TR HÜRJET-Advanced Jet Trainer/ Light attack aircraft

[boredaf]

There were two designs once that we were contemplating about:

View attachment 69370
View attachment 69372
It is a shame that the second one with single engine version was chosen.
Otherwise we wouldn’t be too far away from having indigenous engines for our trainer/light attack aircraft now. Two TF10000 engines would have been ideal for this plane. OK! It would have been more expensive to build and maintain, albeit marginally. But also we wouldn’t be in an engineless position now. At least in a few years from now we should be able to provide TF10000 engines.

Besides it would have been ideal for our carrier based operations too. (Apart from vertical take off and landing planes like F35Bs, Harriers and F35Cs, all carrier operated fighters are twin engined. Even the Indians are going for the twin engined Tejas for their carriers.)

Having chosen the single engined Hurjet for trainers doesn’t stop us going for a twin engined and modified version, with better stealth characteristics, so that it portrays a lower RCS as well.
For light attack and carrier based operations it could be a no brainer to build a twin engined Hurjet-2 which would give us a basis of commonality of production of parts and a cheap twin engined higher thrust, longer operational radius plane with better payload capabilities. (it is most likely that a good deal more thrust is going to be attained from the TF10K engine.)

In time it could prove to be the more economical replacement of our f16s with a stealthy twin engined new Hurjet version 2. After all there isn’t such a big difference between those two in terms of size!

View attachment 69373

Food for thought.

While I am not expert I also suggested we might built something that would be capable enough and cheaper than KAAN. KAAN will be a capable fighter, but for sure more expensive to maintain and operate.

I think it might make sense if we built something that would be considered Gen 4.5 with some stealth characteristics. We know that low observability and sensor package carry a significant importance in today's air warfare. We will be talking about a decent capability in BVR engagements in A2A role and also a good capability in A2G, especially if we can introduce a loyal wingman in combination with a supersonic drones that would act as additional, mobile munition racks that would be commanded by the Hurjet II. As you suggested it may evolve into a carrier based fighter and a potent future stealth solution for a replacement for the F-16s. I mean why not? We are going to acquire an aircraft carrier so we will have to figure out what are we going to put on it. I am a bit concerned by the fact that we don't have an alternative to an eventual F-35B or F35C option.

I remember that in the opening of the Operation Olive Branch 72 F-16s operated in the same time in the air. Yes, the exact number had a symbolic importance at that time, but still that's a lot of fighters in the same time. Imagine a Hurjet II commanding a 2-3 or maybe more loyal wingmen, configured according to the specific need of the operation. They may be tasked with ISR, EW, A2G, A2A payloads and countless combinations of these. The need for so many manned jets in the air will be gone and we would also optimize the whole communication process by eliminating ground stations role and will free a capacity in terms of drone operators by giving the command to the Hurjet II's second pilot that will be acting as a mission support platforms commander.

We can built a good number of them for the lighter tasks in terms of capability requirements, that would supplement perfectly the already big drone fleet we built and we are continuing to improve upon, build KAAN in smaller numbers for when higher capability is needed in accordance to our economy strength.

The Hurjet II would also have an export potential as I am not aware of something that would fit in the specs as "stealth, low cost, 4.5 Gen" fighter. it may be the perfect option for economically weaker countries that may want to posses a capability not very far from the 5th and 6th Generation platforms in the future at a fraction of the cost. If I am wrong, correct me please, but I think the fact that it would be a stealth fighter by itself is a huge leap in terms of capabilities compared to all the current 4-4.5 Geneneration operational fighters. Just combine it with the future proof avionics and the capable sensor package and munitions that we are capable of producing and you got the perfect solution, at least for me, based on my non-expert look at the situation.

I'd argue that we would be better off with designing and producing a 1 engine smaller Kaan rather than 2 engine Hürjet. As capable as it might be, I don't see Hürjet as an effective solution for an aircraft carrier in any way. We are going to have a proper ac in late 2030s at earliest and more likely in 2040s, there is no way a 4th gen plane can still operate safely in 10-15 to 20 ears time.

 

[Saithan]

I think most turks would be happy to have our own jet that flies and can drop same armament as F4 and F16…. Even if it’s only 4-4.5gen

 

[Yasar_TR]

I'd argue that we would be better off with designing and producing a 1 engine smaller Kaan rather than 2 engine Hürjet. As capable as it might be, I don't see Hürjet as an effective solution for an aircraft carrier in any way. We are going to have a proper ac in late 2030s at earliest and more likely in 2040s, there is no way a 4th gen plane can still operate safely in 10-15 to 20 ears time.

