TR TF-X KAAN Fighter Jet

[TheInsider]

The latest info I know is the 6+2 configuration. (6 big AAMs+2 small AAMs)

 

[Lonewolf]

As well as increasing the RCS of the plane while opening weapon bay doors (apparently for over 4 seconds) , when the plane is at 25000ft or lower there is significant overheating problem of the surfaces If the plane has flown for more than 10 minutes at that altitude, which hinders the operation of weapon bay doors.
According to Tubitak MD there were well over 200 firing tests carried out last year. From little bit of news that trickles out to the media, we know that they are producing a liquid fuel powered ramjet. He has said that Ramjet is almost ready and they have turned their attention to the development of the scramjet. The missile is going to be a liquid fuel powered (most likely Gel Based) ramjet.

Liquid fueled for air to air missile is a really bad choice tbh , gel based is something that's a workable solution , good that you went for gel based .

Sfdr tech is a bit tricky .

And by firing ,i meant that actually missile being launched from ground with booster , it helps evaluate flight characteristic for faster development and improvement in base design . Ground firing is just for engine , i meant missile profile , what it looks like .

 

[AzeriTank]

Liquid fueled for air to air missile is a really bad choice tbh , gel based is something that's a workable solution , good that you went for gel based .

Sfdr tech is a bit tricky .

And by firing ,i meant that actually missile being launched from ground with booster , it helps evaluate flight characteristic for faster development and improvement in base design . Ground firing is just for engine , i meant missile profile , what it looks like .

Tubitak is waiting for the opening of the supersonic test facility to finalize all tests. They didnt test the missile itself, which will start after the opening the supersonic wind tunnel facility. So far, they mostly tested the ramjet engine and some ground tests. Tubitak, doesnt want to spend hundreds of millions of dollars by wasting tens of missiles. thats why the facility is very important and it will open in 2022.

 

[Nilgiri]

6 seems feasible but 8 is hard to fit horizontally next to each other unless vertically stacked which will result in a bulkier undercarriage

AMCA's IWB is shown in the below picture

View attachment 38755

Yah but from what I;ve seen so far AMCA is somewhat physically smaller than TFX in the dev so far.

AMCA if it proceeds along this dev trajectory to when its frozen....clearly will have main bay space for 4 BVR, no doubt.

I like AMCA approach for Indian specific theatre needs....anything which gets us more airframes (optimising size a bit smaller if need be) is a positive for our theatre. But thats different subject.

======================================================

Volumetrically TF-X seems quite similar to F-22 in the middle section area at this stage...

F-22 has 6 amraams and 2 sidewinders for internal config

So if TF-X expects to employ a BVR of similar size to AMRAAM, it can achieve 6 in the main bay by staggering like F-22 does:

Can see the staggered hardpoints when empty:

Then the additional smaller sidewinder-sized 2 on the sides for total of 8.

I am unsure why Chinese didn't do the same with theirs and restricted to 4 PL-15 in mainbay (from what we can see so far).

Its very conservatively spaced compared to F-22.

It is likely designing ahead with PL-21's diameter in mind (which will be significantly more than current PL-15)

i.e the expectation that PL-21 will form the majority of the platform's lifetime...so bake the internals with that in mind.

Then it is for sure constrained to just 4 in main bay since you can't stagger that size anymore.

Whereas F-22 is constrained to AIM-120 style diameter for its 6 stagger...and evolves the JATM around that constraint.
But retains 6 BVRAAMs in the main bay when it (JATM) comes online.

Both approaches have their pros and cons that you then plan rest of the military asset architecture, wargaming analysis and mission profiles.

Thus TR I would assume at this point wants to do a 6 + 2 with its GOKTUG family for time being....but maybe w.r.t the final iteration of gokhan ramjet, they may opt to do 4 + 2 (i.e similar to J-20 approach w.r.t PL-21 in mind) instead.

It depends if the CBA best suits it closer to design freeze point in future for the strict "base" A2A stealth profile. i.e It would depend on how Gokhan size and mission utility turns out and what you want to bake in volumetrically (with further CBA for A2G impact) as the best default.

Best to wait and see, its anyone's guess right now as there are too many variables that need to mature and cross-analyse a bit later in the project.

