TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

Heartbang

Experienced member
Messages
2,554
Reactions
8 3,971
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Cakir will most likely be followed by HKG-84 released from Akinci, will give any ship a bad day. Cheap and effective so no need for SOM-J or even Atmaca. .
youd need a guidance kit designed to hit moving targets in all weather conditions. Laser guidance isnt an all weather solution. it needs clear skies to operate effectively
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
To further the point on developing Cakir Mini-Cruise Missile to be as compact as possible;

MIECZNIK Polish Frigate Program, latest design features 16x RBS Mk3/4 surface to surface missiles, because NSM is so compact they are able to spread out these missiles from mid to aft, increasing offensive capability whilst also ensuring survivability of missiles as they are so spread apart.
image_2022-04-08_103304221.png

1649430335327.png


Reducing CAKIR size, would allow Turkish ship designers to incorporate multi-purpose cruise missile like CAKIR into Frigates and Destroyers. Whilst allowing the weapons officers to choose alternative low cost missiles to strike targets.

CAKIR would give a cost-effective Atmaca AShM and Gezgin LACM like capability out to 150km. Whilst also complementing them.
tt.png


Just do it Roketsan. :)
 
Last edited:

Bogeyman 

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
9,192
Reactions
67 31,253
Website
twitter.com
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Optical flow assisted IRCCM algorithm for sea skimming anti-ship missile systems
Kemal Arda Özertem
Dept. of Guidance Design, Roketsan

Are they going to make this seeker DIRCM resistant? I remember Roketsan had such a concept for counter-counter IR seeker.
I advise you to check the archive.
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Last edited:

Khagan1923

Contributor
Messages
970
Reactions
14 4,147
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
I found another angle. Take a look at that!

View attachment 42501
View attachment 42499

This one is due to its shape most likely a Gezgin mock-up. The other one is Siper.

Just as a comparison

mdcn-line1.gif


MdCN from France.

Image-3-Tomahawk-Long-Range-Cruise-Missile.jpg


Tomahawk from the US.



Very similar shape, isn't it?

Tübitak had already announced last IDEF that they have more missiles to share next IDEF...
 

manifesto

Committed member
Messages
153
Reactions
3 474
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I don't know but Cakir is coming to me more dangereous and game changer according to atmaca. Thank you so much our ergineers.
 

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,375
Reactions
4 2,619
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
When I compared Atmaca test and NSM tests, NSM seems to have bigger explosion and more visible damage. They have similar weight of warhead? What is the difference warhead type?
 

Cypro

Contributor
Messages
665
Reactions
3 1,799
Nation of residence
Northern Cyprus
Nation of origin
Northern Cyprus
When I compared Atmaca test and NSM tests, NSM seems to have bigger explosion and more visible damage. They have similar weight of warhead? What is the difference warhead type?
Atmaca has a bigger warhead than NSM (220 vs 150kg), it could be the ship size used in the test videos, point it hit etc. Or maybe the Atmaca test does not show full capability. Both missiles are not intended to create a huge blast over the ship but just sink a ship by a direct hit. So I would value the end result.
 

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
4,683
Reactions
7 7,389
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Atmaca hit the ships hull while NSM hit structures on the deck from what I see. So the Atmaca's blast was more contained.
 

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,375
Reactions
4 2,619
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
Atmaca has a bigger warhead than NSM (220 vs 150kg), it could be the ship size used in the test videos, point it hit etc. Or maybe the Atmaca test does not show full capability. Both missiles are not intended to create a huge blast over the ship but just sink a ship by a direct hit. So I would value the end result.
In wiki it says 150 kg, on Konnberg websıte, couldn't see warhead size, and on Raytheon website, it says 500 pound but maybe this is more developed version.
Atmaca hit the ships hull while NSM hit structures on the deck from what I see. So the Atmaca's blast was more contained.
This might be reason.
 

CAN_TR

Contributor
Messages
1,474
Reactions
17 5,210
Nation of residence
Austria
Nation of origin
Turkey
When I compared Atmaca test and NSM tests, NSM seems to have bigger explosion and more visible damage. They have similar weight of warhead? What is the difference warhead type?
Because ATMACA pierced through the hull and big part of the "explosion" is inside, the target ship sunk within few minutes.

Salute to TC ISIN, a workhorse of the Navy, i wish it could have become a museum.
 

MADDOG

Contributor
Türkiye Correspondent
Professional
Messages
1,218
Reactions
31 7,989
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Cyprus
Because ATMACA pierced through the hull and big part of the "explosion" is inside, the target ship sunk within few minutes.

Salute to TC ISIN, a workhorse of the Navy, i wish it could have become a museum.

I'm really gonna miss that ship. My father used to work on her. He was a Naval officer, thus I had the chance to see her in the flesh. TCG Akın and TCG Işın. Two unforgettable names for me. Salute to them both!
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
In wiki it says 150 kg, on Konnberg websıte, couldn't see warhead size, and on Raytheon website, it says 500 pound but maybe this is more developed version.

This might be reason.

Marketing gimmick, just like what Israeli defence companies do. They hype up the capability of the weapons. NSM supposedly has a 500-pound like effect warhead. Then you look at the composition of the warhead, and it's really not that different then any other insensitive explosive like RDX. A load of hype, and people no less knowledgeable fall for it. Just like marketing video of the NSM missile that hits above deck, any 200 pound bomb could clear a ships deck.

500lb class like effect warhead but, it's actual warhead weight is 264lbs
1650613048088.png
 

Hexciter

Experienced member
Messages
2,575
Reactions
4 11,451
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
What the Konsberg's do is replace iron with titanium to make warhead lighter and keeping expolosive high. Cost of titanium will be very high. Problem here whether the titanium sharapnels will be worser/same/better effect compared to iron ones?
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom