TR Naval Programs

Nutuk

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
989
Reactions
8 3,538
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
Barbaros already has Smart-S if i am not wrong, and CENK-S looks more square like NS100. The same radars would be used unless they plan to transfer those to some other platforms.

I was thinking the same, could it be that CENK is a licensed (NS100) like Aselsan licensed the Smart-S?
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,323
Reactions
96 18,906
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Studies being carried out as to whether Hurjet could be adapted to be carrier launched-landed 😍

if you didn't know it, know it - Hurjet is my favourite jet, step aside TFX

Hmmm, I called it earlier hehe (are they reading this forum??! nice!):

Maybe Turkey can consider doing some STO and arrested landing tests for a naval hurjet?

It could have interim potential with relevant retrofit configuration on TCG anadolu....I checked the total length is reasonable at around 232 metres....and I assume enough of that is available for landing if configured/arranged for it.

N-LCA I believe did its landing on vikramaditya within 100m....and hurjet will be around same size.

Operations will give experience to work upon for next more dedicated platforms in this area.
 

Cypro

Contributor
Messages
662
Reactions
2 1,790
Nation of residence
Northern Cyprus
Nation of origin
Northern Cyprus
There's no question to whether it can or can not, we already have an example of such a jet that can.
Without catapult it still needs a short runaway to take-off and with weapons load it will get longer and longer depending on weight. If I am not mistaken for TCG Anadolu we have a runaway of 200 to 232 meters, It is doable but deck will remain empty for take-offs then you will lose some capacity. Take-off is rather easier than landing actually, landing requires a longer runaway and Anadolu does not have aircraft arrest system in current configuration. If there is a plan for Hurjet to take off and of course Land, then Anadolu definitely needs arresting system planned before commissioning the ship.
  • I would like to mention electromagnetic catapults (EMALS) too, why don't use both ski jump and catapult together?
  • electromagnetic catapults are just like railguns, same technology, Aselsan can do it with Tufan's technology, just bigger, it should be considered imo
  • Think about accelerating aircraft 100 meters before ski jump, then you can take off with both catapult and ski jump combined. Hurjet and Goksungur, and even AEW Akıncı or Aksungur, I think it is possible.
  • You will have a separate generator to charge on demand either batteries or capacitors for fast discharge of energy which will require space and extra fuel. When it is an aircraft configuration may be transport deck can have portable generator for this purpose. Catapult assisted carriers are using nuclear power of course but not option for that and without catapult or F35 like aircraft, it is very hard job to do.
I think Hurjet with just air to air missiles could take-off easily, may be even f16 with few a2a can take off from 200m runaway.. Does anyone know required minimum runaway?
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,473
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
TEJAS Airforce configuration (left) - TEJAS Naval Configuration (Right)
ESV4-HAw-Uw-AErp-XW.jpg
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,157
Solutions
2
Reactions
97 22,991
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Without catapult it still needs a short runaway to take-off and with weapons load it will get longer and longer depending on weight. If I am not mistaken for TCG Anadolu we have a runaway of 200 to 232 meters, It is doable but deck will remain empty for take-offs then you will lose some capacity. Take-off is rather easier than landing actually, landing requires a longer runaway and Anadolu does not have aircraft arrest system in current configuration. If there is a plan for Hurjet to take off and of course Land, then Anadolu definitely needs arresting system planned before commissioning the ship.
  • I would like to mention electromagnetic catapults (EMALS) too, why don't use both ski jump and catapult together?
  • electromagnetic catapults are just like railguns, same technology, Aselsan can do it with Tufan's technology, just bigger, it should be considered imo
  • Think about accelerating aircraft 100 meters before ski jump, then you can take off with both catapult and ski jump combined. Hurjet and Goksungur, and even AEW Akıncı or Aksungur, I think it is possible.
  • You will have a separate generator to charge on demand either batteries or capacitors for fast discharge of energy which will require space and extra fuel. When it is an aircraft configuration may be transport deck can have portable generator for this purpose. Catapult assisted carriers are using nuclear power of course but not option for that and without catapult or F35 like aircraft, it is very hard job to do.
I think Hurjet with just air to air missiles could take-off easily, may be even f16 with few a2a can take off from 200m runaway.. Does anyone know required minimum runaway?
İsmail Demir has referred it as a STOVL variant of Hürjet (however i don't know how they are going to make it, and whether it is feasible considering the amount it will be procured)
So STOVL is already what TCG Anadolu is designed for. Don't expect it to cover duties of a fully fledged aircraft carrier.
Weapons can be loaded in hangar, moreover STOVL aircrafts can vertically land on dedicated landing spot without interrupting the runways.
Also multiple aircraft can land at once at different spots.
Anything else than STOVL doesn't make sense and they know it as well, either can be used in urgency or for rather small UAVs to gain some strike capability and amphibious operation support.
 

