with it.
Last edited:
