TR TF-X KAAN Fighter Jet

[Rodeo]

3-4 countries will take the Tempest. Anyway, it will be at least 2 times the price of TF-X.

AT LEAST

(it should've been capital letters.)

 

[Aloster]

I thought about the same thing.

And let me say they are working on Computational Electromagnetic programs. I worked in the project phase of that building. They wanted us to design a system that would hold the chamber at a certain temperature. So, we designed a system and another company run it on CFD, to see if it the system could hold the the chamber surfaces at the wanted temperature uniformly. After that they run it on electromagnetic programs, and decided on openings.

So, my guess is they already calculated aircarft's RC on program. But still finishing CDR without testing the plane on chamber sounds weirds to me. Maybe they are going to speed up the building process as well but i don't know.

Actually I m not expert about it .I try to understand first of all CDR concept and after digging, I find document at Google. At least some of it. I want to share with forum. What is CDR?

"Critical design review
The Critical Design Review (CDR) closes the critical design phase of the project. A CDR presents the final designs through completed analyses, simulations, schematics, software code, and test results. It should present the engineering evaluation of the breadboard model of the project. A CDR must be held and signed off before design freeze and before any significant production begins. The design at CDR should be complete and comprehensive.

The US military describes a CDR this way, “The CDR establishes the initial product baseline. A successful CDR is predicated on the determination that the subsystem requirements, subsystem detailed designs, results of peer reviews, and plans for test and evaluation form a satisfactory basis for proceeding into system implementation and integration” [5].

The design should be complete at CDR. The CDR should present all the same basic subjects as the PDR, but in final form. Here are some additional example items, beyond the items in a PDR, that a CDR might address:
•
Closure of action items, anomalies, deviations, waivers, and their resolution following the PDR
•
Design changes from the PDR
•
Final parts list
•
Final implementation plans including
–
Engineering models, prototypes, flight units, and spares
–
Software design and process
•
Design margins
•
Operations plan
•
Updated risk management plan
–
Updated risk and hazard analysis
–
Safety requirements
•
Test
–
Qualification and environmental test plans
–
Integration and compliance plans
–
Status of procedures and verification plans
–
Test flow and history of the hardware
–
Completed support equipment and test jigs
•
Schedule
•
Documentation status
•
Product assurance
•
Identification of residual risk items
•
Plans for distribution and support
–
Shipping containers
–
Warehousing and environmental control
–
Transportation."

Source https://www.sciencedirect.com/topic...n Review (CDR,software code, and test results.

According to this explanations, CDR concept a bit blurry. Seems to me testing RC may be not included CDR of MMU but calculating enough. I think some expert only give u correct answer about it .

Ps: sorry for long post

 

[Windchime]

A deal should be made where TF-X's engine and Tempest's engine use the same core. Rolls Royce would be willing to sign a deal then, because they won't have to design another engine from scratch, and we would retain some IP rights.

This must be the most dillusional take I've seen on this thread in a long while.

 

[Windchime]

Maybe someone should give us a clear definition on what constitutes a 6th gen fighter. What makes the aircraft 6th gen but not 5th? The line between 4th gen and 5th gen is clear but not with 6th gen and 5gen. To me, it's a sales pitch.

Anyone wants to take the bullet and give us his opinion on the subject?

Yes, it is a sales pitch. "4th gen" was born as a marketting buzzword, and so was "5th gen". It's just that, sometimes these sales pitch represent the real world quite well and serves as a great tool to understand the differences of varying equipments from various periods in a simplified, easy to understand explanation.

But, Even if we understand that it's usually a marketing tool, we still could make some educated guess on what might be a "6th gen" fighter. More to that later.

• 4th Generation: High levels of agility, some degree of sensor fusion, pulse-doppler radar, reduced radar signature, fly-by-wire, look down/shoot down missiles.
• 5th Generation: Stealth, a high degree of maneuverability, advanced avionics systems, multi-role capabilities, network or data fusion capabilities.
• 6th Generation: Manned or unmanned configuration, able to integrate/form a network with other jets, drones, soldiers, sensors. Directed energy weapons (laser CIWS), Virtual Cockpit (pilot helmet 360° vision), AI (for example autonomous landing), and finally the new generation of variable cycle engines (designed to operate efficiently under different flight conditions, such as subsonic, transonic and supersonic)

RO was only incorporated to 4th gen fighters in the later years. So was FBW as well. For example the F-15 didn't have a FBW FCS whe it was introduced. Multi-role was introduced before 5th gen.

- No. Only GE has it(XA100). But I fail to see why it's relevant other than range extension.

- Can have. The aircraft will have more than 70.000 lbf raw power and it's the biggest 5th gen fighter. It can be integrated to TFX later on.

A major advantage of an adative cycle engine is that it is easier to extract more bleed air when needed. This alongside higher generator capacity are key to future generations of fighter aircraft avionics. You can't just say an engine has this much thrust figure so it has enough power to generate without giving specific SGU capacity and capabilities. If anything, you are taking away the energy from the gas stream to turn the turbine and a generator connected to it.

 

[Windchime]

So, which feature could warrant a fighter jet "6th gen" nameplate? A generational difference indicates a difference that fundamentally cannot be achieved by previous generations. Well, unless you significantly alter the origonal design, which at that point I'll rather call it a different plane.

For example a 1st gen fighter could never achieve supersonuc speeds on level flight or doing combat maneuvers. 2nd gen can't BVR since most of them don't have the provisons for the necessary avionics, nor the generator capacity. 3rd gen distributed avionics cannot be replaced with a federated one. 4th gen isn't stealth. All of those are what I would call a generational difference.

In that sense it is very hard to distinguish a feature that cannot be implemented onto the current 5th generational figthers, or more to be exact the F-35 and J-20 and those which could be. DEW or man-unmanned teaming often gets brought up, but those are things that the USAF are considering for future F-35 blocks. AI is already implemented to a certain degree, and a higher sophistication could be achieved with a better computer and software, which aren't irreplaceable for an integrated modular design of F-35. VCE is also being considered for block-4 with existing prototypes. Almost every other features brought up in this thread are already being implemented to 5th gen or could be implemented.

One thing I could think of is a wide-band stealth technology, or in simpler terms removing, or at least reducing vertical planes of the aircraft. Then again this was already explored with the likes of YF-23.

My suggestion would be to just wait for NGAD to arrive. US has been the pioneer in this regard for decades now and will almost certainly suggest us what the definition of 6th gen might or should be.

One thing's for certain though, and that's that the MMU cannot be 6th gen for obvious reasons. So are F-35, J-20 or J-35. I think there's a high chance that the GCAP and NGF are rather 5.5th ven fighters, not 6th gen when they arrive. Same thing happened in the 80s and 90s when the US was busy developing ATF while Europe was still stuck with EAP. No one can say for certain that same thing won't happen again in 2020s and 30s.

 

[Azyr]

Seems to me that the headline feature of the 6th gen is pretty obvious; energy weapons. There will be other stuff too, like the ones outlined in this thread (better stealth, better sensor fusion, better networking etc), but these are just upgrades - energy weapons are a clear distinction though.

We could see energy weapons on the 5th gen too ofc, but looking at what’s been focused on (power plant) itt probably won’t be at the caliber of what a proper 6th gen can deliver.

 

[Huelague]

I read somewhere that 6.gen could have max speed of Mach 3.

 

[Heartbang]

I read somewhere that 6.gen could have max speed of Mach 3.

MiG-25 Foxbat was able to do that. F-15 is able to do Mach 2.5. But MiG-25 handled like a brick and F-15's in service almost never goes above Mach 2.
Maneuverability matters more.

 

[Huelague]

MiG-25 Foxbat was able to do that. F-15 is able to do Mach 2.5. But MiG-25 handled like a brick and F-15's in service almost never goes above Mach 2.
Maneuverability matters more.

It’s not the only ones who are able to do. Of course, maneuverability matters, as speed is. But I highly doubt the pilot would fly with Mach 3 during a evasive maneuver.

 

[TheInsider]

Recently announced first flight date is difficult but it is still in the realm of possibility. What probably happened is that the CDR was moved from July 2024 to something like March 2024. The first flight was moved from Q1 2025 to Q4 2024. It was pushed 3-5 days more and a date of October 29 was set. Also, the non-flying prototype is quite different from the first-thought non-flying prototype. The non-flying prototype will have all the basic functions such as engine controls, control surfaces, actuators, avionics, computers, and landing gear, etc. of the flying prototype. Those will be exactly the same, and it will be able to taxi with its own propulsion system. As such, some of the tests that should be carried out with the prototype that will actually fly can be shifted to this prototype. If the flying prototype needs to undergo a one-year test campaign before it flies, this might be reduced to nine months (example). A few months will be gained from there, and up to 6 months can be gained in total. Again, it is difficult, it may or may not fly, but it is not impossible. TAI will push for it.

 

[MADDOG]

Well greetings vol2

 

[Ryder]

It is said the 6th gen jet that the USA is developing may look similar to the YF23 Black widow.

 

[Khagan1923]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601469941307559938

TF10000?

Is this the Afterburner version of the TF6000 or a Engine a step above it ?

If latter,

Could we see the TF10000 be used on Hürjet ATJ?

Also if the latter,

TEI seems to be creating a engine family from TF6000 ( MIUS, TISU) to TF35000(TF-X) and in the middle I expected either an F404 or F414 equivalent to be used on Hürjet. Is TF10000 this engine?

 

[Fairon]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601469941307559938

TF10000?

Is this the Afterburner version of the TF6000 or a Engine a step above it ?

If latter,

Could we see the TF10000 be used on Hürjet ATJ?

I was excited when i first saw a video titled TF10000(I believe it was Tolga Ozbek's video with Mr Aksit) but yes it is a afterburner version of TF6000 and not a new engine.

 

[Yasar_TR]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601469941307559938

TF10000?

Is this the Afterburner version of the TF6000 or a Engine a step above it ?

If latter,

Could we see the TF10000 be used on Hürjet ATJ?

Also if the latter,

TEI seems to be creating a engine family from TF6000 ( MIUS, TISU) to TF35000(TF-X) and in the middle I expected either an F404 or F414 equivalent to be used on Hürjet. Is TF10000 this engine?

As per my post in other thread;

”When afterburner kicks in, a 50% increase of sudden ”pulse” of thrust is exerted on all engine parts and engine to plane connections. A complete new engine has to be built to withstand to this force to stop it from crushing in to itself. Hence a different engine nomenclature.
Just like Honeywell F124 and Honeywell F125 engines.”

This is a totally different engine derived from TF6000.
With two of these a Hurjet class plane can be flown.
It will lend itself for use on supersonic TISU or MIUS in single and/or twin format.

 

[Rodeo]

As per my post in other thread;

”When afterburner kicks in, a 50% increase of sudden ”pulse” of thrust is exerted on all engine parts and engine to plane connections. A complete new engine has to be built to withstand to this force to stop it from crushing in to itself. Hence a different engine nomenclature.
Just like Honeywell F124 and Honeywell F125 engines.”

This is a totally different engine derived from TF6000.
With two of these a Hurjet class plane can be flown.
It will lend itself for use on supersonic TISU or MIUS in single and/or twin format.

Have you ever thought about what engine classes should TEI derive from their expanding turbine catalogue. What I mean by this, take TS1400 for instance, you could say TEI should have 5 different engines derived from this core. One is the same size turboprop version, second is a 900hp turboprop, third 700hp turboprop and so on.

I would like to hear your opinion on different engine classes developed from main engine programs like TS1400, TF6000, TF35000 etc. framed by our needs or for export potentials. If you have a scribbled napkin about this lying around somewhere, it's time to share

 

[SavunmaSanayiST.com]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601517340180766720

 

[Yasar_TR]

Have you ever thought about what engine classes should TEI derive from their expanding turbine catalogue. What I mean by this, take TS1400 for instance, you could say TEI should have 5 different engines derived from this core. One is the same size turboprop version, second is a 900hp turboprop, third 700hp turboprop and so on.

I would like to hear your opinion on different engine classes developed from main engine programs like TS1400, TF6000, TF35000 etc. framed by our needs or for export potentials. If you have a scribbled napkin about this lying around somewhere, it's time to share

Since we are not privy to what is being developed behind closed doors, we can only guesstimate at this stage.
To our knowledge and the information released by TEI, plus reading between the lines, we know that there are two basic engines that TEI has in it’s inventory on which they are actively working on; TS1400 and TF6000. plus a possible TF35000!
TS1400 is a radial flow turboshaft engine. It can lend itself to a development of a1500HP gas turbine and a 1500HP turboprop. It’s core can be used to develop a turbofan too, albeit with a lot of work. I recall I Sunnetci mentioning that it‘s core could be used to develop a 8-10000lbf thrust turbofan.

TEI is doing the right thing by gradually improving their thrust level in the Turbofan arena.

Personally I would like them to produce a TF20000 with a dry thrust of 13500lbf. They have something like this project in the pipeline. But it is not a priority at the moment. I would like to see it as a priority. This would be a great engine for twin use as well as single use on planes like Hurjet; A stealth UAV bomber that is powered by twin stealthy engines without afterburners would benefit from an engine like this.
(Although we have set the bar rather high with a 35000lbf class engine, I would have preferred an engine of smaller output and hence a smaller plane for TFX.)

As it stands I can see that in our engine portfolio as turbofans there could be :
TF6000 - TF10000 (dry - AB thrust)
TF13500 - TF20000 “
TF24000 - TF35000 “

As Turboshaft :
TS1400 (already in tests)
TS3000 -TS3500 (TF6000 could lead to this)
TS5000 - TS6000 (for future tilt-rotor engines and for heavy helicopters.)

Most Turboprops are not critical and and are not strategically important engines. So they can be easily obtained from outside sources. So unless we are denied or likely to be denied supply, we shouldn’t really be looking in to manufacturing them.
We should also be careful about not stepping on the toes of big boys like GE, P&W and RR.
But when it comes to military engines, those engines that we would find difficult to procure, we should be producing in house.

Although we are at the infancy of our jet engine production endeavours, we should be looking in to developing adaptive cycle engines too.

Next line of engines TEI should really be looking in to manufacturing are Marine Turbine and Marine Diesel engines. These are critical and strategically important engines. (On the marine diesel scene a JV with Tulomsas can be beneficial.).

 

[Zafer]

Initially 6th gen planes were considered to be not having vertical stabilizers but then 6th gens with vertical stabilizers became common. It is probably only about more visibility angles being eliminated by 6th gen rather than eliminating the VS altogether.

 

[Afif]

Initially 6th gen planes were considered to be not having vertical stabilizers but then 6th gens with vertical stabilizers became common. It is probably only about more visibility angles being eliminated by 6th gen rather than eliminating the VS altogether.

i think NGAD and F/A XX still wont have any vertical stabilizers and will have triangle shape body.
lets wait and see.