TF-X / KAAN / Hürjet Turkish Fighter & Trainer Aircrafts News & Discussions

The US has literally accused China of stealing the plans for the F-35. Recently, a US army soldier was arrested for spying for the Chinese.

Yeah, I figure you might give this example. Except nothing of actual relevance related to tech formula was stolen. It was related to aircraft design and system performance perimeters. Chinese hakcers access it through company networks. Except even then the most secretive and high end technologies being developed for F35 were kept isolated from broader network to exactly avoid this type of breaches.

There are levels to how classified something is. Even then after that incident procedures were tighten further to avoid future breaches in lower ends.

Again, one is partial knowledge about how something would perform. Which you probably could guesstimate anyway with your own experts. (Specially when you have you own extensive R&D in the same field.) Getting hand on those data would only confirm that.

(You can acess the data on Eurofighter trench 1 performance perimeters in detail from warthundner leaks. I have the PDF myself that is classified and originally meant for RAF personel and pilots who would fly the jet.)

Another thing is the tech formula developed to build the systems themselves. Those are guarded far better. And always kept off the network. And then they are being developed by multiple entities none of them has full access to what formula others are using to design and Develop their assigned systems .

Plus, today all hardware is only as relevant as its software, whether it is radar or EW, fusion engine or flight control system. And those are always being developed and updated frequently. And no one has access to that.

Yeah, they probably do.

You think they don't? Because you'd be naive to believe so.

Or respectfully you probably don't have accurate idea about this.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I figure you might give this example. Except nothing of actual relevance related to tech formula was stolen. It was related to aircraft design and system performance perimeters. Chinese hakcers access it through company networks. Except even then the most secretive and high end technologies being developed for F35 were kept isolated from broader network to exactly avoid this type of breaches.
I'm sorry, what you think when I said that the US probably knows everything about the KAAN?

Also, what do you think is relevant information when it comes to knowing things about an aircraft?

By the way, China was also accused to stealing build documents.
There are levels to how classified something is. Even then after that incident procedures were tighten further to avoid future breaches in lower ends.
I know.

most people don't even know ehat classified even means. Its not the same thing as top-secret.
Again, one is partial knowledge about how something would perform. Which you probably could guesstimate anyway with your own experts. (Specially when you have you own extensive R&D in the same field.) Getting hand on those data would only confirm that.
Sure, and I'm pretty sure they have access to the data.
(You can acess the data on Eurofighter trench 1 performance perimeters in detail from warthundner leaks. I have the PDF myself that is classified and originally meant for RAF personel and pilots who would fly the jet.)
Sure.
Another thing is the tech formula developed to build the systems themselves. Those are guarded far better. And always kept off the network. And then they are being developed by multiple entities none of them has full access to what formula others are using to design and Develop their assigned systems .
Again, I don't disagree.
Plus, today all hardware is only as relevant as its software, whether it is radar or EW, fusion engine or flight control system. And those are always being developed and updated frequently. And no one has access to that.
that's where you're wrong.

Someone has access to it, otherwise it can never be used, updated, tampered with...etc.

And so long as one person has access to it, this can be compromised.
Or respectfully you probably don't have accurate idea about this.
Considering historical precedent, I think I have a very good idea.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Odd - why have such limited flights in P0, but then move to integrate "mission computers" in P1? The sequencing makes no sense, given that the Kaan airframe and FBW will need many hundreds of hours of flight testing to validate the flight laws across a range of speeds, altitude and climatic conditions and also different symmetrical and asymmetrical payload layouts ??

Adding mission computers, avionics not specific to validation of the FBW and kinetic performance of the platform at this stage would only complicate the testing programme. Logically, makes more sense to move the final mission computers to a P2/3 etc.

I suspect the twitter post is possibly wrong on the phasing..
 
Odd - why have such limited flights in P0, but then move to integrate "mission computers" in P1? The sequencing makes no sense, given that the Kaan airframe and FBW will need many hundreds of hours of flight testing to validate the flight laws across a range of speeds, altitude and climatic conditions and also different symmetrical and asymmetrical payload layouts ??

Adding mission computers, avionics not specific to validation of the FBW and kinetic performance of the platform at this stage would only complicate the testing programme. Logically, makes more sense to move the final mission computers to a P2/3 etc.

I suspect the twitter post is possibly wrong on the phasing..

They have been doing Iron Bird tests on the ground. Technically P0 was never meant to fly.
 
They have been doing Iron Bird tests on the ground. Technically P0 was never meant to fly.

Yes - but the task of validating the FBW is a separate unique task in its own right that requires the degree of coverage in flying hours to validate and certify as i have said. Iron bird testing will not give that to you, you have to do the flying hours.

Either the twitter post is wrong in terms of sequencing of the prototypes and what is required for each phase, or it is correct, and the Kaan programme is about to make life very difficult for itself with having too many variables in a single prototype. I don't have insights into the programme, and can approach the topic logically from risk management/programme management perspective.
 
Yes - but the task of validating the FBW is a separate unique task in its own right that requires the degree of coverage in flying hours to validate and certify as i have said. Iron bird testing will not give that to you, you have to do the flying hours.

Either the twitter post is wrong in terms of sequencing of the prototypes and what is required for each phase, or it is correct, and the Kaan programme is about to make life very difficult for itself with having too many variables in a single prototype. I don't have insights into the programme, and can approach the topic logically from risk management/programme management perspective.
Like @hyperman said, P0 (or P0* as it is now known), was never meant to fly. In fact, it needed some modifications to take it from P0 to P0* so that it was flight worthy. Since it was not planned as a flight test prototype, all the actual flight testing is going to begin with P1.

The tweet says P1 is going through system integration, wiring avionics and mission systems. Even P0 needed that (obviously). So I don't know what you mean by having too many variables in a single prototype.

P0* actually gave super valuable insights into the FLCS (among other things), which would normally have been corrected with P1, but those will be already fixed when P1 rolls out.

Also, there have been design changes to the Kaan, however, I am not sure which prototype will carry those. I suspect P1 will as P0 was a very early iteration of the Kaan.
 
Meanwhile in Spain there is a growing interest in KAAN.


While this is NOT officials newsite, it is semi-official and most of the authors are ex-military personnel and well related people with MoD.

It is still too soon but testbed for Spain right now it is the Hürjet. After this program Spain Government would eventually evaluate entering other more ambitious programs (aka KAAN).
 
Meanwhile in Spain there is a growing interest in KAAN.


While this is NOT officials newsite, it is semi-official and most of the authors are ex-military personnel and well related people with MoD.

It is still too soon but testbed for Spain right now it is the Hürjet. After this program Spain Government would eventually evaluate entering other more ambitious programs (aka KAAN).

Its a solid choice, who know where this FCAS drama with France goes, Spain will likely have more flexibiltiy and its ability to integrate its own custom made things onto the KAAN, rather than whatever limited workshare France agrees to.

The biggest mistake of the FCAS program is having Dassault as the lead contractor, it should have been an airbus project.
 
Its a solid choice, who know where this FCAS drama with France goes, Spain will likely have more flexibiltiy and its ability to integrate its own custom made things onto the KAAN, rather than whatever limited workshare France agrees to.

The biggest mistake of the FCAS program is having Dassault as the lead contractor, it should have been an airbus project.
Yes, unfortunately UK went to his own with the Tempest so Airbus didn't repeated a consortium with BAe like a kind of 2.0 Eurofighter.

I agree, nobody with some sense of industrial autonomy would agreed to have a partner like Dassault. The bigotry, the autoritarianism and impositions made unbreathable the FCAS from the first. But I have hope they won't abandon the ship. Simply because they would deffinetively kill any European military initiative.

That reason and the existence of interesting projects like Hürjet or KAAN give medium countries like ours some confidence in alternatives.

Even if I don't like Turkish Government, we are pragmatic people and we are ready to work with anyone with enough will to share technology and similar necessities. For us we need a intermediate fighter to replace second line fighter (F/A18) to reach the hypothetical 6 generation fighter. Same as Turkey with their F16 and 6 gen project. So I am following also closely KAAN project. Wish you luck.
 
HÜRJET has received the Design Organization Approval (DOA) and Production Organization Approval (POA) certificates.

confirming its compliance with international standards.
1757496760441.jpeg

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
French media, following TAI's foreign press tour:

KAAN is a 5th-generation fighter jet developed on the other side of the Mediterranean.
A 3.3-ton fuselage awaits cockpit installation in the production hangar.

KAAN poses a greater threat to the Rafale than the F-35.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.



KAAN vs RAFALE F3R

RCS
KAAN : 0.01
RAFALE with air to air missiles : 1 m2
RAFALE F3R with drop tanks and air to air missiles : 2 m2


KAAN is coming with MURAD-600 AESA Radar which can detect a RAFALE from 175-208 km away while RAFALE detect the KAAN from 38 km away

even 100+ km GOKDOGAN air to air Missile will be enough to hit RAFALE
185+ km GOKHAN ramjet powered air to air Missile under development
1757616096438.jpeg
1757615935290.png
 
Last edited:
French media, following TAI's foreign press tour:

KAAN is a 5th-generation fighter jet developed on the other side of the Mediterranean.
A 3.3-ton fuselage awaits cockpit installation in the production hangar.

KAAN poses a greater threat to the Rafale than the F-35.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.



KAAN vs RAFALE F3R

RCS
KAAN : 0.01
RAFALE with air to air missiles : 1 m2
RAFALE F3R with drop tanks and air to air missiles : 2 m2


KAAN is coming with MURAD-600 AESA Radar which can detect a RAFALE from 175-208 km away while RAFALE detect the KAAN from 38 km away

even 100+ km GOKDOGAN air to air Missile will be enough to hit RAFALE
185+ km GOKHAN ramjet powered air to air Missile under development
View attachment 146278
View attachment 146277

Is the performance of the radar dependent on the electrical power of the engines, in so far as would a single TF35000 engine powered fighter be able to expect the same performance from the same radar set as the twin engine KAAN fighter?
 
Is the performance of the radar dependent on the electrical power of the engines, in so far as would a single TF35000 engine powered fighter be able to expect the same performance from the same radar set as the twin engine KAAN fighter?

T/R module number is important, T/R type is also important
(power and heat transfer is also important )

but if the same radar set then generator power is important
F-35 has 1 x 43.000 lbf engine with 240 kw generators
1 x 29.000 lbf F-110GE-129 engine maybe will be not enough for 240 kw generators


Comparison of generator powers of some Fighter Jets

▪︎ KAAN: 2x125Kw .... 250 kw (developed by Turkish company VOLT )
▪︎ F35:3x80Kw .... 240 kw
▪︎ F22: 2x65Kw ... 130 kw
▪︎ KF-21: 2x65Kw .. 130 kw ... (Collins aerospace from USA)

250 kw generators will help KAAN to generate electricity to power the powerful AESA Radar


KAAN's 40 kw AESA Radar ( 2.000+ GaN T/R modules ) to compare with APG-77v1 AESA Radar ( 1,956 T/R GaAS modules )

RAFALE's 11,7 kw RBE2 AA AESA Radar with 838 GaAS modules

Aselsan MURAD-600 AESA Radar with GaN technology ... ( 2.000+ T/R modules )
1757621731876.png
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top