TFX internal bays’ original size may have not allowed many missiles. In fact even SOM-J would not be accommodated. But Tubitak Sage MD has stated clearly that the SOM-J will be carried inside. That is a big missile. So the internal bays’ design must have changed. Until March 2023, we can only speculate.
Also you can’t really compare PL15 with Aim-120 amraam. PL15 is a 4m long 20cm diameter missile, where as amraam is 3.7m long and 18cm diameter.
Also if we are thinking of a meteor like ramjet missile, then Meteor is even very slightly smaller than amraam. So, it should fit in to the same bays.
What is most interesting is that , TUSAS’s site states that:
“Precise and accurate weapon firing from internal weapon bays at high/supersonic speed”
That is something F35 pilot has to think twice, as supersonic speeds damage the plane’s coating and the plane cannot open doors above 1.2 Mach at altitude. Plus at or below 25000ft it has to slow down drastically before opening bay doors due to over heating.
We also need to remember that all our dimensions and weapon platforms have to be in line with NATO standards for interoperability.

Yeah things change for F-22 when its (stealth) A2G mission and large diameter A2G munitions (JDAM) are required.

Designing for 6 goktugs internally staggered actually can be key consideration in the end to achieve (stealth) A2G of 2 large diameter munitions (or the equivalent number of SDB) and still retain 2 BVR goktugs stealthily in the mainbay.

I believe with the two inboard internal staggering, you then employ an adapter for a "dbl slot" munition there and leave the outboard free for (in F-22 case) BVRAAM.

i.e BVR stealth capability option there while on A2G profile.

Rather than if you have 4 slots and just enough room for the 2 SOM-J (or similar sized munition) and then only got the WVR side slots stealthily.

I would assume Gokhan (ramjet) likely takes up similar volumetric consequence like the SOM-J.

But we need to wait and see and then see what TAI designs outwards from a default base requirement (rather than freezing and constraining the payload resolutions from outside in).

In the end it depends how these things come out in the optimised volumetric and payload mission analysis.

 

[AverageMilitaryEnjoyer]

Yah but from what I;ve seen so far AMCA is somewhat physically smaller than TFX in the dev so far.

AMCA if it proceeds along this dev trajectory to when its frozen....clearly will have main bay space for 4 BVR, no doubt.

I like AMCA approach for Indian specific theatre needs....anything which gets us more airframes (optimising size a bit smaller if need be) is a positive for our theatre. But thats different subject.

======================================================

Volumetrically TF-X seems quite similar to F-22 in the middle section area at this stage...

F-22 has 6 amraams and 2 sidewinders for internal config

So if TF-X expects to employ a BVR of similar size to AMRAAM, it can achieve 6 in the main bay by staggering like F-22 does:

Can see the staggered hardpoints when empty:

Then the additional smaller sidewinder-sized 2 on the sides for total of 8.

I am unsure why Chinese didn't do the same with theirs and restricted to 4 PL-15 in mainbay (from what we can see so far).

Its very conservatively spaced compared to F-22.

It is likely designing ahead with PL-21's diameter in mind (which will be significantly more than current PL-15)

i.e the expectation that PL-21 will form the majority of the platform's lifetime...so bake the internals with that in mind.

Then it is for sure constrained to just 4 in main bay since you can't stagger that size anymore.

Whereas F-22 is constrained to AIM-120 style diameter for its 6 stagger...and evolves the JATM around that constraint.
But retains 6 BVRAAMs in the main bay when it (JATM) comes online.

Both approaches have their pros and cons that you then plan rest of the military asset architecture, wargaming analysis and mission profiles.

Thus TR I would assume at this point wants to do a 6 + 2 with its GOKTUG family for time being....but maybe w.r.t the final iteration of gokhan ramjet, they may opt to do 4 + 2 (i.e similar to J-20 approach w.r.t PL-21 in mind) instead.

It depends if the CBA best suits it closer to design freeze point in future for the strict "base" A2A stealth profile. i.e It would depend on how Gokhan size and mission utility turns out and what you want to bake in volumetrically (with further CBA for A2G impact) as the best default.

Best to wait and see, its anyone's guess right now as there are too many variables that need to mature and cross-analyse a bit later in the project.




Yeah things change for F-22 when its (stealth) A2G mission and large diameter A2G munitions (JDAM) are required.

Designing for 6 goktugs internally staggered actually can be key consideration in the end to achieve (stealth) A2G of 2 large diameter munitions (or the equivalent number of SDB) and still retain 2 BVR goktugs stealthily in the mainbay.

I believe with the two inboard internal staggering, you then employ an adapter for a "dbl slot" munition there and leave the outboard free for (in F-22 case) BVRAAM.

i.e BVR stealth capability option there while on A2G profile.

Rather than if you have 4 slots and just enough room for the 2 SOM-J (or similar sized munition) and then only got the WVR side slots stealthily.

I would assume Gokhan (ramjet) likely takes up similar volumetric consequence like the SOM-J.

But we need to wait and see and then see what TAI designs outwards from a default base requirement (rather than freezing and constraining the payload resolutions from outside in).

In the end it depends how these things come out in the optimised volumetric and payload mission analysis.

@Nilgiri the latest design which was revealed at the last presentation by the Air Force and on the video shared by TAI is more up to date and shows/indicates 4 BVRAAM + 2 SRAAM missiles carriable inside the weapons bay

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1479148256387080197

 

[Lonewolf]

Tubitak is waiting for the opening of the supersonic test facility to finalize all tests. They didnt test the missile itself, which will start after the opening the supersonic wind tunnel facility. So far, they mostly tested the ramjet engine and some ground tests. Tubitak, doesnt want to spend hundreds of millions of dollars by wasting tens of missiles. thats why the facility is very important and it will open in 2022.

That's wind tunnel facility , you will test the airframe in it , but some firing up test will have to take place .

And how does the first two missile were tested , in some other nations wind tunnel ? I heard Britain provided you with wind tunnel testing facility for testing .

 

[TheInsider]

@Nilgiri the latest design which was revealed at the last presentation by the Air Force and on the video shared by TAI is more up to date and shows/indicates 4 BVRAAM + 2 SRAAM missiles carriable inside the weapons bay

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1479148256387080197

Those are the "minimum requirements" set by TurAF. It means TurAF expects the end product to have at least that much performance otherwise TurAF won't accept the finished product.

 

[Huelague]

The latest info I know is the 6+2 configuration. (6 big AAMs+2 small AAMs)

I remember this also. Maybe with new typ of missiles like US "Pelegrin", more AAM are possible.

 

[Quasar]

From a diffrent perspective, existance of AKINCI but especially MIUS (and God knows what kind of UAVS that we will have in 5-6 years time from now)renders the number of A2A missiles a bit less relevant. Since A2A missiles or Air to ground ammunition carried by wingmans could be easly added to the Arsenal of MMU. İt is safe to assume that all kinds of Supersonic and to a some extend some of the sub sonic UAVs will be integral part of MMU's missions and tactics. Plus infact any ammunition carried by any air, sea or land platform shairng the same network with MMU can be easly added to MMU's arsenal in certain cases.

 

[Hexciter]

Acceleration is the name of the game for TF/X​

Acceleration is the name of the game for TF-X | Shephard

With the backing of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkish Aerospace recently opened a new engineering centre to speed up its work on the TF-X indigenous fighter programme.

www.shephardmedia.com

 

[CAN_TR]

a rushed development could be very dangerous.

In the end we might get a plane that falls like flies

It doesn't mean necessarily that things are made half hearted in a rush...

 

[Nilgiri]

Also if we are thinking of a meteor like ramjet missile, then Meteor is even very slightly smaller than amraam. So, it should fit in to the same bays.

I forgot to mention meteor volumetric impact goes past just the raw diameter....compared to rocket motor basis like AMRAAM

It has sizeable fins and the intake etc.

This is why the meteor doesn't fit in main bay in feasible optimised fashion in the F-22 for example (this came up in some paper I remember reading a long while back).

Interesting case of the lag/lead times in these project devs more broadly, as by F-35 time, it (meteor) was considered for baked in design at that point (whereas F-22 was much earlier project genesis).

I suppose what F-22 and F-35 each represent for larger NATO ecosystem vis-a-vis export ban (of F-22) played a role too.

Choice of commiting to 4 hardpoints mainbay (and no sidebays) was also far more straightforward decision for F-35 to begin with... given F-35 midsection size, single engine and its placement etc.

 

[Yasar_TR]

I forgot to mention meteor volumetric impact goes past just the raw diameter....compared to rocket motor basis like AMRAAM

It has sizeable fins and the intake etc.

This is why the meteor doesn't fit in main bay in feasible optimised fashion in the F-22 for example (this came up in some paper I remember reading a long while back).

Interesting case of the lag/lead times in these project devs more broadly, as by F-35 time, it (meteor) was considered for baked in design at that point (whereas F-22 was much earlier project genesis).

I suppose what F-22 and F-35 each represent for larger NATO ecosystem vis-a-vis export ban (of F-22) played a role too.

Choice of commiting to 4 hardpoints mainbay (and no sidebays) was also far more straightforward decision for F-35 to begin with... given F-35 midsection size, single engine and its placement etc.

Can F-35 carry Meteor?

Here is an excerpt of the answer of the article to this question:




BAE Systems and MBDA have been contracted to complete the integration of Meteor and Spear missiles onto the Lockheed Martin F-35 for two European operators. ... The fifth-generation fighter will be able to carry up to eight of the more than 75nm range ….

Italy, UK to complete Meteor, Spear missile integration on F-35 fleets

BAE Systems and MBDA have been contracted to complete the integration of Meteor and Spear missiles onto the Lockheed Martin F-35 for two European operators.

www.flightglobal.com

 

[tayyare]

Can F-35 carry Meteor?

Here is an excerpt of the answer of the article to this question:



BAE Systems and MBDA have been contracted to complete the integration of Meteor and Spear missiles onto the Lockheed Martin F-35 for two European operators. ... The fifth-generation fighter will be able to carry up to eight of the more than 75nm range ….

Italy, UK to complete Meteor, Spear missile integration on F-35 fleets

BAE Systems and MBDA have been contracted to complete the integration of Meteor and Spear missiles onto the Lockheed Martin F-35 for two European operators.

www.flightglobal.com

8 Spears not meteor. F35 is expected to carry meteor but quantity is not known.

 

[Nilgiri]

Can F-35 carry Meteor?

Here is an excerpt of the answer of the article to this question:



BAE Systems and MBDA have been contracted to complete the integration of Meteor and Spear missiles onto the Lockheed Martin F-35 for two European operators. ... The fifth-generation fighter will be able to carry up to eight of the more than 75nm range ….

Italy, UK to complete Meteor, Spear missile integration on F-35 fleets

BAE Systems and MBDA have been contracted to complete the integration of Meteor and Spear missiles onto the Lockheed Martin F-35 for two European operators.

www.flightglobal.com

yes thats what i mean, F-35 can handle it (and being integrated now) as it was expected to early on enough (given larger NATO basis for F-35 and meteor as known program by then)

Whereas its too big to retrofit into F-22 (which was not designed for NATO anyway and preceded meteor program)...given the amraams (C's and D "clipfins") are tight squeeze to begin with in the staggering.

Its diameter is around that of amraam, but its inlets and fins (even if redesigned a bit smaller) make it much more space-occupying than amraam...i.e cant fit 6 meteors (instead of 6 amraams) into F-22 mainbay.

Like I guess you could do the 2:1 occupy thing done with JDAM for the meteor in F-22....but its suboptimal use of space and assigned mission profiles developed.

Internally (stealth) I believe F-35 will eventually be able to carry 4 meteors (1 per internal hardpoint) with somewhat smaller redesigned fins (just like AIM-120 C and D were done so for F-22 internals in mind).

But enough overall room was given for this kind of thing from beginning...as meteor was a scaled matured program by time F-35 program started.

Though don't quote me on this stuff, its off top of my head.

Anyway it will be interesting to see what TF-X opts for with its expected family of missiles and munitions.

 

[Fairon]

We should really focus on missiles like Raytheons Peregrine missile. That missile if it became operational will be the game changer on air to air combat.

200km missiles like Meteors are good and all but you won't be hitting any fighter aircraft at that range. Ability to carry twice as much medium range missiles will give you a massive advantage on air.

 

[Nilgiri]

We should really focus on missiles like Raytheons Peregrine missile. That missile if it became operational will be the game changer on air to air combat.

200km missiles like Meteors are good and all but you won't be hitting any fighter aircraft at that range. Ability to carry twice as much medium range missiles will give you a massive advantage on air.

It's like a buffet....you want as many choices as possible.

You want to have as wide spread of possibilities as possible to have most mission capability at hand....especially since a 5th gen a/c is a very large sunk in cost.

 

[TheInsider]

Türkiye also works on anti-missile missiles for fighters.

 

[what]

Turkish police, how many MMUs are they getting?

Stop being a pain in the ass and posting the same thing that has been deleted 2x already.

Police are not getting any fighter jets and you know, we all know why you say it and we understand it but please dont derail the thread. Any further off-topic posts will be deleted & warned without further commenting.

 

[MADDOG]

Somebody call an ambulance for me