Turkish Missile Programs

[Babur Han]

In Kement projects big aircraft without rocket launcher. Kement project little bit different. Kement project without satellites will navigate objects and management of army. In my video Big aircraft launched verry cheap missile. Like a passenger jet bomber idea.

B-737 lacks the penetration Capabillity of an B-1 or B-2. For a strategic Bomber I prefer a concept based ob T-FX, similar like FB-23!

 

[Hurshid Celebi]

B-737 lacks the penetration Capabillity of an B-1 or B-2. For a strategic Bomber I prefer a concept based ob T-FX, similar like FB-23!

I believe that you know the Price of one B-2 ? Possible is KC-135 ,which is aderivative platform of B-52

 

[Babur Han]

Yes, I know! I think a Bomber like the B-2 is too expensive for Turkey, it also lacks experience to built such great Aircrafts and Engine Technology.

 

[UkroTurk]

F-35 not stealth when carry SOM. But B1 lancer carrying 10 stand of missiles has RCS same F35 with one SOM. Maybe for Turkey product B1lancer not big problem.

What is B1? This is big Eurofighter or HAL tehas with 4 engines. We know to use compozite material for aircrsfts. Or Boeing 737 recovering with carbon compozite stealth materials may give stealth or little RCS ?

The World's Most Secretive 737 Is America's Key To Better Stealth Tech

 

[Hurshid Celebi]

@UkroTurk
Our A-400 are mostly Composite material.
BTW I heard that 2000 Police and 3000 Soldiers changed to separatists in Dombas . Right ?

 

[UkroTurk]

@UkroTurk
Our A-400 are mostly Composite material.
BTW I heard that 2000 Police and 3000 Soldiers changed to separatists in Dombas . Right ?

Esir degisiminden bahsediyorsan;onceden oyle seyler olmustu.Son zamanlarda pek degisim yok. Rakamlar cok abartili gibi geldi bana. Polis zaten savasa dahil degil.
Sivil, asker toplam kayip 10000 civari olabilir. Nerde oldugu bilinmeyen cok kayip var.

A400un menzili, kc 135den daha kisa herhalde. A400e som yukleyecegine F16ya yuklemek daha mantikli.

 

[Babur Han]

I believe that you know the Price of one B-2 ? Possible is KC-135 ,which is aderivative platform of B-52

KC-135 will be needet as a Tanker Aircraft in Case of War, if they will be used as Cruise Missile Carrier they can't fullfill there Tanker Role !


The other Points are Power Projection in sub - Saharan Region, north - west Africa(Morocco, Mauretania, Senegal, Gabun etc.). In these Regions former european Colonial Powers have their Interests. For noth - West, -sub - saharan Africa and south Asia RTurkey need strategic Bombers !

TRJ-628 could also be a good Platform for an Transport Bomber !

 

[-------]

Gotcha.

As for datalink, its just enough as long as it supports existing and future TDL standards set by ISSC of STANAG. Wich roughly includes; JTIDS, Link-11/16/22. Currently, TSK already poses these capabilities as obligations. Bro I won't give exact info on Block IIs data-link capabilities but it's likely that Atmaca being a newly developed ASM, will have an upper edge over Block II (RGM-84L) in terms of data-link, more like Block III proposal. The main difference between Block III solution and the RGM-84L is allowing flex-targeting and better accuracy against open-ocean targets since Block II had a little shift onwards littoral targets from her previous base variant.

Flex-targeting is in-flight target updates, positive terminal control and interoperability with data networks under development right now.

I said Block III proposal because this was cancelled at early 2010s when US Navy refused it. Now a Harpoon NG is said to be in development and sources say it will compete against Norwegian NSM on market. (@Technogaianist might have better info on that)

If I were to put my opinion from the information @cabatli_53 has shared to us about Atmaca, I believe it'll be more similar to NSM in general, maybe with a range of a little more or less nautical miles.

I don't know the exact range of Atmaca but RGM-84L has a range of 70 nm, close to 75 to be more precise. It naturally seems to have greater range over Harpoon.

Thanks bro for the info!

I'm going to carry this over to here, as to not further inconvenience Azeri thread.

In a recent video Meteksan released (

). Seahawk appears to be relaying Data-Link from Atmaca back to the surface vessel it was launched from.
Is that something Turkey can do with Harpoons (both blocks, can block III do it)? If not, could it mean that Atmaca has a greater range than Harpoon, as Seahawks might be required to capture and relay over-the-horizon datalink? (I know horizon has limitations on radars etc. could you explain more about this)

I ask this because Kement (data-link) project is slated to have minimum of a 250km datalink range, how much could a sea-hawk increase that range if it were to fly above surface vessel.

Or, perhaps a more plausible assessment. The video, could be showing off network centricity of Kement...

Kement project details for Atmaca and SOM.

KEMENT is going to provide command-control solutions to different operators with a range from minimum 250km.
With the system developed within the framework of the KEMENT Project, operational efficiency shall be increased via components that are resistant to electronic warfare, encrypted, adaptable to power requirements of the platform its embedded to, compatible with the military standards and NATO STANAGs shall be achieved and updating the data related to the target and command-control information shall be enabled within the air- air and air-ground components’ network structure within a range from minimum 250km. Development of an Ammunition Data Network System (MVAS) that could support the 512kbps data transfer speed and transmit an image of sufficient resolution before the shooting during the ammunition’s terminal stage is aimed.
The Project also includes the development of terminals that could operate on SOM and Atmaca which were developed through national capacities and on platforms that could be used in the command/ control of the ammunition (F-16, helicopters and vessels) and design of a network architecture that is specific to the usage concept.

First Phase of the Project to be Accomplished in 38 Months
KEMENT Project that will be executed by Meteksan Defence as the main contractor and TÜBİTAK Sage-Roketsan as main sub- contractors shall be conducted in two phases. The total budget of the Project is 26. 549.000 US$ and two different studies namely KEMENT-S and KEMENT-A are to be executed within the first phase of the project that is determined to be accomplished in 38 months.

KEMENT-S development phase of 2 MVAS SOM Terminals (MST) that could be integrated to Air to Ground Medium Range Missile (SOM) and 2 MVAS Aerial Vehicle Terminals (MHT) that could be integrated to F-16 platforms is aimed.
KEMENT-A Phase contains the development of an Atmaca Data Terminal (AVT), a Vessel Data Terminal (GVT) and a Relay Data Terminal (RVT) unit that could be integrated to the Naval Surface to Surface Guided Missile (Atmaca) and to the related platforms included in the usage scenario of Atmaca having the capacity to operate under relative environmental conditions.

Within the scope of Phase-1, main contractor Meteksan Defence shall be responsible for the establishment of the network architecture, development of Physical Layer, Antenna, Modem and RF solutions. One of the sub-contractors MilSOFT shall conduct the activities for DLP (Data Link Processor), TÜBİTAK UEKAE crypto module and MHT’s integration to F-16 platform together with the 1st Air Supply Maintenance Command, Roketsan and TÜBİTAK Sage. Following the accomplishment of the first phase, activities within the scope of Phase-2shall be launched if approved by the Undersecretariat for Defence Industries.

Meteksans new website is up Meteksan Savunma

 

[Neptune]

Thanks bro for the info!

I'm going to carry this over to here, as to not further inconvenience Azeri thread.

In a recent video Meteksan released (

). Seahawk appears to be relaying Data-Link from Atmaca back to the surface vessel it was launched from.
Is that something Turkey can do with Harpoons (both blocks, can block III do it)? If not, could it mean that Atmaca has a greater range than Harpoon, as Seahawks might be required to capture and relay over-the-horizon datalink? (I know horizon has limitations on radars etc. could you explain more about this)

I ask this because Kement (data-link) project is slated to have minimum of a 250km datalink range, how much could a sea-hawk increase that range if it were to fly above surface vessel.

Or, perhaps a more plausible assessment. The video, could be showing off network centricity of Kement...

Kement project details for Atmaca and SOM.


Meteksans new website is up Meteksan Savunma

Good idea

Yes, our Seahawks have that capability since the arrival of first aircraft. In addition, S-70B-28 which is designated as DZKK's Seahawks are more advanced than some other export Seahawks like Greece (HN) somehow specs of the aircraft was demanded different and it's commonly close to LAMPS III which is the US Navy SH-60. All Harpoons in service of DZKK do support target relaying by airborne maritime platforms, F-16, E-7T. Block III was also designed to support that but as I said Block III program was cancelled. Harpoon has a standard range of 70-74 nm at maximum but I assume from the information shares, Atmaca has nearly 1.85-1.90x times more range than Harpoon.

Bro data relay for target assessment/engage is a bit complex thing because its something that has a high dependant on the environment and the tactical scenario. For radar difficulty, we can compare with land based radars just as how airspaces behind mountainous terrain are blindzones. But I don't think this will be much of a big problem for DZKK in future. I can say that it was yesterday's problem. Ada-class corvettes, Barbaros and some Gabya class FFGs or simply all vessels that have 3-D radars (SMART-S Mk2) don't face these difficulties.

Big punch navies and those who will play big in future use TDRS (Tracking and Data Delay Satellite) for the need of data-relay to overcome the horizon limitations when a missile is fired. Can we do it? Yes and we should. Ex:
GSAT-7 of Indian Navy. Actually because of the horizon, few navies operate their own multi-band satellites.

Helicopter supported relay isn't really much preferred today in ASuW of naval warfare. Today's nato type combatant vessels tend to have longer ranged radars (with 3-D search) with sophisticated sensors which heavily relies on C4ISR capabilities. AEW&C aircraft is more preferred as a airborne relay station due to its nature of better data-link components and flying above tens of thousands feets unlike the SH-60.

When a suspected threat is detected, classification and targeting data is provided to the parent ship via the datalink for surface-to-surface munitions engagement. Missile equipped aircraft can conduct independent or coordinated attack, depends upon the threat and tactical scenario.

TF-100, I-class and TF-2000 will have more surface range than the range of Atmaca itself, so no problem but to guarantee the course and guidance, AEW&C support will be welcomed.

Data-relay today in Turkish Navy will be mostly used by smaller combat vessels that can fire anti-ship missiles but have smaller range due to being FAC, missile craft or whatever, if deemed necessary god forbid

Thanks to US during the Cold-war era they did not only modernize the allied navies but also teached, applied and put the capability of being able to conduct combined and joint operations both alliance wide and national wide, as their prime force doctrine, today we still see that. To give an example, the Navy's first ever qualification for every weapon system to be developed is near excellent data-link capabilities, as at the cool video you've shared about Kement.

In my opinion Turkish Navy is likely to put a RfP to procure Naval Aviation Command's very own AEW&C aircraft and satellites hopefully like close to 15-20 years later. Until then, kim öle kim kala

 

[Hurshid Celebi]

@Neptune 50 yil insan icin bir ömürdür, ama Devletlerin kaderinde bir an kadar kisa sayilir- look back 1974 Kibris ,

41 sene gecmis.

 

[-------]

Good idea

Yes, our Seahawks have that capability since the arrival of first aircraft. In addition, S-70B-28 which is designated as DZKK's Seahawks are more advanced than some other export Seahawks like Greece (HN) somehow specs of the aircraft was demanded different and it's commonly close to LAMPS III which is the US Navy SH-60. All Harpoons in service of DZKK do support target relaying by airborne maritime platforms, F-16, E-7T. Block III was also designed to support that but as I said Block III program was cancelled. Harpoon has a standard range of 70-74 nm at maximum but I assume from the information shares, Atmaca has nearly 1.85-1.90x times more range than Harpoon.

Bro data relay for target assessment/engage is a bit complex thing because its something that has a high dependant on the environment and the tactical scenario. For radar difficulty, we can compare with land based radars just as how airspaces behind mountainous terrain are blindzones. But I don't think this will be much of a big problem for DZKK in future. I can say that it was yesterday's problem. Ada-class corvettes, Barbaros and some Gabya class FFGs or simply all vessels that have 3-D radars (SMART-S Mk2) don't face these difficulties.

Big punch navies and those who will play big in future use TDRS (Tracking and Data Delay Satellite) for the need of data-relay to overcome the horizon limitations when a missile is fired. Can we do it? Yes and we should. Ex:
GSAT-7 of Indian Navy. Actually because of the horizon, few navies operate their own multi-band satellites.

Helicopter supported relay isn't really much preferred today in ASuW of naval warfare. Today's nato type combatant vessels tend to have longer ranged radars (with 3-D search) with sophisticated sensors which heavily relies on C4ISR capabilities. AEW&C aircraft is more preferred as a airborne relay station due to its nature of better data-link components and flying above tens of thousands feets unlike the SH-60.

When a suspected threat is detected, classification and targeting data is provided to the parent ship via the datalink for surface-to-surface munitions engagement. Missile equipped aircraft can conduct independent or coordinated attack, depends upon the threat and tactical scenario.

TF-100, I-class and TF-2000 will have more surface range than the range of Atmaca itself, so no problem but to guarantee the course and guidance, AEW&C support will be welcomed.

Data-relay today in Turkish Navy will be mostly used by smaller combat vessels that can fire anti-ship missiles but have smaller range due to being FAC, missile craft or whatever, if deemed necessary god forbid

Thanks to US during the Cold-war era they did not only modernize the allied navies but also teached, applied and put the capability of being able to conduct combined and joint operations both alliance wide and national wide, as their prime force doctrine, today we still see that. To give an example, the Navy's first ever qualification for every weapon system to be developed is near excellent data-link capabilities, as at the cool video you've shared about Kement.

In my opinion Turkish Navy is likely to put a RfP to procure Naval Aviation Command's very own AEW&C aircraft and satellites hopefully like close to 15-20 years later. Until then, kim öle kim kala

Awesome amount of information! Thank you!

 

[Sub]

TF-100, I-class and TF-2000 will have more surface range than the range of Atmaca itself, so no problem but to guarantee the course and guidance, AEW&C support will be welcomed.

Sorry for going little bit off topic but this caught my attention, isn't I-class and TF-100 the same project?

All along my understanding was that part of the Milgem project two different class of ships were going to be build. One was the Ada class and the other I class(also known as TF-100).

So TF100 and I-class are the same thing not different.

 

[Neptune]

Sorry for going little bit off topic but this caught my attention, isn't I-class and TF-100 the same project?

All along my understanding was that part of the Milgem project two different class of ships were going to be build. One was the Ada class and the other I class(also known as TF-100).

So TF100 and I-class are the same thing not different.

I don't really know the names but AFAIK, there's a variant that is called I-class, but there was one TF-100 named too. Maybe it's the same but names confused.

 

[Sub]

I don't really know the names but AFAIK, there's a variant that is called I-class, but there was one TF-100 named too. Maybe it's the same but names confused.

I think they are the same thing. The elongated ada class with VLS was known as TF100 first but then later they gave it an official designation and called it I-class maybe the name TF100 is some kind of a past project code name and I class is the official name basically they are the same ship.

 

[Kamil_baku]

Roketsan has successfully conducted test firings of HİSAR-A, the National Low Altitude Air Defence Missile, in Aksaray during 19th to 24th of June, 2015. The tests of the Controlled Test Missile-1 (KTF-1) with its own autopilot and the Ballistic Test Missile-2 (BTF-2) with a dual pulse solid propellant rocket motor which itself is a first in Turkey, were realised with the participation of the Turkish Land Forces Command (TLFC), Undersecretariat for Defence Industries (SSM) and Aselsan.

During the tests that have now been completed, the HİSAR-A missiles successfully separated from the launcher with the ignition of the first pulse rocket motor, then igniting the second pulse motor in flight to perform the programmed maneuvers under the control of the on-board autopilot. This is the first ever successful firing of a dual pulse motor missile in Turkey, which has led Roketsan to become a proud member of the limited number of companies with similar technological capabilities in the world. As a result of these firing tests, another milestone has been completed under the development of the first national air defence missile of Turkey.

The HİSAR Projects have been designed to give Turkey a national Air Defence Missile capability towards meeting the Low and Medium Altitude Air Defence requirements of the Turkish Armed Forces and also be able to compete in world markets. The development of the radar, command & control and fire control systems fall under the responsibility of Aselsan, while the design and development of the missile systems are the responsibility of Roketsan, the Missile Center of Excellence of Turkey.