What's new

TF-X Turkish Fighter & Trainer Aircraft Projects

You don't know what racism is.
Having been the subject of it, I do know what racism is.

Try walking home and getting your *** nearly killed by people who constantly call you slurs, before you tell others what is and isn't racism.
 
. . . .
.
And what about Su57 ?
Su 57 has a rearward facing radar but I don't think it also has them on the sides

You could argue about the utility of such a feature but as far as I'm aware, it's never been done before.

Altay has a 3 man turret like the Abrams and Leo2, no autoloader, also different suspension, Turkish Volkan fire control system, Turkish hard kill system etc. We bought engineering assistance from Hyundai Rotem because it was our first tank. We didn't buy the K2 Black Panther tank design. Altay is a heavier, much different tank.
 
.
Su 57 has a rearward facing radar but I don't think it also has them on the sides

You could argue about the utility of such a feature but as far as I'm aware, it's never been done before.

Altay has a 3 man turret like the Abrams and Leo2, no autoloader, also different suspension, Turkish Volkan fire control system, Turkish hard kill system etc. We bought engineering assistance from Hyundai Rotem because it was our first tank. We didn't buy the K2 Black Panther tank design.
Capture d’écran 2023-03-20 171858.png


It has.
 
.
The Navalized Hürjet is not a speculation, but a preliminary design study that has been confirmed by official sources. Question 1: Why is there an idea to develop a training jet for the navy? The most common argument is that this aircraft will be armed and turned into a light-armed navy aircraft to use in TCG Anadolu, but I think the scope of the work here is much broader than that. First and foremost, learning how to navalize a jet and use it on a naval platform.

The other thing is KE, this is being developed as a interceptor jet drone rather than a loyalwing. In other words, it is a high-speed jet, and there are very different and challenging parameters from propeller-driven tactical drones such as the TB-3, from the approach speed of this aircraft to the preparations on the runway. So question 2: Why is Navalized KE or even twin-engine combat jet drones(Ke-2), which have a much higher total take-off weight, currently one of the leading programs of the Turkish defense industry, despite the fact that the existing infrastructure of TCG Anadolu has very challenging limits in terms of sortie capacity of jet-powered aircraft?

Finally, the Anka-3 and the not yet declassified Anka-4. Drone platforms that will be used as bomber penetrators with high stealth characteristics in flyingwing form and perhaps as tanker drones in the future. It is speculated that these systems will develop as navalized. Another anecdote is that there are also targets for the navalized variant within the MMU program.

When we put these examples together, it is clear that there is an attempt to build up a backlog for the next 10 years. In this regard, TCG Anadolu will create a transition and learning process. Even with its limited sortie capacity, we will learn to operate a combined force structure and task groups. In this regard, both armed force sources and political will have repeatedly declared their intentions. We cannot reach that point in an instant. Because the area we are now transitioning to in defense policies is opening up towards technical capabilities and operational capabilities that you cannot buy even with your money. We can only reach these steps by learning and producing them ourselves.

Maybe it will never be a supercarrier, but I see that there is an intention to follow a path similar to the French' past or South Korea's roadmap, and there are many concrete situations that support this. The necessity of such a platform and whether the Turkish economy can carry such an additional burden within the timeframe set are separate discussions. What I want to say is that there is such a will and the infrastructure is being created.

There has to be a dedicated aircraft carrier in the works,

I would discard plans for Hürjet and make it specially designed for maximum 3-4 ton drones. Therefore a much smaller ship with a much simpler catapult, sort of like a miniature Nimitz class.

It would make sense economically, and it would make sense operationally. And poor TCG Anadolu can finally go back to being an LHD :rofl:
I have a hunch that the SSB might push for a single-engine fighter with an MTOW of 16-19 tons for carrier operations and, potentially, a lighter-weight complement to the MMU. The development of the TR Motor turbofan (120-130 kN) would be a key enabler to such a project.

Moreover, I don't know how much range, payload, and general utility they'll get out of the Hurjet in its current design from a naval standpoint. India won't use the Naval Tejas for much more than testing; their goal is to develop the TEDBF (which is closer in size to the Rafale).

Even if they wanted to use the Hurjet, they'd have to enlarge it and also reinforce the airframe anyways. One approach is doing what Saab did by using the Gripen E/F as the basis for the Gripen-M. Yet, at that point, you're heading in the same direction: a new single-engine fighter bigger than the Hurjet.
 
.
I stand corrected. Thank you.

I have a hunch that the SSB might push for a single-engine fighter with an MTOW of 16-19 tons for carrier operations and, potentially, a lighter-weight complement to the MMU. The development of the TR Motor turbofan (120-130 kN) would be a key enabler to such a project.

Moreover, I don't know how much range, payload, and general utility they'll get out of the Hurjet in its current design from a naval standpoint. India won't use the Naval Tejas for much more than testing; their goal is to develop the TEDBF (which is closer in size to the Rafale).

Even if they wanted to use the Hurjet, they'd have to enlarge it and also reinforce the airframe anyways. One approach is doing what Saab did by using the Gripen E/F as the basis for the Gripen-M. Yet, at that point, you're heading in the same direction: a new single-engine fighter bigger than the Hurjet.
In my opinion, designing a carrier that is just focused on KE and ANKA 3 would be much smaller, lighter, more efficient. Elevators, catapults everything would be more efficient.
 
. . . .
mmu-ssb-1.jpeg



"If you look closely, you will see that the inlet is in trapezoid shape, meaning the opposide sides are not parallel to each other, unlike the paralleogram type air intakes which you see in most 4.5 Gen fighters, including the reduced RCS ones and Su-57. Also, it is highly blended with the Wing Shoulder. If somebody has some actual design knowldge of Stealth design, they'll know that parallel sides , bulges, sharp angles are one of the highest source of RCS and that's why in Stealth design, they should be avoided. That's the reason, F-22 has trapezoidal wings so that two sides of the wings are not parallel, slightly angled tailplanes (in Trapezoidal shape as well) so that tailplanes are not parallel to each other and zagged design at the end of the singtips to reduce sharp corners and angles. TAI literally using the copy-book design which can lead to lower RCS in different frequencies (S Band, X Band, C Band and L Band) like F-22, and unlike Su-57 design which are mainly for X- Band Radar, mainly used in Fighter aircrafts."

*

While the aircraft's aerodynamically stealth characteristics have taken a lot from the F-22, which has proven itself in this field, on the avionics side, it seems to be highly influenced by both the Russian school and the JSF's sensor fusion.
 
Last edited:
. . .
Back
Top Bottom