TR UAV/UCAV Programs | Anka - series | Kızılelma | TB - series

Huelague

Experienced member
Messages
5,285
Reactions
19 5,352
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
HMt2ouDWwAEPZUD


Kızılelma variants:
- A
- B
- CA
- CB
- O

There is various speculation regarding the power output and flight envelopes between the variants. We can gues over A, B, and C from older brochures, but the current plan includes a total of five variants. My humble opinion is that C represents the twin-engine threshold, and A and B might relate to the total installed power and supersonic capability. The variant coded 'O' is a complete mystery; perhaps the biggest important milestone in the Bayraktar brothers' vision for the next 30 years: Highly maneuverable, fully autonomous 'air superiority' jet. 'O' could refer to a medium-class (orta sınıf) fighter. Like, Kaan is an optionally manned heavy-class heavy combatant while Kızılelma(O) is a fully autonomous unmanned medium-class combatant.


I miss the smooth fillet between wings and fuselage (wing root/fairing) without these hard edges.
 

dBSPL

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Ambassador
Messages
2,838
Reactions
122 14,383
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
In my opinion, O may refer to Otonom (Autonomous) which it will be full capable of doing air superiority without operator control.
It's highly probable.

The Baykar Group challenges traditional understanding with a fundamentally different concept and discourse, and therefore its activities reflect this. Some consider these views overly idealistic( and unrealistic), while others tend to see Baykar's current position as a point of achieving a result. However, they are talking about a 30-year perspective. I believe that many Baykar initiatives that currently seem separate are, in the long term, part of this vision. I am preparing a short forum article where I will present my humble opinions on this matter.
 

YeşilVatan

Contributor
Messages
782
Reactions
16 1,966
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Kızılelma fleet daily schedule:
  1. Maintenance
  2. Harass Greeks over Sea of Islands lol
  3. Refuel
  4. Harass cypriot greek administration
  5. Tea break
  6. Buzz some westoid ship in mediterranean
  7. Refuel
  8. Do acrobatics for foreign dignitary visit
  9. Refuel
  10. Some NATO patrol stuff in the Black Sea
  11. Refuel
  12. Bomb PKK because peace process is broken again
  13. Refuel and rearm
  14. Get software update
  15. Goodnight sweet prince
Total number of international news caused during the day: 6

I love these machines
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,868
Solutions
1
Reactions
49 16,956
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Using a high-angle trajectory, air-launched missiles of this type can travel roughly three times the distance they would cover if launched from the ground. The video clearly shows the missile gaining altitude after launch. Since TRG-230 reaches 70 km when launched from the ground, we can estimate its range to be roughly 210 km.

Earlier IHA-230 launches differ from this launch as they travel directly to the target without a high-angle trajectory. It seems like Roketsan changed the name to Jet-230.
IHA-230 can't utilize high-angle trajectory meanwhile Jet-230 can utilize high-angle trajectory to extend its range.

IHA-300ER is different as it is a completely new design and has no relation to TRG-300.
 

Huelague

Experienced member
Messages
5,285
Reactions
19 5,352
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Kizilelma has no cockpit and is way smaller than all 5. Gen fighter jets. It has to be a smaller RCS than any of these jets. But it has not.

Why?
 

Turkic

Well-known member
Messages
306
Reactions
5 601
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Kizilelma has no cockpit and is way smaller than all 5. Gen fighter jets. It has to be a smaller RCS than any of these jets. But it has not.

Why?
Better composites = less rcs
Better composites = more money
Better ram coating = less rcs
Better ram coating = more money
Better rcs optimized body shape&curves = more production cost

F-35 ~100 million dollars
KE <50 million dollars

Same goes for B-2 and F-35. Is B-2 smaller?

If you asked why KE has RCS values similar to 4.5th gen jets like Rafale, EF or KF-21; that would be a better question.
 
Top Bottom