TR TF-X KAAN Fighter Jet

[TsumugiShirogane]

In TAI promotion video, they praised Kaan as an agile. Now, they say, they are not.

In modern combat what matters is that one spots the other earlier in their radar, beyond visual range. And so are autocannons and external pylons. It only has to carry BVRAAMs in its internal bays. Only that would be considered a legitimate, strategic asset useful against a modern adversary.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653289733202620419

This project needs more funding as well. Aksit said "development of the engine would require 10+ billion USD, but we'll manage with half that.". Considering JSF project cost totals around 400 billion USD in total according to US DoD, this doesn't sound assuring in the slightest. Can you, or rather, SHOULD you really cheap out on literally the ONE platform, that determines whether you win or lose the war, and needs to be on the cutting edge? Sure, you could come up with something that is far inferior to the one that the enemy will acquire in around a decade, it'll see you hand over air supremacy to the enemy and the rest will be what you saw in Iraq.
I sincerely hope they do a good job with the RAM coating and its RCS will be comparable to the F-35.

 

[Afif]

In modern combat what matters is that one spots the other earlier in their radar, beyond visual range. And so are autocannons and external pylons. It only has to carry BVRAAMs in its internal bays. Only that would be considered a legitimate, strategic asset useful against a modern adversary.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653289733202620419

This project needs more funding as well. Aksit said "development of the engine would require 10+ billion USD, but we'll manage with half that.". Considering JSF project cost totals around 400 billion USD in total according to US DoD, this doesn't sound assuring in the slightest. Can you, or rather, SHOULD you really cheap out on literally the ONE platform, that determines whether you win or lose the war, and needs to be on the cutting edge? Sure, you could come up with something that is far inferior to the one that the enemy will acquire in around a decade, it'll see you hand over air supremacy to the enemy and the rest will be what you saw in Iraq.
I sincerely hope they do a good job with the RAM coating and its RCS will be comparable to the F-35.

The total program cost, including research and development and procurement of all airframes was approximately $400 Billion. The actual research, development and testing phase on its own cost only $35 Billion, as presented in the 2020 JSF CRS report. The overwhelming majority of the $400 Billion program figure is the purchase of 2,456 aircraft, the largest aircraft acquisition in modern US military history.

Now add to that other crucial aspects of the program. For starters, F-35 is actually three different fighters in one airframe.
Also, one definitely needs to take into consideration the labour Cost, PPP and the fact that Lockheed or P&W is not a state owned companies.

After that, it should not look as far-fetched as it appears at first.


Note- When talking about National security strategy, it is always important to understand that, It is not necessary ( or not even logical all the times) to match adversary’s exact A-Z qualitative capabilities to form a sound strategy and achieve credible deterrence.

 

[TsumugiShirogane]

The total program cost, including research and development and procurement of all airframes was approximately $400 Billion. The actual research, development and testing phase on its own cost only $35 Billion, as presented in the 2020 JSF CRS report. The overwhelming majority of the $400 Billion program figure is the purchase of 2,456 aircraft, the largest aircraft acquisition in modern US military history.

Now add to that other crucial aspects of the programs, F-35 is actually three different fighters in one airframe. Also, one definitely needs to take into consideration the labour Cost, PPP and the fact that Lockheed is not state company.

Now, it should not look as far-fetched as it appears at first.

I stand corrected, apologies. But still, it'll require the same, if not more that sum, if it's to not only be in serial production and but to stand its ground against the fifth gen aircraft, in less than twenty years.
Plus, the labour cost would be a minor factor in cutting-edge tech development, and it's offset wildly by the prior experience they had with the F-22 and such. And LM being a private company is a additional factor to the increased cost, could you elaborate further if you don't mind my ignorance?

 

[Afif]

I stand corrected, apologies.

No problem.

But still, it'll require the same, if not more that sum, if it's to not only be in serial production and but to stand its ground against the fifth gen aircraft, in less than twenty years.
Plus, the labour cost would be a minor factor in cutting-edge tech development,

Let me unpack that little bit.


Afaik, The development budget is equivalent to $ 9-10 billions. And if the engine development cost is equivalent to $ 5 billions, in total it would be around 15 billions. (Keep in mind we are talking about direct exchange rate here, not PPP)

So, almost half of JSF development cost.

Labour cost should make a difference in the sesne that, TAI engineers probably on avarage does not need to get paid as high as Lockheed engineers.

But mostly, it is about PPP as a whole.

i assume TUSAS pays it's engineers in Lira, not in USD. But more importantly, (i assume) all the local subcontractor companies that are involved in the TFX project get paid by the state/TAI in local currency. In addition to that, cost of all the locally produced raw materials/parts will also come into the equation.

In this case, PPP would be considerably more accurate when estimating TFX actual development cost.

and it's offset wildly by the prior experience they had with the F-22 and such.

Maybe not as much as it seems at first glance.

Let me explain why, when LM developed F/A-22 as the first true 5th gen air dominance fighter, they had to innovate lot of concepts and technologies (from scratch in the literal snese) that were unheard of before.
Which was much harder as well as costlier Then using follow on same proven design with modifications (like TFX or KFX). In addition to that, they used three decades old design, manufacturing and testing techniques and processes.

However, today much more advanced yet efficient and less costly design processes (like new generation softwares) are available.

Same is true for manufacturing and testing processes. We have now additive manufacturing technology, digital twin technology, etc available.

Just for one example, TAI literally 3D printed TFX's bulkhead with $ 250k printer instead of using costly and super heavy hydraulic forging presses. (Probbaly only 5/6 countries has that technology in the world, but you can commercially buy that same 3d printer that TAI bought)

In a nutshell, all of this considerably reduces the cost.

And LM being a private company is a additional factor to the increased cost, could you elaborate further if you don't mind my ignorance?

Tbh, in this matter I am only relying on 'general wisdom'

I don't have sufficient info to specifically unpack it in details. However, there are other respected forum members here who probably could help us.

 

[Ecderha]

İm a tier 2 shitposter and its not Turkiye its TURKEY.

on a serious note; does anyone have more info on the engines feeding the ew suite etc?

No offense but you are not correct. It is not Turkey anymore.

More than 10 months ago Turkiye government has sent a letter to the United Nations formally requesting that it be referred to as Türkiye.
As it is spelled and pronounced in Turkish. The country called itself Türkiye in 1923 after its declaration of independence.

Idea is the better represent Turkish culture and values, including that “Made in Türkiye” be used instead of “Made in Turkey” on exported products.
So official document was accepted by UN and from that moment any country should write or say Turkiye instead Turkey on official documents or official meeting or when there is referring the country etc..

 

[TsumugiShirogane]

No problem.



Let me unpack that little bit.


Afaik, The development budget is equivalent to $ 9-10 billions. And if the engine development cost is equivalent to $ 5 billions, in total it would be around 15 billions. (Keep in mind we are talking about direct exchange rate here, not PPP)

So, almost half of JSF development cost.

Labour cost should make a difference in the sesne that, TAI engineers probably on avarage does not need to get paid as high as Lockheed engineers.

But mostly, it is about PPP as a whole.

i assume TUSAS pays it's engineers in Lira, not in USD. But more importantly, (i assume) all the local subcontractor companies that are involved in the TFX project get paid by the state/TAI in local currency. In addition to that, cost of all the locally produced raw materials/parts will also come into the equation.

In this case, PPP would be considerably more accurate when estimating TFX actual development cost.



Maybe not as much as it seems at first glance.

Let me explain why, when LM developed F/A-22 as the first true 5th gen air dominance fighter, they had to innovate lot of concepts and technologies (from scratch in the literal snese) that were unheard of before.
Which was much harder as well as costlier Then using follow on same proven design with modifications (like TFX or KFX). In addition to that, they used three decades old design, manufacturing and testing techniques and processes.

However, today much more advanced yet efficient and less costly design processes (like new generation softwares) are available.

Same is true for manufacturing and testing processes. We have now additive manufacturing technology, digital twin technology, etc available.

Jist for one example, TAI literally 3D printed TFX's bulkhead with $ 250k printer instead of using costly and super heavy hydraulic forging presses. (Probbaly only 5/6 countries has that technology in the world, but you can commercially buy that same 3d printer that TAI bought)

In a nutshell, all of this considerably reduces the cost.




Tbh, in this matter I am only relying on 'general wisdom'

I don't have sufficient info to specifically unpack it in details. However, there are other respected forum members here who probably could help us.

While they did pave the way with the general design and the concept of "stealth", when it comes to engines they have a mountain of experience. They first developed the F119, with former experience from F100 all the way to 1950's, and then built the F135 from it. And we've seen the news of the F-35 crashing, having a myriad of minor and some major kinks to iron out over the years in service. We're going to do it cheaper, with no prior experience or research, than the ones developing supersonic thrust systems, for the better part of the century..? Also the RAM coating is still one major problem we have to consider, China, with all its students studying at MIT and the likes, and having access to many classified US industry data through various means, still is yet to develop one on the same level as its adversary. We need to think realistically here. My point is that this project simply requires way more budget than it currently is alloted, if we want to come up a peer system on the same level, in the following two decades.
As for the PPP, apart from the engineer salaries and manned labor costs, the materials and research required for the jet, if it's meant to be competent, isn't going to be substantially less than the US counterparts.

 

[Heartbang]

While they did pave the way with the general design and the concept of "stealth", when it comes to engines they have a mountain of experience. They first developed the F119, with former experience from F100 all the way to 1950's, and then built the F135 from it. And we've seen the news of the F-35 crashing, having a myriad of minor and some major kinks to iron out over the years in service. We're going to do it cheaper, with no prior experience or research, than the ones developing supersonic thrust systems, for the better part of the century..? Also the RAM coating is still one major problem we have to consider, China, with all its students studying at MIT and the likes, and having access to many classified US industry data through various means, still is yet to develop one on the same level as its adversary. We need to think realistically here. My point is that this project simply requires way more budget than it currently is alloted, if we want to come up a peer system on the same level, in the following two decades.
As for the PPP, apart from the engineer salaries and manned labor costs, the materials and research required for the jet, if it's meant to be competent, isn't going to be substantially less than the US counterparts.

RAM coating is in the bag. If you don't believe me, you could use the search function above to see for yourself. No need to worry on that front.

As for the F135, the engine of the F35, it is an troubled off-shoot of a reliable F119 core. Had a lotta issues both in development period, and the usage.
That engine is not our yardstick. F119 is. And since the 80's TEI is very intimately involved with the predecessor of that engine, the F110.
They can rise to the challenge of developing a "T119" , if they are not cash starved or rushed with unrealistic timelines.

 

[TsumugiShirogane]

RAM coating is in the bag. If you don't believe me, you could use the search function above to see for yourself. No need to worry on that front.

As for the F135, the engine of the F35, it is an troubled off-shoot of a reliable F119 core. Had a lotta issues both in development period, and the usage.
That engine is not our yardstick. F119 is. And since the 80's TEI is very intimately involved with the predecessor of that engine, the F110.
They can rise to the challenge of developing a "T119" , if they are not cash starved or rushed with unrealistic timelines.