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
4,485
Reactions
6 7,162
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
a VTOL aircraft requires a special engine that acts both as a jet engine and a turboshaft engine. At least this is what F35B is like. However if you want to make things simple you can use two separate engines, one for jet thrust out the back and the other to drive the lift fan like propfan (high solidity turboprop). Given the existing products of TEI the TS1400 and the elusive TJ1600 combo can form the Voltran. A little farfetched but possible.
 
Last edited:

Cypro

Contributor
Messages
662
Reactions
2 1,790
Nation of residence
Northern Cyprus
Nation of origin
Northern Cyprus
I had discussed this in earlier posts and in other forums with a lot of resistance from others.
Hurjet needs a little help with wing area (HalTejas is a delta wing plane giving it a lot more lift. Also we don’t know how heavy Hal Tejas was at take off) . But with a TVC version of EJ200 at 30% increased output thrust or with a GE414 engine and hold/release brakes fitted to the deck , this aircraft should take off from TCG Anadolu. Landing will have to be through arresting wire and hook system. Of course the plane has to be naval appropriate with structural upgrades fitted.
View attachment 17127
To add; The arresting hook system has to be electromagnetic, if both UAV’s and Hurjet are going to be operational from this ship, as the hydraulic system to stop a 10+ton plane will destroy a much lighter UAV.

It is not impossible to make an electromagnetic arresting system which stores energy from landing to be used on take-off and I think this will be the future of carriers. On the other hand Having multiple versions of Hurjet is a completely another story, it would be like designing a naval version from scratch, it would delay all projects and require more investment. Instead of this I prefer Anadolu to be drone friendly helicopter ship and investing for a aircraft carrier instead of TCG Trakya.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,157
Solutions
2
Reactions
97 22,991
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
He particularly said "dikine iniş" i have interpreted it as STOVL.
What if TB3 is also a STOVL and capable of vertical landing?
Earlier in another speech i have heard "DIHA" studies are going on to use on TCG Anadolu, and in unrelated sentence it could be heard " TB3" is being developed for TCG Anadolu.
Is it viable that two PD180ST can lift a TB2+ vertically during landing? (Assume fuel is down to %15 and munitions are dropped)
Could it be the reason why PD180ST has to be lighter and smaller with a single turbo so that it can fit on a wing of tactical drone?
Can an engine + propeller duo configured to provide push or pull at a certain amount of axial flow also generate a lift in a stationary mode?
Just figured out 105 HP generates about 125 kg of thrust (thus the propeller) ,so it is not viable with the current propeller.
 
Last edited:

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,473
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
What if TB3 is also a STOVL and capable of vertical landing?
Earlier in another speech i have heard "DIHA" studies are going on to use on TCG Anadolu, and in unrelated sentence it could be heard " TB3" is being developed for TCG Anadolu.
Is it viable that two PD180ST can lift a TB2+ vertically during landing? (Assume fuel is down to %15 and munitions are dropped)
Could it be the reason why PD180ST has to be lighter and smaller with a single turbo so that it can fit on a wing of tactical drone?
Can an engine + propeller duo configured to provide push or pull at a certain amount of axial flow also generate a lift in a stationary mode?

Could this be TB-3 ? Could Aselsan be working with Baykar ?

This invention is related to a VTOL/VSTOL/CTOL capable dual hybrid (electric/internal
combustion powered and fixed wing cruise vertical takeoff/landing) unmanned aerial
vehicle with conventional internal combustion or electric powered silent flight capability,
thanks to tiltable 4x2 coaxial counter rotating, folding propeller systems which are
mounted on two removable ,pods.
WO2021010915A1-15.jpg


1617036026400.png
 

Attachments

  • WO2021010915A1.pdf
    392.9 KB · Views: 128

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,323
Reactions
96 18,906
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
What if TB3 is also a STOVL and capable of vertical landing?
Earlier in another speech i have heard "DIHA" studies are going on to use on TCG Anadolu, and in unrelated sentence it could be heard " TB3" is being developed for TCG Anadolu.
Is it viable that two PD180ST can lift a TB2+ vertically during landing? (Assume fuel is down to %15 and munitions are dropped)
Could it be the reason why PD180ST has to be lighter and smaller with a single turbo so that it can fit on a wing of tactical drone?
Can an engine + propeller duo configured to provide push or pull at a certain amount of axial flow also generate a lift in a stationary mode?
Just figured out 105 HP generates about 125 kg of thrust (thus the propeller) ,so it is not viable with the current propeller.

Yeah props are pretty bad at vertical lift compared to rotors....given their respective diameters (thus their respective effective "gearing"/rpm w.r.t airflow mass)

Generally you need to start with rotor requirement as first principle and then make it hybridise as prop too as 2nd for cruise flight (if dual-requirement) like in V-22.

The aselsan concept of having multi-prop lift system looks interesting though, current and mid term battery energy density (and also electric distribution banks) would still constrain it for electric mode, but it will improve with time. I would assume everything is hybrid + connected to make the weight penalty of the prop-unit nacelles worth it for cruise (i.e they are tilt rotated for steady cruise use need as well).

Design might evolve though, this looks conceptual for now. I don't see the wing root remaining that slender from the bending moment imposed by the prop nacelle unit (though the monocoque will add stiffness, maybe its enough)....I would almost try to reverse the locations of those nacelles and the vertical stabiliser monocoque attachment. Also the anhedral of the wing might not be right way to go, these might cause stability issues during vertical ascent by the pitch down perturbation from that moment arm on something this light/compact.

Basically as far as possible, I'd keep the prop nacelle units as closely aligned and positioned to centre of mass as possible...it will make the control logic during crucial take off + transition to cruise more reliable and robust given there is no lift vector on wing to consider (which you then optimise design after for cruise).

EDIT: i just saw combat master posted a WIPO file with lot more details, I will be reading that later.
 

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
4,485
Reactions
6 7,162
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
From Ismail Demir's words I conclude that they are looking for a jet VTOL fighter and the way I described in my previous post is the only way we can make it with domestic resources within 2 years . Such a plane would be around 5 tons (mtow) and it better be unmanned. It can be supersonic and can comfortably carry 1500 kg of useful load.

If they want slower I suggest my design mach .6 cool air fighter.
 
Last edited:

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,473
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
It would need a MAJOR redesign to survive landings even. Landing gear is too weak, and carrying capacity will likely be reduced as well.

I wouldn't go as far as the express major in all-caps, but yes it would have to be modified - that's a given, hence feasibility studies being conducted.

Basically, it will have the same weaknesses that made India refuse to use the Tejas on its carriers.

I don't think that applies here, the reasons why Tejas didn't go as planned is multi-faceted with issues arising from all areas of the project - naval variant probably had the least issues. Also, one of the major gripes with Naval Tejas seemed to stem from it's weight - Airforce variant Hurjet is likely going to weight 4.5tons empty where Tejas weights 6.5tons empty - Naval variants add extra 400kg for strengthened airframe and landing gear. Hurjet would still weigh much less.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,157
Solutions
2
Reactions
97 22,991
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
It would need a MAJOR redesign to survive landings even. Landing gear is too weak, and carrying capacity will likely be reduced as well.

Basically, it will have the same weaknesses that made India refuse to use the Tejas on its carriers.
It will be able to land vertically, again a major redesign but will resolve some of the problems.
I don't know how they will make it STOVL and which engine will be used.
At first TCG Anadolu is not an aircraft carrier, Ismail Demir has also implied that, what i have been telling here for years, its primary role is being an LHD, secondary role is light aircraft carrier with STOVL aircraft.
Assuming ship has operational life of 40 years, nothing would hurt if STOVLs introduced in 10th year. At least personnel will have time to perfect remaining LHD capabilities assisted with UAV operations.
In 10th year and beyond probably they would also introduce a light AC like Korean LPX and Anadolu will be used as interim platform to train pilots and test the aircraft.
I wouldn't go as far as the express major in all-caps, but yes it would have to be modified - that's a given, hence feasibility studies being conducted.



I don't think that applies here, the reasons why Tejas didn't go as planned is multi-faceted with issues arising from all areas of the project - naval variant probably had the least issues. Also, one of the major gripes with Naval Tejas seemed to stem from it's weight - Airforce variant Hurjet is likely going to weight 3.5tons empty where Tejas weights 6.5tons empty - Naval variants add extra 400kg for strengthened airframe and landing gear. Hurjet would still weigh much less.
Found it:
He actually says, "we have talked with TAI whether Hurjet can land and take off from a ship, particularly on vertical landing"
And then he refers to harrier.
At 59:01 of the video you have shared in another thread:
Unfortunately our defense industry magazines are too lazy to listen remaining 5 seconds they directly focus on conventional landing and take off.
Why should he speak about harrier if he didn't imply vertical landing for Hurjet?
2+ Hours long, perhaps couple evenings sitting to soak in the information - haven't had time to watch it all
 
Last edited:

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom