TR Turkish Air Forces|News & Discussion

Cypro

Contributor
Messages
665
Reactions
3 1,799
Nation of residence
Northern Cyprus
Nation of origin
Northern Cyprus
Bro are you handicapped? FNSS is a private company the NEW design they made is for futurue ffs you don't know shit about land vehicles.

Pars 6X6 and 8x8 has been ordered by the army and gendarmerie quantity of 100 more will be ordered in the future they will enter service this year.

You see a new design a go like NOOOOOOOO THEY CAN'T MAKE IT :(((( they even exported pars series to Indonesia.

new design is like the boxer APC for their new pars vehicle pars isn't one vehicle Its a family of vehicles STA, Scout.
If your small brain can't figured that I am just giving real project examples to emphasize possible delays that could create problems in the future then no problem.. Ok remove pars from examples, Altay Hurjet T70 does not matter.
 
M

Manomed

Guest
If your small brain can't figured that I am just giving real project examples to emphasize possible delays that could create problems in the future then no problem.. Ok remove pars from examples, Altay Hurjet T70 does not matter.
Hurjet didn't even finished yet
Altay is a working tank but without engine

T70 is a fuck up Indeed.

Other problems are not related to us but T70 It Indeed smells fishy.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,055
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,446
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
KFX Block 1 won't be a stealth but has 0.08~0.3^2m RCS(without external weapon). Later blocks will be stealth.
No later blocks will have lower RCS but it won't ever be a stealth aircraft comparable to the F-35.
 

kenny

Committed member
Messages
238
Reactions
1 875
Nation of residence
Japan
Nation of origin
Turkey
No later blocks will have lower RCS but it won't ever be a stealth aircraft comparable to the F-35.
I heard from them that their target is not the F-35, but they want to turn it into the 5th and 6th generation.
 

Oublious

Experienced member
The Netherlands Correspondent
Messages
2,152
Reactions
8 4,643
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
I heard from them that their target is not the F-35, but they want to turn it into the 5th and 6th generation.

That won't be a Stealth fighter, they could push to the limit for stealth like they did it with F-15 steath. With internal weapon bay still a F-18. KFX is a fiasco project with minimum stealth, how they are going to put internal weapon bay is a mistery.

1656714763572.png
 

CAN_TR

Contributor
Messages
1,473
Reactions
17 5,204
Nation of residence
Austria
Nation of origin
Turkey
The Koreans never intended that it will have stealth capabilities similar of F-35. With internal weapon bays included the KF-21 is pretty much stealth and 5th Gen. fighter worthy, maybe the GE F414 engine is the only point you can argue about, but heeey supercruise is also a 5th. Gen feature but F-35 lacks it.


1656959429236.png
 

kenny

Committed member
Messages
238
Reactions
1 875
Nation of residence
Japan
Nation of origin
Turkey
One of the most suitable aircraft for us is the KFX. I don't think Korea will cause any problems in selling to us.
 

CAN_TR

Contributor
Messages
1,473
Reactions
17 5,204
Nation of residence
Austria
Nation of origin
Turkey
????? No offence, I simply could not understand, could you rephrase?

If weapon bay included the KF-21 is pretty much stealth, it can supercruise and has overall everything a 5th Gen fighter should have.
Some people argue about the F414 engine which is not stealthy.
 

Radonsider

Contributor
Messages
1,461
Reactions
14 2,782
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina
what makes a stealthy engine tho?
Nothing, actually


Nozzles make it more stealthy but at that angle, you don't really need stealth

IR stealth is more about the aircraft body. Yes, you can run cool air near the engine but that won't make much as there are all aspect heat seekers. Even with those nozzles, F-22 can pretty much be detected with IRST.

This is why lots of countries don't even use serrated nozzles, it simply doesnt worth the cost and complexity, but if you can afford it, why not
 
Last edited:

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,230
Reactions
138 16,119
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
what makes a stealthy engine tho?
There are 4 basic points that defines an engine as a 5th generation engine. Hence a stealthy plane‘s “stealthy“ engine.
1. Nozzles, need to be designed so that both heat signature and the radar reflectance values of the back of the engine conforms to required parameters.
2. All fighter engines have been designed so that the air is taken in through small inlets and compressed. Then this air, after being heated, is thrown out of the nozzle in large quantities. This creates a lot of noise. A stealth plane has to be quieter. To achieve this a larger diameter and a bigger engine is needed that can go even hotter and take in large quantities of air through larger inlets. So a stealthy 5th generation plane’s engine need to be larger to be quieter.
3. Air inlet ducts of the engines have to be designed so that radar reflectance conforms to stealth values.
4. Also due to the needs of large amounts of energy to be used in ancillary systems, electronics and special weapons, a more powerful engine is a prerequisite.
 