I've been following updates on the daily, but didn't hear about new developments on the RAM coat aside from Aselsan's as part of a NATO joint radar absorbing materials study, alongside their RAPID software. If our jet will have comparable RCS to the F-35, it would be a massive success. Next issue to solve would be the heat. As for the engine problem I'm still firmly behind the idea that they must be APTLY funded to rise to the challenge. A potential conflict with Greece will be started, and decided in a matter of hours. And the actors will be the supersonic jet fighters and AI controlled drones, their EW suites and BVRAAM missiles. Aided by AWACS. If protracted, sea assets will see use, and before 24 hours it will end with both sides retreating and cutting their losses. I see tanks, helicopters and propeller drones for example, currently non-factors in this scenario. Their export value is obviously crucial, but we need to keep in mind the platform vital to our literal survivability as a nation. You can't cut corners for these platforms and you can't cheap out. Without quality, quantity will mean nothing, as we've seen Russian jets absolutely fail when it came to challenge Ukrainian airspace.

 

[Afif]

F119 is. And since the 80's TEI is very intimately involved with the predecessor of that engine, the F110.
They can rise to the challenge of developing a "T119" , if they are not cash starved or rushed with unrealistic timelines.

F110 is not F119's predecessor.

 

[Afif]

While they did pave the way with the general design and the concept of "stealth", when it comes to engines they have a mountain of experience. They first developed the F119, with former experience from F100 all the way to 1950's, and then built the F135 from it. And we've seen the news of the F-35 crashing, having a myriad of minor and some major kinks to iron out over the years in service. We're going to do it cheaper, with no prior experience or research, than the ones developing supersonic thrust systems, for the better part of the century..? Also the RAM coating is still one major problem we have to consider, China, with all its students studying at MIT and the likes, and having access to many classified US industry data through various means, still is yet to develop one on the same level as its adversary. We need to think realistically here. My point is that this project simply requires way more budget than it currently is alloted, if we want to come up a peer system on the same level, in the following two decades.
As for the PPP, apart from the engineer salaries and manned labor costs, the materials and research required for the jet, if it's meant to be competent, isn't going to be substantially less than the US counterparts.

US spent billions in RAM research alone over 5 decades and still continue to do so. F-35 is their 4th stealth get and they already rolled out their 5th one (B-21) recently.

So, it is very natural they will continue to have the advantage in this regard over the others in foreseeable future.

Of course, that doesn't mean Turkish RAM wouldn't be good enough.

I am confident TFX will achieve frontal RCS of 20-25 dbcm as was set in the requirement.

And this is good enough for today's environment.

Also, stealth is relatively more advantageous in A2G mission compared to areal domain where both side suspected to operate 5th gen LO platforms against each other.

In this scenario, 5th gen fighter uses its main radar in limited manner. (So it's emission doesn't get caught on adversary’s EW suite) Rather, it primarily relies on its listening ability to detect, track and fire on adversary. (F35's exceptional sensor fusion ability and interoperability with other F-35s allows it to have complete passive firing solution)


But more importantly, as i emphasized previously- When talking about National security strategy, it is always important to understand that, It is not necessary ( or not even logical all the times) to match adversary’s exact A-Z qualitative capabilities to form a sound strategy and achieve credible deterrence.

 

[Era_shield]

I stand corrected, apologies. But still, it'll require the same, if not more that sum, if it's to not only be in serial production and but to stand its ground against the fifth gen aircraft, in less than twenty years.
Plus, the labour cost would be a minor factor in cutting-edge tech development, and it's offset wildly by the prior experience they had with the F-22 and such. And LM being a private company is a additional factor to the increased cost, could you elaborate further if you don't mind my ignorance?

Apart from what Afif said, remember also that the JSF development program didn't develop 1 fighter but 3. Further, the 3 fighters were supposed to have over 80% commonality in parts. It was a much more complicated and more expensive development program.

 

[Hepdert]

Thnx to Allah He did not expose the export price of Kaan

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1655127002532179970

TUSAŞ General Manager Temel Kotil: (KAAN/MMU) Such an aircraft would normally sell for $100 million. We can't say the price right now, but that's how it is. An aircraft above the F-35. By 2029, we will produce 2 per month. That's $2.4 billion.

 

[Cabatli_TR]

Mr Kotil: "A big radar will come to the front of Hürjet and Hurjet will be as effective aircraft as an F16 with 2/3 size and less payload and speed"

 

[Agha Sher]

Thnx to Allah He did not expose the export price of Kaan

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1655127002532179970

TUSAŞ General Manager Temel Kotil: (KAAN/MMU) Such an aircraft would normally sell for $100 million. We can't say the price right now, but that's how it is. An aircraft above the F-35. By 2029, we will produce 2 per month. That's $2.4 billion.

I think if KAAN finds large export orders the production date should be increased to 3 or 4 per months in order to not have long lead times

 

[Lool]

Mr Kotil: "A big radar will come to the front of Hürjet and Hurjet will be as effective aircraft as an F16 with 2/3 size and less payload and speed"

They really need to fix the "less payload and speed" since these are important factors in any fighter jet

 

[Heartbang]

I think if KAAN finds large export orders the production date should be increased to 3 or 4 per months in order to not have long lead times

Won't be enough. At least 10 per month must be the target.

 

[TsumugiShirogane]

US spent billions in RAM research alone over 5 decades and still continue to do so. F-35 is their 4th stealth get and they already rolled out their 5th one (B-21) recently.

So, it is very natural they will continue to have the advantage in this regard over the others in foreseeable future.

Of course, that doesn't mean Turkish RAM wouldn't be good enough.

I am confident TFX will achieve frontal RCS of 20-25 dbcm as was set in the requirement.

View attachment 57149

And this is good enough for today's environment.

Also, stealth is relatively more advantageous in A2G mission compared to areal domain where both side suspected to operate 5th gen LO platforms against each other.

In this scenario, 5th gen fighter uses its main radar in limited manner. (So it's emission doesn't get caught on adversary’s EW suite) Rather, it primarily relies on its listening ability to detect, track and fire on adversary. (F35's exceptional sensor fusion ability and interoperability with other F-35s allows it to have complete passive firing solution)


But more importantly, as i emphasized previously- When talking about National security strategy, it is always important to understand that, It is not necessary ( or not even logical all the times) to match adversary’s exact A-Z qualitative capabilities to form a sound strategy and achieve credible deterrence.

Considering F-35 is VLO as it stands, LO range may not be sufficient by the time our takes off. A VLO jet can fly unimpeded from angles not covered by passive IR sensors of the opposing jets and deep strike into enemy territory and sea assets undetected by SAM systems and ground radars.

You pointing out the passive sensors coming into play in an A2A fight between two stealth platform, it begs the question, we've developed the TOYGUN EOTS system, but does it outrange the Block-4 EOTS/DAS? Another major issue with the engine, IR footprint. If our engine isn't up to 5th gen stealth standards, the adversary will spot it with the passive sensors further away, and will be able to lock on and fire earlier than we do. Another point on why the engine needs a greater development budget.

Not matching the adversaries capability but remaining superior would require you innovating new lateral platforms that compensate for your technological inferiority in the primary fighting platforms. We're addressing that somewhat with other munitions, at the current stage. But they don't have "presence", in peacetime, that's the problem. Your assessment may hold true for strategic prolonged conflict where all your developed platforms come into play, but for short bursts of tactical skirmishes, and for denying space and deterring enemy assets in peacetime by having them being "present", your standing supersonic jets, and submarines having the qualitatively edge is an essential aspect. DPRK has compensated for its lack of nearly ALL conventional systems with nuclear systems which have a binary "launch or not" deterrence, the guys still do parades with Korean War era gear and no one can touch them, yet they can't step outside of their borders, only throw empty threats every once in a while.

 

[Profchaos]

Won't be enough. At least 10 per month must be the target.

You must be out of touch with the reallity to say such thing.

edit: 2 in one month is a perfect number. Even 1.5 per month would be sufficient in a year. And if they can keep those numbers same for 10 year continuously thats 180-240 jets for TAF is no joke. When you consider the economic burden of all these projects maybe 1.5 planes for a month is a better production rate. Also i hope we would limit the purchases of Altay and Atak 2 because their usage on the modern battlefield are quite questionable.

 

[TheInsider]

KAAN will have a comparable frontal RCS to F-22. I can't disclose the details but we are at a very good point in both RAM paint, RAM coating, and auxiliary items like RAM putty. The geometry of the aircraft and production quality already speaks for itself.

 

[Afif]

Considering F-35 is VLO as it stands, LO range may not be sufficient by the time our takes off. A VLO jet can fly unimpeded from angles not covered by passive IR sensors of the opposing jets and deep strike into enemy territory and sea assets undetected by SAM systems and ground radars.

Previously we did somewhat detailed examination of F-35's RCS based on available data. We tried to figure out how SIPER would hold up against a F-35.
(ERIS has a detection range of 470km against targets with 1m RCS)

I actually read that article before. But the thing is, as he mnetioned clearly, this chart is without taking into account ultra-modern RAM coating ( Except for the inner surface of the inlet duct, even though it was only mnZn RAM ) that F-35 has on its fuselage.

I mean it is no secret US was working on RAM coating for 4 decade now and they are ahead of everybody by far in this regard.

And F-35s RAM coating is optimized against S and X Band.

He also said,
"keep in mind though the actual RAM used on stealth aircraft may have absorbing rating of-15 to -25 dB depend on the actual frequency"

And i am gonna say this is actually a conservative estimate given how far US advanced in the field of RAM development.

And if we take cutting age RAM into consideration. Let's say it reduced the F-35s frontal RCS by -20dB against S Band.

And this is f-35s frontal RCS against S Band without RAM.
View attachment 55474

• S-band result of clean F-35 in Case 2 (-20° to +20° horizontal arc, -20° to +20° vertical arc)

So, now on top of that with RAM reducing -20dB....well, you can do the math on your own.

There are saying of USAF generals were they claimed, F-35 is the most stealthiest jet in US inventory.


Note, please don't misunderstand the purpose of this post. I am not on a campaign to discredit ERIS's capability.
It is an excellent radar with cutting age GaN based dual axis AESA technology.

Here is the main article.

F-35A Radar scattering simulation

Introduction F-35 is the backbone of American stealth fighter fleet, it is intended to replace F-16, F-18C/D, Harrier and A-10. There are currently 3 versions of F-35 which are F-35A, F-35B and F-3…

basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com

You pointing out the passive sensors coming into play in an A2A fight between two stealth platform, it begs the question, we've developed the TOYGUN EOTS system, but does it outrange the Block-4 EOTS/DAS?

TOYGUN is not similar to EOTS.


You see TOYGUN is a FLIR only.
While EOTS combines both FLIR and IRST in one.

However, that is why for A2A applications TFX has independent KARAT IRST.

IR footprint. If our engine isn't up to 5th gen stealth standards, the adversary will spot it with the passive sensors further away, and will be able to lock on and fire earlier than we do. Another point on why the engine needs a greater development budget.

True. (But it would be interested to see if they can pull off the desired result within current budget)

Not matching the adversaries capability but remaining superior would require you innovating new lateral platforms that compensate for your technological inferiority in the primary fighting platforms. We're addressing that somewhat with other munitions, at the current stage. But they don't have "presence", in peacetime, that's the problem. Your assessment may hold true for strategic prolonged conflict where all your developed platforms come into play, but for short bursts of tactical skirmishes, and for denying space and deterring enemy assets in peacetime by having them being "present", your standing supersonic jets, and submarines having the qualitatively edge is an essential aspect. DPRK has compensated for its lack of nearly ALL conventional systems with nuclear systems which have a binary "launch or not" deterrence, the guys still do parades with Korean War era gear and no one can touch them, yet they can't step outside of their borders, only throw empty threats every once in a while.

More or less I agree. However, if your concern is Greece then I have to say, they are unlikely to risk their limited numbers of F-35s against TurAF in short brust of tactical skirmishes.