TR HÜRJET-Advanced Jet Trainer/ Light attack aircraft

[TheInsider]

Neither did the WW2 carriers. QE2 carrier has two parallel runways. Angled runways are there for landing and missing the arrester and re taking off while another plane is taking off.
Second runway is necessary if you are employing large number of aircrafts off of a carrier and you need to have simultaneous landings and take offs.
You don’t really need a second runway if you are going to have 6-12 planes. They can take turns in landing and take off. It is a slower process but nevertheless possible. Airports with single runways operate perfectly well. re: Gatwick?? planes wait for their turn to either land or take off!

TCG Anadolu landing strip is shorter compared to carriers. The aerodynamics of the WW2 fighters are completely different than today so comparing WW2 carriers with TCG Anadolu is comparing apples with oranges. QE2 has a longer landing strip even though it is mainly designed for F-35B STOVL version("short take-off" vertical landing). It is in the realm of possibility but extremely dangerous to operate Hurjet from TCG Anadolu unless a big redesign in both aircraft and the ship happens. Being possible(albeit with redesigns) doesn't mean being plausible.

 

[Yasar_TR]

TCG Anadolu landing strip is shorter compared to carriers. The aerodynamics of the WW2 fighters are completely different than today so comparing WW2 carriers with TCG Anadolu is comparing apples with oranges. QE2 has a longer landing strip even though it is mainly designed for F-35B STOVL version("short take-off" vertical landing). It is in the realm of possibility but extremely dangerous to operate Hurjet from TCG Anadolu unless a big redesign in both aircraft and the ship happens. Being possible(albeit with redesigns) doesn't mean being plausible.

WW2 aircrafts’ truly “apparent to all” aerodynamic properties has nothing to do with the operational “dynamics” of a carrier. No one is comparing WW2 carriers with TCG Anadolu! What I am stressing here is the possibility of landing and take off with a single runway. Please do not pick out a single statement and use it out of context.
I can take out your statement about the “necessity to have angled runway” and give you QE2‘s parallel runways. They were actually built parallel, to allow side by side simultaneous operation of landing and take off of conventional planes should the need arise (with provisions for arrester wires and catapult system positions prepared for easy fitting). The QE2 carrier is built to operate, at least 48 aircrafts. So it needs 2 runways.
A carrier needs 3-4 parallel arresting wires. So with arresting wires a plane like Hurjet can land and come to stop in under 100metres on TCG Anadolu. ( Hal Tejas is similar in size and weight; and can land on INS Vikramaditya in 87m) . Taking off is the tricky part; There is under 200metre runway available. The engine of Hurjet and it’s wing area may need improvement to give it the necessary lift for take off with load.
Finally if Tusas and technical team is contemplating it then it is possible. So no need to say :
“It will be near impossible. Anadolu doesn't have an angled landing strip”

 

[TheInsider]

Ok i accept you convinced me HUrjet can easily be operated from TCG Anadolu.

 

[Zafer]

It will be quite some time before we get a full size carrier therefore our engineers should be expected to push the limits to make Hürjet operate from LHD Anadolu. Somebody should start a bet about this.

 

[Nilgiri]

WW2 aircrafts’ truly “apparent to all” aerodynamic properties has nothing to do with the operational “dynamics” of a carrier. No one is comparing WW2 carriers with TCG Anadolu! What I am stressing here is the possibility of landing and take off with a single runway. Please do not pick out a single statement and use it out of context.
I can take out your statement about the “necessity to have angled runway” and give you QE2‘s parallel runways. They were actually built parallel, to allow side by side simultaneous operation of landing and take off of conventional planes should the need arise (with provisions for arrester wires and catapult system positions prepared for easy fitting). The QE2 carrier is built to operate, at least 48 aircrafts. So it needs 2 runways.
A carrier needs 3-4 parallel arresting wires. So with arresting wires a plane like Hurjet can land and come to stop in under 100metres on TCG Anadolu. ( Hal Tejas is similar in size and weight; and can land on INS Vikramaditya in 87m) . Taking off is the tricky part; There is under 200metre runway available. The engine of Hurjet and it’s wing area may need improvement to give it the necessary lift for take off with load.
Finally if Tusas and technical team is contemplating it then it is possible. So ne need to say :
“It will be near impossible. Anadolu doesn't have an angled landing strip”

Earlier in thread (or another one) we discussed this I believe, didn't we come to conclusion that Turkish Navy is not interested in ripping open the deck to make modifications for the arresting gear etc?

Anyway I fond that earlier convo (replies before and after too):

Naval Programs

ULAQ ASW DSH

defencehub.live

So these mods are being looked at? @anmdt

 

[Yasar_TR]

Earlier in thread (or another one) we discussed this I believe, didn't we come to conclusion that Turkish Navy is not interested in ripping open the deck to make modifications for the arresting gear etc?

Anyway I fond that earlier convo (replies before and after too):

Naval Programs

ULAQ ASW DSH

defencehub.live

So these mods are being looked at? @anmdt

With our navy’s general approach of reluctance of ripping a perfectly good surface to accommodate another platform, may be over ruled here. There are political pressures in play and of course they are trying to get the most out of the LHD. Since F35B is no longer an option, UAV’s and may be even a Hurjet is in the running, in spite of how much they may have to rip and damage.
Naval top brass was very much looking forward to having the F35’s on the LHD’s deck. So much that they were very positive for the sister ship to be built as well. We all know how much protection they give to the ship and how much force projection you can apply at off shore battlefields with planes on board.
So there is a point. There seems to be the will as well. But whether it will be realised or not we will see in the days to come.

 

[Anmdt]

Earlier in thread (or another one) we discussed this I believe, didn't we come to conclusion that Turkish Navy is not interested in ripping open the deck to make modifications for the arresting gear etc?

Anyway I fond that earlier convo (replies before and after too):

Naval Programs

ULAQ ASW DSH

defencehub.live

So these mods are being looked at? @anmdt

I probably won't hear about Hurjet-Naval until they need something specific from the platform.
And Ismail Demir, SSB president has also the indicated the question is not whether to acquire aircraft carrier or not, but which plane is going to operate from that.
So there is definitely a plan for an aircraft carrier in long term beyond 2030, and Hurjet is being considered to operate from that platform.
Anadolu will be an LHD extended with UAV operations, if F-35B ever comes it will be just the bonus.

 

[Anmdt]

WW2 aircrafts’ truly “apparent to all” aerodynamic properties has nothing to do with the operational “dynamics” of a carrier. No one is comparing WW2 carriers with TCG Anadolu! What I am stressing here is the possibility of landing and take off with a single runway. Please do not pick out a single statement and use it out of context.
I can take out your statement about the “necessity to have angled runway” and give you QE2‘s parallel runways. They were actually built parallel, to allow side by side simultaneous operation of landing and take off of conventional planes should the need arise (with provisions for arrester wires and catapult system positions prepared for easy fitting). The QE2 carrier is built to operate, at least 48 aircrafts. So it needs 2 runways.
A carrier needs 3-4 parallel arresting wires. So with arresting wires a plane like Hurjet can land and come to stop in under 100metres on TCG Anadolu. ( Hal Tejas is similar in size and weight; and can land on INS Vikramaditya in 87m) . Taking off is the tricky part; There is under 200metre runway available. The engine of Hurjet and it’s wing area may need improvement to give it the necessary lift for take off with load.
Finally if Tusas and technical team is contemplating it then it is possible. So no need to say :
“It will be near impossible. Anadolu doesn't have an angled landing strip”

It is not about the possibility, it is about feasibility.
Moreover, by the time Hurjet Naval version being matured they can start construction of an aircraft carrier.
WWII ACs were pretty "primal" compared to contemporary ones, with a simple flat -deck and simple wires.
It is not the TAI enginers to rule whether it is possible or not, they would make the plane able to do short-take off and arrest landing and then sit on the side,from that point on technically you can land those on any flat-top with some arrest wires placed in somewhere (if exists).
Admirals or strategical departments will decide whether it is feasible and a force multiplier without a secondary runway
Naval Architects will tell whether modifications are feasible or not.
There isn't much time left, the ship could get into the service and Navy personnel should start playing with her at every detail and master it as quick as possible instead of being kept busy with new modifications, new operations.
LHD operations itself is a force multiplier and they are going to add another factor by operating UAVs from there. That will extend to a point which jet-UAVs will be operated from the platform.

While an aircraft carrier later will be used for manned flights and bigger UAVs, do they have luxury of having 2 large strategic ships? Nope, but there is also no chance of STOVL in near future.

Even if there was a chance of STOVL on Anadolu, Navy was also requesting a new platform dedicated to fixed wings only.

So lets, instead of wasting another billion on TCG Anadolu by modifications and keeping her and her crew idle, spend that money on an AC.

Should i further note Turkish Navy is still lacking an LHD experience, even before than an AC.

 

[Zafer]

Once they find a good way operating Hürjet from Anadolu they may probably want to start building TCG Trakya with the modifications built in a short time. They should finish the LHD duo business once they have started before they can move on to the Carrier. Other than the Hürjet and the TB3 one can expect more of novel aircraft designs to be trialed on these LHDs. Especially electric VTOL varieties like the Aselsan one that has been circulating in the media in its patent application raw form. I would love to see some of the novel designs of the varieties of the Teknofest design competitions types which are pretty novel for Turkey. US Army is doing this under the name Agility Prime taking all kind of flying machines and making plans to use them to facilitate their operations. Like small cargo and people carrier flyers. I can imagine all kinds of small flyers flying around Andolu in a futuristic manner.

 

[Bilal Khan(Quwa)]

I probably won't hear about Hurjet-Naval until they need something specific from the platform.
And Ismail Demir, SSB president has also the indicated the question is not whether to acquire aircraft carrier or not, but which plane is going to operate from that.
So there is definitely a plan for an aircraft carrier in long term beyond 2030, and Hurjet is being considered to operate from that platform.
Anadolu will be an LHD extended with UAV operations, if F-35B ever comes it will be just the bonus.

It is not about the possibility, it is about feasibility.
Moreover, by the time Hurjet Naval version being matured they can start construction of an aircraft carrier.
WWII ACs were pretty "primal" compared to contemporary ones, with a simple flat -deck and simple wires.
It is not the TAI enginers to rule whether it is possible or not, they would make the plane able to do short-take off and arrest landing and then sit on the side,from that point on technically you can land those on any flat-top with some arrest wires placed in somewhere (if exists).
Admirals or strategical departments will decide whether it is feasible and a force multiplier without a secondary runway
Naval Architects will tell whether modifications are feasible or not.
There isn't much time left, the ship could get into the service and Navy personnel should start playing with her at every detail and master it as quick as possible instead of being kept busy with new modifications, new operations.
LHD operations itself is a force multiplier and they are going to add another factor by operating UAVs from there. That will extend to a point which jet-UAVs will be operated from the platform.

While an aircraft carrier later will be used for manned flights and bigger UAVs, do they have luxury of having 2 large strategic ships? Nope, but there is also no chance of STOVL in near future.

Even if there was a chance of STOVL on Anadolu, Navy was also requesting a new platform dedicated to fixed wings only.

So lets, instead of wasting another billion on TCG Anadolu by modifications and keeping her and her crew idle, spend that money on an AC.

Should i further note Turkish Navy is still lacking an LHD experience, even before than an AC.

Once they find a good way operating Hürjet from Anadolu they may probably want to start building TCG Trakya with the modifications built in a short time. They should finish the LHD duo business once they have started before they can move on to the Carrier. Other than the Hürjet and the TB3 one can expect more of novel aircraft designs to be trialed on these LHDs. Especially electric VTOL varieties like the Aselsan one that has been circulating in the media in its patent application raw form. I would love to see some of the novel designs of the varieties of the Teknofest design competitions types which are pretty novel for Turkey. US Army is doing this under the name Agility Prime taking all kind of flying machines and making plans to use them to facilitate their operations. Like small cargo and people carrier flyers. I can imagine all kinds of small flyers flying around Andolu in a futuristic manner.

