TR HÜRJET-Advanced Jet Trainer/ Light attack aircraft

[UkroTurk]

There are a lot of rivals of Hürjet . İf TUSAŞ aims export , they should promise more . Stealthy micro trainer and fighter would be great.

 

[dBSPL]

There are a lot of rivals of Hürjet . İf TUSAŞ aims export , they should promise more . Stealthy micro trainer and fighter would be great.

The development of end-to-end and intra-system communication technologies is increasingly unlocking the potential of distributed system architectures. For example, an airplane with a very modest physical payload can now fly with multiple loyal wing drones and use the systems and munitions on them with extremely high efficiency, as if the airplane itself were carrying them. In the operational scheme of a modern air force, complex systems of systems have been operating for decades, but what I am talking about is the development of artificial intelligence, decision support systems and autonomy, and the gradual sub-layering of these systems into micromanagement. If you are strong in avionics and have full access to yours combat flying platforms, with the right system architecture and doctrine, it is possible to increase the deterrence of aircraft with extremely limited physical capabilities to a previously unimaginable extent.

When I look at the Hürjet, I am always excited by the potential I see. It is not only a milestone that paves the way for the Turkish aviation industry to demonstrate that it can compete at international standards and with the most up-to-date systems, but also a project that is advancing with the requirements of an air force with strong main solution partners and high operational standards. Therefore, I am confident that the Hürjet will take part in numerous experimental studies in the coming decades, and that the product family will develop in a very strategic way over time. And maybe the last Hürjet we will see will have nothing in common with the current Hürjet except its name.

 

[Fuzuli NL]

There are unverified rumours about I Sunnetci’s statement regarding Turkey buying some of the unwanted A400M transport planes. (6 out of 7 with Germany getting the other)

There were news that S Korea was offering Spain their trainer aircraft. Spain came back with a counter offer to give them A400Ms at the 15% price of 27million dollars a piece as a swap deal.

South Korea and Spain seek deal to swap trainer jets for airlifters

The deal may involve about 50 basic and advanced trainer jets built by Korea Aerospace Industries, and four to six Airbus A400M airlifters.

www.defensenews.com

Hurjet was offered to the Spanish.
Hurjet was not brought to Farnborough, because it had to go through urgent upgrades.
Now we are hearing that Hurjet is to go to Spain.

2 x 2 = ???

Any thoughts??

Urgent upgrades don't necessarily have to have negative connotation, the urgency maybe making them in time before sending the jet for evaluation by potential customers.

 

[No Name]

I kept saying that Hurjet should have been designed to make it easy to turn it into a cheap, light stealth fighter, sort of like the Su 75, and it looks like the US is also interested in the idea.

yahoo.com air force floats light stealth fighter.

 

[TheInsider]

There is no competition to Hürjet other than T-50 and T-7. T-50 production lines are full and T-7 faces delays. M-346 is not a direct competitor to Hurjet as it is not a supersonic trainer.

I kept saying that Hurjet should have been designed to make it easy to turn it into a cheap, light stealth fighter, sort of like the Su 75, and it looks like the US is also interested in the idea.

yahoo.com air force floats light stealth fighter.

This concept won't materialize as UCAVs will dominate the light stealth fighter segment.

 

[UkroTurk]

I kept saying that Hurjet should have been designed to make it easy to turn it into a cheap, light stealth fighter, sort of like the Su 75, and it looks like the US is also interested in the idea.

yahoo.com air force floats light stealth fighter.

Nice article


Or Kızılelma should be transformed into manned

‘Light Fighter’ Concept Emerges During US Air Force Chief’s Speech at UK's Air and Space Power Association Amid NGAD’s Uncertain Future

Allvin unveiled what the Royal Aeronautical Society has later defined as a ‘notional Light Fighter concept’ while calling for a shift of the next

theaviationist.com

 

[boredaf]

Nice article


Or Kızılelma should be transformed into manned


View attachment 70213
View attachment 70212

‘Light Fighter’ Concept Emerges During US Air Force Chief’s Speech at UK's Air and Space Power Association Amid NGAD’s Uncertain Future

Allvin unveiled what the Royal Aeronautical Society has later defined as a ‘notional Light Fighter concept’ while calling for a shift of the next

theaviationist.com

And lose every single advantage it has? Future is unmanned, there isn't a single reason to turn KE into a manned fighter, an area Baykar has no experience in, and make it bigger (because it isn't just putting a cockpit and a seat, you have to put a lot more equipment) and more expensive and spend years testing it to end up with a plane that has very low payload or much bigger than KE to have a proper payload. KE's advantage is being relatively cheap when compared to other 5th gen fighters (even if it isn't just as capable) and being unmanned it can pull manoeuvres they cannot. There isn't a single logical reason to turn it into a manned system.

 

[dBSPL]

The only thing we need for the Hurjet is an engine with a physical diameter under 90cm and a dry weight under 1200kg, that can generate around 100kN of emergency power with afterburner. To give an exact equivalent example, the F414-GE-39E developed by GE for Gripen. Everything else is ready or at the test level.

If the light attack platform being developed within the scope of the Hürjet project can be shaped around this class of engine, we will have a platform that can continue its development in the direction of whatever is needed, lets say electronic attack, node for drone wings, reco, light/naval attack jet etc., and whose operating costs and logistics system will be extremely advantageous.

Even with a limited payload, short-range and single-engine platform like Gripen; can respond to many needs. Arming the Hürjet with a one level more powerful engine will enable the emergence of a system that is a direct equivalent of the Gripen NG, which can be a very valuable solution in terms of the economy of an air force that also combats both asymmetric threats and facing very near distance threats but needs around / over 300 front line jets in terms of total fleet size.

 

[Huelague]

Nice article


Or Kızılelma should be transformed into manned


View attachment 70213
View attachment 70212

‘Light Fighter’ Concept Emerges During US Air Force Chief’s Speech at UK's Air and Space Power Association Amid NGAD’s Uncertain Future

Allvin unveiled what the Royal Aeronautical Society has later defined as a ‘notional Light Fighter concept’ while calling for a shift of the next

theaviationist.com

Nice idea, a 5. Gen F-16 like.

 

[Yasar_TR]

The only thing we need for the Hurjet is an engine with a physical diameter under 90cm and a dry weight under 1200kg, that can generate around 100kN of emergency power with afterburner. To give an exact equivalent example, the F414-GE-39E developed by GE for Gripen. Everything else is ready or at the test level.

If the light attack platform being developed within the scope of the Hürjet project can be shaped around this class of engine, we will have a platform that can continue its development in the direction of whatever is needed, lets say electronic attack, node for drone wings, reco, light/naval attack jet etc., and whose operating costs and logistics system will be extremely advantageous.

Even with a limited payload, short-range and single-engine platform like Gripen; can respond to many needs. Arming the Hürjet with a one level more powerful engine will enable the emergence of a system that is a direct equivalent of the Gripen NG, which can be a very valuable solution in terms of the economy of an air force that also combats both asymmetric threats and facing very near distance threats but needs around / over 300 front line jets in terms of total fleet size.

I like your enthusiasm. I wish if it were that simple though. What you are suggesting entails substantial changes.
Hürjet was designed and built primarily as a trainer. As a secondary option it may be configured as a light attack aircraft. Due to these constraints, it’s maximum speed, g-force limits and to some extent, it’s payload capacity are lower than the Gripen, especially when compared to the E and F version.

The airframe of new Gripen is quite advanced. Even when it was powered by the F-404 engine it could achieve +9g turns, have 2 Mach top speed and have a higher MTOW. All thanks to the Delta wing construction. It is a true fighter jet that is very manoeuvrable with the canards. In E and F version, the Gripen is a very potent plane.

Hurjet can never be a Gripen, unless we make significant changes to it’s airframe. No engine can turn it in to a Gripen.
Yes, an engine like F414 will make substantial improvements to its MTOW, speed and overall performance. But it is, at the end of the day, still a Hurjet.
As they say in Turkish: “Even with a golden saddle a donkey is a donkey”.

But, still, your post has merits to think about. We can change the nose and fuselage to be stealthy, alter the shape of air inlets, introduce a delta wing and make the airframe more suitable for air combat and higher speed. Then that plane is not really Hurjet though.
In fact, then, the F414 will be the handicap for that plane. We will need 2 x TF12000 engines (8000lbf dry and 12000lbf wet thrust version of TF10000engine) to give us our stealth twin engined “lightish” fighter jet. When navalised, it would be the right plane for operation from our future carrier.