TechNamu

Active member
Messages
50
Reactions
81
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
South Korea
Hi folks. I wonder if anyone of you could answer my inquiries of Turkey's upcoming Advanced Trainer Jet, TAI Hurjet.

1) Wing Area

What I have found it interesting is that Wing Area of Hurjet that is stated on TAI's website is different to what's stated on TAI's official information broucher for Hurjet.

On the TAI's website, It claims that Hurjet will have Wing Area of 35 m2

Wng Area.jpg


Meanwhile on the official information broucher

wing.jpg


It says Wing Area of Hurjet is 25 m2.

So which one is right?

2) Range

range.jpg


Again, I am citing TAI's official information document, the estimated range for Hurjet is 1200nm or 2222km. Is this claimed figure actually a ferry range with a drop tank or the actual range that could be achieved with internal fuel? I've found this specs odd because Advanced Jet Trainers with GE F404 such as KAI T-50 and Boeing-Saab T-7A (though T-7A's specs have not been published and it is just a rumour) are said to have about the same range of 1852 km (1000 nautical miles) with internal fuel and I believe HAL Tejas MkI has about the same range of 1852km too with internal fuel since the aircraft shares the same engine, GE F404.

Of course, all of those aircaft, except T-7A since no information is available, are confirmed to be fitted with a fuel drop tank and Ferry Range is much longer. Eg) KAI FA-50 with a drop fuel tank could fly up to 2,592 km in distance and HAL Tejas Mk.I with two drop fuel tanks could travel the distance up to 3,200 km.

This is why I suspect the stated range is actually Ferry Range and I'd love some clarification from some of you guys who have probably more information.

3) Payload

Again, I'm using TAI's official document as a reference

Payload.jpg


The last curious specs (for now) of TAI Hurjet from the information broucher by TAI is that estimated payload capacity(?) is about 2721kg (6000lbs). It is already given that TAI Hurjet won't carry much load as a full fledged fighter aircraft with the same turbofan engine, GE F404 such as Gripen C/D or Tejas Mk.I which could carry much as 5,300kg (11,700 lb) of external load. However, I expected TAI Hurjet was designed to lift much as another ATJ equipped with the same American engine, KAI T-50 (FA-50) which could theoritically carry about 4,500kg (10,000 lb), but realistically could carry 3,740kg (8,250 lb) of payload with the provisional configuration.

This means KAI T-50 (FA-50) could carry about 38% more payload than TAI Hurjet could.

Yes, Boeing-Saab T-7A is rumoured to have payload of 5000lb (2,200kg), but It is just unconfirmed information and It is said that Boeing has cut corners to reduce the cost of AJT and win the T-X competition and the company has admitted that they will be forced to spend more money for structual upgrade & etc to satisfy requirement set by USAF for the aggressor role-playing aircraft.

However, I don't see why Turkey would do the same with TAI Hurjet as the country is reported to develop a serious light-combat aircraft based on Hurjet and even considers a Naval version of the jet.

I mean there is no magic in Aerospace Engineering. I don't expect an aircraft of a similar size fitted with the same engine and expected to serve almost an identical purpose is drastically different to existing jets. Of course, small improvement could be made through technological advancement and the manufacturer could downgrade the specs with cheaper materials to reduce the cost of aircraft. However, I struggle to come up with a reason why Turkey would design their AJT/LCA to carry about 38% less payload than a comparable AJT/LCA such as KAI T-50 (FA-50). There is practically no reason. I'd love some well-sourced & cited response from you gentlemen.
 

Radonsider

Contributor
Messages
1,461
Reactions
14 2,782
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Hi folks. I wonder if anyone of you could answer my inquiries of Turkey's upcoming Advanced Trainer Jet, TAI Hurjet.

1) Wing Area

What I have found it interesting is that Wing Area of Hurjet that is stated on TAI's website is different to what's stated on TAI's official information broucher for Hurjet.

On the TAI's website, It claims that Hurjet will have Wing Area of 35 m2

View attachment 46049

Meanwhile on the official information broucher

View attachment 46050

It says Wing Area of Hurjet is 25 m2.

So which one is right?

