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

[Turkic]

What is your reference for what the RCS is, Kızılelma is supposed to be better than those planes.

The Rcs value of kizilelma is higher compared to other 5th gen fighters like a F35 f22 or chinese models but is leaps smaller than any 4,5 gen fighter jet. There is also a misunderstanding when it comes to the Rcs value of Eurofighter or rafale these can have a relative small rcs value but only from a direct approach and without any payload and that is not realistic under normal conditions the RCS is a minimum of 1 sqm if not higher. Kizilelma is also still in its infancy and baykar is still new to the game of producing advanced composite airframes with time the RCs value will decrease as production quality increases.

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.

I said these not @Huelague so I will answer. If we consider KE's RCS value (which we don't know) as 0.1m², 4.5th gens RCS values as 1m² and 5th gen RCS values as <0.01; this makes KE's RCS values similar to 4.5th gens more than it is similar to 5th gens. With "similar", I don't mean "same" but "closer when compared".

‘Body‘ (geometry) is not that expensive.

A plane's geometry could affect the production costs more than you think. YF-23, as you know, was extremely expensive and it's geometry had a noteworthy slice from the cake. With new production technologies, it is much cheaper but KE is a low-budget, low-cost aircraft. It may still be expensive for it.

RAM should be ready and in use by KAAN. Kizilelma could use same coating.

Sure, depends on the performance on KE and price. A high-quality ram coating would be perfect on Kaan but if KE's design has flaws and it shines on radars even if you use high-quality ram coating and if it is indeed expensive, they could use a more effective option.

I will define "flaws" to not get misunderstood. Let's assume RCS value of the radom as 0.3 and radom coonection point's RCS value as 0.5. And let's say radome will have 0.01m² RCS value with Kaan's ram coating but the connections will not drop below 0.1m². Would you use high-end ram coating in such a plane or a ram coating enough to take it all just below 0.1m². (If Kaan's ram coating is affordable for KE, go for it. I assumed it is expensive.)

 

[Zafer]

1. F16 1.2
2. EF 0.25
3. SU57 0.1
4. KE 0.07
5. Anka3 0.001

More likely

 

[IC3M@N FX]

The RCS from F-16 is bit higher 1.5
Normally it had an RCS of 3 to 5 as 70s Design Airframe; after undergoing RAM with Project Have Glass I–V RAM, it was reduced to 1.5 RCS.

Eurofighter and Rafale 0.5 to 1 RCS it's 90s Design Airframe with RAM.
SU 57 I don't know is speculation nobody know exactly.
Kizilelma 0.05 - 0.08 speculation
Anka 3 0.005 - 0.008 speculation

 

[Turkic]

Guys, 0.1 for KE and 1 for EF/Rafale was unserious numbers. And we probably will never know the exact numbers. What I meant was KE is not as stealth as F-35 or such and the main reason for this is money. It’s not about the rcs values but the comparisons. KE’s RCS values are probably in low-observable zone together with 4.5th gens, KF-21 and SU-57. And 5th gen RCS values are in very-low-observable zone.

KE might join VLO zone with certain upgrades. I hope we will see those with twin-engine/one big engine configurations.

 

[Turkic]

Here is one reason why I put KE in low-observable zone:

Kızılelma S5 from today. Production is moving ahead.

View attachment 81353

Will those screws stay visible in serial production? I expected them to hide these after S1.

 

[begturan]

We can assume that Baykar, a company that has provided stealth capabilities even to a tactical UAV in the TB2 class, will also provide Kızılelma with satisfactory levels of stealth technology thanks to its advanced composite technology. It will likely have an RCS that will satisfy the Turkish air force at a low cost.

To date, no actual data has been published; currently, no one outside the company and the Turkish Armed Forces knows how much of a radar signature Kızılelma leaves. And it should remain that way.

 

[Zafer]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2066799763245179392

The radar-absorbent material (RAM) coating designed to provide stealth capabilities for the KAAN has been manufactured in Ankara, has passed over 30 tests, and is ready for use.

It can be said that the KAAN's stealth level will surpass that of the F-35, thanks to innovations in RAM technology.

The radar-signal-absorbing coating used on the KAAN and ANKA-3 is superior to the coating used on American F-35 aircraft.

The next-generation coating developed for the KAAN and ANKA-3 was designed with more durable and modern components to overcome the chronic maintenance issues associated with the F-35.

The KAAN’s Radar Cross Section (RCS) value is 0.001 m²—roughly the size of a golf ball.

The KAAN incorporates millions of lines of code written by ASELSAN and HAVELSAN.

 

[Tornadoss]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2066799763245179392

How reliable is this source?

 

[IC3M@N FX]

It is physically and industrially impossible for the KAAN (a huge, twin-engine fighter with conventional round engine nozzles and a supporting central cockpit arch) to have exactly the same radar signature as the much smaller, single-engine F-35 with its completely seamless, one-piece cockpit.
Realistic figure: Taking into account the updated, flatter TUSAŞ dimensions (5 metres in height) and an Have Glass V equivalent + coating, the production KAAN’s frontal area is realistically between 0.005 m² and 0.01 m². This is still an absolutely top-class figure, placing the jet well within the VLO (Very Low Observable) range, but not quite at the absolutely extreme level of the F-35.

And....how can the TAI KAAN, which has the same radar absorbers as the Anka 3 & Kizilelma, have the same RCS values as the Anka 3, which is completely Clean Design and Tailless?

With the TEI TF-35000 fitted with optimised nozzles, it is certainly possible to achieve an RCS of between 0.003 and 0.008, but that is as low as it gets – which is still a bloody good figure.
The USA has had experience with radar-absorbing materials, coatings and paints since the 1970s and 1980s; it is impossible to reach this level in 5 to 10 years.

 

[TheInsider]

How reliable is this source?

Source is not reliable, but what he wrote is %100 correct.

I'm not talking about RCS of KAAN, it is classified; nobody knows that. I'm talking about RAM being better than F-35. That is true.

 

[IC3M@N FX]

Source is not reliable, but what he wrote is %100 correct.

How is possible?
TAI KAAN and Anka 3 has same RCS?
With the Anka 3, this is still possible, as it features a pure flying-wing design; and thanks to its tailless design, the radar-absorbing materials and coatings can realistically achieve this value. But TAI KAAN is not Tailless and It even has a centre strut cockpit canopy and vertical stabilisers.

The US is miles ahead of every other nation in the world when it comes to radar-absorbing materials, coatings and paints.
If China can’t even manage to develop better radar-absorbing materials, despite having a budget ten times as large as ours … Sorry, but that’s propaganda.