TR TF-X Fighter & Trainer Aircraft Projects

[Sanchez]

a double engined Hürjet would add at least 3 4 years to the project, that's basically a new aircraft.

It will either be with F404s or with its local equivalent when it matures, no real other way.

 

[Rodeo]

We don't need to produce every class of jet engines immediately to avoid sanctions. We have limited engineering resources. What we should do is to prove that we have the know-how and know-why to design and can manufacture whatever engine we need for our platforms. TF6000 is paramount to demonstrate this capability. If the engine is successful and we show the mock-up of TF35000 in 2025, it'll make very little sense for them to sanction us from that point on. Therefore, i think, we should bring TF6000 forward as soon as possible and strap it on one of our drones. That would take care of our engine supply issues.

 

[Radonsider]

This means that the potential sale of this jet is dependent on the buyer country's relations with the US.


Btw this was exactly the ''face'' I mentioned above

That's also how its happening with T/FA-50, they couldn't sell to some countries because of US

 

[Nutuk]

I said Hurjet's competition with the T-50 will be interesting. What's strange about this? Potential sales of this aircraft will be blocked 99% by the US

Yes that is a possibility, therefor TAI should maybe prepare and also integrate the EJ200 engine on the aircraft to offer it with 2 different engine possibilities

 

[Chocopie]

That's also how its happening with T/FA-50, they couldn't sell to some countries because of US

The US only blocked sales of T-50 to Uzbekistan so far. Lockheed gets share of revenues, they‘re interested in making money and will push export chances.

And UK refused approval for sales of light fighter FA-50 to Argentina (Martin-Baker ejection seat and other UK parts).

The other failed bids are lost tenders or canceled procurement plans by diverse countries.

 

[Baryshx]

The US only blocked sales of T-50 to Uzbekistan so far. Lockheed gets share of revenues, they‘re interested in making money and will push export chances.

And UK refused approval for sales of light fighter FA-50 to Argentina (Martin-Baker ejection seat and other UK parts).

The other failed bids are lost tenders or canceled procurement plans by diverse countries.

This is where the importance of localizing all parts as much as possible comes into play. Of course, time is needed for this, even know-how. Maybe it will have to be bought from abroad out of necessity, but all in all, efforts should be made.

In fact, the same situation happened with the Atak helicopter.

 

[Hasanrize]

This is where the importance of localizing all parts as much as possible comes into play. Of course, time is needed for this, even know-how. Maybe it will have to be bought from abroad out of necessity, but all in all, efforts should be made.

In fact, the same situation happened with the Atak helicopter.

True, but we need to remember that we are not a country with 700B $ in the military budget. When we pour money into somewhere, we lose the opportunity of another project. Opportunity cost should not be underestimated.

Also, Faruk Akşit himself said that they could design engines for Hürjet if necessary. It can be done by engineers working on the MMU engine. Asking engineers working on the MMU engine to work on the Hürjet engine will delay the most important engine project. That is something we can not afford; we can't risk MMU for the sake of Hürjet.

 

[Chocopie]

For Türkiye’s Western embargo situation it would be best to localize as much parts as it can get for Hürjet.

For Korea it‘s not that urgent, T-50/FA-50 is an older design, too much costs to replace foreign parts when the blocked sales are few. Wouldn‘t make economic sense to waste money & HR on a domestic ejection seat project for a possible sale of only 10 fighters to Argentina.

The Poland deal of 48 FA-50s is a booster to finance a Block 20 version with AESA radar, BVR capability and refueling probe.

 

[Rooxbar]

Temel Kotil has stated in multiple interviews that, unlike MMU, they don't have any qualms about using foreign parts in Hürjet and they have opted to procure parts from wherever they could just to finish the project, and they prioritize practicality as opposed to MMU which is a strategic asset.

 

[Radonsider]

Temel Kotil has stated in multiple interviews that, unlike MMU, they don't have any qualms about using foreign parts in Hürjet and they have opted to procure parts from wherever they could just to finish the project, and they prioritize practicality as opposed to MMU which is a strategic asset.

Keep in mind that Hürjet is still very much indigenous, lot less foreign parts compared to other countries

 

[Rajendra Chola]

Front landing gear disagrees with you.

I fail to see how it's also designed for carrier ops, as there are no carrier designs for it to land yet. This is made by TAI's own resources. Their goal is to create a LIFT trainer for hvkk and even that is not yet guaranteed. Let's not get that ahead of ourselves.

If Hürjet becomes a reality and an N version is in the works, it'll be buffed up heavily in structural integrity and MTOW will increase. Probably will need 2 engines or a bigger one. As it currently stands with the F404, not worth to have her on a carrier, what good will it do?

Indian Navy rejected Naval Tejas with F404 due to bulked up increased MTOW which limits the radius and weapons capacity. It also finished landing and take off tests from aircraft carriers. From the results, Navy also rejected F414 engine upgrade seeing it still would carry low capacity and wanted multi engine aircraft.

IN requirement is different. It needs to police last swathes of water. So it needs an fighter with long legs. But Turkey can make do with an fighter with shorter legs as it’s primary threats are not far away. Hurjet in Naval role may still work.
However I agree, turning an Air Force variant into Naval variant is time consuming, complex design changes etc

 

[Heartbang]

Indian Navy rejected Naval Tejas with F404 due to bulked up increased MTOW which limits the radius and weapons capacity. It also finished landing and take off tests from aircraft carriers. From the results, Navy also rejected F414 engine upgrade seeing it still would carry low capacity and wanted multi engine aircraft.

IN requirement is different. It needs to police last swathes of water. So it needs an fighter with long legs. But Turkey can make do with an fighter with shorter legs as it’s primary threats are not far away. Hurjet in Naval role may still work.
However I agree, turning an Air Force variant into Naval variant is time consuming, complex design changes etc

Part of the success F404's managed to get with F-18 fighters come from F-18 being designed with CATOBAR ops in mind. When you get to yeet the plane at high velocity for launch, everything gets way easier.
Modifying Hurjet for STOBAR ops might not be worthwhile.

 

[Rajendra Chola]

Part of the success F404's managed to get with F-18 fighters come from F-18 being designed with CATOBAR ops in mind. When you get to yeet the plane at high velocity for launch, everything gets way easier.
Modifying Hurjet for STOBAR ops might not be worthwhile.

F18 is still dual engine. Two F404 would still work in Catobar or stobar config. Would still carry lot of fuel and weapons in stobar config.
But single engine with stobar would be still an tough call.

For Indian tender, F18 was tested in stobar configuration and they found it can still lift 80% of the capacity in Catobar config. For IN, it’s still an significant improvement over Mig29k

 

[Heartbang]

F18 is still dual engine. Two F404 would still work in Catobar or stobar config. Would still carry lot of fuel and weapons in stobar config.
But single engine with stobar would be still an tough call.

For Indian tender, F18 was tested in stobar configuration and they found it can still lift 80% of the capacity in Catobar config. For IN, it’s still an significant improvement over Mig29k

With this in mind, we could argue making a naval Hurjet will not be a minor upgrade it needs to be and will be essentially a brand new aircraft.
At that point, it would be better idea to make a VTOL TFX.

 

[Zafer]

With this in mind, we could argue making a naval Hurjet will not be a minor upgrade it needs to be and will be essentially a brand new aircraft.
At that point, it would be better idea to make a VTOL TFX.

It is an overkill to make a VTOL TFX. However smaller VTOL aircraft can be made. But still TB3 and Kızılelma can do the job already.

 

[uçuyorum]

Hürjet is not a fighter. There is a planned light attack craft version that is also not a multi-role fighter. It also has much more in common with 4th generation fighters than a 5th gen fighter. Making a twin engine naval version of Hürjet means making an entirely new, F18 A/B like fighter from scratch, and these would still have very limited usefulness in a hypothethical TCG Trakya that is similar to TCG Anadolu. And then if we were to make an entirely new full fledged aircraft carrier, would we make it for Hürjet, an underpowered platform based on outdated technology? To me it seems only in 2040-2050, after we have a significant fleet of TFX and significant economic recovery / growth could we hope to make a real aircraft carrier and a 5+ gen fighter that will be operated on it that will actually give us proper naval aviation capacity, if at all. Until then TB-3 / Kızılelma seem more realistic and useful.

 

[Heartbang]

It is an overkill to make a VTOL TFX. However smaller VTOL aircraft can be made. But still TB3 and Kızılelma can do the job already.

It will be a bonafide hit. And a mighty competitor to F-35B. After TFX project bears fruit we must look into it.

Hürjet is not a fighter. There is a planned light attack craft version that is also not a multi-role fighter. It also has much more in common with 4th generation fighters than a 5th gen fighter. Making a twin engine naval version of Hürjet means making an entirely new, F18 A/B like fighter from scratch, and these would still have very limited usefulness in a hypothethical TCG Trakya that is similar to TCG Anadolu. And then if we were to make an entirely new full fledged aircraft carrier, would we make it for Hürjet, an underpowered platform based on outdated technology? To me it seems only in 2040-2050, after we have a significant fleet of TFX and significant economic recovery / growth could we hope to make a real aircraft carrier and a 5+ gen fighter that will be operated on it that will actually give us proper naval aviation capacity, if at all. Until then TB-3 / Kızılelma seem more realistic and useful.

My point exactly.

 

[Yasar]

Aircraft carriers are expensive and bulky platforms that are difficult to defend and operate. They are far too complicated to be useful for small but versatile navies.
For future modern navies, their presence may be questioned with a view to reform them in to more manageable platforms of sort.

A purpose built more economically calculated design carrier of 225-250 metre length of ~20000tons with CATOBAR system, operating a few squadrons of twin TF10000 engined stealthy KE UCAVs would be capable of giving both aerial and surface defence to the ship as well as project force within a diameter of 1500km.
There is no need to build expensive carriers and planes to operate from them. Expendable UCAVs can be the solution. A good ASW frigate and a submarine would suffice to provide escort for such a ship, that can also operate various helicopters to project force and defence against other surface combatants.
We don’t have to do and copy what other navies are doing. We need to develop our naval force in line with what we need and what we can afford. (Just like our tank and Pantsir killer TB2s)

 

[dBSPL]

I don't know whether it will be an upward bifurcation from the Hurjet project or a downward fork from the MMU, but I'm almost sure that we will see another fighter jet between the two platforms, in 2030s. In addition to the TF-6000/10000 engine development program We need two engines, one in the 20.000lb (with afterburner) and one in the 35.000lb in heavy class. Apart from the Hurjet advanced training jet, the KE's heavy variant can use this 20,000lb engine in twin and single engine configurations, and the Anka-3 follow-on/heavier variant in single engine configuration, without a/b.

The 35,000lb engine can be used as a single engine in this intermediate jet as well as the MMU. Also, if the force needs a high-capacity strategic bomber/penetrator/tanker etc, this engine could be used to achieve a much heavier and larger variant of latest ANKA fork.

So to summarize, we need engines in 3 main classes for possible combat aviation projects in the medium to long term:

1. 6000/10000 light class turbofan
2. 24000/35000 heavy class turbofan
3. 13000/20000 medium class turbofan

 

[boredaf]

What I would love to see is a missile truck like F-15EX that can take full advantage of all the AESA's we are planning to put on drones.