Any new news about Siper and Bora 2 ?It is time to introduce Gezgin, Siper, Gökhan and Bora-2. Some should take a cold shower in this fair.
Latest Thread
Any new news about Siper and Bora 2 ?It is time to introduce Gezgin, Siper, Gökhan and Bora-2. Some should take a cold shower in this fair.
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.Any new news about Siper and Bora 2 ?
Date: 04.2018The 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.
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.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.
Exactly. Thats why we got some ToT from Germany. We lack on high explosive destruction technology.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.
Standard Harpoon missile’s warhead was 221kg.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.
Securing the Royal Navy’s future firepower
As things stand, 2018 will see the Royal Navy’s Harpoon (Block 1C) missile – the sole heavyweight anti-ship missile system in its service – retire without replacement, leaving the UK with a serious under-capacity to perform the most fundamental of all naval tasks – sinking ships.www.naval-technology.com
That’s what I am talking about.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.
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.
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.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.
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)
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.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
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.
I don’t mean the comparison above about 140kg vs 250kg. I am talking about chemical compounds in general.Then you are wrong. No new chemical compound is invented to make a 140kg warhead better than 250kg. What Cabatli said is true.