TR TF-X KAAN Fighter Jet

Windchime

Well-known member
Moderator
Professional
South Korea Moderator
Messages
419
Reactions
22 1,300
Nation of residence
Poland
Nation of origin
South Korea

UK will offer GCAP subsystems to India, Korea, Taiwan, and Indonesia. No mention of Turkiye. The UK probably lost hope after seeing our subsystem development programs.
Wouldn't really believe what that article's saying without it mentioning primary source. Besides, Korea's the last place you'd expect the GCAP consortium to supply those core components for obvious reasons. Also no way in hell they do so with Taiwan as well.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Wouldn't really believe what that article's saying without it mentioning primary source. Besides, Korea's the last place you'd expect the GCAP consortium to supply those core components for obvious reasons. Also no way in hell they do so with Taiwan as well.
It will not supply. It will possibly offer subsystems for the Korean project that follows KFX or the later KFX block that will be really different than the current KFX. The KFX project is already in an advanced phase and Korean MOD decided on all of the subsystems so there is no space for discussion.
 

Windchime

Well-known member
Moderator
Professional
South Korea Moderator
Messages
419
Reactions
22 1,300
Nation of residence
Poland
Nation of origin
South Korea
It will not supply. It will possibly offer subsystems for the Korean project that follows KFX or the later KFX block that will be really different than the current KFX. The KFX project is already in an advanced phase and Korean MOD decided on all of the subsystems so there is no space for discussion.
That as well, but I'm talking about Korea-Japan relationship. There is no chance that Japan sells/purchases advanced military equipment/components to Korea and vice versa. It simply cannot happen. It's like an Indian new paper reporting that Aselsan could potentially supply BURFIS radar to Greece.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
That as well, but I'm talking about Korea-Japan relationship. There is no chance that Japan sells/purchases advanced military equipment/components to Korea and vice versa. It simply cannot happen. It's like an Indian new paper reporting that Aselsan could potentially supply BURFIS radar to Greece.
I don't think Japan will a big say on most of the subsystems. Brits are running the show.
 

Chocopie

Contributor
South Korea Correspondent
Messages
634
Reactions
35 2,277
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
South Korea
I don't think Japan will a big say on most of the subsystems. Brits are running the show.
So far only Indian sources, not credible IMO.

From Jane‘s:

„While the UK led the Tempest effort, the GCAP programme will be a partnership of equals. BAE Systems is heading up development for the UK, with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) for Japan, and Leonardo for Italy.“

The Japanese would rather set themselves on fire before sharing sophisticated defense and aerospace tech with South Korea.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
So far only Indian sources, not credible IMO.

From Jane‘s:

„While the UK led the Tempest effort, the GCAP programme will be a partnership of equals. BAE Systems is heading up development for the UK, with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) for Japan, and Leonardo for Italy.“

The Japanese would rather set themselves on fire before sharing sophisticated defense and aerospace tech with South Korea.
True, but what can the Japanese say if Brits offer ECRS Mk2 radar? Tempest radar will be based on ECRS Mk2 similar to Murad AESA and Burfis. RR can offer engine cooperation. You see when countries like UK and USA say equal partners what they mean is they are first among equals. That is why we are strict with companies like RR and BAE.

 

Agha Sher

Experienced member
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
2,755
Reactions
11 9,303
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Afghanistan
i believe Tempset would be ready by 2035 for partner countries and for export by 2040.

I dont see Tempset's timeline missing more than TFXs timeline missing!
Remember Tempset would be marketed by japan too in Asia.
However, FCAS will be more late.

Tempest will have a demonstrator flight in 2027 and the first prototype will fly in 2035. Therefore, considering some delays it will enter service around 2045.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,754
Reactions
94 9,092
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Tempest will have a demonstrator flight in 2027 and the first prototype will fly in 2035. Therefore, considering some delays it will enter service around 2045.
First prototype flight is in 2027 and first service entrance in 2035.
it has been stated officially without any confusion.

they are naming the first prototype as demonstrator for the whole future combat air system, which will need more time to develop, not the main Tempset aircraft itself.
 
Last edited:

Aloster

Active member
Messages
80
Reactions
1 130
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
View attachment 51829

An armed twin engine Hürjet with two TF10000 engines equipped with downscaled Murad AESA, Göktug AAM, Aselpod as well as various A2G armaments.

I think it would be a big hit export wise especially with smaller and/or poorer countries.

And would rid us of dependecy on the US for engines (F404).

In the future if interest exists a naval version with upgraded engines (TF17000-20000?) could be developed for TN to be used on a Light AC...

Just saying I think Hürjet has more potenial then most people realize. I hope TAI thinks the same.

Also the picture is old before some get the wrong ideas.
From many expert from here , I understand that changing engine especially twin engine configuration same as designing new plane. If we do that, we have to imaginative. I mean we have to change exoskeleton of the plane too. To competitive at market we can make light class 5th gen aircraft like downscaled version of the MMU . At these point we can use both MMU sub system and also Hurjet sub system to reduce cost also developing time. With very low Radar signature, lightweight, light internal hidden payload but has 1.5 - 1.8 mach speed and down scaled Murad Ease radar also low operating cost it can be new F16 - Mig29 for many countries.
 

urban mine

Committed member
Messages
207
Reactions
18 542
Nation of residence
South Korea
Nation of origin
South Korea
From many expert from here , I understand that changing engine especially twin engine configuration same as designing new plane. If we do that, we have to imaginative. I mean we have to change exoskeleton of the plane too. To competitive at market we can make light class 5th gen aircraft like downscaled version of the MMU . At these point we can use both MMU sub system and also Hurjet sub system to reduce cost also developing time. With very low Radar signature, lightweight, light internal hidden payload but has 1.5 - 1.8 mach speed and down scaled Murad Ease radar also low operating cost it can be new F16 - Mig29 for many countries.
The idea reminds me of the Шах и мат(Checkmate).
 

Aloster

Active member
Messages
80
Reactions
1 130
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The idea reminds me of the Шах и мат(Checkmate).
Yes concept true but Checkmate still has big questions for me ? After Ukraine war many thing will be evaluated about russian weapons. For example for ur country if u say "we do that " , I say yes absolutely they do that but counter part of it for Russia and also for Chiana. I want to listen their claim and show me some proof.
 

urban mine

Committed member
Messages
207
Reactions
18 542
Nation of residence
South Korea
Nation of origin
South Korea
Yes concept true but Checkmate still has big questions for me ? After Ukraine war many thing will be evaluated about russian weapons. For example for ur country if u say "we do that " , I say yes absolutely they do that but counter part of it for Russia and also for Chiana. I want to listen their claim and show me some proof.
Well, I think that's a good idea. Because not everyone can have a high-end fighter.
 

Radonsider

Contributor
Messages
1,467
Reactions
14 2,802
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Looking at this patent by TAI it looks like this system actually functions as both passive and active RAS/RAM, materials present and how they are situated etc. makes the structure cause destructive interference with the incoming electromagnetic waves, thus using an active method for stealth but also doing this by a passive system.


This is probably possible by those materials given there and their properties, with their small size they probably absorb and act as a small antenna maybe(?)

@Yasar @Cabatli_TR @Combat-Master @TheInsider @Rodeo

Your opinions?
 

Attachments

  • Image158.gif
    Image158.gif
    3.7 KB · Views: 84

Baklava Consumer

Active member
Messages
81
Reactions
3 211
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Does anyone know how TF-X BURFIS radar will compare to the F-35 APG-81?

The APG-81 is a GaAs (Gallium Arsenide) radar. The APG-81 has a detection range of 150km for 1 m² targets (RCS).