2) Range

View attachment 46051

Again, I am citing TAI's official information document, the estimated range for Hurjet is 1200nm or 2222km. Is this claimed figure actually a ferry range with a drop tank or the actual range that could be achieved with internal fuel? I've found this specs odd because Advanced Jet Trainers with GE F404 such as KAI T-50 and Boeing-Saab T-7A (though T-7A's specs have not been published and it is just a rumour) are said to have about the same range of 1852 km (1000 nautical miles) with internal fuel and I believe HAL Tejas MkI has about the same range of 1852km too with internal fuel since the aircraft shares the same engine, GE F404.

Of course, all of those aircaft, except T-7A since no information is available, are confirmed to be fitted with a fuel drop tank and Ferry Range is much longer. Eg) KAI FA-50 with a drop fuel tank could fly up to 2,592 km in distance and HAL Tejas Mk.I with two drop fuel tanks could travel the distance up to 3,200 km.

This is why I suspect the stated range is actually Ferry Range and I'd love some clarification from some of you guys who have probably more information.

3) Payload

Again, I'm using TAI's official document as a reference

View attachment 46052

The last curious specs (for now) of TAI Hurjet from the information broucher by TAI is that estimated payload capacity(?) is about 2721kg (6000lbs). It is already given that TAI Hurjet won't carry much load as a full fledged fighter aircraft with the same turbofan engine, GE F404 such as Gripen C/D or Tejas Mk.I which could carry much as 5,300kg (11,700 lb) of external load. However, I expected TAI Hurjet was designed to lift much as another ATJ equipped with the same American engine, KAI T-50 (FA-50) which could theoritically carry about 4,500kg (10,000 lb), but realistically could carry 3,740kg (8,250 lb) of payload with the provisional configuration.

This means KAI T-50 (FA-50) could carry about 38% more payload than TAI Hurjet could.

Yes, Boeing-Saab T-7A is rumoured to have payload of 5000lb (2,200kg), but It is just unconfirmed information and It is said that Boeing has cut corners to reduce the cost of AJT and win the T-X competition and the company has admitted that they will be forced to spend more money for structual upgrade & etc to satisfy requirement set by USAF for the aggressor role-playing aircraft.

However, I don't see why Turkey would do the same with TAI Hurjet as the country is reported to develop a serious light-combat aircraft based on Hurjet and even considers a Naval version of the jet.

I mean there is no magic in Aerospace Engineering. I don't expect an aircraft of a similar size fitted with the same engine and expected to serve almost an identical purpose is drastically different to existing jets. Of course, small improvement could be made through technological advancement and the manufacturer could downgrade the specs with cheaper materials to reduce the cost of aircraft. However, I struggle to come up with a reason why Turkey would design their AJT/LCA to carry about 38% less payload than a comparable AJT/LCA such as KAI T-50 (FA-50). There is practically no reason. I'd love some well-sourced & cited response from you gentlemen.
The info in both of those are absolutely outdated.

The payload has been increased to 5 tons, wing area is increased, don't know about the ferry range problem
 

TechNamu

Active member
Messages
50
Reactions
81
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
South Korea
The info in both of those are absolutely outdated.

The payload has been increased to 5 tons, wing area is increased, don't know about the ferry range problem

Do you have a source for your claim? I am directly citing TAI(Tusas)'s current information broucher for Hurjet.
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,230
Reactions
138 16,119
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Hi folks. I wonder if anyone of you could answer my inquiries of Turkey's upcoming Advanced Trainer Jet, TAI Hurjet.

1) Wing Area

What I have found it interesting is that Wing Area of Hurjet that is stated on TAI's website is different to what's stated on TAI's official information broucher for Hurjet.

On the TAI's website, It claims that Hurjet will have Wing Area of 35 m2

View attachment 46049

Meanwhile on the official information broucher

View attachment 46050

It says Wing Area of Hurjet is 25 m2.

So which one is right?

2) Range

View attachment 46051

Again, I am citing TAI's official information document, the estimated range for Hurjet is 1200nm or 2222km. Is this claimed figure actually a ferry range with a drop tank or the actual range that could be achieved with internal fuel? I've found this specs odd because Advanced Jet Trainers with GE F404 such as KAI T-50 and Boeing-Saab T-7A (though T-7A's specs have not been published and it is just a rumour) are said to have about the same range of 1852 km (1000 nautical miles) with internal fuel and I believe HAL Tejas MkI has about the same range of 1852km too with internal fuel since the aircraft shares the same engine, GE F404.

