TF-X Turkish Fighter & Trainer Aircraft Projects

[era_shield]

its quite early to speculate anything like this .... give some time to this program

BTW engine power is not the only thing which is required to achieve super cruise there are other design factors as well .... for example F-16XL achieve the same with Supersonic Laminar Flow Control & with single engine of 29,000 pounds thrust ... so wait for some time ... its just premature to be judgmental about the TFX & its capabilities at this stage

F-16XL wasn't really supercruise capable, the 2nd version accidentally achieved it in an experimental test. With a combat loadout it would not have been able to do it. And, realistically, TF-X will be heavier and in terms of design have more aerodynamic restrictions (due to stealth) than the F-16XL so it's not realistic to expect it to be able to supercruise with a single engine. I think the TF-X will very likely be dual engine. Single engine would only make sense if the main goal is export success, since it will bring the price down a lot.

 

[HRK]

F-16XL wasn't really supercruise capable, the 2nd version accidentally achieved it in an experimental test. With a combat loadout it would not have been able to do it.

I am talking about the F-16XL with modified wing by NASA for Supersonic Laminar Flow Control study program ....

And, realistically, TF-X will be heavier and in terms of design have more aerodynamic restrictions (due to stealth) than the F-16XL so it's not realistic to expect it to be able to supercruise with a single engine.

Nor I am expecting it to be single engine I just give an example that engine power is not the "sole factor" for the achievement of Supercruise ability, in fact if you reread my post I haven't make any comment about TFX at this time and advised the gentleman to remain patient in regards TFX program

I think the TF-X will very likely be dual engine.

Make sense as Turkey will also operate single engine F-35

Single engine would only make sense if the main goal is export success, since it will bring the price down a lot.

You are right to some extent but in my opinion export market for 5th generation aircraft is already very limited, not many countries can afford it & those counties who can afford (like some middle eastern countries) are not that advance to fully exploit the potential of 5 gen fighter aircraft ... so they will either required to establish or to upgrade their technological capabilities & infrastructure of AIR & SPACE.

 

[monitor]

İngiltere Savunma Bakanı Sn. Fallon ile yaptığımız görüşmede TF-X projesindeki ortaklığımızın başka alanlarda da sürdürülmesini ele aldık.

Translated from Turkish by Bing

United Kingdom Defence Minister Mr. Fallon to our discussion with the TF-X project partnership in other areas continuation.

 

[TheMightyBender]

There has a discussion started that Turkish 5 . gen fighter wouldn't be supercruise capable with only one EJ-2000 engine.
Afaik the engine is updated .
Infos available ?
@HRK

If TFX ends up with only one EJ200 engine then it will probably be the most underpowered fighter in the world after JF-17 and HAL tejas

Hell even with two engines it is still seriously underpowered compared to other 5th gen air superiority fighters.

 

[Oguzhan]

As far as i know,what we want is ej230 which theoritically right engine,things will start with ej200 but after 11 years who knows with what

 

[AnatolianEagle]

Guys pls listen to Temel Kotil first. He said not the prototype Version but the the final production V will have a domestic jet engine in 2030. Its useless to discuss further...
@Oguzhan @JustHappened @TheMightyBender

 

[era_shield]

If TFX ends up with only one EJ200 engine then it will probably be the most underpowered fighter in the world after JF-17 and HAL tejas

Hell even with two engines it is still seriously underpowered compared to other 5th gen air superiority fighters.

How did you come to that conclusion when there's only 1 true stealthy air superiority fighter in existence, and it cost $350million each - the F-22? The PAK-FA is semi-stealthy at best, comparable to the Rafale. The J-20's engine will probably go the way of the Indian Kaveri or have to be underrated and therefore have similar thrust to the engines used in LRIP. The fact that the Chinese are buying Su-35s (probably to reverse-engineer engines and other tech) speaks volumes about both their stealth fighters. Let's not even start on the stealth-destroying IR signature of the Russian engines.

Whether a fighter is underpowered or not depends on many factors, not just engine thrust. In this analysis the author says the EJ-200 is the 2nd best overall performing engine of all (after the F-22's engines), and that the EJ-230 is even better than the F-22's.

 

[-SINAN-]

Whether a fighter is underpowered or not depends on many factors, not just engine thrust.

Yeah, it is. Others define how efficient engine is, how hard is it to maintain, etc...

 

[TheMightyBender]

How did you come to that conclusion when there's only 1 true stealthy air superiority fighter in existence, and it cost $350million each - the F-22? The PAK-FA is semi-stealthy at best, comparable to the Rafale. The J-20's engine will probably go the way of the Indian Kaveri or have to be underrated and therefore have similar thrust to the engines used in LRIP. The fact that the Chinese are buying Su-35s (probably to reverse-engineer engines and other tech) speaks volumes about both their stealth fighters. Let's not even start on the stealth-destroying IR signature of the Russian engines.

Whether a fighter is underpowered or not depends on many factors, not just engine thrust. In this analysis the author says the EJ-200 is the 2nd best overall performing engine of all (after the F-22's engines), and that the EJ-230 is even better than the F-22's.

Here is how I came to this conclusion. I never mentioned stealth in my post. I said 5th gen fighter. Stealthy or not, there is no denying that the PAK-FA is a 5th gen fighter. And here are my numbers for this conclusion:

Aircraft name...........Total dry thrust
F-22................................52000 lbf
PAK-FA.............................42000 lbf
J-20..............................~40000 lbf

And here is how the TFX compares (assuming EJ200 engines)
sing-engine......................13500 lbf
twin-engine......................27000 lbf

I know that these numbers are subject to change but we both know that the changes will not be that dramatic.
You are right in that being underpowered is not solely a function of engine thrust. Conventionally being underpowered means having a lower T/W ratio. Perhaps I should have used a different term, let's say "size". I think the TFX will be smaller than the other speculated 5th gen air superiority fighters. But the simple fact is that more thrust ≡ larger aircraft ≡ more missiles you can carry for the same speed.

 

[era_shield]

Conventionally being underpowered means having a lower T/W ratio. Perhaps I should have used a different term, let's say "size". I think the TFX will be smaller than the other speculated 5th gen air superiority fighters. But the simple fact is that more thrust ≡ larger aircraft ≡ more missiles you can carry for the same speed.

I suggest you read the article I linked to see how oversimplified your comparison is.

 

[TheMightyBender]

I suggest you read the article I linked to see how oversimplified your comparison is.

I did read it. It is a shady af article. It uses 324323215324 units for the same dimensions. They didn't even bother homogenizing the units. It keeps mentioning some mysterious EJ230 but none of its data are listed. It doesn't give any sources. It uses data obtained from the comments section. It doesn't even correctly label the data columns. Hell it doesn't even give the author's name! For all I know it could be compiled by a 12 year old who compiled the data from his what he heard from his friends. How can you trust such a source even a little bit???

In times such as this I truly wish there was a version of John Baez's Crackpot Index (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html) for engineers. I can't even imagine how high this article would score in such an index .

But put all that aside. I am not saying the EJ200 is not a good engine. I am also not saying that it has a poor performance. As a matter of fact it is a great engine, as it is newer than most engines listed there.
What I am saying is that it is SMALL. No matter how good and powerful an iPhone is, you can't use it as a workstation. ( <- this is an analogy in case it was not clear).

 

[era_shield]

I did read it. It is a shady af article. It uses 324323215324 units for the same dimensions. They didn't even bother homogenizing the units. It keeps mentioning some mysterious EJ230 but none of its data are listed. It doesn't give any sources. It uses data obtained from the comments section. It doesn't even correctly label the data columns. Hell it doesn't even give the author's name! For all I know it could be compiled by a 12 year old who compiled the data from his what he heard from his friends. How can you trust such a source even a little bit???

In times such as this I truly wish there was a version of John Baez's Crackpot Index (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html) for engineers. I can't even imagine how high this article would score in such an index .

But put all that aside. I am not saying the EJ200 is not a good engine. I am also not saying that it has a poor performance. As a matter of fact it is a great engine, as it is newer than most engines listed there.
What I am saying is that it is SMALL. No matter how good and powerful an iPhone is, you can't use it as a workstation. ( <- this is an analogy in case it was not clear).

Judging assertions based on such a heuristic is itself misguided and is not much more than a thinly veiled "orthodoxy-o-meter" for people who want to fortify their intellectual herd mentality, but that's neither here nor there. Yes, the engine is relatively small, but that gives the airplane designers certain advantages in other areas when designing the aircraft which, to some extent, makes up for the lesser thrust. Look at the Eurofighter - Mach 2 top speed, Mach 1.5 supercruise, good weapons load, air superiority role capable, excellent aerodynamic performance, yet it uses 2xEJ-200. Certainly not underpowered. And for the TF-X the ~30% increase in thrust from the updated EJ-2x0 should make up for the fact that it will need to be bigger for internal weapons carriage.

 

[TheMightyBender]

Judging assertions based on such a heuristic is itself misguided and is not much more than a thinly veiled "orthodoxy-o-meter" for people who want to fortify their intellectual herd mentality, but that's neither here nor there. Yes, the engine is relatively small, but that gives the airplane designers certain advantages in other areas when designing the aircraft which, to some extent, makes up for the lesser thrust. Look at the Eurofighter - Mach 2 top speed, Mach 1.5 supercruise, good weapons load, air superiority role capable, excellent aerodynamic performance, yet it uses 2xEJ-200. Certainly not underpowered. And for the TF-X the ~30% increase in thrust from the updated EJ-2x0 should make up for the fact that it will need to be bigger for internal weapons carriage.

I wouldn't call it an "orthodoxy-o-meter" I am not judging them for their style of writing but nowhere in the world, no one serious will trust you when you are speaking anonymously on the internet and the only source you have is another anonymous person in the comments section. Not to mention not giving any sources for 99% of your data. I would suggest you be more critical in online reading. All I am saying is that I can open a blog, write an anonymous post and claim that the JF-17 thunder is twice as good as the F-22 using the methods in this article.

Regarding the Eurofighter. I can't believe I am saying this for the 3rd time. I am talking about a 5TH GENERATION FIGHTER! EF is not 5th gen. If you want a 4th gen fighter then 2xEJ200 is more than enough. Even the most renowned 4th gen air superiority fighter, F-15 eagle, flies with roughly the same power. But If you are building a 5th gen you need to store your ammo inside. That's a big difference.

But anyways if I haven't convinced you so far I doubt that I can after this. I don't want to waste people's time here by prolonging this subject. So adios

 

[era_shield]

But If you are building a 5th gen you need to store your ammo inside. That's a big difference.

And for the TF-X the ~30% increase in thrust from the updated EJ-2x0 should make up for the fact that it will need to be bigger for internal weapons carriage.

Adios indeed.

 

[TheMightyBender]

The video is a bit old but it's hilarity makes up for it