TR TF-X KAAN Fighter Jet

[Yasar_TR]

I don’t understand this fixation of a plane looking ugly or beautiful.
Who cares how ugly a plane looks?
These are machines to kill.
If it does what it is supposed to do, it doesn’t matter an iota even if it looks beautiful or not.

Besides, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Here is The picture of Russian Queen Katherine I. Peter the great and Merzifonlu Pasha may have thought quite differently of her looks!

 

[Spitfire9]

I don’t understand this fixation of a plane looking ugly or beautiful.
Who cares how ugly a plane looks?
These are machines to kill.
If it does what it is supposed to do, it doesn’t matter an iota even if it looks beautiful or not.

Besides, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Here is The picture of Russian Queen Katherine I. Peter the great and Merzifonlu Pasha may have thought quite differently of her looks!
View attachment 71896

Can't fault her lipstick!

 

[TR_123456]

Quote:
advantage of having twin vertical stabilizers is that the location of vertical tails helps in having control authority at high alpha(where the fuselage/wing can blank a single vertical stabilizer). In modern stealth aircraft, having a twin tail enables them to be canted, helping in reducing RCS.
Having twin vertical stabilizers reduces their size, resulting in reduced stress at stabilizer root and reduction in weight.
In case of twin engined aircraft with engines spaced wide apart, having twin rudders helps in getting sufficient rudder authority in case of an engine failure.
Unquote.

They are also there to mask engine exhaust.

So they are not there to please our eyes. But serve a purpose.

Thats not what he meant,he asked a good question,why are they on the engines?
Its about the placing,

 

[TR_123456]

I don’t understand this fixation of a plane looking ugly or beautiful.
Who cares how ugly a plane looks?
These are machines to kill.
If it does what it is supposed to do, it doesn’t matter an iota even if it looks beautiful or not.

Besides, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Here is The picture of Russian Queen Katherine I. Peter the great and Merzifonlu Pasha may have thought quite differently of her looks!
View attachment 71896

I see,you like them big huh???

 

[ChadThunder74]

This is what he expected, I don't blame.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Thats not what he meant,he asked a good question,why are they on the engines?
Its about the placing,

Actually the answer is hidden in my post.
With planes where engines are far apart, the twin rudders give better control over the rudder in case of an engine failure. But there is an optimum place where these rudders are placed and how apart and large they need to be. To optimise RCS and rudder control characteristics , plane is subjected to various wind tunnel tests. I presume our plane’s optimum rudder placement position happened to be on the engine casings.

F 16 has a single rudder and it is right on top of the engine casing.
F18 in below picture has it’s rudders right on top of the engine casing too. (Mind you there is nowhere else to put them on the F18)

 

[TR_123456]

Actually the answer is hidden in my post.
With planes where engines are far apart, the twin rudders give better control over the rudder in case of an engine failure. But there is an optimum place where these rudders are placed and how apart and large they need to be. To optimise RCS and rudder control characteristics , plane is subjected to various wind tunnel tests. I presume our plane’s optimum rudder placement position happened to be on the engine casings.

F 16 has a single rudder and it is right on top of the engine casing.
F18 in below picture has it’s rudders right on top of the engine casing too. (Mind you there is nowhere else to put them on the F18)
View attachment 71897

@Baklava Consumer here is your answer.

 

[Huelague]

I don’t understand this fixation of a plane looking ugly or beautiful.
Who cares how ugly a plane looks?
These are machines to kill.
If it does what it is supposed to do, it doesn’t matter an iota even if it looks beautiful or not.

Besides, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Here is The picture of Russian Queen Katherine I. Peter the great and Merzifonlu Pasha may have thought quite differently of her looks!
View attachment 71896

Have you ever noticed, that „best“ weapons-/systems, are in the same way the most handsomes? From handguns over tanks, to the fighter jets. ‚Form follows Funktion‘.

 

[Baklava Consumer]

Of course, the function is more important, but this jet is more than a fighter jet, it's a propaganda tool and it builds the reputation of the country and its people. Whether you like it or not, it should look like it performs, the exterior does matter. Why do so many people try to tear up the F-35 or F-22? Because it's a glaring example of American power.

Look at the SU-57, they brought it to China, and everyone laughed at them.
SU-57 is a low stealth, low-quality mess, showing how backward Russian workmanship/engineering is and therefore Russia is.

 

[boredaf]

Of course, the function is more important, but this jet is more than a fighter jet, it's a propaganda tool and it builds the reputation of the country and its people. Whether you like it or not, it should look like it performs, the exterior does matter. Why do so many people try to tear up the F-35 or F-22? Because it's a glaring example of American power.

Look at the SU-57, they brought it to China, and everyone laughed at them.
SU-57 is a low stealth, low-quality mess, showing how backward Russian workmanship/engineering is and therefore Russia is.
View attachment 71905
View attachment 71902
View attachment 71903 View attachment 71904
View attachment 71906

Comparing apples to oranges here. TAI's first prototype was built better than this SU-57, placement of rudders are completely irrelevant to that. And it is beyond ridiculous to dig your heels on "OmG It ShOuLd LoOk BeAuTiFuL" when all that matters is its performance. No one will give two fucks if it wins a 5th gen jet fighter beauty contest while performing like shit. Engineers at TAI might change the positioning or they might not, but they sure as fuck won't make that decision based on its looks.

 

[TR_123456]

Of course, the function is more important, but this jet is more than a fighter jet, it's a propaganda tool and it builds the reputation of the country and its people. Whether you like it or not, it should look like it performs, the exterior does matter. Why do so many people try to tear up the F-35 or F-22? Because it's a glaring example of American power.

Look at the SU-57, they brought it to China, and everyone laughed at them.
SU-57 is a low stealth, low-quality mess, showing how backward Russian workmanship/engineering is and therefore Russia is.
View attachment 71905
View attachment 71902
View attachment 71903 View attachment 71904
View attachment 71906

That is a bit of an overreaction by your side.
We are not Russians,all our weapon systems produced by our companies are in perfect shape.
You should compare the Russian systems to that of Iran.
So,stop worrying!

 

[blackjack]

Of course, the function is more important, but this jet is more than a fighter jet, it's a propaganda tool and it builds the reputation of the country and its people. Whether you like it or not, it should look like it performs, the exterior does matter. Why do so many people try to tear up the F-35 or F-22? Because it's a glaring example of American power.

Look at the SU-57, they brought it to China, and everyone laughed at them.
SU-57 is a low stealth, low-quality mess, showing how backward Russian workmanship/engineering is and therefore Russia is.
View attachment 71905
View attachment 71902
View attachment 71903 View attachment 71904
View attachment 71906

To be fair they brought prototype instead of the serial produced su-57 to that airshow. I think next year the Su-75 will be showcased at airshows

"The first flight of the Checkmate will take place in 2024, Head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade Denis Manturov said in a [March 2023] interview with Interfax."