Thrust vectoring is not worth the effort in modern planes. If deemed useful it can be added as a nozzle extension in the future. However I don't think TAI will do it as it is not critical when you have stand off munitions.
Thanks for the informative post but I wasn't really asking for a traditional type of fighter but one that doesn't have vertical stabilizers, From what I understand Fluidic Thrust Vectoring might be necessary for fighters that lack vertical stabilizers.Although thrust vectoring gives a definite advantage in agility and quick manoeuvrability, the advantage obtained has not been a game changer or a must case. In fact information to the contrary has been more prevalent.
Just to give you a quick example; The EJ200 engine has had a TVC version which also gives an increase in thrust (both dry and withA/B). Eurofighter users have not opted for this version. Because the advantage wasn’t worth the effort.
Where it would be used most is the dog fights and escaping a2a missiles.
But from pilots‘ anecdotes and technical papers it is certain that when TVC is applied the plane loses so much energy and momentum that to recover it becomes a problem in WVR missions. This has come to light when F22s were played against German Typhoons in Alaska.
With more BVR oriented planes, TVC is not seen a necessity at all.
My guess is because 6th gen fighters rely on better stealth it will not need as much agility and control surfaces in the wings will be enough for the amount of agility it needs.Thanks for the informative post but I wasn't really asking for a traditional type of fighter but one that doesn't have vertical stabilizers, From what I understand Fluidic Thrust Vectoring might be necessary for fighters that lack vertical stabilizers.
That said I may be wrong on this, if anyone knows please feel free to jump in and correct me.
Vertical stabilisers are there to control yaw (side to side movement of nose).Thanks for the informative post but I wasn't really asking for a traditional type of fighter but one that doesn't have vertical stabilizers, From what I understand Fluidic Thrust Vectoring might be necessary for fighters that lack vertical stabilizers.
That said I may be wrong on this, if anyone knows please feel free to jump in and correct me.
It should be the opposite. Vertical stabilizers for yaw control and horizontal stabilizers for pitch control.Vertical stabilisers are there to control pitch (side to side movement of nose).
Horizontal stabilisers help control yaw ( up and down movement)
It should be the opposite. Vertical stabilizers for yaw control and horizontal stabilizers for pitch control.
Vertical stabilisers are there to control pitch (side to side movement of nose).
Horizontal stabilisers help control yaw ( up and down movement)
On a delta wing aircraft Elevons/ailerons and flaps take over this duty.
But as per @Zafer ‘s explanation, a 6th generation aircraft may not going to need the kind of agility that is required of a 4th or 5th generation plane. However that is not enough reason to do away with it.
Having said that, the X-36 jet has proven that a tail-less design with delta wings can be very unstable and agile. Please read below site.
View attachment 53386
My guess is because 6th gen fighters rely on better stealth it will not need as much agility and control surfaces in the wings will be enough for the amount of agility it needs.
Damn niceBMC power production Ankara facility (18,000m2) in New BMC Defence Ankara facility (70,000m2)
UTKU test center
View attachment 53392
Batu Test
- TTZA Engine (400hp): Vuran APC, Kirpi-2
- Azra Engine (600hp): Tank carrier BMC trucks and Marlin USV(2023), %75+ national contribution
- TTZA and Azra transmission projects are planned
- Utku engine (1000hp): Firtina2 SPH (Contract signed, Firtina-2 with Utku will be delivered in 2025) and New generation IFV. 10 Utku prototypes are produced until now.
- Utku transmission run on October 2022. Utku will be run as a power group (engine+transmission) for the first time in 2 months
- BATU powerpack (1500hp) will be introduced to public in following days. 6 BATU engine prototypes are produced until now. BATU engine was run for 1000 hours in the test environment. When BATU Power Group is attached to the ALTAY prototype, it will undergo a mobility test of 10,000 kilometers.
- BATU tranmsission run in last Friday first time. The process of combining the engine, transmission and cooling package in the BATU Powerpack continues. The first operation of the BATU Powerpack (engine+transmssion+cooling systems) will be made this year. %75+ national contribution
- In the M60A3 modernization, BMC plans to develop a power pack with a capacity of 1300hp. The aim is to reduce the BATU power group and to develop 1300 HP power group.
- BMC power has been developing hybrid propulsion systems.
- TTZA, Azra, Utku and Batu marine/land generators will be revealed.
View attachment 53391
![]()
BMC POWER Sakarya`da Sektör Basınıyla Buluştu
www.defenceturkey.com
How many engineers does it take to develop a modern military turbofan engine from scratch(30k-40k lbf wet thrust)?
@Nilgiri