TR Propulsion Systems

[Rodeo]

Who might be the foreign customer wants to put TF6K to twing engine trainer aircraft then. The F124 is used in almost all twin-engine trainer aircraft.Just China comes to my mind .As far as I know they are the only ones who don't use F124 on their twin engine aircraft and need an engine in this class.

The wording of Mahmut Akşit suggests that it will be a newly designed trainer(at least to me)

 

[zio]

In prioritization plans, the importance of having domestic axial type turbofan engines may have been seen as more essential. With Tf6000/10000, both Kızılelma and Anka-3/4, which are nearing the end of their development phase will be answered and it will also be a test-bed for KAAN's more powerful engine program. In this way, unlike TS1400, the first military type gas turbine engine with an axial compressor technology will be gained. Qs a result of this program, A 3000-3500hp turboshaft engine will be developed from the core of TF6000. In other words, we can say that TEI aims to kill many birds with one stone.

TEI even did not got one stone two birds with tırboprop version of TS 1400,I dont satisfy with an answer like we dont need it.

 

[Bürküt]

The wording of Mahmut Akşit suggests that it will be a newly designed trainer(at least to me)

Could it be a another country's project that hasn't been announced yet .I was able to find these as a new design and I don't think them use TF6K instead of F124/125 :

An in-depth look at Airbus' Future Jet Trainer

Airbus is developing a new-generation advanced jet trainer for Spain, but how will this future platform fare on the export market, with air arms starting to look at the recapitalisation of their training fleets across the globe? We investigate.

www.key.aero

Spanish project

Aeralis’s Modular Aircraft Advances Toward the Hardware Stage | AIN

Aeralis has seen considerable progress in the development of its modular aircraft concept through a series of high-level agreements.

www.ainonline.com

British project

 

[Bürküt]

Qs a result of this program, A 3000-3500hp turboshaft engine will be developed from the core of TF6000. In other words, we can say that TEI aims to kill many birds with one stone.

It will be the engine of both Anka3 and Kızılelma.It will be turned into a marine engine and used in KAAN class assault boats.Even as it is TEİ will kill many birds with one stone.

I have asked Sayın @Yasar many times before "is it possible a 3000-3500hp turboshaft can be easily produced from the core of the TF6000" and he said "Producing a 3000HP engine from the TF6000 engine means , seriously reducing the diameter of this engine and seriously changing the fan and turbine structure of this engine.A certain amount of time and some new technical development phases can be saved.But you basically have to build engines almost from scratch."

The diameter of the combustion chamber of the engine to be produced for Atak 2 will be at most half of the TF6000.I conclude that the TS3000 will be a brand new engine, not a derived engine. Sayın F. Akşit was said " we will increase the diameter of the TF6000 and build a KAAN engine from here".I think relevance between TF6000 and TS3000 is the same also.Not like Snecma M88-TP400.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Internal Layout of TEI-TF6000, a Low Bypass Turbofan Engine

www.defenceturkey.com

There is a lot of good information here about the innards of TF6000.
This is definitely a very modern engine using the latest innovative technologies short of Ceramic Matrix Composites. It’s diameter is given as 87cm. It is weird that this is the diameter domain of engines almost double the dry thrust level of TF6K, like f404. Taking Prof Aksit’s statement about the engine diameter being the decisive factor in thrust level, it is logical to expect much higher thrust levels from this engine. But it seems, TEI is designing a more conservatively placed thrust level engine in TF6K.
(Can I be devil’s advocate and suggest that TEI may also be covertly doing the ground work of a Turkish f404 class engine in the embodiment of TF6K?) pls see last paragraph of above article.

Further to @Burkut’s post above, the diameter of 87cm of TF6K, would yield a turbo shaft engine that develops 6500HP , like the ones on Osprey Tilt Motor. Yet an engine like T700 that develops 2000 to 3000HP shaft power has a 39cm core diameter. The latest CMC tech GE-T901 engine also develops 3000HP and has an overall fan tip diameter of 67cm with a core diameter of 39cm as it is identical in size to the T700 engine.

So it is logical to assume that in order to produce an engine with a power level of 3000HP , using TF6K as a starting point is false economy. You would be downgrading the TF6K. Using some of the technologies in TF6K on a smaller diameter engine however, is feasible. Hell! We produce more than 70% of that T700 engine’s parts domestically, including the hot parts. It shouldn’t be too difficult to build a new Turkish T700-lookalike engine if push comes to shove. Of course that is , workforce availability and finances permitting.

Going back to above article; I would like to point the statement of the author about the engine’s thrust of 6000lbf being divided between the core supplying 65% and the bypass stream the remaining 35%.
This means the engine will be running fairly cool and will have a lot of cooler air coming out of it’s nozzle, thereby improving the stealth and IR signature characteristics.

 

[Radonsider]

Internal Layout of TEI-TF6000, a Low Bypass Turbofan Engine

www.defenceturkey.com

There is a lot of good information here about the innards of TF6000.
This is definitely a very modern engine using the latest innovative technologies short of Ceramic Matrix Composites. It’s diameter is given as 87cm. It is weird that this is the diameter domain of engines almost double the dry thrust level of TF6K, like f404. Taking Prof Aksit’s statement about the engine diameter being the decisive factor in thrust level, it is logical to expect much higher thrust levels from this engine. But it seems, TEI is designing a more conservatively placed thrust level engine in TF6K.
(Can I be devil’s advocate and suggest that TEI may also be covertly doing the ground work of a Turkish f404 class engine in the embodiment of TF6K?)

Further to @Burkut’s post above, the diameter of 87cm of TF6K, would yield a turbo shaft engine that develops 6500HP , like the ones on Osprey Tilt Motor. Yet an engine like T700 that develops 2000 to 3000HP shaft power has a 39cm core diameter. The latest CMC tech GE-T901 engine also develops 3000HP and has an overall diameter of 67cm with a core diameter of 39cm as it is identical in size to the T700 engine.

View attachment 60757
So it is logical to assume that in order to produce an engine with a power level of 3000HP , using TF6K as a starting point is false economy. You would be downgrading the TF6K. Using some of the technologies in TF6K on a smaller diameter engine however, is feasible. Hell! We produce more than 70% of that T700 engine’s parts domestically, including the hot parts. It shouldn’t be too difficult to build a new Turkish T700-lookalike engine if push comes to shove. Of course that is , workforce availability and finances permitting.

Going back to above article; I would like to point the statement of the author about the engine’s thrust of 6000lbf being divided between the core supplying 65% and the bypass stream the remaining 35%.
This means the engine will be running fairly cool and will have a lot of cooler air coming out of it’s nozzle, thereby improving the stealth and IR signature characteristics.

My take on why TF-1000 produces less thrust than F-404 class is the bypass ratios, F-404 is a near-turbojet turbofan while our TF-6000 has a ratio of 1.06 iirc, so compared to F-404 we don't use most of the flow for compression.

Why th am I writing these to you? You already know these to the root

 

[Afif]

My take on why TF-1000 produces less thrust than F-404 class is the bypass ratios, F-404 is a near-turbojet turbofan while our TF-6000 has a ratio of 1.06 iirc, so compared to F-404 we don't use most of the flow for compression.

Yet F404 is SFC is still relatively very low, 0.81lb compared to TF-6000 0.70lb.

 

[zio]

TF-10000 nozzle is not circular so this make more reduced infrared sign

 

[zio]

Is it possible to make TF10000 to TF 20000 with some changes like lenght,one more fan reduced by pass ratio etc….

 

[Radonsider]

Is it possible to make TF10000 to TF 20000 with some changes like lenght,one more fan reduced by pass ratio etc….

Mainly we would need to decrease the bypass ratio, so a redesign is needed

 

[Rodeo]

Is it possible to make TF10000 to TF 20000 with some changes like lenght,one more fan reduced by pass ratio etc….

I want to add a question. Since the landscape of war is moving towards the stealth realm and that invalidating dog fights, shouldn't the newly designed military turbofans have more bypass ratio? Does the aircraft really need the aggressive manevours with high acceleration? Considering the higher bypass ratio provides more efficient engine and less IR signature, the industry should start abandoning the low bypass turbofans, right?

 

[Yasar_TR]

I want to add a question. Since the landscape of war is moving towards the stealth realm and that invalidating dog fights, shouldn't the newly designed military turbofans have more bypass ratio? Does the aircraft really need the aggressive manevours with high acceleration? Considering the higher bypass ratio provides more efficient engine and less IR signature, the industry should start abandoning the low bypass turbofans, right?

F404 has a 3 stage Low Pressure fan section. That means a lot of air is pushed in to the 7 stage High Pressure compressor.
It has very different structure to our TF6K. It has proven itself as a good stealth plane engine - re: F117 Nighthawk. It generates 11000lbf dry thrust. Nevertheless it is an old school engine.
We are in the right track. The TF6K is going to pave the way for us in modern turbofan engine tech. With the use of CMC materials and adaptive cycles in later years, our engines will be at a level with the best of them out there.
TEI need support and funding during these early years though.
Fighter aircrafts will always need aggressive manoeuvring. They need to evade missiles coming from other planes as well as from ground. They also need to return home as quickly as possible after completing their missions. This is most apparent if they have to perform attacks whilst flying close to ground and following contours of the terrain. Therefore rather than abandoning low bypass, a compromise like TF6K will be more appropriate.

F118 engines, which are the non afterburning version of F110, power B2 bombers. The modified version of the f118 engine is the EPE version of F110 sans afterburners, with Blisk technology modifications and delivers 19000lbf thrust. These modified engines allow the B2 to fly at transonic speeds. (TEI builds this engine for GE and USAF, under license) Building on the experience gathered with such projects, TF35K should be a perfect match for KAAN.

 

[YeşilVatan]

I want to add a question. Since the landscape of war is moving towards the stealth realm and that invalidating dog fights, shouldn't the newly designed military turbofans have more bypass ratio? Does the aircraft really need the aggressive manevours with high acceleration? Considering the higher bypass ratio provides more efficient engine and less IR signature, the industry should start abandoning the low bypass turbofans, right?

Anka-III? Akşit-sama please deliver!

 

[TheInsider]

Is it possible to make TF10000 to TF 20000 with some changes like lenght,one more fan reduced by pass ratio etc….

Yes, it is possible. TEI can scale up the engine but it seems it is not a priority. The engine development for Kaan is the priority project. It will be a scaled-up version of TF10k with 5th gen technologies like a special cooling system for IR reduction, RCS reduction of the nozzle, etc.


The bypass ratio of TF6/10k is really at a sweet spot. I don't think going lower or higher will benefit its performance.

 

[Windchime]

Who might be the foreign customer wants to put TF6K to twing engine trainer aircraft then. The F124 is used in almost all twin-engine trainer aircraft.Just China comes to my mind .As far as I know they are the only ones who don't use F124 on their twin engine aircraft and need an engine in this class.

Doesn't necessarily mean that foreign aircraft manufacturers want them for an existing model. Also, unlike what the twitter is quoting of Mahmut Akşit, it is more probable that foreign manufacturers are considering the possibility of using TF-6000, not outright wanting to use them. What's conveyed in that twitter post also points to manufacutrers requesting basic information for evaluation of possible application.

Could it be a another country's project that hasn't been announced yet .I was able to find these as a new design and I don't think them use TF6K instead of F124/125 :

An in-depth look at Airbus' Future Jet Trainer

Airbus is developing a new-generation advanced jet trainer for Spain, but how will this future platform fare on the export market, with air arms starting to look at the recapitalisation of their training fleets across the globe? We investigate.

www.key.aero

Spanish project

Aeralis’s Modular Aircraft Advances Toward the Hardware Stage | AIN

Aeralis has seen considerable progress in the development of its modular aircraft concept through a series of high-level agreements.

www.ainonline.com

British project

AFJT was envisioned to use single EJ200 class engine and is basically dead. Aeralis is still a pipe-dream with flawed concept, though it makes sense if Aeralis contacted TEI to request information so that they could consider TF-6000 alongside F124 for their subsonic advanced trainer variant design.


To be quite honest, I should cast some doubts about how serious any of the "foreign customers who wants to use TF-6000 for their trainer aircraft" were, considering the fact that the market is very much saturated now. In the west there are alread M-346, T-50 and T-7. China, Russia and India all have their own designs. Some European countries and Japan might come up with their own model again to replace Alpha Jet, T-4 and so on (Spain who made Avio Jet is most probably going to buy off-the-shelf, as I've noted above regarding AFJT), but in current defense spending environment I personally think even France and Japan will probably buy M-346 or T-7.

There might be some developing countries who are aspiring to develop their own advanced trainer model with an ITAR free engine and is thus contacting TEI in its early stages, but realistically speaking, that possibility is extremely low.

If anything, TF-6000 is more suited to compete in the future wingman-drone market, the market segment where Kızılelma is placed in. With proliferation of more capable and larger drones, capable of more sophisticated strike and air-to-air roles, its obvious that more players will enter the market, some of which might be non-aligned countries.

 

[Sanchez]

considering the fact that the market is very much saturated now.

I'm thinking, Hürjet will see more export success as a light fighter in the future than a LIFT trainer for this exact reason. Sale of trainer aircraft nowadays also brings manuals and more importantly flying school "memberships" alongside. TAI being part of the international test pilot school is good, but not the kind of school I have in mind.

 

[Windchime]

It is weird that this is the diameter domain of engines almost double the dry thrust level of TF6K, like f404. Taking Prof Aksit’s statement about the engine diameter being the decisive factor in thrust level, it is logical to expect much higher thrust levels from this engine. But it seems, TEI is designing a more conservatively placed thrust level engine in TF6K.
(Can I be devil’s advocate and suggest that TEI may also be covertly doing the ground work of a Turkish f404 class engine in the embodiment of TF6K?) pls see last paragraph of above article.

Engine diameter is only one part of the equation, and not even the main variable. We need to know OPR, TIT, MFR, BPR and SFC to be able to actually explain why there are such differences.

Since TS1400 TIT figures are known, I'd assume that TF-6000 will have similar TIT figures. This leaves it on the similar ballpark to the F404 TIT.

For one the BPR between the two differes by around a factor of 3. This means that although the engine diameter itself are similiar, there are quite a difference in the MFR, especially for the core section between the two engines. I'd also expect the OPR of TF-6000 to be lower than F404 as well, which might explain the lower SFC. compared to it

I want to add a question. Since the landscape of war is moving towards the stealth realm and that invalidating dog fights, shouldn't the newly designed military turbofans have more bypass ratio? Does the aircraft really need the aggressive manevours with high acceleration? Considering the higher bypass ratio provides more efficient engine and less IR signature, the industry should start abandoning the low bypass turbofans, right?

Supersonic speeds are still needed and you need low BPR engines for that. Also, who says maneuverability is not needed anymore? The focus of which kind of manueverability is needed has shifted, not that maneuverability itself has become irrelevant.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Since TS1400 TIT figures are known, I'd assume that TF-6000 will have similar TIT figures. This leaves it on the similar ballpark to the F404 TIT.

TS1400 turbo shaft turbine inlet temperatures should not be too high. LHTEC CTS800 engine (ts1400 was based on the same radial flow design) has a TIT of 1050 degrees. When TS1400 was first made, to stress on the single crystals used, it was mentioned that the TIT could go as high as 1350 degrees C. - not necessarily the TIT value of TS1400. I don’t have the exact TIT values for TS1400. If you do I would appreciate it if you could share.

TF6000/10000 turbofan engines are being produced primarily as test bed engines for the KAAN’s prospective TF35000 engine. This engine is to contain technologies and specifics that would lead to an engine that can produce around 26000lbf dry and 35000lbf wet thrust similar to F119. Prof Aksit himself claimed that at TEI they could produce such an engine. Now proof of the pudding is in the eating.
To be used as test bed, TF6K is to contain third generation single Crystal blades, Blisk fans and compressors. Plus many parts being produced with additive technologies. F119 has a TIT value of 1649 degrees C and uses third generation single Crystal blades with Blisk fan and compressor sections. So TF6000 is being produced with similar tech on board. So I think it would be wrong to draw analogies between TF6K and TS1400. Next few months will be very enlightening for all.

 

[Tornadoss]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1698604141352738857

Composite fan duct inner case of Tf6000 which is built by Sabanci University delivered toTEI

 

[boredaf]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1698604141352738857

Composite fan duct inner case of Tf6000 which is built by Sabanci University delivered toTEI

I honestly cannot express how desperately I want to see TF6000 start before the end of this year. So many of our projects depends on TF6000/TF10000/TF35000