TR Aircraft Carrier and Amphibious Ship Programs

[TR_123456]

France and the UK have islands in other side of the planet, hence why they have AC's, to be able to protect their overseas territories, and even then they have troubles maintaining these, but why Turkiye ? The Navy is in need of frigates, but no, let's build a big ass aircraft carrier that will cost us billions just to maintain it. Doest't make any sense to be completely honest. We don't know how to manage our priorities. We just like to show off.

See posts 4528 and 4548 of this thread.

 

[Knowledgeseeker]

You do realize that is an enormous what if, right? An aircraft carrier itself costs billions of dollars, on top of building a lot of ships that needs to be in its carrier group. And we have 3 coasts we have to defend as well, so we can't just allocate all of our naval budget to create 1 carrier group.

Yes an aircraft carrier in itself will cost a minimum of 3 billion USD or the equivalent of 3 TF-2000. The warships and submarines I mentioned were not intended to be created just for 1 carrier group. Turkey does not need to have a huge aircraft carrier group like the US if Turkey intends to power project its influence to neighboring countries such as Libya and Somalia for example.

 

[Manomed The Second]

we are too broke to afford a ac end of the story

 

[boredaf]

Yes an aircraft carrier in itself will cost a minimum of 3 billion USD or the equivalent of 3 TF-2000. The warships and submarines I mentioned were not intended to be created just for 1 carrier group. Turkey does not need to have a huge aircraft carrier group like the US if Turkey intends to power project its influence to neighboring countries such as Libya and Somalia for example.

Mate, you don't half-ass a carrier group, you either do it right or you don't do it at all. We don't have the luxury to rely on NATO "allies" to provide us cover if necessary, so either we go all in on a csg or we shouldn't even touch the idea.

If all we want is being able to project power around Mediterranean we should just build Anadolu's sister Trakya and focus on getting KE, TB-3 and Anka-3 up to speed, and, our USV's.

 

[Manomed The Second]

Mate, you don't half-ass a carrier group, you either do it right or you don't do it at all. We don't have to luxury to rely on NATO "allies" to provide us cover if necessary, so either we go all in on a csg or we shouldn't even touch the idea.

If all we want is being able to project power around Mediterranean we should just build Anadolu's sister Trakya and focus on getting KE, TB-3 and Anka-3 up to speed, and, our USV's.

You don't even have jets to use on a AC ffs Its a waste of money.

First we need to get our frigates ready and AAW destroyers.

 

[Manomed The Second]

I think our priority should be nuclear-powered submarines before aircraft carriers, and we can cooperate with Russia in this regard. Like the S400 and Akkuyu nuclear power plant.

I don't think other options will help us, maybe Russia won't either...

yeah lets antoganize NATO even more.

 

[Knowledgeseeker]

Mate, you don't half-ass a carrier group, you either do it right or you don't do it at all. We don't have to luxury to rely on NATO "allies" to provide us cover if necessary, so either we go all in on a csg or we shouldn't even touch the idea.

If all we want is being able to project power around Mediterranean we should just build Anadolu's sister Trakya and focus on getting KE, TB-3 and Anka-3 up to speed, and, our USV's.

What does that have to do with a "half" carrier group? Do you think that the Turkish navy would need 10 submarines, 15 heavy frigates, and 5 destroyers for a single aircraft carrier group? If that's the case then we could be sure that Turkey will surpass the UK/France in terms of the size of their aircraft carrier groups.

I do understand your point and all the others that have made similar points in the thread. I'm just saying that is feasible to build a huge Turkish navy with an aircraft carrier if the shipyard capabilities and the financial part are intact. If UK/France can do it then why should Turkey not be able to do the same?

 

[boredaf]

If UK/France can do it then why should Turkey not be able to do the same?

Because both have about 4 times higher yearly military budget than us, on top of having overall economies that dwarf ours in almost every metric?

 

[Fairon]

I think our priority should be nuclear-powered submarines before aircraft carriers, and we can cooperate with Russia in this regard. Like the S400 and Akkuyu nuclear power plant.

I don't think other options will help us, maybe Russia won't either...

Yeah that went well for China and India.

Any collaboration with Russia in any military projects will be waste of money and time.

 

[Baryshx]

Yeah that went well for China and India.

Any collaboration with Russia in any military projects will be waste of money and time.

