TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

Cabatli_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
5,360
Reactions
81 45,455
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The first Siper prototype is under construction at Aselsan. The Bora 2 only exists in the minds of some of us, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Date: 04.2018
Mr Canikli, in the Turkish Grand National Assembly said “We have great projects. Our national missile Bora entered the inventory. We are now working on its more technologically advanced one. If I explain the details, you would forget the candidate for the roof and the election."
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
An extended ranged UMTAS wouldn't be suitable for fast-jet operations nor have the added autonomous strike capability. Roketsan should develop an affordable NLOS type missile from UMTAS, similar to Spike-NLOS.
Spike-NLOS is a 70+kg missile with a range of 25-30km. I think we should have a 100kg missile with a range of 50km and a heavier warhead rather than a 50kg missile which fits nowhere. It is slightly heavier than Umtas (37,5kg). I would rather have an Umtas-ER (50kg) than Kuzgun-KY (50kg). Product segmentation doesn't make sense.
 

Huelague

Experienced member
Messages
3,931
Reactions
5 4,136
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Can you rephrase this please?
Do you mean, the destructive effect of a warhead is not only governed by the explosive’s weight?
If so I agree with you.
Exactly. Thats why we got some ToT from Germany. We lack on high explosive destruction technology.
 
Last edited:

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,247
Reactions
141 16,269
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Exactly. That why we got some ToT from Germany. We lack on high explosive destruction technology.
Standard Harpoon missile’s warhead was 221kg.
New Harpoon Next Generation has a warhead of 140kg with much more destructive and lethal power than the standard one.
Quote:
Harpoon Next Generation boasts a host of new features to improve performance. It will have an increased range of 134nm, a lighter but reportedly “more lethal” warhead weighing in at 140kg, a more efficient turbo-jet engine with state-of-the-art electronic fuel controls and an active radar-homing seeker to give enhanced all-weather operation.
Unquote.
That in itself is proof of technology advancement of explosives.
 

Cabatli_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
5,360
Reactions
81 45,455
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Standard Harpoon missile’s warhead was 221kg.
New Harpoon Next Generation has a warhead of 140kg with much more destructive and lethal power than the standard one.
Quote:
Harpoon Next Generation boasts a host of new features to improve performance. It will have an increased range of 134nm, a lighter but reportedly “more lethal” warhead weighing in at 140kg, a more efficient turbo-jet engine with state-of-the-art electronic fuel controls and an active radar-homing seeker to give enhanced all-weather operation.
Unquote.
That in itself is proof of technology advancement of explosives.

Bro, It is not possible for a 140kg same type (Most likely both of them are same type HE blast fragmentation+semi armor piercing) warhead to produce more effective result than a 250kg warhead unless a more effective chemical is invented in the warhead of this 2+ER in terms of the level of explosion and the shockwave it creates. The American company achieved the 2+ER model by reducing the warhead weight to reach longer ranges with the existing missile body and fuel so "ER" code was added and Boeing's claim is not that it is a more effective missile in terms of destruction than the 240kg warhead in the Harpoon-2 version, but that Boeing's 2+ER has a more effective penetration/destruction capability than the competitor Raytheon+Kongsberg's NSM missile with 125kg warhead. Both of them are offering and selling their solutions to US Navy and the competitor of Boeing's 2+ER is not Boeing's Harpoon-2 but Raytheon's NSM.
 

Huelague

Experienced member
Messages
3,931
Reactions
5 4,136
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Bro, It is not possible for a 140kg same type (Most likely both of them are same type HE blast fragmentation+semi armor piercing) warhead to produce more effective result than a 250kg warhead unless a more effective chemical is invented in the warhead of this 2+ER in terms of the level of explosion and the shockwave it creates. The American company achieved the 2+ER model by reducing the warhead weight to reach longer ranges with the existing missile body and fuel so "ER" code was added and Boeing's claim is not that it is a more effective missile in terms of destruction than the 240kg warhead in the Harpoon-2 version, but that Boeing's 2+ER has a more effective penetration/destruction capability than the competitor Raytheon+Kongsberg's NSM missile with 125kg warhead. Both of them are offering and selling their solutions to US Navy and the competitor of Boeing's 2+ER is not Boeing's Harpoon-2 but Raytheon's NSM.
That’s what I am talking about.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Then you are wrong. No new chemical compound is invented to make a 140kg warhead better than 250kg. What Cabatli said is true.
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Spike-NLOS is a 70+kg missile with a range of 25-30km. I think we should have a 100kg missile with a range of 50km and a heavier warhead rather than a 50kg missile which fits nowhere. It is slightly heavier than Umtas (37,5kg). I would rather have an Umtas-ER (50kg) than Kuzgun-KY (50kg). Product segmentation doesn't make sense.

SPIKE-NLOS is definitely not a 71kg missile, that is the weight value given for the missile in the canister (Missile+Canister = 71kg) which is clearly stated in Rafael's brochure but fallen to misinformation on other sites.

Let's be generous and say that the canister is around 30% (20kg) of the overall weight, that would mean SPIKE-NLOS is closer to 50kg.

Here's an image of an Integration round with no warhead which weighs in at 42kg, with videos of SPIKE-NLOS missile strikes, I would say it has a similar effect as UMTAS with a warhead close to 10kg.

42kg inert round + 10kg warhead, a missile that is closer to 50kg than it is to 71kg.
Inert-NLOS.jpg


Kuzugn-KY would be perfect in replacing AGM-65 Maverick in the Turkish AIrForce Inventory for one. Give additional long-range strike capabilities for Land Forces Aviation, with MMW capability, missiles could be semi-autonomous and strike targets on their own.

As for the Navy, well - it's an additional capability that we may soon see on Barbaros MLU

MBDA developed Spear missile from Brimstone missile, so, Tubitak developing a Brimstone like a missile from Spear missile isn't that odd and makes sense to me...
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Kuzgun-KY will be an overpriced underachiever for the class it is stationed in. We don't need a Brimstone. It is a failed product it is not cost-effective. Kuzgun has to be cost-effective. Remember triple Ms( Modüler, Müşterek, Maliyet-etkin) Brimstone block-1 is basically Umtas-ER which costs more than quadruple compared to Umtas. Brimstone Block-2 brings good capability but costs fucking a quarter of a million $. Mark my words Kuzgun-TJ will cost a lot less than a Brimstone-2. That is not logical. I would rather have cheap cost-effective Umtas-ER than having an overpriced Brimstone copy. At this segment (50kg/20-30km range) cost-effectivenes is more important than anything because armed forces will be using thousands of this.

Brimstone-1 ( 170k $ overpriced and has similar capability with a theoretical UMTAS-ER/NLOS)
Brimstone-2 (250k $ brings good capability but overpriced)
 

Siper>MMU

Contributor
Messages
542
Reactions
2 1,191
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
You can't compare UK with Turkey in terms of costs. When calculated with TL many systems cost less than their counterparts. Here is salaries are lower, part costs are lower etc. I want to remind that a Atmaca missile costs less than $500K, almost 1/3 of Harpoon Block 2 ER.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I would rather have a 100kg missile with a bigger more lethal warhead that can reach 50+km(real replacement for AGM-65 Maverick and excellent capability for UAVs, naval assets, choppers, and land-based launchers) and pay 11 liras for it rather than having a 50kg missile with a smaller warhead that can reach 20-30km and pay 10 liras. Price/performance and cost-effectiveness wise Kuzgun-KY doesn't make sense.
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,247
Reactions
141 16,269
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Bro, It is not possible for a 140kg same type (Most likely both of them are same type HE blast fragmentation+semi armor piercing) warhead to produce more effective result than a 250kg warhead unless a more effective chemical is invented in the warhead of this 2+ER in terms of the level of explosion and the shockwave it creates. The American company achieved the 2+ER model by reducing the warhead weight to reach longer ranges with the existing missile body and fuel so "ER" code was added and Boeing's claim is not that it is a more effective missile in terms of destruction than the 240kg warhead in the Harpoon-2 version, but that Boeing's 2+ER has a more effective penetration/destruction capability than the competitor Raytheon+Kongsberg's NSM missile with 125kg warhead. Both of them are offering and selling their solutions to US Navy and the competitor of Boeing's 2+ER is not Boeing's Harpoon-2 but Raytheon's NSM.
You may be correct from your own perspective. But from the article I have shared, what I understand is that US company has developed a ”more lethal” explosive for the “next generation” 2+ER version. It is NOT the same type of explosive used in previous Harpoons. It clearly compares this one to the previous Harpoon version being more lethal yet weighing less.
I am only going by, with what I read.
According to the below article this new generation version is developed from SLAM-ER land attack missile. And carries a “more lethal” warhead, is lighter faster and smaller.
Quote:
The Block II+ER is a lot lighter and smaller than the SLAM-ER, but it has a more lethal warhead, higher speed
Unquote.
However I agree that the article is a bit vague in expressing about what it is more lethal than. But one thing is sure. According to these articles; The new generation version is using a different and more effective explosive. But not necessarily more effective as a whole than the previous Harpoon..
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Kuzgun-KY will be an overpriced underachiever for the class it is stationed in. We don't need a Brimstone. It is a failed product it is not cost-effective. Kuzgun has to be cost-effective. Remember triple Ms( Modüler, Müşterek, Maliyet-etkin) Brimstone block-1 is basically Umtas-ER which costs more than quadruple compared to Umtas. Brimstone Block-2 brings good capability but costs fucking quarter a million $. Mark my words Kuzgun-TJ will cost a lot less than a Brimstone-2. That is not logical. I would rather have cheap cost-effective Umtas-ER than having an overpriced Brimstone copy. At this segment cost-effectivenes is more important than anything because armed forces will be using thousands of this.

Brimstone-1 ( 170k $ overpriced and has similar capability with a theoretical UMTAS-ER/NLOS)
Brimstone-2 (250k $ brings good capability but overpriced)

Well, your opinion of a failed product is not one and the same as the UK armed forces who are currently integrating Brimstone missile into MQ-9B SkyGuardian and AH-64E Apache attack helicopters. Where they could have easily have gone with Hellfire Missiles.

If Kuzgun-KY is similar in capabilities to the Brimstone missile, it would be only second to it - as no other missile offers the same capabilities in differing use cases as the Brimstone missile. And that, is a wonderful thing :)
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
More lethal compared to what? What is the measurement of lethality. I would put an armor-piercing capability similar to Atmaca and can say my warhead is more lethal now. What is the total amount of energy both warheads release? That is the real question. There is no way a 140kg explosive releases more energy than a 250kg one. Anyone who invented such a chemical will win a nobel prize. Moreover, those explosives have to be insensitive and stable in all environmental changes. Those explosives also had to comply with NATO MIL-STD specs.
 
Last edited:

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Well, your opinion of a failed product is not one and the same as the UK armed forces who are currently integrating Brimstone missile into MQ-9B SkyGuardian and AH-64E Apache attack helicopters. Where they could have easily have gone with Hellfire Missiles.

If Kuzgun-KY is similar in capabilities to the Brimstone missile, it would be only second to it - as no other missile offers the same capabilities in differing use cases as the Brimstone missile. And that, is a wonderful thing :)
The UK doesn't need to spend thousands of them. The UK's only military presence is their overseas support missions with the US. They can afford overpriced exotic products we can't. MQ-9B Skyguardian is an overpriced failed product too. Akıncı>Skyshit. That's why the UK is swallowing her pride and tries to learn more about Turkish UAVs.
 
Last edited:

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
I would rather have a 100kg missile with a bigger more lethal warhead that can reach 50+km(real replacement for AGM-65 Maverick and excellent capability for UAVs, naval assets, choppers, and land-based launchers) and pay 11 liras for it rather than having a 50kg missile with a smaller warhead that can reach 20-30km and pay 10 liras. Price/performance and cost-effectiveness wise Kuzgun-KY doesn't make sense.

The realities of the future of modern warfare seem to slip you by. Missiles are getting smaller with platforms being capable of carrying multiples of them. I'd rather have two missiles on a platform than one. I'd rather see two targets taken out on a single sortie than one. You likened the missile to SPIKE-NLOS, which weighs far less than you first theorised now you are coining off the missile with an imaginary price-performance ratio... How about we wait for the details to come through. :)
 

Philips

Well-known member
Messages
359
Reactions
991
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Netherlands
Convincing arguments from both sides but I find the cost-effectiveness argument the most convincing. Turkey needs PGM's from the MAM-C all the way to the NEB in the high tens of thousands, not in the hundreds like the UK and France. 10 years ago, the French ran out of PGM's in Libya after a couple weeks of bombing and had to resort to concrete filled bombs.
Turkey cannot afford to have these expensive missiles in low numbers for the large threats it is facing from state and non-state actors on every side of its borders. Turkey has to deal with the Greeks, Armenians, alphabet-soup terror groups, the Iranians, the Egyptians, the Russians and even the Israeli's in its vicinity. Add to that the growing strategic reach of Turkey in other theaters beyond the immediate region, and it is clear Turkey needs inexpensive but high-tech weapons.

I can see the Kuzgun-KY and even the SS (MAM-T and MMB/SDB competitor) suffer the same fate as the TOROS project. The Kuzgun-Tj on the other hand will have great success.
 
Last edited:

Huelague

Experienced member
Messages
3,931
Reactions
5 4,136
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Then you are wrong. No new chemical compound is invented to make a 140kg warhead better than 250kg. What Cabatli said is true.
I don’t mean the comparison above about 140kg vs 250kg. I am talking about chemical compounds in general.
 
Last edited:

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom