We have no clue how much power the TB3 needs to take off from the Anadolu but if it lacks power some cable tug assist will work wonders. A more powerful engine if the TB3 ever needs one will rid the assist cables but is not absolutely necessary.
Mojave's MTOW is 3000 kg(2 times the TB3's) and its engine produces 450 hp(2 times the power output of PD222, 2x225hp). If we assume the requirements are changing linearly for small differences then PD222 makes more sense. It's oversimplified but gives the ballpark.
We may also check Mojave's operational range chart. (Given with respect to payload and take off distance-limiting fuel payload). In the STOL mode it gets 4 to 6 hours of ISR capability, unarmed.
PD300 is a little on the weak side for Akıncı and on the strong side for Aksungur. There seems to be no existing platform that this new engine is made to perfectly match. It is more of a project to take the PD170 to the extremes I guess. There is not really any information about it. However a new platform should be made to make use of this engine's full capability. If it is light enough which seems to be so it can even be used for VTOL aircarft. Like helicopters and compound helicopters that have both helicopter and plane features. Also civilian sector should catch up to use such engines. Some companies had seaplane development work in the past.
TB3 would make more sense for Navy even if used from land with its heavier payload capacity.
I think take off and landing of piston engine powered aircrafts ( also TB-2/3 have long wings for low stalling speed) immensely bounded to weather conditions, wind speed thus Naval Operational use of TB-3 could be limited.
What we know for sure is TB3 has flown in 130 kmh winds taking off from land. Off course landing back on the ship will be challenging, still some machine learning and AI will probably assist in such a feat. I have seen videos of smll drones flying in stormy weather, but it will take a lot of tuning to get there. With 1450kg take of weight TB3 has quite a bit of heft to stand some wind, I would say.
TEI can produce compact jet engines.
Small turbine engines are good for fast planes or missiles, for cargo or weapons load carrying propellers are more efficient. A small, rather high bypass turbofan engine could be used to strike a good balance between speed and efficiency but there is next to no such turbofan in production. Turbine engines are rather inefficient when they are small.
I meant for naval use. For launch from AC. Let's solve the problem which doesn't exist
There maybe use cases where efficiency comes last like when boostering a plane in take off but still there are other solutions to the problem like catapulting or tuging with cable which are more convenient.I meant for naval use. For launch from AC. Let's solve the problem which doesn't exist
Along with the propeller one or two microturbunes could increase take off speed. Kinda additional JATO (Jet assisted take off) When stalling UAV uses just propeller.
www.turdef.com
