TR TF-X KAAN Fighter Jet

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,247
Reactions
141 16,265
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Pulsejet ? Isn't that tech a bit less mature to be utilised on a plane directly
I thought rotating detonation engine was the culmination of all the developments made after the pulse detonation engine. Where as there are certain shortcomings of a pulse detonation engine, there are various advantages with a rotating detonation engine. Apparently the beauty of the rotating detonation engine is that theoretically, it can be enlarged in scale, or downsized if and when needed, without detriment to it’s efficiency, unlike a pulse detonation engine.
In a rotating detonation engine, because detonations create extreme pressures, it is possible to design them without an additional compressor that's often usually required. But , not only are compressors are complex, but their operation generally uses a lot of energy, too. However, adding a compressor to a detonation engine actually makes it even more efficient. This compatibility makes it easier to retrofit gas-turbine engine vehicles to be used with detonation engine technology.
So the scope of development and use of rotating detonation engines are there waiting to be exploited.
 

Lonewolf

Contributor
Messages
511
Reactions
297
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
I thought rotating detonation engine was the culmination of all the developments made after the pulse detonation engine. Where as there are certain shortcomings of a pulse detonation engine, there are various advantages with a rotating detonation engine. Apparently the beauty of the rotating detonation engine is that theoretically, it can be enlarged in scale, or downsized if and when needed, without detriment to it’s efficiency, unlike a pulse detonation engine.
In a rotating detonation engine, because detonations create extreme pressures, it is possible to design them without an additional compressor that's often usually required. But , not only are compressors are complex, but their operation generally uses a lot of energy, too. However, adding a compressor to a detonation engine actually makes it even more efficient. This compatibility makes it easier to retrofit gas-turbine engine vehicles to be used with detonation engine technology.
So the scope of development and use of rotating detonation engines are there waiting to be exploited.
On a flight certified human rated vehicle they are too far in future , for missile , drones they will be seen before 2030
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,761
Reactions
119 19,783
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
I thought rotating detonation engine was the culmination of all the developments made after the pulse detonation engine. Where as there are certain shortcomings of a pulse detonation engine, there are various advantages with a rotating detonation engine. Apparently the beauty of the rotating detonation engine is that theoretically, it can be enlarged in scale, or downsized if and when needed, without detriment to it’s efficiency, unlike a pulse detonation engine.
In a rotating detonation engine, because detonations create extreme pressures, it is possible to design them without an additional compressor that's often usually required. But , not only are compressors are complex, but their operation generally uses a lot of energy, too. However, adding a compressor to a detonation engine actually makes it even more efficient. This compatibility makes it easier to retrofit gas-turbine engine vehicles to be used with detonation engine technology.
So the scope of development and use of rotating detonation engines are there waiting to be exploited.

Yes the main issue right now with RDE is sustaining the (micro array) detonation and the macro-combustion so to speak....that pulse detonation does in much more crude less optimal way.

There are material and some practical limits constraining rotational approach given the impulse of time involved.

Conceptually the issue is quite similar to scramjet impulse intensity issues as well.

i.e you have only so much time to exert and achieve a result with the "block" of air being heated and expanded/accelerated to produce thrust....compared to conventional macro-approach systems (traditional Internal combustion cycles).

We will need many more fundamental micro and nano structural breakthroughs here compared to the latter.

The stochiometric buffer available by the fuel and (working fluid) air mixture remains very broad to harness.... but of course the issues lie with the thermodynamic realities of the working fluid that need smaller scale resolution with enough reliability achieved at such scale.
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,247
Reactions
141 16,265
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
X-15 chuckles in your direction.
I know of the X15 plane achieving over 2km/sec speed at the edge of space. Launched from a B52 bomber and flown by pilots designated as astronauts, the year I was born. During the record Mach 6.93 flight, the aircraft received thermal structural damage and the covering was severely pitted and charred. Repair was uneconomical and the aircraft was grounded.
just to be pedantic;
I would only call it a manned hypersonic flight, when the plane takes off from ground with a turbofan/turbojet engine that transforms in to a scramjet engine at altitude and flies at 6mach, then reverts back to a turbofan/turbojet when at lower atmosphere.
I don’t think we are too far away for that to become a reality if you consider the advances being made in jet engine technologies in recent years.
Nearly 70 years on and we still have not actually gone over the threshold of technological advances to crack true manned hypersonic flight.
Then there is the hypersonic flight at lower atmosphere. For that the engine and vehicle construction and metallurgical science has to be at such a level that both the cost and durability of materials become acceptable.
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,761
Reactions
119 19,783
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
I know of the X15 plane achieving over 2km/sec speed at the edge of space. Launched from a B52 bomber and flown by pilots designated as astronauts, the year I was born. During the record Mach 6.93 flight, the aircraft received thermal structural damage and the covering was severely pitted and charred. Repair was uneconomical and the aircraft was grounded.
just to be pedantic;
I would only call it a manned hypersonic flight, when the plane takes off from ground with a turbofan/turbojet engine that transforms in to a scramjet engine at altitude and flies at 6mach, then reverts back to a turbofan/turbojet when at lower atmosphere.
I don’t think we are too far away for that to become a reality if you consider the advances being made in jet engine technologies in recent years.
Nearly 70 years on and we still have not actually gone over the threshold of technological advances to crack true manned hypersonic flight.
Then there is the hypersonic flight at lower atmosphere. For that the engine and vehicle construction and metallurgical science has to be at such a level that both the cost and durability of materials become acceptable.

Yah depends on definitions in the end. Obviously the X-15 has limited direct applicability to what we generally consider a "fighter plane" today.

But it was part of an ecosystem of thinking in early cold war about the "mothership" approach.... which would ultimately see greatest fruition in (what would later change course and become the XB-70...and then terminate due to various economies of scale involved w.r.t emerging missile + sensoring along with the XB-70 major accident that doomed it's evolution into anything else).

In that mothership approach, there was plenty of scope for potentially hypersonic manned fighter "modules/payloads" to take shape.

Who knows, one day it may see viable re-emergence....but they are unlikely to be manned as you have noted in earlier posts. There's just too much needed to be invested in keeping a pilot alive and functional compared to any benefit by having him compared to onboard AI only.

In fact with wingman drone concept etc the mothership concept is already taking new shape (at our current juncture of subsonic and supersonic etc)....so it will definitely be applied and scaled relevantly in the hypersonic realm as we unlock more of that with time.

How the "macro" evolves optimally in that remains to be see w.r.t is it more optimal to have a large mothership with drone payloads (that can go hypersonic)....

....or do you develop + have a complete system that is fully capable of all regimes. i.e a modern day blackbird with scramjet regime unlocked (by core bypass) this time instead of essentially ramjet back then.

Both may have their roles/places in an aerial doctrine.
 

Quasar

Contributor
The Post Deleter
Messages
734
Reactions
51 3,280
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
according to the report from "patenteffect.com" website. TUSAŞ became the champion of Turkey in the first quarter of 2022 in International Patent Applications made to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).

As of 2022, 175 national and 87 international applications have been made

- there are patent applications for the air data computer, flight computer, navigation systems and landing systems used in ANKA, there are also patent applications for the thermal trace increasing system used in ŞİMŞEK, flight control mechanisms in HÜRKUŞ and HÜRJET aircraft.

-there are patents on nanomaterials, composites and additive manufacturing methods to produce aircraft structural parts.

C4DEFENCE
 
Last edited:

Ryder

Experienced member
Messages
10,857
Reactions
6 18,707
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Turkey
If these rumours are true, I really hope that the Tempest is already planned to be hypersonic. Both the USA and China will have hypersonic 6th gen fighters.

I wonder how this would be approached. Variable cycle engines combined with ramjets? Perhaps rotating detonation engines? A really interesting period is coming for military aviation.

Does Hypersonic mean it can travel in space too?
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,247
Reactions
141 16,265
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Does Hypersonic mean it can travel in space too?
No! Absolutely no!
These are aircrafts that will use air breathing ramjet/scramjet engine combinations. They need to take in oxygen from the atmosphere.
Hypersonic means an aircraft travelling over 5 times the speed of sound. Hence 5 Mach + .
A lot of ICBMs and satellite carrying rockets travel at over this speed. So they are hypersonic. But they have oxygen tanks to allow them to burn the fuel in space.
 
Last edited:

Ryder

Experienced member
Messages
10,857
Reactions
6 18,707
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Turkey
No! Absolutely no!
These are aircrafts that will use air breathing ramjet/scramjet engine combinations. They need to take in oxygen from the atmosphere.
Hypersonic means an aircraft travelling over 5 times the speed of sound. Hence 5 Mach + .
A lot of ICBMs and satellite carrying rockets travel at over this speed. So they are hypersonic. But they have oxygen tanks to allow them to burn the fuel in space.

Okay understood.
 

Khagan1923

Contributor
Messages
981
Reactions
14 4,180
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
No need to over complicate things.

The two major things I want from the UK are 1. RR help for the TF-X Engine and 2. Industrial participation in the Tempest program to gain know-how.

We don't have a need for outdated second aircrafts which can't be modernized to a modern standard.
 

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
4,683
Reactions
7 7,389
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
It is pretty much certain that we can make jet fighters we are only counting months to see our planes built so we need to focus our efforts on engine development.
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
EJ200 is not suitable for TFx

Even the up-powered engine doesn't meet TFx requirements
1652616441709.png
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,247
Reactions
141 16,265
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Even the up-powered engine doesn't meet TFx requirements
View attachment 43942
Exactly!
The engine, that will give acceptable high super-cruise capability and supply enough power for electrical parts without detracting from performance as well as being able to propel an aircraft the size of TFX , needs to be 34-36000lbf class.
 

Brokengineer

Committed member
Messages
239
Reactions
1 480
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I for my part am totally against 4th generation foreign fighter jets, be it Eurofighter or anything else.

Put all on our own Hurjet figther.
After Hurjet one can even decide for twin engine Hurjet (= practically equivalent of Eurofighter), but better is to concentrate on unmanned fighters

and continue on the TFx fully committed, every penny spend on foreign fighter jets is a waste (I am even against 40 new F16 blk 70, just take the 80 upgrade kits)
We do not know how long would it take to gain full independence on producton of tfx or hurjet.
As long as there is a technology transfer, joint production or a cost effective solution like modernisation kits or new f16s (that we are very capable of its maintainance, logistics and production), i am okay.
 
Last edited:

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
4,683
Reactions
7 7,389
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Developing ,testing and manufacturing a fighter jet is a decade long process. If u want to maintain parity then import is the only option.
Once you have developed a successful fighter the next development will take like half the time.
US for one has brought down the development cycle to less than 5 years.
It also is a different story when you are developing a ground breaking fighter and a common fighter.
Türkiye has also nearly completed the development of all components of a fighter except for the engine.
We are already way into the development, counting months to roll out.
 

fire starter

Well-known member
Messages
314
Reactions
3 441
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
Once you have developed a successful fighter the next development will take like half the time.
US for one has brought down the development cycle to less than 5 years.
It also is a different story when you are developing a ground breaking fighter and a common fighter.
Türkiye has also nearly completed the development of all components of a fighter except for the engine.
We are already way into the development, counting months to roll out.
Sure you can develop Or import LRUs but designing is a big challenge especially when you have no prior experience.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom