Yup. They probably still use old models, including the mockup. Doesn't mean anything, we know TAI is usually hit&miss when it comes to models and mockups and they shouldn't be taken as gospel.Looks exactly like the old mock up design
Yup. They probably still use old models, including the mockup. Doesn't mean anything, we know TAI is usually hit&miss when it comes to models and mockups and they shouldn't be taken as gospel.Looks exactly like the old mock up design
Could the lack of a new mockup indicate the design fluidity of KAAN? Maybe they don't see value in making new mockups when the final design is not set yet.Yup. They probably still use old models, including the mockup. Doesn't mean anything, we know TAI is usually hit&miss when it comes to models and mockups and they shouldn't be taken as gospel.
That was mentioned before by T. Kotil.the canopy-radome line looks smoothed out and the "pelican" look is gone.
It has to.
Should KAAN be able to do that? 'Cause main air bases are vulnerable. Even with AMD bubble.
Frankly speaking if you find yourself using highways for landing and take off it means that things are not going well for you. As we all know For Sweeden and Finland it was a contingency plan in case a war with Russia during Cold War in a scenario where they may have limited ability to use their airfields or the orgin of V/STOL concept which was succesfully adapted for use from AC or even the desperate aircraft designs of NAZİ Germany are the reflections of the same idea.... So should KAAN land on Highways?
As a conclusion if you find yourself using highways for landing and take off it means that things are not going well for you... you can not win a war by using hayways
No. the very same reflection of the very same idea if you look a bit carefullyNo. Operating from highways is part of USAF's new Agile combat employment CONOP.
No. the very same reflection of the very same idea if you look a bit carefully
It is more than that. I read their dcotrinal publication. Did you?
Operating from highways does not mean you are already at significant disadvantage. USAF is the most capable in the world by a wide margin. Still, ACE and operating from highways as part of it is their new CONOP from the get-go. Not because they are tactically or operationally desperate like Nazi Germany, or outgunned like Nordic countries.
Good for you! So you read the dcotrinal publication and guess we have to assume that you understand it... right??
Lets read a small section of it together but this time lets put a mutual effort to understand it.
''As NATO peer and near-peer adversaries have continued to advance their intelligence-gathering, targeting, and long-range strike capabilities. Consequently, airbases, which have typically been geographically separated from conflict areas and represented relative safe havens, are increasingly vulnerable''
Doesn't this sound like a disturbance in their ontological securtiy?
I dont generally write aggressive comments but I dont like the way you replied....''I read their dcotrinal publication. Did you?'' this is not an argument and not a nice way to start
Thank you for posting. STG has done a fantastic job with it. Mind the fingers, the screen is usually quite hotTouch screen developed by STG for Turkey's 5th generation fighter jet KAAN. Unlike the F-35 screen, the design does not reflect. The current design, which was tested on KAAN's first prototype and received feedback, was exhibited at SAHA EXPO. - Avionout
1-ACE 2022 conicides with two major events... Russian Ukranian war and the first time NATO singled out that China is one of its strategic priorities for the next decade....So? I don't remember denying any overlaps or similarities bwtween two concepts or underpinning operational logic.
You said something very specific though. ACE is "the very same reflection of the very same idea if you look a bit carefully".
I disagreed and said, it is more than that.
Swedes didn't had any robust IAMD (specially BMD) like US military so they were disproportionately reliant on distributed operations from remote airfields and highways. USAF ACE CONOP very much include all types of active defenses of permanent bases and relies on it. While being contested, they expect to continuesly operate from there. However, it also conclude, IAMD, hardening and other measures are not fully sufficient. So, it reduces its sole reliance on permanent bases and distribute a good portion of its operations to small airfields and highways from the get-go.
Also, proactive intelligence plays an important role in force protection and risk management aspects of ACE. The quality and the quantity of which Swedes never had.
When, I am talking about KAAN landing on highways I am not merely copy pasting the Swedish concept. It's more similar to ACE. Where TurAF or any other friendly nation that operates KAAN has IAMD (including BMD) to protect permanent airbases and and contiue to fight for it and operate from there. At the same time distributing a portion of its operations to remote airfields and even highways.
I wasn't trying to insult your intelligence. It was a simple question. And frankly, now it seems more relevant given you quoted something that isn't exactly from USAF ACE doctrine.
The heat signature of an engine plays a subordinate role in the air combat of the 21st century.I’m not a fan of Kaan rear design.
View attachment 71617
Engines that are wide apart are not as stealthy. Hiding the thermals will be difficult.
There may be advantages in close range dogfighting with TVC but that’s it.
When engines are closer together you have a more streamlined flow which increases fuel efficiency. It’s much easier to hide heat signature (stealth). And it could make it easier to fly if one engine goes out.
Dont worry, final version will get a F-22 -like TVC...I’m not a fan of Kaan rear design.
View attachment 71617
Engines that are wide apart are not as stealthy. Hiding the thermals will be difficult.
There may be advantages in close range dogfighting with TVC but that’s it.
When engines are closer together you have a more streamlined flow which increases fuel efficiency. It’s much easier to hide heat signature (stealth). And it could make it easier to fly if one engine goes out.