TAIS Unveiled BORA Class Combatant Ship Platform Designs

[SgtGungHo]

its possible to load SM-2 to Turkish Frigate-140

16 cells VLS for 24x ESSM and 10x SM-2 ..... total of 34x SAMs to compare with 32x SAMs on FREMM Frigate

btw Turkey develops SIPER long range SAM which is similar to ASTER-30


and Turkish Frigate-140 carry 16x anti-ship missiles , French FREMM Frigate carry only 8x anti-ship missiles

Exactly, so why did you mention packing all cells only with ESSM? I said you might want to load more SM2 and you went on trying to convince me that ESSM is better than Aster-30, which was irrational. It is better to have 32 Aster-30 than have 64 ESSM on ship.

Again, European have a different VLS and American frigate based on FREMM, the Constellation-class frigate does have 32-cells that could be loaded with American missiles such as ESSM & SM-2 and 16 Anti-ship missiles.

the Constellation-class frigate (based on FREMM)
32-cells for AAW
16 anti-ship missiles

vs.

the Turkey's Frigate 140
16-cells for AAW
16 anti-ship missiles

Of course, it won't be even comparable since the Constellation-class frigate benefits (based on FREMM) the Aegis Combat System.

However, again I won't say FREMM is superior design since each navy has their own priorities & budgets.

76mm ? İts main naval gun
but Turkish Frigate-140 has both 76mm main naval gun and 35mm CIWS

No, Italy has developed the davide/strales system so they could use OTO Melara 76/62mm with the davide/strales system and DART guided-ammunition in Super-Rapid mode for CIWS duty such as air-defence (and they are not wrong). Italy prefers utilizing OTO Melara 76/62mm as CIWS over their pretty decent (again, nowhere the best) DARDO (DART) 40mm.

This is why they have either 2 OTO Melara 76/62mm davide/strales guns or one OTO Melara 76/62mm davide/strales and Otobreda 127/64 Vulcano on their ship.

Even then the Italian company, fincantieri, offers a dedicated CIWS if a customer chose not to use the 76mm gun with the davide/strales system and DART guided-ammunition for CIWS.

Again, it all depends on what each navy demands & requires.

The image is from www.fincantieri.com

but 6.500 tons Frigate-140 can be equipped with 32 cells VLS

Yeah and Frigate-140 (6500 tons) is listed here with only 16 cells. That's why I thought it was a bit underwhelming, especially for a ship that is not in service, but a new design.

However, the point is each navy has different priorities & budgets.

 

[MMM-E]

Exactly, so why did you mention packing all cells only with ESSM? I said you might want to load more SM2 and you went on trying to convince me that ESSM is better than Aster-30, which was irrational. It is better to have 32 Aster-30 than have 64 ESSM on ship.

ESSM or ASTER-30 that doesnt matter , both can not stop enemy Fighter Jets which fires anti-ship missiles from 150+ km away

also the most crucial part of the battle as the most potent long range anti ship missile which fires from Warships and Fighter Jets

for example , Enemy Forces can fire 16 supersonic anti-ship missiles on Turkish Frigate-140 or French FREMM. and when the missiles are 25km away from Frigate they would break the radar horizon and Radar would be able to track them. because of the radar horizon cover

so 120 km ASTER-30 also will start defend Frigate from 25 km away against incoming supersonic anti-ship missile like BRAHMOS or YAKHONT in sea skimming mode


therefore , we need pinˌpoint protection against anti-ship missiles
and 64 ESSM is better than 32 ASTER-30 to protect Frigate against anti-ship missiles

Turkish Frigate-140 would start firing its ESSM missiles which are designed to counter such type of maneuverable low flying missiles ... Frigate-140 armed with 64 SAMs would fire even 2–3 missile per BRAHMOS or YAKHONT to have a high probability of hitting the target


so , French FREMM with 32 SAMs without CIWS against 16 BRAHMOS or YAKHONT supersonic missiles
and Turkish Frigate-140 with 64 SAMs + CIWS against 16 BRAHMOS or YAKHONT supersonic missiles

We would prefer 64 ESSM and 16x ATMACA anti-ship missiles instead of 32x ASTER and 8x EXOCET


if enemy Forces fires 32 anti-ship missiles , then bye bye
there would be no way FREMM would have survived the attack. This is the reason saturation attacks has become such an important factor in modern naval warfare.


even Italian and Egyptian Navies FREMM Frigates are equipped with 16 cells VLS for 16 ASTER SAMs



btw Turkish Frigate-140 or ISTIF class Frigates to protect Turkish EEZ against enemy Warships in the Eastern Mediterranean
so , Turkish Frigates will be under the protection of S400 Air Defense Systems and Turkish F-16s against enemy Fighter Jets

 

[MMM-E]

the Constellation-class frigate (based on FREMM)
32-cells for AAW
16 anti-ship missiles

vs.

the Turkey's Frigate 140
16-cells for AAW
16 anti-ship missiles

I am talking about FREMM Frigates which used by the French-İtalian-Egyptian Navies with MBDA SYLVER VLS
MBDA SYLVER VLS has no quad pack capability in one canister for ASTER-15

and now you are talking about American Constellation class Frigate project with MK-41 VLS

No, Italy has developed the davide/strales system so they could use OTO Melara 76/62mm with the davide/strales system and DART guided-ammunition in Super-Rapid mode for CIWS duty such as air-defence (and they are not wrong). Italy prefers utilizing OTO Melara 76/62mm as CIWS over their pretty decent (again, nowhere the best) DARDO (DART) 40mm.

what about French FREMM ?

only 1 x 76mm naval gun and without CIWS

on the other hand Turkish Frigate-140 has 76mm naval gun and 35mm CIWS


GOKDENIZ 35mm CIWS

-- capable of firing air burst ammunition
-- each barrel of the 35mm gun can fire 1,100 rounds a minute

 

[T-SaGe]

This design(BORA) is not the FREMM counterpart, if we are to give an example from Italy, seen that it has a similar design philosophy with the Thaon di Revel (PPA) class new generation multipurpose offshore ships. Because the BORA class has OPV/Multi-Purpose Ship origin actually, starting from 75 meters and 1500 tons. Even if this situation is ignored, It is difficult to understand why it compared to ships in the French and Italian navy main combatant platforms either. For comparison, it is necessary to look at the export solutions of the countries in question.

It is a solution offering for ISR, EW, EEZ territorial defense, and capable for ASUW / ASW with 2 helicopter or unmanned systems as well as 8x2 ASM. However, as a multi-role frigate, it also has tactical-level air defense capability.

This platform is put forward for the foreign market. (Likely to be developing at the request of X country) The Turkish Navy does not have such a purchase planning other than the MILGEM program. It is an alternative and possibly more economical package to the MILGEM platform. And the 16x4 tactical length anti-air missile package(for 140 hull) is the optimal solution, not the maximum.

*

After the Soviets collapsed, the main mission of the western navies has changed from stopping a possible Russian invasion to meeting needs such as irregular migration control, escort duties, EEZ area control etc. However, maintaining these needs with ships built according to old doctrines, leads to excessive wear of the ships problem and naval budgets that are difficult to control.

So making inferences based solely on the tonnage will lead you to extremely inaccurate results. What matters here are today's changing navy doctrines and diversifying needs. Why did the US start the FFG (X) project, despite having a massive main combat platform? Why did Italy start the PPA project despite having a very successful program like FREMM? Nowadays, with the importance of sea areas and in order to control navy expenses, many countries have had to develop intermediate solutions.

 

[SgtGungHo]

therefore , we need pinˌpoint protection against anti-ship missiles
and 64 ESSM is better than 32 ASTER-30 to protect Frigate against anti-ship missiles

Aster-30 is much better at protecting a ship from threats such anti-ship missiles than ESSM. Aster-30's effective range is 120km and ESSM's is only 50km+. Not only that Aster-30 is fater (4.5 Mach vs. 3 Mach for ESSM Block I, 4 Mach for Block 2) and has higher service ceiling (20km vs 11km, though block II should be have closed the peformance gap). Hell, even the seeker was arguably better on Aster-30 up until Raytheon have recently introduced ESSM Block II.

In fact, agility and manoeuvrability were THE major selling points of Aster-series over American counterparts as the missile could reach 60 G plus and additional 12 G lateral acceleration (though, things might have changed since Raytheon completed the development of ESSM Block II which was a very recent event).

I am talking about FREMM Frigates which used by the French-İtalian-Egyptian Navies with MBDA SYLVER VLS
MBDA SYLVER VLS has no quad pack capability in one canister for ASTER-15

SYLVER VLS can't be loaded with 4 Aster-15 in one cell, but it can accomdate 4 CAMM in one cell. Look, European & American are not dumb. American has improved their missiles when they saw missiles like of Aster-30 and European have developed CAMM when they saw American of quad-packing ESSM in one cell.

and now you are talking about American Constellation class Frigate project with MK-41 VLS

I mentioned the Constellation class frigate pretty much earlier on as you started talking about FREMM frigates since the Constellation class frigates is also based on FREMM by Italy and it shows that the design (FREMM) could also accommodate American VLS system and the frigate is expected to carry 32 cells of VLS Mk 41 and 16 Anti-ship weapons, which makes your point over Turkey's Frigate-140 of being superior design for carrying American missiles a moot.

My point has been Turkey's Frigate-140 of having only 16-cell VLS is a bit disappointing, especially in the comparison with other upcoming ships, but everyone must understand that each navy has different priorities and needs.

This design(BORA) is not the FREMM counterpart, if we are to give an example from Italy, seen that it has a similar design philosophy with the Thaon di Revel (PPA) class new generation multipurpose offshore ships. Because the BORA class has OPV/Multi-Purpose Ship origin actually, starting from 75 meters and 1500 tons. Even if this situation is ignored, It is difficult to understand why it compared to ships in the French and Italian navy main combatant platforms either. For comparison, it is necessary to look at the export solutions of the countries in question.

I am not sure why our member, @MMM-E, started the comparison between this design and FREMM either. However, judging from his initial statements, he had not fully understood the purpose & capability of FREMM-based frigates.

However, isn't the FREMM program meant to be for a multi-purpose frigate and provide a tailored design for each overseas customer's needs? In fact, the FREMM design has been not only exported to Egypt & Morocco, but also to USA. The country might end up operating the largest FREMM-based frigates. So, yeah, I can see that they (FREMM and BORA) potentially compete in the export market.

Then again, I believe Frigate-115 is more competitive as a package as @S.Y.A mentioned.

 

[MMM-E]

Aster-30 is much better at protecting a ship from threats such anti-ship missiles than ESSM. Aster-30's effective range is 120km and ESSM's is only 50km+. Not only that Aster-30 is fater (4.5 Mach vs. 3 Mach for ESSM Block I, 4 Mach for Block 2) and has higher service ceiling (20km vs 11km, though block II should be have closed the peformance gap). Hell, even the seeker was arguably better on Aster-30 up until Raytheon have recently introduced ESSM Block II.

Why you dont understand ?

ASTER-30 and ESSM both can engage on incoming supersonic anti-ship missile like BRAHMOS or YAKHONT in sea skimming mode from only 25-30 km away ... because of the radar horizon cover

so Aster-30's effective range is 120km against Aircrafts , not against Missiles in sea skimming mode



yes ASTER-30 has advantage with active radar guidance

ESSM block-I would need guidance from Frigate-140’s main Radar because of ESSM block-1 doesn’t have active guidance

but ESSM block-2's active radar homing seeker will support terminal engagement without the launch Ship's target illumination Radars ..... ( Turkish HISAR-O air defense missile will have also active radar guidance and data link )

and ESSM has max speed of mach 4+


of course ASTER-30 is far better than ESSM for wide area defence role ... ( btw even ASTER-30 could not stop Fighter Jets which armed with 150+ km missiles )

but ASTER-30 has no so advantage to compare with ESSM block-II to intercept incoming supersonic anti-ship missiles in sea skimming mode

so We prefer 64 ESSM instead of 32 ASTER-30 to protect Frigate from anti-ship missiles in saturation attack which has become such an important factor in modern naval warfare


S400 air Defense Systems and F-16 Fighter Jets will make role to protect Frigate-140 from Fighter Jets in the Turkish EEZ .... also Frigate-140 will have great defense capability with 64x SAMs and 35mm CIWS against anti-ship missiles

and 2x more anti-ship missiles with 16 units

 

[MMM-E]

SYLVER VLS can't be loaded with 4 Aster-15 in one cell, but it can accomdate 4 CAMM in one cell. Look, European & American are not dumb. American has improved their missiles when they saw missiles like of Aster-30 and European have developed CAMM when they saw American of quad-packing ESSM in one cell.

CAMM has range of 25 km and speed of mach 3 ...... but still CAMM will be enough for point defence to defend against saturation attacks of anti-ship missiles

I am not sure why our member, @MMM-E, started the comparison between this design and FREMM either. However, judging from his initial statements, he had not fully understood the purpose & capability of FREMM-based frigates.

İtalian , French and Egyptian Navies have FREMM Frigates which are potential threat to the Turkish Navy in the Eastern Mediterranean

currently İtalian and Egyptian Navies FREMM Frigates with 16 cells VLS for 16 ASTER SAMs and carry 8x EXOCET anti-ship Missiles .... ( French FREMM Frigates with 32 cells VLS for 32 ASTER SAMs )

on the other hand , Turkish Frigate-140 with 16 cells VLS for 64 ESSM SAMs and carry 16x ATMACA anti-ship Missiles

I just said that , maybe Turkish Frigate-140 with 16 cells VLS but has superior fire power to İtalian , French and Egyptian Navies FREMM Frigates to match in the Eastern Mediterranean



if we are talking about multi-purpose Frigate to compare with FREMM , then Turkish STM has designed 150 meter TF-4500 class Frigate including AAW capability

32 cells VLS
2 x 21 cells RAM
16 x ATMACA anti-ship Missiles
12 x Torpedoes
1 x 76 mm naval Gun

 

[T-SaGe]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1382789248726798338

USN FFG Constellation-class frigate latest design model
76mm main gun
4x4 Harpoon/NSM canisters
8x2 Mk41 tactical

Italian Navy PPA Full (Marcantonio Colonna)
Oto-Melara 127/64 main gun
8 x Teseo Mk.2 canisters
2 x Sylver A-70 VLS (8x2)

 

[Zarvan]

16x cell SAM VLS and only 1x CIWS on a 6500 tonne ship is a joke.
Frigate 115 has a good package though.

I agree with that. Firepower for 6500 tonnage ship is way to low.

 

[MMM-E]

I agree with that. Firepower for 6500 tonnage ship is way to low.

32 cells VLS would be better
but what about Indian KOLKOTA class Destroyer ?



KOLKOTA class Destroyer

Lenght : 163 m
Displacement : 8.100 t

32 cells VLS for 32 x BARAK-8 SAMs
16 x BRAHMOS anti-ship Missiles


Frigate 140

Lenght : 140 m
Displacement : 6.500 t

16 cells VLS for 64 x ESSM SAMs
16 x ATMACA anti-ship Missiles



Type 054A Frigate for Pakistan Navy

Lenght : 134 m
Displacement : 4.000 t

32 cells VLS for 32 x HQ-16 SAMs
8 x C-803 anti-ship Missiles

 

[Zarvan]

32 cells VLS would be better
but what about Indian KOLKOTA class Destroyer ?



KOLKOTA class Destroyer

Lenght : 163 m
Displacement : 8.100 t

32 cells VLS for 32 x BARAK-8 SAMs
16 x BRAHMOS anti-ship Missiles


Frigate 140

Lenght : 140 m
Displacement : 6.500 t

16 cells VLS for 64 x ESSM SAMs
16 x ATMACA anti-ship Missiles



Type 054A Frigate for Pakistan Navy

Lenght : 134 m
Displacement : 4.000 t

32 cells VLS for 32 x HQ-16 SAMs
8 x C-803 anti-ship Missiles

Brother I am Pakistani. And yes Indian Kolkota class is also under armed. Secondly yes 32 VLS specially if 16 VLS are for SAM and 16 are for land attack cruise missiles. It would be great to see that in this design.

 

[eagleeye]

it is all about the requirement of the customer. if it is needed then i am sure they can put also 32 cell sam vls