TR Naval Programs

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Ada class was 250M in 2013, the bid was given for FY2013.

Tax exemption affects purchases made related to naval platforms, thus it reflects on steel and nuts directly and this is in force since a long time. Recurring VAT is also dropped. The tax exemption will more reduce the R&D costs than it reflects on the actual product, and at the moment we are not really discussing the R&D costs or adding it on top of the actual product cost. If you have slightest idea on how much the Ada and I-Class R&D has costed then you may see how big will be the gain by removing the tax.

OPV cost reduction is not related to these matters at all It is simply re-evaluation of the needs, removal of certain weapons and conversion to optional, replacing CODAG with CODAE, removing advanced ESM and Radar, Tracking radar with mediocre and simple ones. Redefined mission profile has yielded to a simpler and optionally gunned platform.

I will not continue this further.

According to the latest situations, the VLS, MKE 76/62 will be seperately contracted between MSB and the supplier, thus the bid is going to be given for exemption of these systems and installation of those. So excluding those the bid will be around ~1B, add these and related installation activities on top of that. It surpasses 350 excluding Atmaca and air defense missiles to be supplied by Navy.

Also add 5 to 10% raise in price due to the simultaneous construction as announced by Erdogan.
We will see as always time will tell.

OPV cost reduction is not related to these matters at all It is simply re-evaluation of the needs, removal of certain weapons and conversion to optional, replacing CODAG with CODAE, removing advanced ESM and Radar, Tracking radar with mediocre and simple ones. Redefined mission profile has yielded to a simpler and optionally gunned platform.

I will not continue this further.
This is completely wrong. OPV budget was already planned without those subsystems. Those subsystems were optional(FFBNW) from the start. I know it %100 ask around and you will see. No one can construct 2+8 Milgem based OPV with the weapon and sensor load you mentioned without paying a small fortune and we don't have that kind of financial capability. Look at the naval projects that are running in parallel do you think we have 2+ billion extra navy budget to throw on OPVs with the load you suggest? They are planned with that in mind from the start. Those 2+8 OPVs will cost less than 4 Ada class Milgems.
The more we nationalize the cheaper it gets. The more Milgem based products we produce the cheaper it gets. And tax reduction doesn't work like that. Shipyards will even be able to buy a welding machine without a tax provided that it is in the scope of an SSB or MoD project. And you can bet that from now on every single item or service that those shipyards buy will be in the scope of an SSB or MoD project.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
You can not build I class below 350 million usd , especially when you consider milgem without many equipments compared to i class. Only ship with out even cables costs at least 150-200 million USD. Check past Aselsan and havelsan combat management systems deals for milgem ships!! Add that numbers, add weapon system costs with local manufacturing pricess. There is engines costing at least 25-30 million USD ( gas turbine and diesel ones combined).
The ones saying below 300 million USD for i class lives in fairy tales!!
As far as I know empty hull costs %25-30 of the price.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
How much does it cost for rmk to build 2 empty milgem for ukraine??
The price for exports is different sometimes we charge double the price for certain products. And we don't build empty Milgem bodies for Ukraine we are building full Milgem bodies without some subsystems.
 

Fighter_35

Contributor
Messages
543
Reactions
1 739
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
As far as I know empty hull costs %25-30 of the price.
This also contradicts with your opv claims ,due being similar to milgem cost decreases!!
If major costs are electronic systems and components , why there could be so much decrease in prices compared to milgems if hull cost is 25-30 percent only??
 

Fighter_35

Contributor
Messages
543
Reactions
1 739
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The price for exports is different sometimes we charge double the price for certain products. And we don't build empty Milgem bodies for Ukraine we are building full Milgem bodies without some subsystems.
I know 170 million USD figure for each , with out engines,with out weapons . Additional costs will be added to this price separately,like any Aselsan or havelsan system.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
That percentage was for the first 4 Milgems where nationalization is lower and weapon and sensor load is a lot better than OPVs. The subsystems and weapons we buy from foreign sources are expensive which makes the hull cost percentage fall down.

Lets give an example. Assume that we have 100 TL to spend.

Milgem Ada class first ship
25 TL for full (high national capability)
25 TL for things like power delivery system, generators, citadel hvac system etc. (Medium national capability)
30 TL for sensor (Medium national capability)
20 TL for weapons (basic national capability)

National contribution percentage %65
Hull percentage is %25 total cost 100TL

Milgem Ada class if we want to build it now
25 TL hull (high national capability)
20 TL for ship subsystems (high national capability)
20 TL for sensors (high national capability)
12 TL for weapons (high national capability)

National contribution percentage %80
Total cost 77 TL Hull percentage %32.5

Milgem Based OPV.
20 TL hull (high national capability)
14 TL for subsystems (high national capability)
8 TL for sensors (high national capability)
4 TL for weapons (high national capability)

National contribution %85
Total cost 46 TL hull percentage %43.5


BTW we gave a price of 300 million $ per ship(1.2 billion in total) to Pakistan for Milgem based frigates(very close to I class specs). Later the price came down when Pakistan decided to modify our first offer and use different weapons and subsystems with separate contracts.


Pakistan MİLGEM Projesi'nin ekonomik büyüklüğüne ilişkin de bilgiler veren Yılmaz, "Yapılacak işin ekonomik büyüklüğü yaklaşık olarak 1 milyar dolar civarında. MİLGEM'lerin fiyatı üzerindeki sistemlere, silahlara göre değişiyor. Bu proje kapsamında Pakistan, elindeki bazı sistemlerden de yararalanacağı için fiyat, normalde başka bir ülkeye satacağımızdan daha düşük. Orijinal konfigürasyonla bunu başka bir ülkeye satıyor olsaydık bir geminin fiyat büyük ihtimalle 300 milyon dolardan aşağı olmayacaktı. Dolayısıyla 4 tanesini 1,2 milyar dolar gibi bir rakam olacaktı." diye konuştu.
 
Last edited:

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I know 170 million USD figure for each , with out engines,with out weapons . Additional costs will be added to this price separately,like any Aselsan or havelsan system.
Wrong engines are included. Some weapons are also included. Nearly all of the sensors are included. Besides it is export price.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,502
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,884
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
This is completely wrong. OPV budget was already planned without those subsystems. Those subsystems were optional(FFBNW) from the start. I know it %100 ask around and you will see. No one can construct 2+8 Milgem based OPV with the weapon and sensor load you mentioned without paying a small fortune and we don't have that kind of financial capability. Look at the naval projects that are running in parallel do you think we have 2+ billion extra navy budget to throw on OPVs with the load you suggest? They are planned with that in mind from the start. Those 2+8 OPVs will cost less than 4 Ada class Milgems.
Re-read my post, i am not telling OPVs were planned with the exact weapon payload as Ada Class. It was planned as Ada Class without heavy weapons but light weapons (Temren etc) keeping the ESM and Radar, Propulsion and FCR the same. Later these were downgraded as Navy's re-evaluation, first to CODAD then the CODAE. Thus the 40% reduction in price have occured by replacing SMART-S with MAR-D, ARES-2N with lighter variant, ADVENT with limited features and less consoles.
Replacing CODAG to CODAE alone brings OPV cost down by %20.

Meanwhile check who has told this in past;
I'm surprised this one has 76mm at the front and Smart-S Mk2 at the mast. Lol, this is a Milgem without RAM and Atmaca. I don't think we have enough budget to produce 10 of this

and then this when ASFAT have showcased fully loaded Hisar Class;
Those OPVs will be expensive, especially in that configuration, I don't know how we can produce 10 of them. Note that we will also be constructing İstif class and we will probably put TF-2000 on the keel. The calendar of those projects is intersecting. Money doesn't grow on the tree. I'm afraid we have to cut some projects. Let's wait and see.

Then who told this in response to above message, months before ASFAT has spoken about %40 price reduction. (I have told it in Augusts in IDEF when ASFAT has showcased fully equipped Hisar Class, haven't even shown the light-empty configuration yet)
Not actually, those OPVs are meant to be constructed with ease in a fast-schedule. 10 of those will cost as much as 3 I-Class, or even less.

And now who says this;
Look at the naval projects that are running in parallel do you think we have 2+ billion extra navy budget to throw on OPVs with the load you suggest? They are planned with that in mind from the start. Those 2+8 OPVs will cost less than 4 Ada class Milgems.

I am not here for a piss-content with a person who feeds on forum's data and then rewrites it somehow as if his own "insider" informations. Personally i take part in these projects, and i am out of this discussion.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,502
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,884
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
That percentage was for the first 4 Milgems where nationalization is lower and weapon and sensor load is a lot better than OPVs. The subsystems and weapons we buy from foreign sources are expensive which makes the hull cost percentage fall down.

Lets give an example. Assume that we have 100 TL to spend.

Milgem Ada class first ship
25 TL for full (high national capability)
25 TL for things like power delivery system, generators, citadel hvac system etc. (Medium national capability)
30 TL for sensor (Medium national capability)
20 TL for weapons (basic national capability)

National contribution percentage %65
Hull percentage is %25 total cost 100TL

Milgem Ada class if we want to build it now
25 TL hull (high national capability)
20 TL for ship subsystems (high national capability)
20 TL for sensors (high national capability)
12 TL for weapons (high national capability)

National contribution percentage %80
Total cost 77 TL Hull percentage %32.5

Milgem Based OPV.
20 TL hull (high national capability)
14 TL for subsystems (high national capability)
8 TL for sensors (high national capability)
4 TL for weapons (high national capability)

National contribution %85
Total cost 46 TL hull percentage %43.5


BTW we gave a price of 300 million $ per ship(1.2 billion in total) to Pakistan for Milgem based frigates(very close to I class specs). Later the price came down when Pakistan decided to modify our first offer and use different weapons and subsystems with separate contracts.

This is so wrong in many levels, i have no time to correct these neither any intention. Just leaving this comment here so that people knows and not misleaded.
 

Fighter_35

Contributor
Messages
543
Reactions
1 739
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
That percentage was for the first 4 Milgems where nationalization is lower and weapon and sensor load is a lot better than OPVs. The subsystems and weapons we buy from foreign sources are expensive which makes the hull cost percentage fall down.

Lets give an example. Assume that we have 100 TL to spend.

Milgem Ada class first ship
25 TL for full (high national capability)
25 TL for things like power delivery system, generators, citadel hvac system etc. (Medium national capability)
30 TL for sensor (Medium national capability)
20 TL for weapons (basic national capability)

National contribution percentage %65
Hull percentage is %25 total cost 100TL

Milgem Ada class if we want to build it now
25 TL hull (high national capability)
20 TL for ship subsystems (high national capability)
20 TL for sensors (high national capability)
12 TL for weapons (high national capability)

National contribution percentage %80
Total cost 77 TL Hull percentage %32.5

Milgem Based OPV.
20 TL hull (high national capability)
14 TL for subsystems (high national capability)
8 TL for sensors (high national capability)
4 TL for weapons (high national capability)

National contribution %85
Total cost 46 TL hull percentage %43.5


BTW we gave a price of 300 million $ per ship(1.2 billion in total) to Pakistan for Milgem based frigates(very close to I class specs). Later the price came down when Pakistan decided to modify our first offer and use different weapons and subsystems with separate contracts.

You are joking right ??
Sensor and weapon cost decrease from 50 to 12??
In order for this , this ships only should be built for the complement of tuzla class! with this sensor and weapon load !! But we know that they will host almost everything compared to milgems. What you can do is decrease to 35-40 at most from 50!!
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,247
Reactions
141 16,269
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
@Anmdt , is CODAE propulsion like CODLAG or CODLOG ? Combined Diesel Electric And/Or Gas? In this case Combined diesel and Electric.? Any similarity to AZP or IEP ?
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,502
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,884
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
@Anmdt , is CODAE propulsion like CODLAG or CODLOG ? Combined Diesel Electric And/Or Gas? In this case Combined diesel and Electric.? Any similarity to AZP or IEP ?
Yes it is like CODELAG (Combine Diesel-Electric and Gas), you may see CODAE (Combine Diesel and Electric) is also referrred as CODELAD (Combined Diesel-Electric and Diesel). With an image;

1642683838307.png


If you drive these Electrical motors (Called Power-Take-In if they deliver power to the shaft, and Power-Take-Off , PTO, if they receive power from the shaft),altogether with the diesels in MISO (multi input single output) and if diesel-electric generators feed the the electrical motors it becomes CODELAD, if you uncouple the diesels when electric motors in SISO it becomes CODELOD. If you drive the generator via gas turbine you replace the latest letter with G.

IEP is an integrated system, while CO-Combined systems usually refer to decoupling electricity demand of the ship from the demand of the propulsion, IEP brings those together. Thus the ship only has a set of generators that both feed the propulsion and the whole ship.

AZP is like more Diesel-electic propulsion. Gensets feed the electrical motors in azimuths.
 

Khagan1923

Contributor
Messages
981
Reactions
14 4,180
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Why are you discussing something without any information on the numbers? The last three pages have been nothing but waste and distracting from the actual topic. No one cares about the price, that is for the government and the specific branch to deal with. If the Navy and the Government have decided that they will build the remaining three I-Class in parallel to each other then they probably thought this through.

Can we now stop this.
 
Top Bottom