TR Naval Programs

No Name

Well-known member
Messages
311
Reactions
5 310
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Afghanistan

Arda Mevlütoğlu, examines the evolution of the type 23 project over time. Google translated last section that he evaluates TN and the allegeded Type 23 procurement.

Evaluations

In the light of the age status of Type 23 class frigates in the British Royal Navy inventory and their retirement plans reflected in open sources, it is seen that in addition to HMS Monmouth, HMS Argyll in 2023 and HMS Lancaster in 2024 will be out of service. These will be followed by HMS Iron Duke in 2025, with subsequent ships gradually retiring until 2035.

There is not enough depth and detail to make a sound comment in the news and statements about Turkey's interest in Type 23 frigates. From the words of the Minister of National Defense Hulusi Akar, "There is nothing concrete or definite", it is concluded that a study is still in progress. It is not clear whether this work started with the proposal of the UK or the request of Turkey.

If the request came from Turkey, the most likely reason for this demand is the urgent need for a frigate class ship.
There are 16 frigates in Turkish Navy service, four of which are Yavuz class (MEKO 200TN Track I), four Barbaros class (MEKO 200TN Track II) and eight Gabya class (FFG-7 Oliver Hazard Perry) class; There are nine corvettes, four of which are Ada class (MilGem) and five Burak class (A69 D'Estienne d'Orves).

The combat management system of eight Gabya class frigates of these ships was renewed with the GENESIS project, and four of them were equipped with SMART-S Mk2 radar and Mk41 vertical firing system and ESSM air defense missile firing capability. The SMART-S Mk2 radar is also available on Barbaros class frigates, Ada class corvettes, Bayraktar class amphibious ships and the Anadolu amphibious assault ship that will be put into service soon.

Four Barbaros class ships are undergoing half-life modernization. Within the scope of half-life modernization for Barbaros class frigates, ASELSAN-made MAR-D three-dimensional search and Scorpion fire control radar, AREAS-2NC and ARES-2NV2 electronic warfare systems, GENESIS ADVENT Combat Management System, Atmaca anti-ship missile developed by ROKETSAN and ASELSAN Gökdeniz self-defense weapon system [27]
The project is of great importance in terms of increasing the number of ships using the Turkish GENESIS combat management system architecture and also indigenizing critical systems (target detection, electronic warfare and weapons) on board.

On the other hand, Yavuz class frigates and Burak class corvettes have come to the end of their lives. The electronic warfare systems of four Yavuz class frigates were renewed with systems produced by ASELSAN, with a project completed at the beginning of 2020.[28] However, it is doubtful how much longer the hull and machinery of these 40-year-old ships can withstand.

In the evaluations available in open sources, there is a dominant opinion that the Yavuz class frigates will be replaced by the Stack class national frigates.[29] The construction and equipping of Istanbul, the first of the four stowage class ships, continues. This ship is expected to enter service in 2023. However, the construction activity of the other three ships has not started yet. In line with the decision taken at the Defense Industry Executive Committee (SSİK) meeting in December 2022, these ships are planned to be built in 36 months, jointly by three shipyards (Sedef, ADİK and Sefine), under the main contractor of STM.[30]
Therefore, it is possible to say that the need for the renewal of Yavuz class frigates of the Turkish Naval Forces will be met around 2026-27, if the project schedule is not delayed further.

At this point, it becomes more difficult to explain the purchase of a Type 23 or any foreign ship in a different class on a rational basis. Administrative and technical negotiations, purchase agreement, preparation of the ships for delivery and subsequently equipping them to serve in the Turkish Naval Forces, preferably equipping them with domestic and national systems, putting them into service following tests and experiences will require an average of 1-2 years per ship. Due to the structural condition of the ships (corrosion, wear, need for reinforcement, etc.), this process is likely to take longer.

There is no significant information in open sources about geopolitical risk assessment, threat assessment and predictions about the factors that shape the procurement and modernization projects of the armed forces. In other words, there is no publicly available document on the national security and defense policies of the Republic of Turkey, on which academic, intellectual and sectoral research or discussion can be conducted. In particular, there is no document or statement of the Turkish Naval Forces regarding a threat perception, change in force structure or a different situation, if it really exists, that may necessitate urgent recruitment. Therefore, if such a request for Type 23 came from the Turkish side, it is impossible to explain this request with the available information and documents. Especially when the process of existing domestic and national projects is as summarized above. It should be emphasized that in the MilGem project this process has lagged considerably.

In addition to the financial resources that can be transferred to the domestic shipbuilding industry, the purchase of Type 23 carries the risk of disrupting the new domestic ship purchasing schedule due to the need to leave an average of 100 personnel to work on each of these ships. After these ships are purchased, they will need to undergo a comprehensive modernization so that they can be equipped with domestic and national weapon systems and electronic systems. Aside from the total time this modernization will take, it is doubtful what gap they will fill as they are already 30 years old on average. Transferring the financial resources, labor and shipyard infrastructure to be spent on these, to domestically designed combat ships would be a much more accurate decision.

Except for the RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missile and AN/SLQ-25A Nixie countermeasure systems used on Type 23 class ships, no hardware and components are available in the Turkish Naval Forces. Turkish sailors are not familiar with any of the systems and weapons systems, including the 114mm cannon, which is the head gun of the Type 23s. In this case, after the acquisition of the ships, it will be necessary to learn the maintenance, attitude and use of weapons and electronic systems, as well as the machinery and subsystems of the ships, and to adapt the ships to the operational methods and tactics of the Turkish Naval Forces. This will mean a certain amount of time and financial resources. While the Turkish Naval Forces equips all combat surface elements with the GENESIS combat management system, the compatibility of Type 23s with the inventory, which has already undergone two refits and a half-life modernization, and whose hulls are heavily worn during offshore missions, is a waste of material and moral resources.

The Type 23s, designed to operate under the air defense umbrella of friendly elements, are extremely weak against modern anti-ship missiles. Adding a self-defense weapon system such as Phalanx, Gökdeniz or RAM to ships will require integration with a combat management system and radar, etc. sensors. This will be another issue that increases the time and cost of the ship's entry into service after a possible transfer. On the other hand, in the Type 23 design, since there is no room left for the self-defense weapon system in the superstructure, it will be a problem to create additional space and ensure that it does not have electromagnetic and mechanical interference with other systems.

Type 23s that have undergone LIFEX and PGMU have many systems in common with the newly commissioned Type 26s: They have the same diesel engine, radar, air defense missile, hull-mounted and towed sonar systems. In this respect, it can be said that the modernized Type 23s are an element of gaining experience for the British Royal Navy in the transition to Type 26s. The retiring ships HMS Argyll and HMS Lancaster have undergone LIFEX but not PGMU. Considering that these ships also have common systems with Type 26, with the exception of diesel engines, it is very important for England to offer Type 26 to Turkey and to sell Type 26 to a country that can evaluate scrap at the age of 30, while its own shipbuilding industry has reached a certain level of competence. it will be easier. As it will be remembered, the UK offered the Type 26 to Turkey around 2011 with the "purchase of ready-made design" model, and Turkey rightly rejected this ridiculous offer.[31] If the first proposal for Type 23 came from the UK, the most likely explanation for this scenario could be an effort to persuade Turkey to Type 26 through Type 23.

The following text, included in the parliamentary minutes, regarding the sales permit of the Type 23 frigates sold to Chile in the British Parliament, is noteworthy:
These licenses were assessed against Criterion 4 (preservation of Regional Peace Security and Stability) and approved on the assessment that there was no clear risk that they would be used aggressively against another country or to assert by force a territorial claim.
These licenses have been evaluated under Criterion 4 (Protection of Regional Peace, Security and Stability) and have been approved on the basis that they will not be used to make a territorial claim against another country in an aggressive manner or by force.[32]

It is in accordance with their national interests and foreign policies that the UK (or other countries) observe such criteria and rules in the sale of new or used weapons, tools - equipment. Similar rules and conditions will be imposed on a possible Type 23 purchase. In this case, it is beyond the imagination of the author of these lines that under what conditions and conditions Turkey will deliver these ships to Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean, which is the most important front of the Blue Homeland, where England is a direct stakeholder through the Akrotura and Dhekelia bases.

In Turkey, which established the aerospace and defense industry almost from scratch right after the establishment of the Republic, but these first steps were interrupted by foreign purchases and military aids since the 1950s, the defense industry and especially military ship design, construction and modernization capabilities have reached such an advanced level. It is devastating that an issue has even come to the fore in this way.

If this is true, and the Type 23 ships are going to take more than two years to become operational, then Turkey should just start to produce the Dearsan F 142 frigate instead.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,111
Solutions
2
Reactions
95 22,764
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey

ADVENT-MUREN CMS and AKYA guidance integration to Gür Class submarines.

Finally, ADVENT is becoming a family of CMS that is clearly ready to be shipped and commonized.

Another example of how TN values commonization, Gür Class had relatively up to date but foreign CMS.

And safe to tell, it is not just about integration of AKYA torpedo but more.
 

dBSPL

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Ambassador
Messages
2,048
Reactions
77 10,602
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey

Arda Mevlütoğlu, examines the evolution of the type 23 project over time. Google translated last section that he evaluates TN and the allegeded Type 23 procurement.

Evaluations

(...)
RFA Fort Austin and RFA Fort Rosalie sold to Egypt and these 50 years old fleet replenishment ships will sail for Egypt Navy after refurbishment work. Three of the Type 23s have already been delivered to the Chilean navy and it is likely that at least one more frigate will be sold to Chile. At least 3-4 more of these ships will probably be transferred to South American/Asian countries in this way. I think what needs to be considered here is where the relatively new ASW frigates, which were undergoing Mid-life modernization from 2015 onwards and generally launched after 92/93, will go. Two years ago, there was speculation about the transfer of two of these ships(as gift) to Greece (then an agreement was signed with the French and the news stopped.) When Egypt was buying 50 year old auxiliary ships, there was probably a discussion about these frigates.

Of course, the UK is not only renewing frigates as part of its navy modernization. Another equally important transformation is taking place in the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. In addition to the 30,000 tons displacement RFA Fort Victoria replenishment oiler, which started active duty in 1994, the hospital/aviation training vessel RFA Argus is also going out of service as of 2023.

But I think the most important ship is the 14.000 tons displacement ocean survey (secondary role mine countermeasure) vessel HMS Scott. This ship was the only ocean-going survey ship the Royal Navy had. The ship's known navionic equipment includes sonar array sounding system (SASS), proton magnetometer, Sonar 2090 ocean environment sensor, and SASS IV multibeam depth-sounder. The ship, which started active duty in '97, underwent a comprehensive refit in 2014. Instead of combatant platforms, the integration of such auxiliary ships, which I mean especially HMS Scott, into the Turkish navy could have been much faster and cost-effective without undermining existing indigenous projects.
 
Last edited:

Ripley

Contributor
USA Correspondent
Messages
558
Reactions
12 1,512
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Turkey
RFA Fort Austin and RFA Fort Rosalie sold to Egypt and these 50 years old fleet replenishment ships will sail for Egypt Navy after refurbishment work. Three of the Type 23s have already been delivered to the Chilean navy and it is likely that at least one more frigate will be sold to Chile. At least 3-4 more of these ships will probably be transferred to South American/Asian countries in this way. I think what needs to be considered here is where the relatively new ASW frigates, which were undergoing Mid-life modernization from 2015 onwards and generally launched after 92/93, will go. Two years ago, there was speculation about the transfer of two of these ships(as gift) to Greece (then an agreement was signed with the French and the news stopped.) When Egypt was buying 50 year old auxiliary ships, there was probably a discussion about these frigates.

Of course, the UK is not only renewing frigates as part of its navy modernization. Another equally important transformation is taking place in the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. In addition to the 30,000 tons displacement RFA Fort Victoria replenishment oiler, which started active duty in 1994, the hospital/aviation training vessel RFA Argus is also going out of service as of 2023.

But I think the most important ship is the 14.000 tons displacement ocean survey (secondary role mine countermeasure) vessel HMS Scott. This ship was the only ocean-going survey ship the Royal Navy had. The ship's known navionic equipment includes sonar array sounding system (SASS), proton magnetometer, Sonar 2090 ocean environment sensor, and SASS IV multibeam depth-sounder. The ship, which started active duty in '97, underwent a comprehensive refit in 2014. Instead of combatant platforms, the integration of such auxiliary ships, which I mean especially HMS Scott, into the Turkish navy could have been much faster and cost-effective without undermining existing indigenous projects.
What I understand from your post is that you’re basically suggesting that we should focus more on naval platforms and capabilities which TN lacks of, instead of wasting our resources and time on Type23.

Question: Would RN even consider selling such a strategic component of force when it has just one single such vessel in its own active fleet?
 

Saithan

Experienced member
Denmark Correspondent
Messages
8,092
Reactions
21 18,639
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Turkey
They’d remove all critical systems first and we may ve allowed to take over systems that we already have due to our NATO alliance. If export permission is given from partners involved in those systems.
 

dBSPL

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Ambassador
Messages
2,048
Reactions
77 10,602
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
What I understand from your post is that you’re basically suggesting that we should focus more on naval platforms and capabilities which TN lacks of, instead of wasting our resources and time on Type23.

Question: Would RN even consider selling such a strategic component of force when it has just one single such vessel in its own active fleet?
The ship I'm talking about is not a strategic asset. Besides, the ship is already for sale by the UK defense ministry. It can support the scientific work of many organizations, especially Turkiye's arctic mission. In addition, the ship has very powerful sonar systems and can increase the capabilities of the navy in mine countermeasure, as well as underwater tactical picture on open seas.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,111
Solutions
2
Reactions
95 22,764
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The ship I'm talking about is not a strategic asset. Besides, the ship is already for sale by the UK defense ministry. It can support the scientific work of many organizations, especially Turkiye's arctic mission. In addition, the ship has very powerful sonar systems and can increase the capabilities of the navy in mine countermeasure, as well as underwater tactical picture on open seas.
Especially could fulfill test ship role. But again, Turkish shipbuilding industry can design and build a bare test ship within the time required for British to strip off the ship, arrive TR and go another stripping of aged or incompatible subsystems.

I have given little information in artic mission thread, there are currently two programmes to support arctic missions

1- upgrading and modifying one existing ship in accordance with polar - ice classifications. Turk Loydu works on this to propose rules for such a vessel.

2- purchasing a new dedicated arctic mission support vessel jointly operated by 3 bodies; TN, Ministry of Technology (through Tubitak) and SSB.
 

Ripley

Contributor
USA Correspondent
Messages
558
Reactions
12 1,512
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Turkey
If we‘re planning to evolve our operational capabilities into an open sea navy wrt Blue Homeland doctrine on top of homeland shore’s protection, then possessing such vessels should only come natural.
So, yeah let’s go for HMS Scott since it’s available
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,111
Solutions
2
Reactions
95 22,764
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey

Göktuğ missiles, both Gökdoğan BVR and Bozdoğan WVR goes through studies to be land and naval-platform based. (As the sea platform based studies were known since years ago and nothing new on that part)

Let me just give one hint, It is being considered for pretty exotic and outstanding application that will blow our minds when it is revealed.
 

Fairon

Well-known member
Messages
367
Reactions
6 868
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey

Göktuğ missiles, both Gökdoğan BVR and Bozdoğan WVR goes through studies to be land and naval-platform based. (As the sea platform based studies were known since years ago and nothing new on that part)

Let me just give one hint, It is being considered for pretty exotic and outstanding application that will blow our minds when it is revealed.

So G40 isn't navalized quadpackable Gökdoğan?

Or to be clear are G40 and navalized Göktuğ missiles different projects?
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,111
Solutions
2
Reactions
95 22,764
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
So G40 isn't navalized quadpackable Gökdoğan?

Or to be clear are G40 and navalized Göktuğ missiles different projects?
Primary goal is to use Göktuğ family as is or with minor modifications (booster addition etc) to acquire NASAMS like capability.

For the Navy it is a little strange, we may hear it later in March or April.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
3,915
Reactions
64 7,083
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Primary goal is to use Göktuğ family as is or with minor modifications (booster addition etc) to acquire NASAMS like capability.

For the Navy it is a little strange, we may hear it later in March or April.
Dont you think quad packed gokdogan would be better than single packed Hisar D?
 

babayetu

Member
Messages
24
Reactions
2 109
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Hisar-D will be quad-packed soon. Gokdogan has its own advantage in a unique application.

How can even they quadpack soon? I thought it would take at least 5+ years.
Quadpacking is not easy job afaik. British wasted billions$ and took so long time, a lot of other advanced countries could not even get close. Also isnt quadpacking g40 would be easier that is cold launched?
Another question, how much a quadpack missile package cost? i heard that it'll cost way much than 4x the missile cost.
 

boredaf

Contributor
Messages
948
Solutions
1
Reactions
11 2,674
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Gokdogan has its own advantage in a unique application.
Unique part in your clue is interesting. Unmanned surface and ground vehicles would be the safest best, I think. Maybe a RAM system with Gokdogan? But that wouldn't exactly be unique either. Can't wait to find out what it'll be.
 

dBSPL

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Ambassador
Messages
2,048
Reactions
77 10,602
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
If we‘re planning to evolve our operational capabilities into an open sea navy wrt Blue Homeland doctrine on top of homeland shore’s protection, then possessing such vessels should only come natural.
So, yeah let’s go for HMS Scott since it’s available
I am completely convinced on this issue, especially the program of Kozan Erkan and Arda Mevlütoğlu moderated by Kaner Kurt was a real eye-opener. And of course we have a treasure like Anmdt, in defensehub. I have put a lot of effort into developing a positive mindset about the rationale behind this news. I have scoured many English documents and mission archives on the ships that will be decommissioned by UK MoD. However, in the final analysis, even if they are auxiliary class ships, transferring resources to these ships, when the Turkish shipbuilding industry is a rising value in the world markets in the field of military platforms, will not only affect our resource efficiency, but will also cause irreparable damage to our international marketing activities. I am not directly involved in the shipbuilding industry, but I am very close to it and I have a lot of people from the industries from whom I can get ideas, and need to say that the future of the industry is very bright, so much so that the economic size of our country or an infrastructure that will positively differentiate it from other industries is being formed.

More and more Istif-class frigates, and an ever-expanding participation in military shipbuilding. That's all we should be advocating for.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,111
Solutions
2
Reactions
95 22,764
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Unique part in your clue is interesting. Unmanned surface and ground vehicles would be the safest best, I think. Maybe a RAM system with Gokdogan? But that wouldn't exactly be unique either. Can't wait to find out what it'll be.
I posted the news on Naval Programs and called it 'unique' thus it is not something that can be easily thought of.

How can even they quadpack soon? I thought it would take at least 5+ years.
Quadpacking is not easy job afaik. British wasted billions$ and took so long time, a lot of other advanced countries could not even get close. Also isnt quadpacking g40 would be easier that is cold launched?
Another question, how much a quadpack missile package cost? i heard that it'll cost way much than 4x the missile cost.
Quadpacking is sure hard and challenging as far as the development of VLS itself, however, it does not cost $1 Billion nor as much as the VLS. It brings more than what it costs at the end.

And yes, the quad-packed canister and related controllers costs more than 4 of the individual canisters, but this worths the trouble. One cell is installed with 4 missiles at once, and time is saved during replenishment at harbor and 4 missiles are connected through common interface.

G40, if developed, can be still used from MIDLAS or individual vertical launcher developed by Tubitak and this is not much of a concern.
 

uçuyorum

Contributor
Messages
687
Reactions
9 1,120
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
What I wonder is if G40 can be used with a much smaller launcher from smaller ships that lack vls or have very few of them and easier to place on the deck, like a RAM launcher but with significantly longer maximum range. I imagine it would then be very useful for a large number of ships.
 

Heartbang

Experienced member
Messages
2,313
Reactions
7 3,494
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I am completely convinced on this issue, especially the program of Kozan Erkan and Arda Mevlütoğlu moderated by Kaner Kurt was a real eye-opener. And of course we have a treasure like Anmdt, in defensehub. I have put a lot of effort into developing a positive mindset about the rationale behind this news. I have scoured many English documents and mission archives on the ships that will be decommissioned by UK MoD. However, in the final analysis, even if they are auxiliary class ships, transferring resources to these ships, when the Turkish shipbuilding industry is a rising value in the world markets in the field of military platforms, will not only affect our resource efficiency, but will also cause irreparable damage to our international marketing activities. I am not directly involved in the shipbuilding industry, but I am very close to it and I have a lot of people from the industries from whom I can get ideas, and need to say that the future of the industry is very bright, so much so that the economic size of our country or an infrastructure that will positively differentiate it from other industries is being formed.

More and more Istif-class frigates, and an ever-expanding participation in military shipbuilding. That's all we should be advocating for.
I say get the ships, and dismantle them ASAP. Reverse engineer everything that's worth something. They'll be worthy of their value then.
 

babayetu

Member
Messages
24
Reactions
2 109
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I am completely convinced on this issue, especially the program of Kozan Erkan and Arda Mevlütoğlu moderated by Kaner Kurt was a real eye-opener. And of course we have a treasure like Anmdt, in defensehub. I have put a lot of effort into developing a positive mindset about the rationale behind this news. I have scoured many English documents and mission archives on the ships that will be decommissioned by UK MoD. However, in the final analysis, even if they are auxiliary class ships, transferring resources to these ships, when the Turkish shipbuilding industry is a rising value in the world markets in the field of military platforms, will not only affect our resource efficiency, but will also cause irreparable damage to our international marketing activities. I am not directly involved in the shipbuilding industry, but I am very close to it and I have a lot of people from the industries from whom I can get ideas, and need to say that the future of the industry is very bright, so much so that the economic size of our country or an infrastructure that will positively differentiate it from other industries is being formed.

More and more Istif-class frigates, and an ever-expanding participation in military shipbuilding. That's all we should be advocating for.
I agree. TCG Istanbul is almost ready, that shows we have almost every subsystem ready, midlas and hisar-rf is on the way. We are talking about paying 10b$+ deal for f-16s to US, we are talking about paying 10b$+ to UK for eurofighters but we don't have 5-6b$ for our shipbuilding industry and state firms like Aselsan so we discuss buying junk, truely a remarkable situation.

Order 6x Ada class (add 2x8vls like ukrainian one)
Order 6x more total 10 I- Class (accelerated redesign for 32vls for like 4 of them)
Quicken the ADKG process
Decommission 4xGabya and 4xYavuz and 5xburak

It would take 4-5 years for this process we got enough shipyard, we would get like 20 new hulls instead of 13 most problematic assets. We would get rather modern navy instead of a average 35 years old navy... I-class with 32 vls is enough to accompany TCG Anadolu for now send 3x with it if needed.

Whole 20 ships would take at most 6b$ literally 1.2b$ a year is not even much. It is not a huge burden and we could wait till 2030 for the tf-2000 with no problemo.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom