TR HÜRJET-Advanced Jet Trainer/ Light attack aircraft

[No Name]

They most likely can. How far in the future is the real and limiting question.

The way TEI talks about the TF-6000 engine is that they can use it to make a more powerful engine just by upscaling it. so my question is if it is possible to do that in order to rapidly create an engine for Hurjet or is TEI just oversimplifying things and downplaying the difficulty?

 

[Zafer]

They first need to verify the technologies used in the TF6000 and they can move on to building the next engine up the power scale. They can probably go ahead and start building for Hürjet right now but when setbacks happen it effects all builds in the works. So ideally this should be made sequentally rather than in parallel. But if you want to throw more money at it you can very well build all the engines planned simultaneously.

 

[Fairon]

The way TEI talks about the TF-6000 engine is that they can use it to make a more powerful engine just by upscaling it. so my question is if it is possible to do that in order to rapidly create an engine for Hurjet or is TEI just oversimplifying things and downplaying the difficulty?

When will they deliver the TF-6000? They delivered TS1400 for tests at December 2020 and the engine is still not in use yet.(Due to tests process is taking time and I belive they are doing the tests as fast as they could)

For TEI's claims, unfortunately I don't have necessary information to answer wheter they are oversimplifying or not. All I know is usually upscaling and downscaling processess are not as simple as they sound.

 

[dBSPL]

The Hürjet will definitely need more powerful engines for its transformation into a multi-role fighter jet. There is one official information we know, and that is that a preliminary study is being conducted for the Naval fighter jet version of the Hürjet. I think there is an evaluation of a lighter attack jet that will have a cheaper production cost than the MMU. And this jet will probably be a jet similar to the Gripen concept, which can operate from short and raw runways, and this jet will also be structurally navalized.

There are two possibilities, one of which is to move towards a single-engine MMU design after the current configuration of the MMU becomes operational. The other is to change the engine design of the current Hurjet and expand its wing area to become a 4.5++ fighter jet with a 30,000 lb engine. The first would be a stealth design philosophy while latter an operationally cost-effective approach. The second way could enable the Hurjet project team to stay on their track for a longer future.

In any case, I personally don't think the force would prefer a jet with 17,000 lb thrust and 2700 kg ammunition capacity, as combatant platform. Anyway, unmanned jets with this lift capacity and even mission profile (altitude/speed) will be offered to the service of the force within a foreseeable range.

 

[Rodeo]

On today's news, Temel Kotil has reiterated the date March 18th for the first flight of HÜRJET. The program has suffered no delay according to this most recent statement.

 

[Boz]

 

[Combat-Master]

View attachment 53538

Keep it up, great comparison!

 

[Tsenal]

View attachment 53538

Nice comparison. I shared it on Reddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarplanePorn/comments/10tcpy0

 

[Zafer]

As Temel Kotil keeps saying because the Hürjet is the latest to the scene it sports the latest concepts. Though Americans made their trainer a twin stabilizer model to match their twin stabilizer fighters most of the world will keep their single stabilizer planes for many more decades.

 

[Zafer]

I wish TAI move on to working on the LCA model without spending too much time on the trainer model.

 

[MADDOG]

Hürjet really looks cool here...

 

[Baryshx]

View attachment 53538

Does anyone have any thoughts on the difference in landing gear and their position? Pros or cons?

 

[Gary]

Does anyone have any thoughts on the difference in landing gear and their position? Pros or cons?

All 3 are tricycle

 

[Turan]

All 3 are tricycle

Thanks, very informative post

 

[Ripley]

Does anyone have any thoughts on the difference in landing gear and their position? Pros or cons?

Was gonna ask the same question myself

While T50 and T7 designed on center lined main landing gears similar to F16 and old F104, on Hurjet they preferred the main landing gears beneath the wing roots.
The only main gain I can think of is Hurjet’s prospective ability to carry centerline pods and even ammunition.
On structural strength and weaknesses, experts here can do a better assessment.

Saying that, however, can’t help but notice the resemblance between Hurjet’s and F14’s main landing gear design. *wink wink.

 

[Sanchez]

Thinking about the jets Hürjet hopefully will train its pilots for, tricycle design is similar to that of F-16. But, same job is currently done by the T-38 with its more traditional landing gear, which is similar to that of Hürjet. One would think that the traditional design is more stable during landings, remembering the BF-109 from WW2?

 

[Zafer]

Mind you, carrier landing capability is also being considered for Hürjet.

 

[Jacop]

Thinking about the jets Hürjet hopefully will train its pilots for, tricycle design is similar to that of F-16. But, same job is currently done by the T-38 with its more traditional landing gear, which is similar to that of Hürjet. One would think that the traditional design is more stable during landings, remembering the BF-109 from WW2?

More balanced and more safe for trainer pilots. also if im not wrong tricycle design was related to speed for thinner wings

 

[Ripley]

Mind you, carrier landing capability is also being considered for Hürjet.

Actually I tried to hint out the main landing gear (mlg) they chose for the plane Regarding this probabiliTy. It highly resembles the F14’s mlg design which is a strong, rugged one that would endure CV operations. Therefore, I assumed that TAI already designed the plane carrier operations in mind.
Will this be the final naval version, if there’ll ever be a one? I doubt it but the mlg design they chose just might be a clue.
Again, though, don’t quote me on this one. Was just thinking.

 

[Sanchez]

Front landing gear disagrees with you.

I fail to see how it's also designed for carrier ops, as there are no carrier designs for it to land yet. This is made by TAI's own resources. Their goal is to create a LIFT trainer for hvkk and even that is not yet guaranteed. Let's not get that ahead of ourselves.

If Hürjet becomes a reality and an N version is in the works, it'll be buffed up heavily in structural integrity and MTOW will increase. Probably will need 2 engines or a bigger one. As it currently stands with the F404, not worth to have her on a carrier, what good will it do?