You should provide a translation with non-english sources.Atlay tank mk3
You should provide a translation with non-english sources.Atlay tank mk3
@Ajax01 Are you still maintaining your position?Well I will eat a Landing Gear if TAI TF-X rolls out in 2023. See the Korean's T-50 they made that but still got the Triumph Group to make their 5th gen fuselage for K21. Control Laws for fighter take lots of time and Hurjet is hardly intended to be a fighter. Then they get tested a lot to finetune. Then you get the AESA radar which needs to be flown a lot to optimize algos in supersonic testbeds. Then RAMs RAS on top of fighter aircraft composites , IR control material, supersonic nozzle with stealth. Then manufacturing technologies for bulkhead ,actuators, etc. Its like jumping 10 floors at the same time. Turkey's drone achievements are enviable and top class but supersonic manned fighters are an entirely different ballgame from turboprop uavs.
Tell me why will BAE guys will make something and hand over IPR to TAI no one does that if there is no strong business case. And then there is Know How to Know Why transition.
TF6000(6.000lbf dry, 10.000lbf wet thrust)I have just read wikipedia and something about the Kızılelma drone pisses me off.
Please dont fucking tell me that Turkey put all their eggs in one basket to have the Ukrainians develop the engines for the drone. Please tell me that Turkey has an alternative engine thats developed for the drone. I am pissed off as it is that the TFX has to rely on another foreign country for their engines.
If I had a dime everytime a person praises SpaceX without giving credit to NASA, I would be a billionaire. This guy above is fucking clueless. SpaceX derived 90% of their IP from open source (I mean only to US companies) and public IP and research. The reusable thing? That wasn't SpaceX, it was NASA's Delta Clipper. SpaceX based their technology base on that foundation. And it was Blue Origin that came up with the reusable rocket first. All those cryoengine technology? That came from NASA. Sure SpaceX is taking it up another notch but they didn't start from scratch. Whereas in Turkey, they basically would have to come up from scratch.Intresting stuff
Let's see what comes next View attachment 183818
Hello everyone I read a lot of triggering things about our defense industry on this forum and don't know where to start to give right info about that assumptions. Let's start with this one.Wrong, not 360 but 270, need rear rf sensor to meet 360 like fgfa.
Oh yeah. Probably will dismantle it soon enough like the koreans to put stuff in.@Ajax01 Are you still maintaining your position?
You think equipping the aircraft will take more than a year?Oh yeah. Probably will dismantle it soon enough like the koreans to put stuff in.
Yeah actually I relied on forum for info regarding Turkish industry and tech but after many news about production and prototype I went to other pages forums sites to understand Turkish defense systemsHello everyone I read a lot of triggering things about our defense industry on this forum and don't know where to start to give right info about that assumptions. Let's start with this one.
Bruh there wont be only one AESA on TFX one of them will at 6 of the jet. Between the engines.
P.S. everybody says: yes you did it because you're on NATO yeah you achieved that because of NATO etc. LMAO! These days we feel like we're in nato to defend ourrself from NATO. They don't give us shït! Should I mention CAATSA? Sorry but I can't accept undermining our gifted engineers efforts. Thanks
MoIntresting stuff
Let's see what comes next View attachment 183818
1. Is the FCS being developed in house?Quick question, Is the FCS being developed in house? How many LRUs are sourced within turkey? Was CFD Analysis of design carried out in house or help taken from BAE?
No. I think indigenous subsytems have not been developed or tested as such it can't be put in the aircraft.You think equipping the aircraft will take more than a year?
We're talking about roll-out. The aircraft won't enter service by 2028 at the earliest. AESA or EOTS or other non-ready systems won't be included in this first prototype. And this prototype is not even flight-worthy. So we have plenty of times to test those systems by IOC. I thought this was clear.No. I think indigenous subsytems have not been developed or tested as such it can't be put in the aircraft.
For example, has the AESA radar flown on a supersonic testbed yet? If not, how will they refine the algos and test all the modes? It takes a flight regime of 3 years at the very least to just optimize the radar given there are no teething issues (which are expected for most airborne FCR). Has the IWB aerodynamics been done inhouse? Do you have pics of that?
I think most of these are supplied to Turkey as 'black box' tech by its Western partners. After all 100 million pounds in the PDR stage itself to BAE is a lot of money(though not enough for a full 5th gen).
Then you can just put that airframe on a stretcher and use some 30kN engine for taxying and still call it roll out.We're talking about roll-out. The aircraft won't enter service by 2028 at the earliest. AESA or EOTS or other non-ready systems won't be included in this first prototype. And this prototype is not even flight-worthy. So we have plenty of times to test those systems by IOC. I thought this was clear.
Now that's a stretch. What is the point of putting AESA on a prototype that's going to be used for ground testing?Then you can just put that airframe on a stretcher and use some 30kN engine for taxying and still call it roll out.
It's not enough to fly the radar on a fighter class aircraft during development. You will need extra space and power for monitoring and diagnostics hence the radar flying testbed is usually something larger like a business jet .We're talking about roll-out. The aircraft won't enter service by 2028 at the earliest. AESA or EOTS or other non-ready systems won't be included in this first prototype. And this prototype is not even flight-worthy. So we have plenty of times to test those systems by IOC. I thought this was clear.
Seriously, how many active AESA radar for TFX ? 3 or 6 ?Hello everyone I read a lot of triggering things about our defense industry on this forum and don't know where to start to give right info about that assumptions. Let's start with this one.
Bruh there wont be only one AESA on TFX one of them will at 6 of the jet. Between the engines.
P.S. everybody says: yes you did it because you're on NATO yeah you achieved that because of NATO etc. LMAO! These days we feel like we're in nato to defend ourrself from NATO. They don't give us shït! Should I mention CAATSA? Sorry but I can't accept undermining our gifted engineers efforts. Thanks
F35 vs TFX(Sensor Suite):
F35:
- EOTS (MWIR Forward Looking IR + IRST)
- DAS (360⁰ IR Situation awareness + IRST)
- Nose GaAs AESA radar
- MADL protected data transfer and communication in-flight F35s
MMU:
- BEOS (L/MWIR MCT (NAR project)) FLIR and targeting system for air to air/air to ground missions (F35 EOTS equivalent)
- Nose sensor: Infrared Search and tracking (F35 have EOTS + DAS used as IRST)
- Yıldırım DIRCM: Infrared counter measure (F35 don't have DIRCM yet)
- Nose GaN AESA + Side looking GaN AESA radars for 360⁰ situation awareness and tracking (F35 don't have 360 degree radar coverage capability)
- FSS 360⁰ Situation awareness + UV solar blind MWS (F35 DAS equivalent)
- IVDL protected data transfer and communication with in-flight TFXs (F35 MADL equivalent)
by Cabatli
Can also be applied to military.He is talking about the recent flood. Rescuing from humanitarian crisis. Another example of clickbait title. Without any context..
"The images that emerged after the flood disaster that flooded a significant part of Pakistan broke our hearts. We have mobilized the means at our disposal for the people of Pakistan. In order to overcome these difficult days, we will continue to stand by Pakistan in the future as we have done in the past."