TR TF-X KAAN Fighter Jet

[Merzifonlu]

View attachment 55832
Why does the front landing gear is like this? I need answers.

IMO, Because they wanted to make it look like F16 as much as possible. In order not to disturb the order that the maintenance teams are accustomed to.

 

[MADDOG]

View attachment 55832
Why does the front landing gear is like this? I need answers.

F-35

F-15

 

[Oublious]

View attachment 55832
Why does the front landing gear is like this? I need answers.

Thats a single arm design, whats wrong with that? If they have calculated and they certainly about it nothing wrong.

 

[UcanTost]

How is MMU going to be better than F35 thats just cope

He probably just meant physical performance i mean mmu is huge and powered by two big engines. Probably longer distance, higher ceiling and faster i guess?

 

[Manomed The Second]

Thats a single arm design, whats wrong with that? If they have calculated and they certainly about it nothing wrong.

I just needed answers I never looked at the F16 or F15 front gears nowadays they use double arm designs.

I got my answer tho

 

[Huelague]

Guys, @Manomed The Second just express his opinion. Like, I am the opinion that circle has a rectangular angles.

 

[Manomed The Second]

He probably just meant physical performance i mean mmu is huge and powered by two big engines. Probably longer distance, higher ceiling and faster i guess?

That might be it yeah.

 

[Manomed The Second]

F-35
View attachment 55833

F-15
View attachment 55834

What are the pros and cons of the single arm landing gear?

 

[CAN_TR]

Here is a comparison of Fifth gen landing gears you said those landing gear wouldn't change

Im saying that In the future block 10 will have buffier gears.

View attachment 55831 why does it have one bolt holding onto it?

 

[Ecderha]

What are the pros and cons of the single arm landing gear?

My 50 kurus (50 cent)
It is easy and quicker to replace the tyre. Like formula 1

 

[boredaf]

Not the landing gear shite from looking at pictures *again*...

 

[uçuyorum]

Everyone is allowed to have opinions but having a good / valid opinion based on facts and actual knowledge is an entirely different matter. You don't get to claim your opinion matters without a bit of due diligence

 

[Manomed The Second]

Everyone is allowed to have opinions but having a good / valid opinion based on facts and actual knowledge is an entirely different matter. You don't get to claim your opinion matters without a bit of due diligence

I can say anything I want

 

[Agha Sher]

I can say anything I want

You have relegated yourself to nothing but a spam bot.

your opinions are a waste of everybody’s time

 

[dBSPL]

horizontal lines we see here are the junction of the side weapons bay hatches to airframe, right?

edit: Not accurate just to give an idea: It seems MMU's side weapon bay is designed probably 10% wider-longer than the F-22 side gun bay.

 

[what]

Anyone is free to say what they want. But sometimes its okay to agree to disagree and to avoid 3-4 pages of back and forth and the same arguments on repeat.

 

[Gary]

Guys, any translation of what he's saying ?

 

[Windchime]

I read somewhere that as the future force structure, the US is thinking about having a number (500?) of NGADs, same number of F-35s, and then KE-style jet drones about twice the total number of manned jets. But the costs they were estimating for the NGAD apiece were in the hundreds of millions of dollars, which is absolutely bunkers. Even the F-35 is pushing it with its price. I think with NGAD the US is financially going to a place where many of its allies can't follow. If we were still on the F-35 bandwagon, we would probably still be getting off at NGAD.

Not knowing the technical details it's hard to guess if these prices are justified but this does resemble a common mode of failure in human organizations. Organizations get larger and larger, making the product produced more and more complicated and over-engineered, like what arguably happened towards the end with F-35. Whether it's the suppliers who want to sell more or companies and politicians who want the prestige of having produced the absolute best, something pushes them on far past the point where diminishing returns set in.

If Turkey ever gets to that level, I like to think that due to the Turkish mentality being more grounded in reality and shortcut-oriented, it will prove less liable to over-engineering. We might make a two-seater version of TF-X for MUM-T and call it a day.

Small clarification, the USAF NGAD is the systsms of systems program, part of which is PCA, the manned fighter compoment you are talking about.

Yes, they are planning on an unmanned component and that's the CCA, Collaborative Combat Aircraft, which will act as a workhorse. As for the PCA, what they are envisioning is a fundamentally different fighter, suited for long-range missions in the Pacific. I am expecting an aircraft at least the size of F-111s. Whatever it turns out to be, it will be very different from the other western next generation manned fighters not only because of the technological gap, but the operational environment the USAF is in, that they have to garauntee survivability and effectiveness under Chinese A2AD.

 

[Windchime]

Guys, it seems like for weeks you are arguing about unnecessary and trivial stuff like landing gears and external looks of the plane, but let's not forget this is GTU-0 and also remember that critical designing phase is not complete.

Although the shape of the MMU will probably not change by much, how the plane looks in detail will be very different between GTU-0 and the first CDR representatice prototype to be rolled out in 2025. We all know that GTU-0 wasn't even meant to fly before TUSAS insisted on doing so. Of course several things will seem off.

Also, as others have said, GTU-0 is not a mock-up. It's a functioning aircraft that, according to TUSAS can fly. I've got no reasons to not believe what TUSAS is saying regarding the GTU-0. No, it can't fulfill any tactical missions but that's not the point of this specific aircraft in the first place. Comparing GTU-0 to production F-22 or F-35, or even KF-21 prototypes and to argue MMU is flawed is absolutely pointless.

 

[Ripley]

Guys, it seems like for weeks you are arguing about unnecessary and trivial stuff like landing gears and external looks of the plane, but let's not forget this is GTU-0 and also remember that critical designing phase is not complete.

Although the shape of the MMU will probably not change by much, how the plane looks in detail will be very different between GTU-0 and the first CDR representatice prototype to be rolled out in 2025. We all know that GTU-0 wasn't even meant to fly before TUSAS insisted on doing so. Of course several things will seem off.

Also, as others have said, GTU-0 is not a mock-up. It's a functioning aircraft that, according to TUSAS can fly. I've got no reasons to not believe what TUSAS is saying regarding the GTU-0. No, it can't fulfill any tactical missions but that's not the point of this specific aircraft in the first place. Comparing GTU-0 to production F-22 or F-35, or even KF-21 prototypes and to argue MMU is flawed is absolutely pointless.

Thank you @Windchime