Could Turkey become a production partner for the KF-21 Boramae?

South Korea and Turkey had stepped in the field of military aviation at similar times with a similar business model. KAI in Korea and TAI in Turkey started life by undertaking the production of F-16 aircraft under license. Of course, the course of both companies differed over time. As there are differences in all other areas of both countries. But when we look at the present, we see a very interesting similarity. South Korea continues its project, which it started as KF-X, which began to take shape in flesh and bones, and later named KF-21 Boramae. Turkey, on the other hand, carries out the 5th Generation fighter jet program, which started as TF-X and continued with the designation MMU.

South Korea, like many other states, wants to create its own domestic and national defense and aerospace industry. This country, which started out with the production of the F-16 under license, first designed the KT-1 turboprop engine trainer aircraft. Hürkuş, similar to this aircraft, has succeeded in producing Turkey. Then, it implemented the jet-powered T-50 trainer with the support of the American Lockheed-Martin and with the production philosophy based on the use of common parts as much as possible with the F-16. Afterwards, this aircraft was derivatized according to many different needs, especially the FA-50. We can describe this as the Hürjet equivalent. Even if we say equal, they have a development and production schedule far ahead of our projects.

South Korea, which is an important part of the international system based on Western culture, has political and economic privileges that are much different from ours. For this reason, the KF-21, which is their newest and most important project, is a warplane that is produced by importing its engine and many other subsystems from abroad, in an architecture open to international cooperation and technology transfers. In addition, although the KF-21 fighter aircraft meets most of the design philosophy and criteria that can be defined as the 5th Generation in a way, it has more attainable and low-level goals and requirements, which are described as 4+ or 5-. Of course, the country aims to upgrade the aircraft's qualities over time and step by step. The aircraft has been phased in the design phase to have a multi-tasking structure in line with the trends of the future.

Over time, Indonesia also became a participant partner in this program with a 20% share. It is planned to deliver 60 aircraft, which will be produced as IF-X, to the Indonesian Air Force. However, later developments started to completely change Indonesia's perspective on this project. The first of these is that many countries that do not hesitate to share technology with Korea do not show the same generosity towards Indonesia. In other words, IF-X has come to qualify as a candidate project to be a heavily downgraded (cropped, reduced features and capabilities) version of KF-X. The second is that there are radical changes in the threat perception of this country in the near future. You can reach my other article on the changes in Indonesia's fighter jet requirement from this link. If you haven't read it, I suggest you take a look.

Rus Savaş Uçakları Türkiye için Çözüm Olabilir mi? - STRASAM.ORG ®

South Korea has the opportunity to complete the project on its own. However, Indonesia's signs of dissatisfaction, including payment delays, stand out as an inconvenience factor.

If we look at our country; We see that we are going through a special period that is increasingly isolated, exposed to open and covert embargoes, removed from the F-35 JSF project and forced to do everything on its own. During this period, the need for an intermediate period (gap filler) fighter aircraft is brought up from time to time until the MMU phase, due to the fact that the "aging" F-16 fleet started to fall short of maintaining deterrence. However, in terms of our security concerns and sustainable defense, it is absolutely necessary not to cause a weakness in our domestic military aviation projects.

If we signed the contract for the supply of aircraft with another country today, it would take at least five years for the aircraft to enter, exit, train and adapt to the production line. But our country does not have the luxury of waiting. Because threats are increasing and its focus is on our present and near future. So, in extraordinary times, it's time to generate thoughts that go beyond your framework.

I would like to start by asking the following question: Countries like ours often arm themselves to increase their war capacity and maintain their deterrence. There are also countries that, like Greece, are armed to feed a certain offensive movement in a certain time period. But why is it not considered in defense procurement planning to foresee the risk of a war, to rebuild the air force after a possible war and to reconstruct its deterrent capacity, which will surely wear out?

My second question is this: We are surrounded by oil-rich countries that make a significant part of their money a part of global markets, but that can make irrational and wasteful decisions.  In fact, you know that many countries around us are armed with offensive purposes by targeting us. The desire of a significant part of these countries for the F-35 is obvious. It is also possible that they will not be able to achieve these wishes in the near future. The only combat aircraft supply alternative will be the KF-21, close to the western standard, 5th generation requirements of these countries. Can we prevent this? How?

I would like to ask my third question within the framework of the procurement practices of many countries: As you know, all weapon systems imported from abroad bring certain restrictions with them. In addition, there is always a risk that the supplier country will negatively affect your war capacity, especially spare parts, with embargoes. For this reason, many countries prefer to supply from multiple sources. For example, Greece simultaneously supplied F-16s from the USA and Mirage-2000s from France. Now it is desired to continue this with Rafale and F-35. However, no country has ever implemented a dual source supply mechanism, one domestic and the other foreign. Why?..

In the light of these questions, I would like to draw a proposal framework. Our country should continue all domestic and national defense projects without slowing down. But at the same time, this ideal should not prevent him from outsourcing weapons procurement programs that he deems necessary. In this context, as the main participating partner country, Indonesia's place and rights can be taken over in the South Korea KF-21 Boramae project. In this way, it will be prevented that another country in the region will be able to supply the aircraft in question without our permission.

Although our country is tired with veiled embargoes, it is still a NATO member and has a very important / valuable geostrategic position. Therefore, it is assumed and accepted that it may have a fully functional aircraft, not a downgraded aircraft as in the IF-X. In fact, KF-21s to be procured after such a project partnership will be able to gain many additional features and weapons with domestic facilities.

Imagine a program framework with 60 exact and 180 options. Making no additions to South Korea's existing definitions and requirements for the first 60 aircraft; or it would make sense to contribute to the program with little and well calculated national requirements. For the remaining 180 options, it will be possible to make many original additions and customizations within the framework of the progressing MMU project.

Our MMU project has an air superiority-weighted set of requirements from the very beginning. The KF-21, on the other hand, has a multi-tasking structure. Therefore, in the future, a unique structure centered on the 5th generation network, like the USAF's F-15 / F-16 duo, will be created. Obviously, a front line light fighter and an air superiority wing wingman is an approach taken by many air forces as well.

The aircraft in question uses a family of GE F-404 / 414 engines that have long roots. The engine chosen by our country for Hürjet is from this family. Even though it is an American company, GE has a deep-rooted partnership relationship with TEI. In addition, the supply of the said engine for Hürjet was met without any problems. Thanks to this initiative, it will be possible to manufacture the said engine family under license in our country and to gain additional industrial capabilities.

Our country is quite advanced in military unmanned aviation systems. It is much further ahead than South Korea and the future roadmap is also richer. Korea, on the other hand, has obvious advantages over our country, both in terms of modern hardware and software. The synergy that these two countries can create may pave the way for us to capture a very wide export potential not only in the field of ammunition, but also in the field of manned and unmanned team approach. In addition, an optionally manned Hürjet or T/F/A-50 will have the potential to change the picture of future air combat.

Within the framework of our country's MMU project, it is observed that an important foreign contribution is sought under the leadership of British BAE Systems. However, the UK has invested the future of its air force in the 6th generation Tempest project, which we are not involved in. Within the scope of this project, direct international cooperation with countries such as Italy and Sweden and indirect international cooperation with countries such as Japan has been created. For this reason, problems may arise at the point of outsourcing a subsystem that we cannot mature enough for the MMU project. Even if provided, this will be an older system, not the next-gen system in Tempest. A possible participation in the KF-21 project may have a positive contribution and backup potential to our MMU project in terms of the reliability of the subsystems.

A proverb says: A horse neighs for its owner. I made a suggestion here and tried to draw a rough framework in this context. Of course, this proposal embodies risks and opportunities equally. Most importantly, it is possible that it can lead to wrong results by mismanaging. However, I think it's worth thinking about.