 

[boredaf]

But, still, your post has merits to think about. We can change the nose and fuselage to be stealthy, alter the shape of air inlets, introduce a delta wing and make the airframe more suitable for air combat and higher speed. Then that plane is not really Hurjet though.
In fact, then, the F414 will be the handicap for that plane. We will need 2 x TF12000 engines (8000lbf dry and 12000lbf wet thrust version of TF10000engine) to give us our stealth twin engined “lightish” fighter jet. When navalised, it would be the right plane for operation from our future carrier.

But if we're going to go through all that trouble of virtually designing a whole new plane from scratch, wouldn't we be better off with 1 TF35K power lighter version of Kaan? That would be worth the trouble much more than a modified Hürjet as it would be a proper light 5th gen fighter and would be much, much better for a carrier.

If we are going to cheap out on the planes for the carrier, we shouldn't even entertain the idea of a proper aircraft carrier; just build Trakya and make it more of a drone carrier and use KE and Anka-3 on it. Hürjet, as heavily modified as it might get, is still not the future and certainly shouldn't be considered for an aircraft carrier we might get in 2040s.

 

[dBSPL]

Wait a minute, before this discussion takes a more interesting turn, let's make one thing clear: The armed Hürjet, or even the navalized development of this variant, is not the fantasy of a handful of defence enthusiasts, and please stop trying to treat it as such.

Was it not declared by the former TAI GM, the current TAI president, even the TAI aircraft division managers, and directly by the project engineers of the Hürjet, that the roadmap for the Hürjet includes the development of an armed attack jet? For one reason or another, there may be those who say that it would be unnecessary to continue to develop Hurjet any further, okay. I have no objection. For a 1-year-old jet that is designed as a digital system from the design stage and will perhaps share some interfaces with KAAN, there may be those who say that no more money should be spent on this aircraft, it is a waste of time and money, fine. I didn't object to that either. It can even be said that, never mind the explanations, it won't happen if so many senior executives are in agreement, that's fine too...However, what we are trying to do on the other side of the coin is to envision the Armed Hürjet with reference to the statements in open sources that leave no room for doubt. To make assumptions about how it can be more beneficial to our military capacity. As we did with the national aircraft carrier project, for example. Or as we did with the purchase of Eurofighter systems.

Among the main characteristics, the one that stands out is the payload lifting capacity of around 6500lb. This reference is based on statements made 5-6 years ago. With current data, we understand that this characteristic has been formed with the current engine configuration. Therefore, the first and foremost consideration should be engines that can produce higher power in the same diameter and dry weight class without changing main airframe design of the aircraft.

I am not an aeronautical engineer, but one thing is that the relationship between power increase and lift capacity increase is not linear. For example, a 25% increase in power can provide a lifting capacity that is more than that. The other issue is that the jet can increase its lift capacity with avionics improvements and structural advances. At this point, the Korean T/FA-50 project is a very successful example. With the F-404-102, they reached a lift capacity of around 12,000lb. The increase in power will not only increase the lifting capacity, but will also enable the use of more powerful electronic systems. On the avionics side, once there is a suitable jet, it is now within the capabilities of the Turkish industry to equip it with electronics at the level of the F-16 B70 or equivalent.

TL,DR; whether the engine is changed or not, many improvements will be made to this aircraft to turn it into an attack jet. So, I believe that this development should be in the direction of a real light attack jet that can also take part in solving some of the cost-effective needs of the TAF.

 

[uçuyorum]

Tai can make a different fighter with experience from hürjet but many of the discussions here are based on conjecture. Hürjet light attack version can certainly be useful but not the same as a full fledged fighter. Those many modifications you mention may just not he possible or financially feasable for Hürjet, not to mention shortage of qualified workers.

 

[Strong AI]

I have a feeling that TurAF has no great interest in a CAS Hürjet and that configuration is more aimed for export.
Instead imho TurAF has more interest in Air/Air Hürjet to control UCAVs, and the Air/Air configuration will be purely for self defence measures.

 

[Anmdt]

Nice article


Or Kızılelma should be transformed into manned


View attachment 70213
View attachment 70212

‘Light Fighter’ Concept Emerges During US Air Force Chief’s Speech at UK's Air and Space Power Association Amid NGAD’s Uncertain Future

Allvin unveiled what the Royal Aeronautical Society has later defined as a ‘notional Light Fighter concept’ while calling for a shift of the next

theaviationist.com

So.. I-22 Sikatan was not a dumb idea at all.

 

[IC3M@N FX]

I read somewhere that the first prototype flew with F110-129 Engine instead of F404 Engine.
Can anyone confirm or deny this?

 

[Strong AI]

I don't understand why so many members jump on an article, which is based on an idea of just one man in the USAF.
There is no such thing as

and it looks like the US is also interested in the idea.

No, the US is not interested, it is only an idea of one man.

 

[TheInsider]

Nice idea, a 5. Gen F-16 like.

5th gen F-16 is called F-35 and it is not a light fighter.

Investing in stealth manned light fighter is stupid and no neither F-35 nor J-31 nor SU-75 checkmate is a light fighter. They are single-engine fighters.

F-50 is a light fighter. If we go back in time F-5 is a light fighter even though it has 2 engines.

 

[Sanchez]

I have a feeling that TurAF has no great interest in a CAS Hürjet and that configuration is more aimed for export.
Instead imho TurAF has more interest in Air/Air Hürjet to control UCAVs, and the Air/Air configuration will be purely for self defence measures.

TurAF should first increase the ordered number of aircrafts to replace the T-38 before anything else, current order is to replace the NF-5s of Turkish Stars after all. Navy Design Office's carrier design clearly have Hürjets on it, so we know that the navy is interested in a combat variant even if air force isn't. We expect Spain to buy the thing, when our own air force hasn't fully subscribed to the project yet.
-

I read somewhere that the first prototype flew with F110-129 Engine instead of F404 Engine.
Can anyone confirm or deny this?

We saw the thing from all possible angles and in flight, it has an F404.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Among the main characteristics, the one that stands out is the payload lifting capacity of around 6500lb. This reference is based on statements made 5-6 years ago. With current data, we understand that this characteristic has been formed with the current engine configuration. Therefore, the first and foremost consideration should be engines that can produce higher power in the same diameter and dry weight class without changing main airframe design of the aircraft.

I am not an aeronautical engineer, but one thing is that the relationship between power increase and lift capacity increase is not linear. For example, a 25% increase in power can provide a lifting capacity that is more than that. The other issue is that the jet can increase its lift capacity with avionics improvements and structural advances.

Without going in to aerodynamics 101 too much, let us just look at the forces that play a part in flight.
There are 4 basic forces that act upon a plane. Weight, Thrust, Drag and Lift.
They are all interdependent on each other during the flight. Thrust and speed induced drag, is the force that gives you lift. But it all depends how well designed your airframe and wings are. Too much weight or not enough thrust can degrade performance.
Thrust is forward force.
Drag is rearward force.
Weight is downward force.
Lift is upward force.
Exemplary avionics that control flight characteristics and structural improvements will help increase the performance of any plane as you have rightfully mentioned.
Thrust on its own is not enough to give you good lift. Your plane’s airframe and your wings will have to be designed correctly to accommodate the high thrust your engine provides and translate it in to induced drag to create effective and efficient lift.
With a small increment of thrust it is possible to induce an ample amount of drag to give efficient lift when you hava a large area of wing to play with. So yes! Thrust to lift is not linear. But depends on all the 4 forces in play and the design of your wings and plane.

We don’t know how our Hurjet was designed. What we know is that it is going to be good for training 5th generation plane pilots and is agile enough to perform acrobatics as well.

We seem to be doing this frequently:
We produce an amphibious assault ship and try to turn it in to an aircraft carrier.
We start designing an air superiority fighter with a modest size. Then increase size to include in it’s end use, ground assault and multi role.
Now produce a trainer aircraft with a possible light attack capability. Then change it to include naval carrier operations too.

Anything is possible as long as there is a will and money to do it! But we mustn’t forget the limitations we have and the current situation we are in.