KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe?

Profile picture for user obligatory

Member for

11 years 1 month

Posts: 6,983

Some details about the programme: 1. Aircraft serial production expected to start in 2030 2. Turkish Airforce will buy 250 aircraft to replace F-16s 3. RAF plan to modernise its Eurofighter fleet with TF-X avionics 4. New engine to developed based on EJ200 design by RR for TF-X http://m.haberturk.com/ekonomi/teknoloji/haber/1373433-7-milyar-dolara-250-ucak-alip-savas-teknolojisi-getirecegiz
england to swap avionics in their EF by 2030 ? i think it means they intend to keep EF to 2050 or so, but EF is fairly expensive to operate, at least with european standards. does it make sense when unmanned warplanes can do it so much cheaper ?
Profile picture for user mrmalaya

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 4,619

Well at this stage, it doesn't mean anything more than BAE are using their skills as consultants on an up to date project. How much of that will translate across to anything else, is anyone's guess eh? I was thinking that with Japanese weaponry and Turkish funded avionics, the RAF aircraft are going to be less of a Eurofighter by 2030...

Member for

13 years 7 months

Posts: 1,010

250 planes to replace f-16?? Right now turkish AF doesn't operate many more than 250 combat planes. Also, current planes are for some 100-120 F-35, no? So either those F-35 planes will be severly cut, or 250 TFX is simply not realistic (around half that number might be?) or Turkish AF plans to increase the number of its combat squadrons by 2040 or so by roughly 50%.
Profile picture for user Sintra

Member for

12 years 3 months

Posts: 3,766

Some details about the programme: 1. Aircraft serial production expected to start in 2030 2. Turkish Airforce will buy 250 aircraft to replace F-16s 3. RAF plan to modernise its Eurofighter fleet with TF-X avionics 4. New engine to developed based on EJ200 design by RR for TF-X http://m.haberturk.com/ekonomi/teknoloji/haber/1373433-7-milyar-dolara-250-ucak-alip-savas-teknolojisi-getirecegiz
1 - Optimistic 2 - Unrealistic 3 - Snowing in Ougadougou?! Aint ASELSAN doing most of the work there? The chances of the RAF (nevermind the other partners) going for avionics for the Phoon not coming from the likes of Selex are not much more than nill (my opinion, disputable off course). 4 - Realistic
Profile picture for user mrmalaya

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 4,619

Avionics is a very loose term though isn't it? What if BAE said to the Turkish side, "We will base a lot of what we design into the project on the future UK Typhoon avionics." Which I understand is not all BAE, but frankly the only source on the internet talking about RAF Typhoon upgrades deriving from a Turkish programme, is the one posted above (and I can't read Turkish and don't know the provenance of the article). Buuuuuuut, if the UK was the first to commit to running it's Typhoon fleet out to 2040, then any project that was in essence putting advanced Typhoon innards into an advanced airframe is going to be beneficial. How many times over the years have we said, the UK just needs the above rather than a 6th generation design.

Member for

7 years 9 months

Posts: 4,168

Well at this stage, it doesn't mean anything more than BAE are using their skills as consultants on an up to date project. How much of that will translate across to anything else, is anyone's guess eh? I was thinking that with Japanese weaponry and Turkish funded avionics, the RAF aircraft are going to be less of a Eurofighter by 2030...
japese weaponry atm limited to their will to incorporate their seeker in Meteor. @obligatory Typhoon is an excellent tool to deterr russian raid over north sea or Fulda. To attack ADA, F-35 or a Typhoon/FCAS combo would be fine.

Member for

7 years 2 months

Posts: 932

250 planes to replace f-16?? Right now turkish AF doesn't operate many more than 250 combat planes. Also, current planes are for some 100-120 F-35, no? So either those F-35 planes will be severly cut, or 250 TFX is simply not realistic (around half that number might be?) or Turkish AF plans to increase the number of its combat squadrons by 2040 or so by roughly 50%.
"Officially" its 234 F-16s, 63 F-4Es 59 F-5s, though 14 of those are RF-4Es and recon role is "actually" replaced by TARP F-16s, and F-5s haven't flown actual combat duty for the last 20 years or so... Considering 116 F-35s are NOT slated to replace any F-16s but other ~122 (on paper that is, 49 are actually flying combat missions) legacy aircraft of TuAF on near 1-1 basis, Replacing ~232 F-16s with same 1-1 basis does not look THAT unrealistic to me; esspecially considering domestic aircraft will probably be cheaper to build and operate than F-35... That is all, of course, provided the TF-X program actually fruits a functional aircraft ballpark around F-35 levels.

Member for

7 years 11 months

Posts: 5,841

We will see how it performs. Prediction are difficult at this time scale with the present technological landscape. By the way, and very ironically, it's nearly the first 5th Gen manned fighter developed in Europe. Very approximately I should say.
Profile picture for user Y-20 Bacon

Member for

6 years 7 months

Posts: 2,040

http://s2.postimg.org/f2pz4p85l/Comp_F_22_F_35.jpg Found this, is it me or is the replica not to scale? didnt think it would be longer than the f-22
Profile picture for user mrmalaya

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 4,619

Oh its too painful. If only, if only. The only similarity between the 1990s Replica and the 2016 Catia TFX designs are the intakes.
Profile picture for user Y-20 Bacon

Member for

6 years 7 months

Posts: 2,040

Oh its too painful. If only, if only. The only similarity between the 1990s Replica and the 2016 Catia TFX designs are the intakes.
who mentioned anything about similarities? i asked if the replica was to scale
Profile picture for user mrmalaya

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 4,619

Yes, yes you did. I assumed incorrectly that you were making a link between this competition and Replica. It turns out, you were just interested in dimensions.
Profile picture for user Y-20 Bacon

Member for

6 years 7 months

Posts: 2,040

Yes, yes you did. I assumed incorrectly that you were making a link between this competition and Replica. It turns out, you were just interested in dimensions.
thats fine, at least you admit your mistake unlike others. anyways, is that chart correct? googling didn't produce much other than a picture that claimed 65 ft. http://s28.postimg.org/f1pcv1d6j/Measurement.jpg
Profile picture for user mrmalaya

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 4,619

Well I would think that short of measuring it yourself, that is probably as good as we will get until and unless the thing turns up in a museum. The Turkish requirement is for a shorter beast though is it not? I mean weapons have shrunk since the days where BAE were thinking of Tornado replacements. Essentially people don't know what to make of this development because it doesn't fit anyone's accepted world view. If you like the F35 then you can't see the need, if you are Russian then it is plain confusing, and if you are European the combination of Turkey and Britain is probably toxic now :)
Profile picture for user Y-20 Bacon

Member for

6 years 7 months

Posts: 2,040

Well I would think that short of measuring it yourself, that is probably as good as we will get until and unless the thing turns up in a museum. The Turkish requirement is for a shorter beast though is it not? I mean weapons have shrunk since the days where BAE were thinking of Tornado replacements. Essentially people don't know what to make of this development because it doesn't fit anyone's accepted world view. If you like the F35 then you can't see the need, if you are Russian then it is plain confusing, and if you are European the combination of Turkey and Britain is probably toxic now :)
not sure how short. TAI produced renders of 3 variants and all 3 are very differennt sizes https://image.slidesharecdn.com/taipresentationmay2014outsourcingred-140625075634-phpapp02/95/adm-sevilla-turkish-aerospace-industries-strategy-17-638.jpg?cb=1403683085 this is the only slide that shows the actual TAI aircraft with an F-16 for a size comparison. The twin engined version looks very big. i would say close to an f-18E. the others look more mig-29 sized. (this was hard to find because there's a ton of fake TAI TFX pics using photoshopped Korean stealth pics). am I also the only one who thinks Korea/Indonesia should join with them on this project? they seem to be asking for the same things. might as well join together to share risk and costs.

Member for

13 years 7 months

Posts: 1,010

"Officially" its 232 F-16s, 63 F-4Es 59 F-5s, though 14 of those are RF-4Es and recon role is "actually" replaced by TARP F-16s, and F-5s haven't flown actual combat duty for the last 20 years or so... Considering 116 F-35s are NOT slated to replace any F-16s but other ~122 (on paper that is, 49 are actually flying combat missions) legacy aircraft of TuAF on near 1-1 basis, Replacing ~232 F-16s with same 1-1 basis does not look THAT unrealistic to me; esspecially considering domestic aircraft will probably be cheaper to build and operate than F-35...
If true, it would still mean a planned increase of combat coded squadrons by roughly 50%. And as F-5 squadrons would be replaced by true combat planes, their training role would then have to be performed by additional new trainer planes, no? Aren't most of those 50+ F5 really retired? And remaining two dozen are purely for training (as addition to T-38) and/or airshow performance?

Member for

13 years 7 months

Posts: 1,010

Wait, what?!? That TAI brochure says "aircraft to substitute existing T-38 and F-16" ???? So both a low cost trainer and a medium/light sized combat plane? If true, then it's going to have to be a single engined plane, considering EJ200 being picked as the basis of new engine. As I just don't see EJ200 core being changed to much so it loses a third of its size/weight (for a twin engined solution) nor do i see it being enlarged as that just doesn't make sense for a T-38 replacement. Of course, having a single EJ200 class engine, even if offering a little bit more power, mostly precludes the possibility of a proper stealth plane with weapon bays and internal fuel enough for 2500+ km ferry range. Maybe one could manage to include a tiny, two missile weapons bay but that's about it.
Profile picture for user Z1pp0

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 204

If true, it would still mean a planned increase of combat coded squadrons by roughly 50%. And as F-5 squadrons would be replaced by true combat planes, their training role would then have to be performed by additional new trainer planes, no? ...
Well the situation came about with the delays to the F-35 and in combination with waiting for whatever USAF T-X will produce. Offcourse the chronical lack of funds doesn't help. In short it's more like the squadrons will regain their combat status compared with "increasing combat strength by 50%".
Profile picture for user Y-20 Bacon

Member for

6 years 7 months

Posts: 2,040

Wait, what?!? That TAI brochure says "aircraft to substitute existing T-38 and F-16" ???? So both a low cost trainer and a medium/light sized combat plane? If true, then it's going to have to be a single engined plane, considering EJ200 being picked as the basis of new engine. As I just don't see EJ200 core being changed to much so it loses a third of its size/weight (for a twin engined solution) nor do i see it being enlarged as that just doesn't make sense for a T-38 replacement. Of course, having a single EJ200 class engine, even if offering a little bit more power, mostly precludes the possibility of a proper stealth plane with weapon bays and internal fuel enough for 2500+ km ferry range. Maybe one could manage to include a tiny, two missile weapons bay but that's about it.
not sure if medium/light can be said. based on calculations via photoshop.. assuming the F-16 is 15 meters then.. F-16 132 pixles - 15 meters TFX Agility 164 - 18.6 meters (f-15) TFX Lethal 156 - 17.7 meters (mig.29) TFX Speed 180 - 20.4 meters (Pak-fa) those are some big planes

Member for

13 years 7 months

Posts: 1,010

Well the situation came about with the delays to the F-35 and in combination with waiting for whatever USAF T-X will produce. Offcourse the chronical lack of funds doesn't help. In short it's more like the squadrons will regain their combat status compared with "increasing combat strength by 50%".
https://www.hvkk.tsk.tr/en-us/Turkish_Air_Force/Todays_Air_Force/Aircraft_in_the_Inventory Is the above link official TAF website? If so, it says current active planes number 240 F16, 49 F4 and 32 F5. (as well as 33 T38). So active combat plane inventory is 289 to 321 planes, depending on combat capability of F5. I find it really strange if TAF is really going to get rid of their jet trainers and replace them with a pure fighter. Even more so if that fighter is going to be heavier than F-16. It doesn't make much economic sense.