Their weights are similar but PT-6 generates more than 4x the power than the PD-170. As a prototype engine it's fine but we really need to step it up here. Turboprops should be simpler than turbofan engines after all.
It was not my point. It is possible to mount PT-6 instead of PD-170 especially after TAI starts using stronger wings on Anka-Aksungur. 550hp version of PT-6 might be a better fit. Aksungur is a big UAV and will be able to carry enough payload to high altitudes with PT-6 engines. PT-6 also produces enough electricity to power on-board systems and possible payloads but still, there might be other requirements we don't know like maybe it can't carry a specific payload for whatever reason maybe it is too slow (maybe it is required to be as fast as 350knots at sea level) due to its big wings etc. In the end, there are decisions and trade-offs to make.
Why to obstruct ? Akinci is in sky and most of use of flir is toward the land so there is no obstruct unless akinci use its flir to film another plane just in front of himI have question regarding the Akinci. WHen having payload under the fuselage, wouldn't it obstruct the forward view of the flir? I am not sure forward view is important or not on UAV.
Well for the situational awareness for such scenario below. Yes it will have radar but still maybe some visuals are also better to have.
SO there is a camera on tail. Didn't know that.
A CCD and thermal camera are on the tail, just like with current versions of Kizilelma, Akinci, TB2 and TB3.
Again, Nope. At best we will see a take off in 2024, no landing. Only if Baykar proves the concept at the land.
Again we will see but don't be surprised if you see TB3 taking off and landing on TCG Anadolu in 2024.
We will see it in 2024, i am tagging this post to be checked in 2024 May.
What will be different as normally?