It bet they're studying the 'Naval Hürjet' as a proof-of-concept like India did with the Naval Tejas. I don't think there's enough space in the Hürjet design or in the GE F404 to effectively enable carrier operations (not without heavy compromises). If anything, Turkey is going to learn a lot about weight management, powerplant and power requirements, and dynamic components (e.g., retractable arrestors) through the Naval Hürjet. @Nilgiri

IMO, ultimately, Turkey will develop a larger carrier fighter (navalized TFX) for a CATOBAR carrier. This is the most feasible route as it'd enable Turkey to re-use lots of the existing work from the TFX. Not only that, but by selecting the GE F110-class engines, the TFX design can handle the additional weight resulting from a carrier ops variant.

OTOH, developing a STOVL aircraft is basically a call to totally duplicate a TFX-type effort. You'd literally have to double everything because a STOVL aircraft would be a completely different design with very different inputs. Even if you can afford it, you'd be better off navalizing the TFX and using the savings to actually design and build the carrier(s).

 

[Nilgiri]

It bet they're studying the 'Naval Hürjet' as a proof-of-concept like India did with the Naval Tejas. I don't think there's enough space in the Hürjet design or in the GE F404 to effectively enable carrier operations (not without heavy compromises). If anything, Turkey is going to learn a lot about weight management, powerplant and power requirements, and dynamic components (e.g., retractable arrestors) through the Naval Hürjet. @Nilgiri

IMO, ultimately, Turkey will develop a larger carrier fighter (navalized TFX) for a CATOBAR carrier. This is the most feasible route as it'd enable Turkey to re-use lots of the existing work from the TFX. Not only that, but by selecting the GE F110-class engines, the TFX design can handle the additional weight resulting from a carrier ops variant.

OTOH, developing a STOVL aircraft is basically a call to totally duplicate a TFX-type effort. You'd literally have to double everything because a STOVL aircraft would be a completely different design with very different inputs. Even if you can afford it, you'd be better off navalizing the TFX and using the savings to actually design and build the carrier(s).

Yes more or less that is the conclusion we reached here....there will be some level of feasibility study w.r.t Hurjet and Anadolu....but basically Turkish Navy is not interested to make such modification to the ship to handle it (since Hurjet is non STOVL and anadolu has STOVL baked in expecting F-35).

Rather a navalised hurjet design will be the ecosystem progenitor downroad for future LHDs and Carriers that are made to handle STOBAR or CATOBAR if such a doctrine (extended blue water power projection) is deemed necessary to Turkey's future needs.

N-LCA or Hurjet size I don't think strictly prevents the role w.r.t a carrier, it would depend on the doctrine developed and assigned w.r.t to rest of the navy assets you have and likeliest operations you envisage.

For a LHD and Turkey Mavi Vatan (mediterranean) priority, I think hurjet-size is fairly optimal (given you get some benefit in having more per carrier vis a vis going for larger range+payload platform), I would not expect it to get much bigger.

Whereas with N-LCA this was a sticky situation given Indian scope w.r.t blue water access in IOR...which definitely counted against N-LCA even though it has good immediate numbers arguably w.r.t Mig 29K (in such things as payload etc)....it is single-engined and there is of course drop in range capability for each payload level. Thus why India started on TEDBF program to compare/contrast with other options (rafale-M, superbug etc) when the fiscal means are more available downroad to equip the IAC and maybe vikramaditya depending how Mig-29K replacement is needed.

W.r.t Turkey, I would imagine what is learned and developed (that is relevant) with TF-X will integrate itself onto Hurjet ecosystem. Whether Turkey has ambition to navalize TF-X at its size (and the very large carrier this will need) remains to be seen....but that I feel is something quite long term as Turkey likely stays to LHD or smaller carriers till they broaden out their navy in the regular warship hull size + subs (And every weapon and sensor that goes with these) that is needed sustainably first for later CBG plans and capacities.

 

[TheInsider]

Yes more or less that is the conclusion we reached here....there will be some level of feasibility study w.r.t Hurjet and Anadolu....but basically Turkish Navy is not interested to make such modification to the ship to handle it (since Hurjet is non STOVL and anadolu has STOVL baked in expecting F-35).

Rather a navalised hurjet design will be the ecosystem progenitor downroad for future LHDs and Carriers that are made to handle STOBAR or CATOBAR if such a doctrine (extended blue water power projection) is deemed necessary to Turkey's future needs.

N-LCA or Hurjet size I don't think strictly prevents the role w.r.t a carrier, it would depend on the doctrine developed and assigned w.r.t to rest of the navy assets you have and likeliest operations you envisage.

For a LHD and Turkey Mavi Vatan (mediterranean) priority, I think hurjet-size is fairly optimal (given you get some benefit in having more per carrier vis a vis going for larger range+payload platform), I would not expect it to get much bigger.

Whereas with N-LCA this was a sticky situation given Indian scope w.r.t blue water access in IOR...which definitely counted against N-LCA even though it has good immediate numbers arguably w.r.t Mig 29K (in such things as payload etc)....it is single-engined and there is of course drop in range capability for each payload level. Thus why India started on TEDBF program to compare/contrast with other options (rafale-M, superbug etc) when the fiscal means are more available downroad to equip the IAC and maybe vikramaditya depending how Mig-29K replacement is needed.

W.r.t Turkey, I would imagine what is learned and developed (that is relevant) with TF-X will integrate itself onto Hurjet ecosystem. Whether Turkey has ambition to navalize TF-X at its size (and the very large carrier this will need) remains to be seen....but that I feel is something quite long term as Turkey likely stays to LHD or smaller carriers till they broaden out their navy in the regular warship hull size + subs (And every weapon and sensor that goes with these) that is needed sustainably first for later CBG plans and capacities.

Turkey plans to use an electromagnetic launching system in its future carrier. Experience gained from railgun projects will play a crucial role in the development of an electromagnetic launching system. An aircraft carrier is planned after 2030 so a long road ahead. Turkey wants a carrier similar to Queen Elizabeth class.

 

[Bilal Khan(Quwa)]

Yes more or less that is the conclusion we reached here....there will be some level of feasibility study w.r.t Hurjet and Anadolu....but basically Turkish Navy is not interested to make such modification to the ship to handle it (since Hurjet is non STOVL and anadolu has STOVL baked in expecting F-35).

Rather a navalised hurjet design will be the ecosystem progenitor downroad for future LHDs and Carriers that are made to handle STOBAR or CATOBAR if such a doctrine (extended blue water power projection) is deemed necessary to Turkey's future needs.

N-LCA or Hurjet size I don't think strictly prevents the role w.r.t a carrier, it would depend on the doctrine developed and assigned w.r.t to rest of the navy assets you have and likeliest operations you envisage.

For a LHD and Turkey Mavi Vatan (mediterranean) priority, I think hurjet-size is fairly optimal (given you get some benefit in having more per carrier vis a vis going for larger range+payload platform), I would not expect it to get much bigger.

Whereas with N-LCA this was a sticky situation given Indian scope w.r.t blue water access in IOR...which definitely counted against N-LCA even though it has good immediate numbers arguably w.r.t Mig 29K (in such things as payload etc)....it is single-engined and there is of course drop in range capability for each payload level. Thus why India started on TEDBF program to compare/contrast with other options (rafale-M, superbug etc) when the fiscal means are more available downroad to equip the IAC and maybe vikramaditya depending how Mig-29K replacement is needed.

W.r.t Turkey, I would imagine what is learned and developed (that is relevant) with TF-X will integrate itself onto Hurjet ecosystem. Whether Turkey has ambition to navalize TF-X at its size (and the very large carrier this will need) remains to be seen....but that I feel is something quite long term as Turkey likely stays to LHD or smaller carriers till they broaden out their navy in the regular warship hull size + subs (And every weapon and sensor that goes with these) that is needed sustainably first for later CBG plans and capacities.

If Turkey brings the Naval Hürjet to fruition (for operability from LHD or LPX-III-sized carriers), then I think the total commoditization of carriers and fixed-wing naval aviation is on. IMHO, countries like Pakistan, Qatar, Morocco, Indonesia, Malaysia, etc, will all ask for it too.

 

[Combat-Master]

TAI HURJET ADVANCED TRAINER
Purpose designed single engine, tandem-seat advanced Jet Trainer Aircraft HÜRJET, fullfills a critical role in modern combat aircraft training through its superior performance characteristics. Combat Variant of HÜRJET provides a battlefield force multiplier through a wide range of mission capabilities and its extensive payload. Its main roles are Advanced Jet Trainer , Lead-in Fighter Trainer , Light Attack (Close Air Support) , Red Aircraft, Air Policing (Armed & Unarmed) , Acro Team Aircraft.

 

[FalconSlayersDFI]

It bet they're studying the 'Naval Hürjet' as a proof-of-concept like India did with the Naval Tejas. I don't think there's enough space in the Hürjet design or in the GE F404 to effectively enable carrier operations (not without heavy compromises). If anything, Turkey is going to learn a lot about weight management, powerplant and power requirements, and dynamic components (e.g., retractable arrestors) through the Naval Hürjet. @Nilgiri

IMO, ultimately, Turkey will develop a larger carrier fighter (navalized TFX) for a CATOBAR carrier. This is the most feasible route as it'd enable Turkey to re-use lots of the existing work from the TFX. Not only that, but by selecting the GE F110-class engines, the TFX design can handle the additional weight resulting from a carrier ops variant.

OTOH, developing a STOVL aircraft is basically a call to totally duplicate a TFX-type effort. You'd literally have to double everything because a STOVL aircraft would be a completely different design with very different inputs. Even if you can afford it, you'd be better off navalizing the TFX and using the savings to actually design and build the carrier(s).

Converting an Airforce aircraft into a naval aircraft is useless, you’ll need dedicated Naval aircrafts. That’s why Naval Tejas are used only for training. While we are developing our own Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter for our Aircraft Carriers.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Converting an Airforce aircraft into a naval aircraft is useless, you’ll need dedicated Naval aircrafts. That’s why Naval Tejas are used only for training. While we are developing our own Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter for our Aircraft Carriers.
View attachment 18679

Is that why US navy and US airforce marine core use F18 Hornets, as well as Canadian Airforce , Finnish airforce, Swiss Airforce, Spanish airforce and Australian airforce, all of whom use f18’s in their Air Force ?
With regards to Hal Tejas; If you check further, you will find that it is because Indian Naval Chiefs wanted a twin engined naval plane. (If one engine falters they want their plane to be able to land).
Yet in fact, there is no proof that the twin engined fighter planes are actually safer! On the contrary in practice more twin engined fighter planes are lost than single engined ones.

 

[Siper>MMU]

Mete Yarar is not a person very trustable.

 

[Zafer]

Mete Yarar is talking about some interesting points.
1. He reckons Aesa Radar is already on F16 and being tested. (4.30+min)
2. An unmanned jet fighter will fly long before TFX. This will be a very capable and very “modern” plane.

These are easy predictions. It is a nobrainer that a precursor to an EASA radar should already have been made and being tested as it has been worked on for quite a while now. Also making a prototype unmanned version of a jet fighter is I bet easier than making a manned one as there will be quite a few elements less than a manned version if you will not enter it in a dogfight.

Still there is probably some more indicators that he has access to in order to make allegations about things that will unfold before too long. In any case, good news.

 

[Combat-Master]

Mete Yarar is not a person very trustable.

He is a an editor on M5 magazine, has done multiple interviews with heads of TAI, TEI, Roketsan and MKEK. He mentioned upgrades and armour packages of Leopard 2A4 being developed before any one got wind of it. His analysis should be respected like any other person. If you do not agree with it, then argue why.

 

[Siper>MMU]

He is a an editor on M5 magazine, has done multiple interviews with heads of TAI, TEI, Roketsan and MKEK. He mentioned upgrades and armour packages of Leopard 2A4 being developed before any one got wind of it.

His knowledge is not different from a standart defence industry researcher.