However, BURFIS is a GaN, Gallium Nitride radar:
Gallium Nitride is capable of withstanding greater heat dissipation and can be used to make radars operate across a wider band of frequencies; this means that a GaN radar can be more powerful (meaning a bump in max detection range and an increase in electronic attack / jamming power).

Will the TF-X BURFIS GaN be able to detect the F-35 before the APG-81 detects the TF-X?

I know this is very hit and miss, and depends on RAM paint, aircraft design, missiles, but what could the max detection range be of the
BURFIS (for 1 m² targets)?
1671969966584.png
 
Last edited:

Radonsider

Contributor
Messages
1,467
Reactions
14 2,802
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Does anyone know how TF-X BURFIS radar will compare to the F-35 APG-81?

The APG-81 is a GaAs (Gallium Arsenide) radar. The APG-81 has a detection range of 150km for 1 m² targets (RCS).

However, BURFIS is a GaN, Gallium Nitride radar:
Gallium Nitride is capable of withstanding greater heat dissipation and can be used to make radars operate across a wider band of frequencies; this means that a GaN radar can be more powerful (meaning a bump in max detection range and an increase in electronic attack / jamming power).

Will the TF-X BURFIS GaN be able to detect the F-35 before the APG-81 detects the TF-X?

I know this is very hit and miss, and depends on RAM paint and aircraft design, but how what could the max detection range be of the BURFIS?
We still don't know anything about any of those, but just to give some context, BÜRFİS will have more T/R modules than AN/APG-81, it will use GaN and probably more power
Frontal RCS of F-35 will be better compared to first blocks of TF-X and probably similar for 2nd block.

For having twice less detection distance, you must have 16 times less RCS, so that difference doesn't matter that much either,

Let's say for a given moment TF-X has frontal point RCS of -25dBsm and F-35 has -35dBsm, which would translate into 0.005m² and 0.0005m² respectively, at those ranges, F-35 would be able to see TF-X around (1/16/16) (so 150/4 km, which is 37.5km, 0.001 part doesn't really change anything so we can round that up)
If TF-X has a radar which is exactly on par with AN/APG-81, it would be able to see F-35 around 20-21 km, but we know that if there is no f*ck up in radar algorithm for BÜRFİS, both should be able to see eachother in similar distance, probably TF-X detecting F-35 earlier than F-35 detecting TF-X.



But this is kind of irrelevant, as at those ranges both would be using the sensory input from EOTS and BEOS/IRST if weather is not in a really really bad condition, which I think TF-X does have an advantage here by having 2 different sensors.


Also, you don't have to switch modes from radar to IR as sensor fusion automatically does that, friendly forces present are also a big factor as with datalinks, fusion can be more precise and rich.

Actually we don't have to compare F-35 with TF-X, why would we? We won't go into a war with NATO or Greece, our TF-X and their F-35 will always fly with Luneberg lenses, and even if a war with (only Greece, not NATO), we would have data superiority as we have lot more platforms that can be used to create a picture of the situation and use them by datalinks.


Our main threat in the area (in the future) would be Su-75s, Su-57, or maybe J-35s, and I am sure that TF-X will be superior to all of those stated.


Also keep in mind that combat is multi directional and RCS is a really dependent factor, so comparison of RCS in smaller levels, like 0.005 against 0.0005 doesn't really matter in the environment of EW contested area and just the sheer number of forces in the area, stealth fighter won't be able to face an enemy just from the front, this is the reality for every fighter
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
A little more about MURAD
MURAD 1000+ GaN T/R

GaN T/R Module
PAE(Power Added Efficiency) : Rumors start from %37 and reach as high as %54
20W nominal 30W peak output power per module (20kW power-30kW peak power for radar plus several kW for accessories like LRUs etc.)
Multilayer LTCC packaging (Low-Temperature Co-fired Ceramic)
SIGE (Silicon-Germanium) multifunction BICMOS IC/Core Chip (either on 130 or 150nm/0.13-0.15μm)
GaN MMIC (likely on 150nm 0.15μm)
Digital beamforming+cognitive radar algorithms.
Specially designed ethylene glycol+water liquid cooling system with microchannels.

Radar part of the BURFIS
2000+ GaN T/R module

It is rumored that the complete RF integrated suite(BURFIS) might have a peak power of more than 100kW.
Another rumor is that radar will have dual-band capability (S and X band) and will be able to detect stealth targets over 100km.

Another piece of news is that Aselsan is working on an L Band very long-range land-based radar.

Does anyone know how TF-X BURFIS radar will compare to the F-35 APG-81?

The APG-81 is a GaAs (Gallium Arsenide) radar. The APG-81 has a detection range of 150km for 1 m² targets (RCS).

However, BURFIS is a GaN, Gallium Nitride radar:
Gallium Nitride is capable of withstanding greater heat dissipation and can be used to make radars operate across a wider band of frequencies; this means that a GaN radar can be more powerful (meaning a bump in max detection range and an increase in electronic attack / jamming power).

Will the TF-X BURFIS GaN be able to detect the F-35 before the APG-81 detects the TF-X?

I know this is very hit and miss, and depends on RAM paint, aircraft design, missiles, but what could the max detection range be of the
BURFIS (for 1 m² targets)?
View attachment 51865
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,754
Reactions
94 9,092
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Does anyone know how TF-X BURFIS radar will compare to the F-35 APG-81?

The APG-81 is a GaAs (Gallium Arsenide) radar. The APG-81 has a detection range of 150km for 1 m² targets (RCS).

However, BURFIS is a GaN, Gallium Nitride radar:
Gallium Nitride is capable of withstanding greater heat dissipation and can be used to make radars operate across a wider band of frequencies; this means that a GaN radar can be more powerful (meaning a bump in max detection range and an increase in electronic attack / jamming power).

Will the TF-X BURFIS GaN be able to detect the F-35 before the APG-81 detects the TF-X?

I know this is very hit and miss, and depends on RAM paint, aircraft design, missiles, but what could the max detection range be of the
BURFIS (for 1 m² targets)?
View attachment 51865
You see the issue here is, neither TFX nor f35 can uses its radar as freely as you think against each other in head to head mode.
because there is a good chance that, opponent's EW suite will pick you up!
That is the very reason why world's first stealth aircraft F117 didn't have any radar in the first place.

But with the introduction of f22 Raptor, a new generation of radar technology was put into its nose cone of the aircraft.
AESA was very decisive when it first came, because no contemporary RWR or EW system could pick it up at that time because of its very low probability of interception characteristic.
for example, APG-77 can change its frequency bandwidth thousand time per second.

However, one decade later with introduction of f35, we got highly evolved PROCCESING POWER and true SENSOR FUSION technology.
which again, somewhat changes the game in favor of the 'LISTENER' (passive detection) over 'SEEKER' (active detection)
because now, not just today's 5th gen EW systems are far more sensitive than the previous generation, but also, unlike past, now with the sensor fusion capability it got directly integrated with main 'SUPER' computer of the aircraft!
Thus, giving it enormous and unprecedented capability.

And that is why in a test in2009, f35 superior EW system was able to pick up Raptor's APG-77s transmission even though it has very good LPI characteristic as i mentioned before.


With that being the case, in todays air domain stealth fighters primary sensor is its highly sophisticated and super sensitive ELECTRONIC WARFARE suite and electro optical suite, not its FCR even if it is LPI AESA!
for example, that is how BAE system describe AN/ALR-94s capability and implication.

Quote-
"BAE Systems’ AN/ALR-94 digital electronic warfare system geolocates potential threats by detecting adversary radars at significant ranges, ALLOWING THE F-22 RAPTOR TO LIMIT ITS OWN RADAR EMISSIONS, ENABLING IT TO BETTER CONCEAL ITS LOCATION WHEN OPERATING IN HOSTILE TERRITORY"
Unquote-


Today, against a possible near-peer adversary f35/f22 will use its APG-77/APG-81 in highly selective and limited manner and PRIMARILY rely on its excellent passive detection and sensor fusion capability.

And that is also one of the core reason why the MUM T concept becoming with 5th gen and 6th gen platform becoming more and more critical, as an somewhat expandable drone or wingman carrying sensors on board can ACTIVELY SEARCH for enemy contact while the main expensive manned aircraft like f35 or TFX can remain passive and undetected while listening for the hostile radio transmission.

CONCLUSION-
So in my opinion, sensitivity of the TFX's EW system, EOTS and DASS, plus the degree of its SENSOR FUSION would be more decisive against a near-peer adversary than its AESA radar's active detection effort.

Obviously, this is not to downplay that GaN based fine piece of technology in nose cone of the TFX, which is an excellent advantage in any scenario and has its wide range of implication as part of broader integrated system.
 
Last edited:

Radonsider

Contributor
Messages
1,467
Reactions
14 2,802
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina
You see the issue here is, neither TFX nor f35 can uses its radar as freely as you think against each other in head to head mode!
because there is a good chance opponent's EW suite will pick you up!
That is the very reason why world's first stealth aircraft F117 didn't have any radar in the first place.

But with the introduction of f22 Raptor, a new generation of radar technology was put into its nose cone of the aircraft.
AESA was very decisive when it first came, because no contemporary RWR or EW system could pick it up at that time because of its very low probability of interception characteristic.
for example, APG-77 can change its frequency bandwidth thousand time per second.

However, one decade later with introduction of f35, we got highly evolved PROCCESING POWER and true SENSOR FUSION technology.
which again, somewhat changes the game in favor of the 'LISTENER' (passive detection) over 'SEEKER' (active detection)
because now, not just today's 5th gen EW systems are far more sensitive than the previous generation, but also, unlike past, now with the sensor fusion capability it got directly integrated with main SUPER computer of the aircraft!
Thus, giving it enormous and unprecedented capability.

And that is why in a test in2009, f35 superior EW system was able to pick up Raptor's APG-77s transmission even though it has very good LPI characteristic as i mentioned before.


With that being the case, in todays air domain stealth fighters primary sensor is its highly sophisticated and super sensitive ELECTRONIC WARFARE suite and electro optical suite, not its FCR even if it is LPI AESA!
for example, that is how BAE system describe AN/ALR-94s capability and implication.

Quote-
"BAE Systems’ AN/ALR-94 digital electronic warfare system geolocates potential threats by detecting adversary radars at significant ranges, ALLOWING THE F-22 RAPTOR TO LIMIT ITS OWN RADAR EMISSIONS, ENABLING IT TO BETTER CONCEAL ITS LOCATION WHEN OPERATING IN HOSTILE TERRITORY"
Unquote-


Today, against a possible near-peer adversary f35/f22 will use its APG-77/APG-81 in highly selective and limited manner and PRIMARILY rely on its passive detection and sensor fusion capability.

And that is also one of the core reason why the MUM T concept becoming with 5th gen and 6th gen platform becoming more and more critical, as an somewhat expandable drone or wingman carrying sensors on board can ACTIVELY SEARCH for enemy contact while the main expensive manned aircraft like f35 or TFX can remain passive and undetected while listening for the hostile radio transmission.

CONCLUSION-
So in my opinion, sensitivity of the TFX's EW system, EOTS and DASS, plus the degree of it SENSOR FUSION ability would be more decisive against a near-peer adversary than its AESA radar's active detection effort.
Just one thing, F-35 doesn't have a supercomputer, nor any of the aircraft flying today except some research aircraft probably
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,754
Reactions
94 9,092
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Just one thing, F-35 doesn't have a supercomputer, nor any of the aircraft flying today except some research aircraft probably
I didnt mean it in the literal sense, just to exaggerate f35s computing capability.
 
Last edited:

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom