TR TF-X Fighter & Trainer Aircraft Projects

Tonyukuk

Committed member
Messages
267
Reactions
1 529
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Kazakhstan
The size makes me wonder if combat radius will be a priority. I've heard that one of the advantages that 6th gen fighters will have over 5th gen fighters is their range. We knew TFX was going to be big, but the pictures really put it into perspective. It's fuel capacity must be enormous.

The size alone makes the TFX more suitable as a 5+/5.5+ gen fighter than any of its current competitors.

Imagine this beast with variable cycle engines.
 

Khagan1923

Contributor
Messages
618
Reactions
1 2,617
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey

"The purple part in the assembly model on the back is the bore gauge that Ismail Demir is working on. Again, we understand from the model that just above it, where there is a plaque, there is actually a sensor window.

It is understood that there will be the IRST here."


217092-592452c20c57b3751203b56a780ea584.png


Looks like the mockup of the IRST we saw at the Farnborough air show would fit the shape and size of the cutout for a sensor seen here on the assembly model.
Nice catch.

So even this was taken into account for lowering the RCS.

When we compare this to how the IRST is embedded into the fuselage in the KF-X it just shows how serious TAI is taking the stealth characteristics of the plane.
I think the TF-X will be even more stealth than we expect when all is said and done.
 

heartbang

Contributor
Messages
670
Reactions
1 828
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey

"The purple part in the assembly model on the back is the bore gauge that Ismail Demir is working on. Again, we understand from the model that just above it, where there is a plaque, there is actually a sensor window.

It is understood that there will be the IRST here."


View attachment 50750

Looks like the mockup of the IRST we saw at the Farnborough air show would fit the shape and size of the cutout for a sensor seen here on the assembly model.
Nice catch.

So even this was taken into account for lowering the RCS.

When we compare this to how the IRST is embedded into the fuselage in the KF-X it just shows how serious TAI is taking the stealth characteristics of the plane.
I think the TF-X will be even more stealth than we expect when all is said and done.
so it would have a separate IRST unit?
 

notnull

New member
Messages
1
Reactions
19
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
United States of America
I have been watching this thread for a while now. I have just registered so I can say how happy I am to see the TF-X come to reality! It is a beauty! Congrats to the Turkish people on this achievement.

I have a question about the timeline: Has the CDR for the TF-X completed?
 

Khagan1923

Contributor
Messages
618
Reactions
1 2,617
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
so it would have a separate IRST unit?

Separate. One of the biggest criticism I heard of the EOTS/DAS on the F-35 is the IRST aspect(can't confirm if this is true or not). I think maybe because of that TAI and TurAF decided to go with a separate unit on the nose. I do not see another reason to go with an separate unit if the method used on the F-35 was satisfactory to the TurAF.
 

Afif

Contributor
Messages
512
Reactions
1 609
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Separate. One of the biggest criticism I heard of the EOTS/DAS on the F-35 is the IRST aspect(can't confirm if this is true or not). I think maybe because of that TAI and TurAF decided to go with a separate unit on the nose. I do not see another reason to go with an separate unit if the method used on the F-35 was satisfactory to the TurAF.
F35 is EOTS is the most advanced of its kind.
There is nothing unsatisfactory about it.

However, Blending IRST and FLIR in one package is not very easy as I understand it.
 
Last edited:

osman

Active member
Messages
95
Reactions
1 173
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Although 132 version has an advantage in thrust, it comes with penalties. It is more expensive and uses more fuel which can reach double digit number percentage levels. F110-GE132 is configured for a single engine use. We needed engines that were configured for twin engine use. Hence the “E” version of the 129 engine. If the 132 version were such a big improvement, the new F15EX would be using them as well. Yet they still use “129E” version.
Is it possible for us to convert the engines of our f 16s for twin engine use and use them in MMUs, cannibalise f 16s for MMUs, yes a bad idea but for the worst scenario in which we can not find/produce an engine because of harsh embargo..
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
4,073
Solutions
2
Reactions
23 16,468
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
So , would you say there could be some truth in what @merzifonlu was trying to point out before many here dismissed his view and blamed him with flat-earthing.
Clearly Tusas and BAE engineers have moved away a bit from classic western design approach when it comes to the rear part of the plane. Also the plane looks wider than most western counterparts and more akin to what the Soviets used. Although it has a lot of similarities with an F22, it is nice to see that our design engineers have moved away from 100% Western approach and developed a new design altogether.
It is no sin if we were aspired by the Soviet design a little; After all it was thanks to a Soviet Scientist called Pyotr Ufimtsev that the western scientists cracked the stealth technology as we know it today, after seven long years of deciphering his mathematical calculations on electromagnetic radio wave equations.

It was me who said that, and claiming TF-X based on Ex-Soviet design that left out in Ukraine following dissolution and reengineered by BAE and Ukranian engineers for TR is indifferent from flat earther theories.

Different styles might be adapted as @Nilgiri also pointed out, there are motives and design philisophies that can be debatable and open for discussion with trade-offs and gains but claiming 'TF-X is 'Ex-soviet design that is reengineered and redesigned by BAE and Ukranian engineers' is not something such.

See Tempest for example it also features separated engine with a large rear radar house in some of the alternative CGIs.
 

Yasar

Experienced member
Lead Moderator
Professional
Messages
2,444
Reactions
23 10,344
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Is it possible for us to convert the engines of our f 16s for twin engine use and use them in MMUs, cannibalise f 16s for MMUs, yes a bad idea but for the worst scenario in which we can not find/produce an engine because of harsh embargo..
Theoretically could be possible. The FADEC of twin engined use, will be different to single engined use. There could be slight differences in the airflow of the two types of the engines in certain cases. This should best be answered by TEI.
Recent F16 planes generally use F110-GE129C and D engines if I remember correctly. TuAF in 2007 had ordered 42 F110-GE129B engines at a cost of 180 million dollars to upgrade the old engines on our f16s. These were delivered by 2011.
Newer engines have different airflow characteristics. TFX is going to use F110-GE129E. This engine is the same one that flies f15EX. The 129E model incorporates improvements from GE’s Service Life Extension Programme (SLEP).
 

hasanrize

Active member
Messages
86
Reactions
218
Nation of residence
Finland
Nation of origin
Turkey
I have been watching this thread for a while now. I have just registered so I can say how happy I am to see the TF-X come to reality! It is a beauty! Congrats to the Turkish people on this achievement.

I have a question about the timeline: Has the CDR for the TF-X completed?
Nope, It will be completed in 2024. We prepare cargo during a delivery. This was the way all Turkish defense products are made, engineers design their stuff open for changes in the future.

1669295961198.png
 

rodeo

Well-known member
Messages
434
Reactions
3 975
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
This building will be used.
Isn't this building directly connected to the design bureau? I think it's a very convenient place for rapid prototyping. I would use it for different prototypes in the future as well. The engineers could implement the design changes very fast. Is the building big enough for accommodating both prototypes and serial production lines? What if we had a workload of building 50 TFXs per year?
 
Last edited:

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
2,973
Reactions
1 4,889
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Isn't this building directly connected to the design bureau? I think it's a very convenient place for rapid prototyping. I would've used it for different prototypes in the future as well. The engineers could implement the design changes very fast. Is the building big enough for accommodating both prototypes and serial production lines? What if we had a workload of building 50 TFXs per year?
We do not know how much time each plane needs to spend in this station. If they spend a shorter time then more planes can be output from the line. If they spend more time then a smaller number of planes can be output. Additional capacity can always be created by expanding this space or creating another hanger like this at another area in the campus. Capacity is not a problem. We want 24 planes per year normally but we can make more. Mr Kotil said similar words.
 

rodeo

Well-known member
Messages
434
Reactions
3 975
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
We do not know how much time each plane needs to spend in this station. If they spend a shorter time then more planes can be output from the line. If they spend more time then a smaller number of planes can be output. Additional capacity can always be created by expanding this space or creating another hanger like this at another area in the campus. Capacity is not a problem. We want 24 planes per year normally but we can make more. Mr Kotil said similar words.
Sure. But having the space is not the only issue. The testing and the logistics of the finished aircraft is also a concern. Imo, companies should have different facilities for prototyping and serial production. They should be purpose-built places for the maximum efficiency for cost, time and quality aspects of the product.

The company might have different, challenging projects in the future and i think that place is too good to be sacrificed for the serial production of a single product.
 
Last edited:

I_Love_F16

Well-known member
Messages
399
Reactions
1 680
Nation of residence
France
Nation of origin
France
In the early days when Turks had the intention to build such things didnt we invite Pakistan to become a partner in it? Now Turks are proving themselves I hope we can bring many allied nations into these things, increase the number of units purchased and lower the cost per unit.

Surprisingly, many people on Twitter from various countries are saying that Pakistan is part of the project. @MADDOG can you confirm it ? Is there a true and clear statement from someone working at TAI ?
 

TR_123456

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,747
Reactions
7,956
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
Surprisingly, many people on Twitter from various countries are saying that Pakistan is part of the project. @MADDOG can you confirm it ? Is there a true and clear statement from someone working at TAI ?
Not true,Pakistan is not part of the project.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom