TR TF-X KAAN Fighter Jet

[boredaf]

I'll be making a general comment. I've seen a lot of "they did this, they did that" nonsense on the internet today. There is no right or wrong in this sense. There are advantages and disadvantages related to every design. TAI, with the consulting they got from BAE Systems, has come up with a DESIGN. I guarantee every TAI employee who is currently reading our "design debates" are laughing their asses off. Here is the thing, you can't question a complex aircraft's aerodynamics without proper CFD analysis. You can't question its LO characteristics either. You don't have the same tools as they do. So let's all be done with it. I would also like to remind our fellow forum members that we are still looking at the same aircraft we saw on the final assembly line a couple of months ago. This went on for wayyy too long.

thank you!

 

[Manomed The Second]

It looks like the early F35 prototypes

 

[dBSPL]

If they leak a higher resolution image, I promise not to remove the watermark of the savunmasanayist next time.

 

[Era_shield]

my advise is please give some space to a bit of sarcasm in your life or dont bother to reply next time

Sorry bro, it's hard to tell the sarcasm from the genuine idiots sometimes.

 

[Heartbang]

If they leak a higher resolution image, I promise not to remove the watermark of the savunmasanayist next time.

View attachment 54969

That arc embedded into the canopy glass is THIS close to disappearing. I bet we won't see that in the final product. It will be a bubble canopy just like F-16.

 

[No Name]

Would moving the vertical stabilizer off the engines in the future be difficult, or would the jet be redesigned?

 

[Era_shield]

Would moving the vertical stabilizer off the engines in the future be difficult, or would the jet be redesigned?

The vertical stablisers are exactly where they're supposed to be.

 

[Manomed The Second]

If they leak a higher resolution image, I promise not to remove the watermark of the savunmasanayist next time.

View attachment 54969

@Windchime @Baljak It reminds me of the KF21

 

[dBSPL]

That arc embedded into the canopy glass is THIS close to disappearing. I bet we won't see that in the final product. It will be a bubble canopy just like F-16.

I have a guess: In the pilot ejection sequence, and during the canopy removal stage, the part behind the belt explodes only. Due to the concave line of the aircraft's aerodynamics from the top of the nose to the front canopy, the sequencer can safely fire the STAPAC even if the ejection system pitots give a higher airspeed measurement.

 

[Cabatli_TR]

Angles. Cockpit is too high, that is one of the reasons plane looks "off". But only from this new angle you can see how severe it is. Just my opinion.

The design of the aircraft including cockpit section was the same at the last IDEF fair but mock-up in the showroom had nothing to do with reality. That's why P0 prototype you see seem "weird" to you. however, there is nothing bad about aircraft in terms of aerodynamic analysis and technologies. The aircraft itself developed in the computer environment as a result of aviation software and RCS simulations and later tested in wind tunnels. The Block-10 prototype will be slightly different from this prototype because development of aircraft will continue so it is not appropriate choice to make such negative comments that are not based on any mathematical or scientific data by looking at low-resolution photos.

 

[MADDOG]

Would moving the vertical stabilizer off the engines in the future be difficult, or would the jet be redesigned?

Everything needs to be in harmony aerodynamically. Moving the vertical stabs is a big challenge and probably isn't worth the time and effort. I also believe there is a reason why TAI put them there to begin with.

 

[Anmdt]

There is making observations and then disregarding the work of experts as "mistakes" based on a comparison between mock-ups/cgi models and this prototype based on 2 photos that look like they were taken with a potato from terrible angles.

Pretty much what is the issue is about. The angle, the lens, fov and quality of the image. It looks much better to naked eye and will look much better from a farther position with a proper lens.

I'll be making a general comment. I've seen a lot of "they did this, they did that" nonsense on the internet today. There is no right or wrong in this sense. There are advantages and disadvantages related to every design. TAI, with the consulting they got from BAE Systems, has come up with a DESIGN. I guarantee every TAI employee who is currently reading our "design debates" are laughing their asses off. Here is the thing, you can't question a complex aircraft's aerodynamics without proper CFD analysis. You can't question its LO characteristics either. You don't have the same tools as they do. So let's all be done with it. I would also like to remind our fellow forum members that we are still looking at the same aircraft we saw on the final assembly line a couple of months ago. This went on for wayyy too long.

Without a proper CFD analysis unless you are into supersonic fluid dynamics for a certain term as mininum.
Asked a friend, out of curiosity after seeing people's rage, whom i trust with and who has had 15+ years experience with fluid dynamics in academis this was his response;
"Bro i have not studied supersonic or compressible flows and i may not answer this question."

Meanwhile others;
"I don't know conversation of momentum but anyway the shape looks off and intrinstictively i am telling it is a bad design."

We are living in an era which everyone knows everything better than anyone aka; trump syndrome.

 

[MADDOG]

Pretty much what is the issue is about. The angle, the lens, fov and quality of the image. It looks much better to naked eye and will look much better from a farther position with a proper lens.


Without a proper CFD analysis unless you are into supersonic fluid dynamics for a certain term as mininum.
Asked a friend, out of curiosity after seeing people's rage, whom i trust with and who has had 15+ years experience with fluid dynamics in academis this was his response;
"Bro i have not studied supersonic or compressible flows and i may not answer this question."

Meanwhile others;
"I don't know conversation of momentum but anyway the shape looks off and intrinstictively i am telling it is a bad design."

We are living in an era which everyone knows everything better than anyone aka; trump syndrome.

I've encountered way too many "eXpErTs" today. Unfortunately this is how low the damn bar is.

 

[MADDOG]

Beauty

 

[Sanchez]

LET'S GOOOO

 

[Oublious]

TFX zaliminoglu......

 

[Agha Sher]

The

Beauty

View attachment 54980
View attachment 54981

View attachment 54982

View attachment 54984

The most beautiful aircraft! Cheers to the morons who were judging it based on a low res picture

 

[Fairon]

Now we are talking!

Can't wait to see her fly!

 

[Holikarbon]

Now let's see all the comments again, shall we? )

 

[Angry Turk !!!]

Beauty

View attachment 54980
View attachment 54981

View attachment 54982

View attachment 54984

What a beauty. Congrats to our engineers, great job!