120KVA with even an 80% power factor yields 100KW, so thats the spectrum within which it can power any radar.
That's most definitely not enough power for a heavy class aircraft.
The F-35 has 2 75kVA generators. Weirdly the F-22 also has the same amount. But the PAK FA is expected to have nearly twice that amount on the AL-51. However the 117S may be closer or equal to the ones on the F-22/F-35.
what system has 50% power factor? who on gods green earth would approve such a poor design?
100KW is only the peak power, and a generator will generate that much power only for a few seconds. If you want more power for a few minutes, you may be able to get 80% of that. And if you want a continuous supply of power, then you will be able to use only 60% of the actual capacity. So we are talking about 60KW being usable. This has nothing to do with power factor. For example, the Airbus A380 has 150kVA generators, but its continuous power generation capacity is 90kVA. Peak power lasts only 5 seconds.
If you consider Irbis-E, then we are likely talking about a peak power consumption of 35-40KW. So the remaining power is most definitely not enough to handle all the other electronics and also the FBW. And this is only considering general electronics, we don't know what sort of exotic technologies the MKI may carry.
As for the power generators that are actually used, designers have already almost peaked. Or else they wouldn't just put 60kVA or 75kVA generators when it's obvious it's preferable to have as much power as possible. There is a pretty good risk you will blow the engine or set it on fire if too much heat gets trapped, so the quality of your heat sink is also a major limitation.
Another problem is these are not plug and play systems. Once you make changes to the generator and gearbox, you will have to put the engine and aircraft through a full length flight testing and certification process.
the gearbox is not going to deplete engine life. basic design/common sense.
Nothing to do with the gearbox. AL-31FP's engine life itself is just 2000 hours, and doesn't even meet that much. It was merely improved from the AL-31F after all, which has a service life of a little less than 1500 hours. 117's is 4000 hours.
Most likely Pakfa already has the step up gearbox, drive and generator.
You mean the AL-51? It's likely that nothing on this engine is of use on a 4th gen engine. We may be talking about an embedded generator here, where the generator is inside the core of the engine itself. One of the rumoured goals is to use the entire engine shaft power to generate electricity, so one of the engines simply stops developing thrust and switches to an electric powerplant instead. Even if that's not the case, I don't think there's anything usable on the AL-51.
No. That's just your speculation. A government that negotiates AK's at $1000 a pop, is most likely to bungle these things up for a long time to come.
It's modification that they can easily bungle up, like your idea of enhancing the AL-31FP's power generation, which the Russians have not done, and is a proper R&D program where costs have to be based on estimates, and also comes with significant risk. But simply buying the 117S and sticking it on the MKI is easy-peasy, the Russians have already done it, all we need is a contract.
Rather Jaguar and Mig-27's reengine programs were actually R&D programs, came with tremendous amounts of risks and ultimately failed. The AL-31FP modification could also go the same way. What's more, if the IAF was actually willing to engage in such risky business, then simply buying the 117S with zero risk is an obvious choice. It's a proven engine and has even seen some combat.
As for the AK, I wouldn't speculate on costs of anything until a contract is signed.