I understand and to a degree not rejecting the idea of a single engined sister plane to KAAN.

But let us look at the current situation and contemplate with the bird in hand rather than the ones in the bush. We still don’t have a concrete physical presence of that indigenous engine that may power that single engined plane. Yet we have a TF6K that is working and being readied for prototype production. Also a single engined KAAN will not be cheap.

Smaller diameter engines are easier and cheaper to produce. Our TF6K engine is being designed as a stealthy engine and the size of it makes it more feasible to be upgraded to a level that is close to double the thrust levels than what TEI has been advertising. I remember reading about the grapevine news that already at this early stages it is developing 6700+lbf thrust levels. That sort of thrust from two engines are actually similar to what a single GE-F414 engine develops. That one engine propels Gripen-E to 2Mach speed with a usable payload of 7200kg, MTOW of 16500kg and a combat range of 810Nmiles.
It would be more economical and clever to employ a Stealthy Hurjet with twin engines from a carrier whereby we know we can build that plane and don’t have any outer force hampering our engine choice. Per hour cost of a plane like that will be cheaper than a KAAN, no matter how economically you produce that baby KAAN.
In an ideal world a single engined KAAN sounds good. But today we have a flying Hurjet in hand and a working engine that will be available within a couple of years.

Just to put a close perspective to twin engined Hurjet’s use; If I remember correctly, Sweden’s Gripen-E is fully navalised against salt water corrosion and as a delta wing design is inherently stealthy. Plus thanks to Akaer, who were also responsible for Hurjet’s airframe design, is an extremely manoeuvrable plane. It can take off land on short runways.

 

[uçuyorum]

"Stealthy twin engine hürjet" is not hürjet and the airframe would have 0 common parts with the hürjet. Better just make twin engine KE or Anka 3

 

[Quasar]

Glad that Hürjet exists and the nobel thing about TAI is nobody asked for Hürjet it was TAI's own decision to manufacture it. Glad they did Otherwise we could not have all these disccusions... twin engine Hürjet .... navalized Hürjet .... Hürjet for AC... an aircraft nobdy asked for become the savior

 

[Yasar_TR]

"Stealthy twin engine hürjet" is not hürjet and the airframe would have 0 common parts with the hürjet. Better just make twin engine KE or Anka 3

A lot of parts could be designed to be common. Airframe design has to be addressed. Probably more of a delta wing construction will have to be applied.
Parts of fuselage, interiors and avionics can be common. A stealth Hurjet doesn’t have to be as stealthy as KAAN or F35. A compromised design that will give good stealth characteristics with a solid design that will not detract too much from original Hurjet can be made.
They are going to navalise Hurjet, and alter its airframe anyway. By making it twin engined we may overcome the possible engine handicap and increase the thrust available to facilitate shorter runway usage for take offs.
Just a thought!

 

[Huelague]

Beside from design shape, to be stealthy. What about RAM and paint?

 

[Quasar]

so many question marks...if we gonna go for AC eventually a new aircraft design becomes inevitable almost in all scenarios

1- if USA approves the supply of engine for navalised Hurjet (which definitly needs structural changes anyway) for our AC, inherit limitations of Hürjet should be compensated with UAVs like KIZILELMA, ANKAIII, TB 3 ....and hard to say that Hürjet will be the primary asset of AC in this case

2- A twin engine (enhanced TF 6000-10000) aircraft design may be not necesarly a Hürjet variant but an aircraft with inevitable commonalities with HÜRJET and may be KAAN which still destined to be a stop gap solution but which can act as the primary asset of the AC untill the arrival of a real 5 gen AC based naval aircraft

3- Navalised KAAN

 

[boredaf]

I understand and to a degree not rejecting the idea of a single engined sister plane to KAAN.

But let us look at the current situation and contemplate with the bird in hand rather than the ones in the bush. We still don’t have a concrete physical presence of that indigenous engine that may power that single engined plane. Yet we have a TF6K that is working and being readied for prototype production. Also a single engined KAAN will not be cheap.

Smaller diameter engines are easier and cheaper to produce. Our TF6K engine is being designed as a stealthy engine and the size of it makes it more feasible to be upgraded to a level that is close to double the thrust levels than what TEI has been advertising. I remember reading about the grapevine news that already at this early stages it is developing 6700+lbf thrust levels. That sort of thrust from two engines are actually similar to what a single GE-F414 engine develops. That one engine propels Gripen-E to 2Mach speed with a usable payload of 7200kg, MTOW of 16500kg and a combat range of 810Nmiles.
It would be more economical and clever to employ a Stealthy Hurjet with twin engines from a carrier whereby we know we can build that plane and don’t have any outer force hampering our engine choice. Per hour cost of a plane like that will be cheaper than a KAAN, no matter how economically you produce that baby KAAN.
In an ideal world a single engined KAAN sounds good. But today we have a flying Hurjet in hand and a working engine that will be available within a couple of years.

Just to put a close perspective to twin engined Hurjet’s use; If I remember correctly, Sweden’s Gripen-E is fully navalised against salt water corrosion and as a delta wing design is inherently stealthy. Plus thanks to Akaer, who were also responsible for Hurjet’s airframe design, is an extremely manoeuvrable plane. It can take off land on short runways.

But Hürjet is nothing like Gripen, in fact, it is even inferior to Korean T-50 in terms of payload despite using the same engine. Comparing Hürjet to Gripen, even its first iteration is an insult to Gripen and unfair to Hürjet.

And come on mate, GE-F414 has something like 20k thrust with afterburners and over 10k without iirc, while we are talking about 10k thrust with afterburners (6k dry) with TF10k. Even Gripen's RR engine was more powerful than TF10k is supposed to be. I know you're talking about a twin engined Hürjet but you should know better than me that you can't just slap a second engine on an existing design and call it a day. TAI would have to design that almost from scratch and it would have to go through every phase all over again.

And you keep saying stealthy Hürjet but geometry of a plane is a giant part of its stealth capabilities. Hürjet is not stealthy. At all. Sure we can slap a coat of radar absorbing paint on it and load it up with sensors and countermeasures and increase its survival chances, but it isn't going to change the fact that it has to carry whatever payload it has on its wings and it'll light up on a radar no matter what you try and it doesn't even have the little advantage of the delta wing.

We don't have a twin engine jet in hand mate, it is as far out in the bush as single engine Kaan might be. And I would much rather we work on something that actually has a chance to work in the future than waste precious time and resources trying to turn a 4th gen trainer jet into something it has no business being in the first place.

Who gives a flying fuck about how cheap it is to produce or fly, we are talking about putting a jet on an aircraft carrier that is going to cost a billion or two here. What is the point of having an aircraft carrier if you're going to half-arse the jet you are going to put on it?

 

[YeşilVatan]

To me, a mini-KAAN would be more fitting for our carrier needs. It needs to be stealthy and able to work with loyal wingmen. I don't believe payload is that much of an issue to be honest. We will have KE to do the heavy lifting. Survivability and being a network node will be the main selling points here. It just needs to carry enough boom-boom for 'self defence' so to speak. Sortie generation would be a more serious concern I think.

But it seems navalized Hürjet will become reality in the future. I just hope it can carry much more than what this iteration of Hürjet can.

 

[Yasar_TR]

And come on mate, GE-F414 has something like 20k thrust with afterburners and over 10k without iirc, while we are talking about 10k thrust with afterburners (6k dry) with TF10k.

Pls check again. GE-F414 in Gripen develops 13000lbf dry and 22000lbf wet thrust.

Performance​

• Maximum thrust:
• 13,000 lbf (57.8 kN) military thrust
• 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) with afterburner
• Overall pressure ratio: 30:1
• Bypass ratio: 0.25:1

In actual use, twin engines developing 10000lbf and totalling 20000lbf, is worth less than a single engine’s 20000lbf. Twin engines weigh more in total.

If upgraded correctly and furnished with the correct munitions, why shouldn’t our Hurjet be as lethal as a Gripen?

Even Gripen's RR engine was more powerful than TF10k is supposed to be.

What RR engine? Gripen was designed around US’s GE-F404 engine manufactured as Volvo RM12.
Of course it was more powerful. It was developing 12000lbf dry and 18100lbf wet thrust.

TAI would have to design that almost from scratch and it would have to go through every phase all over again.

Of course TAI would have to redesign the plane. Do you think they will not redesign Hurkus when navalising it? Airframe will have to undergo extensive upgrading.

Hürjet is not stealthy. At all.

Open sources put TA-50 and similar trainers at the similar RCS rating as F16. Hurjet needs to have a delta wing if it is to take off from short carrier runways without any hitches. Increasing wing area and forming a delta wing will improve lift.
If it is to be carrier operated it has to go through a lot of changes. It can be made stealthier.

We don't have a twin engine jet in hand

If you have a twin engined KAAN then you have a twin engined plane.
Hurjet was also designed to have two engines at the beginning. But a single engined model was chosen.
It is easier to use two small engines on a Hurjet than having to develop a single engine for a KAAN.
OK! The single engined KAAN will have to be smaller; which is worse. That means all parameters of current KAAN will have to be changed.

Your last paragraph is a controversial point. But cost does matter. Indians have been offered 26 navalised Rafale’s for 8 billion dollars. That dwarfs our 4 to 5 billion dollar carrier cost. That most probably takes in to account ammo, training, spares etc.
The trick here is to find the right balance to be effective. Baykar‘s TB2 when first became famous was so small and slow that it was very stealthy. It was cheap and didn’t carry a lot of ammo. But caused mayhem within Russian armour. Cheap annd small isn’t always bad.

We are discussing to find what is best for our Navy and airforce here. We don’t need to agree on every point. Your view point and mine can be very different.
And it is good that they are different. This way we may discover different ideas and find solutions to questions in our minds.
It is up to the Naval and Airforce command and their technical experts to decide which direction to go. But we can use our imagination about solving some of the dilemmas that our Navy and Airforce is faced with within the scope of limited information we have.

 

[Bogeyman]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811285560931090891

HÜRJET successfully completed its 79th sortie and reached a speed of Mach 0.9 at an altitude of 30,000 feet.

 

[I_Love_F16]

I kind of agree with @boredaf here. If we want something that would be carrier capable, wouldn’t it be better to develop something that would pack a punch instead ? Would it be worth all the trouble to navalized the Hurjet knowing that it’s payload capability is limited ?

Or like @Yasar_TR said, redesigning the Hurjet to have a delta wing, and putting two TF-10000 on it. That would result in a nice increase of the payload capability, and maybe it will be sufficient enough for the navy ?

 

[uçuyorum]

I kind of agree with @boredaf here. If we want something that would be carrier capable, wouldn’t it be better to develop something that would pack a punch instead ? Would it be worth all the trouble to navalized the Hurjet knowing that it’s payload capability is limited ?

Or like @Yasar_TR said, redesigning the Hurjet to have a delta wing, and putting two TF-10000 on it. That would result in a nice increase of the payload capability, and maybe it will be sufficient enough for the navy ?

Using same F404 hürjet to make naval trainer and LCA and then going for something single engine using a TF35000 towards 2050 makes more sense to me. Using hürjet as a stepping stone. Then that single fighter jet can also be used to replace aging F16s and serve alongside KAAN, as well as being more export friendly.(a bit like reverse of F18)

 

[zio]

Hürjet’s role has been well described there is no intention to push it,but it can be finished earlier than kaan,so we use this platform to test avionics,radar,etc.Guys aselsan did not described electronic support/war suite yet,and there is no progress on towed or expendible ew decoys.Özgür project brings to where we are at the moment and hürjet gives further improvement.

 

[I_Love_F16]

Using same F404 hürjet to make naval trainer and LCA and then going for something single engine using a TF35000 towards 2050 makes more sense to me. Using hürjet as a stepping stone. Then that single fighter jet can also be used to replace aging F16s and serve alongside KAAN, as well as being more export friendly.(a bit like reverse of F18)

Personally I don’t find the idea of a single engined plane that will be carrier capable good to me. A two engined plane would be more appropriate. If you have only one engine and it breaks in flight you have no chance to land back.

 

[Zafer]

Personally I don’t find the idea of a single engined plane that will be carrier capable good to me. A two engined plane would be more appropriate. If you have only one engine and it breaks in flight you have no chance to land back.

If you can make a single engine with enough reliability you can do with one engine, but twin engine also gives more range with just one engine development cost.

 

[I_Love_F16]

If you can make a single engine with enough reliability you can do with one engine, but twin engine also gives more range with just one engine development cost.

Yes but it’s not just about the reliability. Failures can and does happen, even with reliable engines. That’s why dual engines are preferable.

 

[Miskin]

Personally I don’t find the idea of a single engined plane that will be carrier capable good to me. A two engined plane would be more appropriate. If you have only one engine and it breaks in flight you have no chance to land back.

I think we need carrier capable Hurjet for training in naval aviation regardless of ultimate decision which plane will be deployed on the carrier.

 

[zio]

F-35? carrier version
is single engine