Of course, all of those aircaft, except T-7A since no information is available, are confirmed to be fitted with a fuel drop tank and Ferry Range is much longer. Eg) KAI FA-50 with a drop fuel tank could fly up to 2,592 km in distance and HAL Tejas Mk.I with two drop fuel tanks could travel the distance up to 3,200 km.

This is why I suspect the stated range is actually Ferry Range and I'd love some clarification from some of you guys who have probably more information.

3) Payload

Again, I'm using TAI's official document as a reference

View attachment 46052

The last curious specs (for now) of TAI Hurjet from the information broucher by TAI is that estimated payload capacity(?) is about 2721kg (6000lbs). It is already given that TAI Hurjet won't carry much load as a full fledged fighter aircraft with the same turbofan engine, GE F404 such as Gripen C/D or Tejas Mk.I which could carry much as 5,300kg (11,700 lb) of external load. However, I expected TAI Hurjet was designed to lift much as another ATJ equipped with the same American engine, KAI T-50 (FA-50) which could theoritically carry about 4,500kg (10,000 lb), but realistically could carry 3,740kg (8,250 lb) of payload with the provisional configuration.

This means KAI T-50 (FA-50) could carry about 38% more payload than TAI Hurjet could.

Yes, Boeing-Saab T-7A is rumoured to have payload of 5000lb (2,200kg), but It is just unconfirmed information and It is said that Boeing has cut corners to reduce the cost of AJT and win the T-X competition and the company has admitted that they will be forced to spend more money for structual upgrade & etc to satisfy requirement set by USAF for the aggressor role-playing aircraft.

However, I don't see why Turkey would do the same with TAI Hurjet as the country is reported to develop a serious light-combat aircraft based on Hurjet and even considers a Naval version of the jet.

I mean there is no magic in Aerospace Engineering. I don't expect an aircraft of a similar size fitted with the same engine and expected to serve almost an identical purpose is drastically different to existing jets. Of course, small improvement could be made through technological advancement and the manufacturer could downgrade the specs with cheaper materials to reduce the cost of aircraft. However, I struggle to come up with a reason why Turkey would design their AJT/LCA to carry about 38% less payload than a comparable AJT/LCA such as KAI T-50 (FA-50). There is practically no reason. I'd love some well-sourced & cited response from you gentlemen.
As per @Radonsider ’s above post, the info on the Tusas site are outdated.
Hurjet airframe has since been undergoing a serious redesign by Akaer of Brazil. These are the people who made Gripen so much more than what it originally was. Talking about Gripen; There you have a 2mach top speed plane that is one of the most agile jet fighters around. It had f404 engine propelling it, until block E and F. (Albeit it was an F404 engine with 18100lbf thrust as opposed to Hurjet’s f404-102 developing 17700lbf thrust)
Hurjet wing area has been increased in view of possible carrier use in later days and with Akaer’s involvement.
In his latest interview the MD of Tusas mentioned that Hurjet will have a payload of 5000kg.
Regarding ferry range values; I would disregard this as plane‘s aerodynamic geometry has changed since the info on the site was published.
 

TechNamu

Active member
Messages
50
Reactions
81
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
South Korea
As per @Radonsider ’s above post, the info on the Tusas site are outdated.
Hurjet airframe has since been undergoing a serious redesign by Akaer of Brazil. These are the people who made Gripen so much more than what it originally was. Talking about Gripen; There you have a 2mach top speed plane that is one of the most agile jet fighters around. It had f404 engine propelling it, until block E and F. (Albeit it was an F404 engine with 18100lbf thrust as opposed to Hurjet’s f404-102 developing 17700lbf thrust)
Hurjet wing area has been increased in view of possible carrier use in later days and with Akaer’s involvement.
In his latest interview the MD of Tusas mentioned that Hurjet will have a payload of 5000kg.
Regarding ferry range values; I would disregard this as plane‘s aerodynamic geometry has changed since the info on the site was published.

I understand your claim, but could you actually cite technical data that the airframe designed done by Akaer has improved TAI Hurjet's payload or could you at least a link to the alledged interview that the MD of TAI (Tusas) claims that Hurjet will be designed to carry 5,000kg (11,000lb) of payload. It is difficult to believe that TAI (Tusas) has not updated a major upgrade information like that on their website

defence.jpg
.

Also for Wing Area. I have managed to find an old 2021 photo by TAI (Tusas) on Defence Turkey and it claims Wing Area of being 24m2. So, the wing area DID increase, but only from 24m2 to 25m2, which is within the range for this class of aeroplane. The updated Wing Area of 25m2 is mentioned on TAI's official broucher.
 
Last edited:

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom