@Nilgiri would like to read your evaluation in light of the newly published information about TEI and the road ahead to create an TF-X class engine.
Mr Aksit gives a very useful summary here of what is involved and what timelines are (2 - 3 years for lot of RnD parts) often like when converting/improving or scaling up a core (from current one in TS-1400) for employment in basis of larger turbofan (TF-6000)
His implying ~1:1 bypass ratio for TF-6000 illustrates the MIUS basically will balance supersonic capability with payload/range/endurance curves as best as theoretically possible. Since going above this will make supersonic impossible and going well below it (and having lower bypass realm) will reduce the mass and payload efficiency of the platform.
I mention this earlier in MIUS thread post (the entire post can be read there for context):
Military turbofans that go supersonic also have to follow this constraint and are essentially fan augmented turbojets. There is more design expectation for such aircraft to perform in the subsonic realm (compared to say a concorde) so having/balancing as much as bypass as possible is a good advantage since you have more effective range/time that way.
But generally cannot go much above a bypass ratio of 1:1 if you want to have supersonic capability (you start to invest too much in the fan side of things and impose penalties on the core relative to the mission/design profile of the aircraft). i.e To better provide for supersonic capability at larger engine thrusts, simply the bypass ratio is often kept in 0.5 - 0.8 design range so as to not impose on having larger afterburner or having complex intake systems for the engine itself.
The rest of this interview article with Mr. Aksit contains useful information for audience on matters in general when you approach inflection points of development in this arena as you gain experience in various disciplines within it, but at same time also scaling up during timeline pressure as well. i.e how it also continues with maturing of TF-6000 to then a TF-30000 etc (for TF-X platform eventually).
In end as
@Yasar mentioned before iirc, proof in pudding is the eating, so Turkish gas turbine development, result and application will be very interesting to watch and see how it all goes this decade and next one.
Some of the earlier discussion regarding TS--->TF core w.r.t Turk progression+ambition here that may be of interest for folks to read over a few pages etc :
There's no way TS1400 core could produce 6000lb of thrust. Where such notions come from, I don't understand. Look into the Garrett F109 which also shares similar core to TS1400. This Garrett engine is tiny compared to ts1400. Also it is a high bypass turbofan. (5:1). ( As an example; Ukranian...
defencehub.live
There was another one too I remember w.r.t weight estimates and such iirc, I'll try find it later
EDIT: nvm its the same post I already gave at top, can use quote arrow etc.
@SageTubitak Energetic Systems Group Coordinator Bülent Sümer: "SDDM is a potential propulsion system for aerospace systems offering high efficiency and low mechanical complexity