That is almost how China developed. India was a bit unwise, they could not use it. China's tradition of statehood and cunning throughout history has always been dangerous.

 

[Fairon]

That is almost how China developed. India was a bit unwise, they could not use it. China's tradition of statehood and cunning throughout history has always been dangerous.

China is replacing every Russian based design they can as fast as they could.

My conclusion is they couldn't make them work no matter how hard they tried and they find replacing the designs with European or US ones will be easier. Their ships evolved in that regard.

We don't have the time and money to invest the designs that we have to change in the end anyway. It is better to work with what we have instead of cooperating with the Russians.

 

[boredaf]

China is replacing every Russian based design they can as fast as they could.

My conclusion is they couldn't make them work no matter how hard they tried and they find replacing the designs with European or US ones will be easier. Their ships evolved in that regard.

We don't have the time and money to invest the designs that we have to change in the end anyway. It is better to work with what we have instead of cooperating with the Russians.

On top of that, Russia is now a complete pariah and we are already dancing on the line as it is. No reason to go anywhere near Russia for any military reason, we are much better off without them.

 

[Zafer]

Türkiye can achieve its military goals at less than a third of the cost as richer nations pay.

 

[Oublious]

Without a proper carrier group ready, by which I mean multiple TF2000s on top of frigates, it would be a colossal waste of money and time

Untill it is operational it will be 2040.

 

[Fairon]

Untill it is operational it will be 2040.

It will drain the budget until 2040 though. It is not like we will pay for it after the carrier delivered to the Navy.

We should only consider an aircraft carrier after we secure the budget for the replacement and additional ships for the navy and in a more secure position economically.

Lowkey design stuides will be usefull though within a small budget.

 

[Oublious]

It will drain the budget until 2040 though. It is not like we will pay for it after the carrier delivered to the Navy.

We should only consider an aircraft carrier after we secure the budget for the replacement and additional ships for the navy and in a more secure position economically.

Lowkey design stuides will be usefull though within a small budget.

No, lets say the budget is 10 billion dollar. It will be spread over 15 years if they start it in 2025.

 

[dBSPL]

I was expecting that the Hurjet Naval and Trakya carrier projects would be announced today. I had even heard something about it. I couldn't watch the ceremony live, I guess there was no announcement about it.

 

[Zafer]

I have been wishing for 2 LHD and 2 full size carriers but it is all about realizing the potential. If things go well you can go for more if not you chose the affordable. Our technological development and requirements to protect our interests along with budgetary possibilities will play their roles. Sustainability will be the key, we want solutions that can be scaled.

 

[dBSPL]

I have been wishing for 2 LHD and 2 full size carriers but it is all about realizing the potential. If things go well you can go for more if not you chose the affordable. Our technological development and requirements to protect our interests along with budgetary possibilities will play their roles. Sustainability will be the key, we want solutions that can be scaled.

They don't have to be twin ships. It is enough that they have the minimum qualifications to back each other up. The second ship will also have a dock. However, its deck area will be greatly expanded and it will offer qualities more suitable for air operations. As Ismail Demir stated two days ago, a great deal of experience has been accumulated with the construction and testing activities of TCG Anadolu, and these will be realized as new approaches. This accumulation will increase exponentially when the ship starts its navy service. I expect a ship with a combat weight between 32K-40K. I think we will go step by step. I hope that by the end of the 2030s we can talk about a real aircraft carrier, a ship whose main striking force will be the MMU.

However, on a personal note, I consider it more strategic to move forward in the field of nuclear-powered submarines rather than aircraft carriers. For each aircraft carrier or LAC ship, we need to add another 20% on top of the current size of the navy. The seconder strike capability platforms offers both defensive and offensive deterrence without this expansion. Aircraft carriers are for dominating the seas.

*

EDIT: When the TCG Anadolu was being designed, the F-35B was the aim. When designing the Trakya ship, the aim will be twin-engine KE and Hürjet Naval (or another project that has not yet been declassified). This detail should not be overlooked.

 

[Baryshx]

We don't have the time and money to invest the designs that we have to change in the end anyway. It is better to work with what we have instead of cooperating with the Russians.

Do we have the capability to build nuclear reactors for submarines and aircraft carriers, and nuclear power plants for energy? How can we develop this on our own?

That would require political will, though. That too is uncertain, at least for future governments.