TR Aircraft Carrier and Amphibious Ship Programs

[Sanchez]

CdG is about 42-45k. Korea's CVX is also about 45k. Since we are not talking with France regarding a new carrier, it's either UK or Korea anyhow.

 

[boredaf]

I hope we build Trakya before we start going after a carrier twice as big without jets to fly from it. And if we do, I hope we build it primarily as a "mothership", as in with a focus on UAV and USV operations first and an amphibious assault ship second. That way, it could compliment Anadolu or operate without it to support our fleet.

Imagine a scenario where we suspect submarine activity. We can send TB3s equipped with Aselsan's sonobuoys from several hundred kms away from the suspected area, then, send in Ulaqs which also has few hundred kilometers of cruise range iirc equipped with Akya's or Orka's to try to hunt the submarine. All without risking a single human or ship. Same type of scenario can apply to anti-surface warfare or even anti-air defense.

I think this type of mothership will be very important for mid size powers in the future.

 

[Cabatli_TR]

I think he means double the size. I'm confused too.
Dear @Cabatli_TR ,could you share the quote in Turkish please?

"TCG Anadolu'nun bir misli büyüğü". He talked about an aircraft carrier with twice the displacement of the TCG Anadolu and this make Turkish type AC an 55000/60000ton class.

 

[Cabatli_TR]

I hope we build Trakya before we start going after a carrier twice as big without jets to fly from it. And if we do, I hope we build it primarily as a "mothership", as in with a focus on UAV and USV operations first and an amphibious assault ship second. That way, it could compliment Anadolu or operate without it to support our fleet.

Imagine a scenario where we suspect submarine activity. We can send TB3s equipped with Aselsan's sonobuoys from several hundred kms away from the suspected area, then, send in Ulaqs which also has few hundred kilometers of cruise range iirc equipped with Akya's or Orka's to try to hunt the submarine. All without risking a single human or ship. Same type of scenario can apply to anti-surface warfare or even anti-air defense.

I think this type of mothership will be very important for mid size powers in the future.

Turkiye analyzes the changing trend very well and takes serious steps in this regard. With the proliferation of unmanned aircrafts/drones, aircraft carriers will also enter the process of changing and will be built in an order which manned/unmanned mixed fleets will be carried. In this direction, our industry which has built and delivered a 28000ton LHD in 7/8 years, will built a 55000 ton aircraft carrier in a period of 9-10 years. At best, we can think that this ship will be ready for delivery by 2035, if construction starts in 2025. In 2035, Turkiye's manned/unmanned fleets will have already reached a serious level of maturity with their own gas turbine engine solutions. All that remains is an aircraft carrier which these platforms will take off and steps taken are not related to the planning of today but of the next 15/20 years. in this direction, Carrier fleet will be clearly formed like that;

• 2x Drone/Helicopter Carrier/LHD Mini-AC (TCG Anadolu-28000ton class, TCG Trakya- ~30000ton(?))
• 1x TT Aircraft carrier 550000ton(Manned/Unmanned Combat/Fighter aircrafts)

 

[Khagan1923]

"TCG Anadolu'nun bir misli büyüğü". He talked about an aircraft carrier with twice the displacement of the TCG Anadolu and this make Turkish type AC an 55000/60000ton class.

View attachment 56164

I said at the time when the first talk began about an true aircraft carrier that the most likely partner in this would be the UK. We can go at it alone but I guess this route would take more years. IMO there are three real options the navy has, granted the necessary budget even exists by then to procure such a vessel and maintain it.


1. UK offers a variant of its QEZ-Class tailored to the requirements of the Turkish Navy. As they have done with France in the 2010s.

2. UK offers technical in the design process, similar to the TF-X.

3. Navy decides to go at it on its own.

But even past that a big question that would need answering is this:

Which Aircraft would be deployed on it? Yes Drones but the Navy won't built a full fledge 60000+ Ton Aircraft carrier to just deploy Kizilelma and Anka-3 from it.
How feasible would a navalized TFX be? Especially with its size. When looking at china who seem to rather go with the J-31 for their carries and taking into account that the TF-X is similiary sized, makes own curious.

Alas unless the economy sees a sudden recovery and the budget an nice increase this is a dream for the next decade maybe even for the 2040s.

 

[Tornadoss]

You can have multiple carriers in one group, however.

It doesn't make much sense to deploy such valuable ship to the same location.

 

[boredaf]

It doesn't make much sense to deploy such valuable ship to the same location.

Let's say we built Trakya and full blown aircraft carrier, you can deploy Anadolu and Trakya in one group to support each other along with their group to operate closer to home and then the aircraft carrier with its group to operate in blue waters. Obviously it wouldn't be as simplistic as this but this might be the gist of it.

Of course, I wouldn't expect to see this closer than 2040s.

 

[Chocopie]

CdG is about 42-45k. Korea's CVX is also about 45k. Since we are not talking with France regarding a new carrier, it's either UK or Korea anyhow.

Korean and Japanese navy don‘t follow US and European tradition of tonnage declaration. All tonnages of ROKN and JMSDF surface ships are declared as empty displacement.

CVX plans have changed from light aircraft carrier to „medium size“ which means 50,000+ t empty and 60,000+ t full. With navalized KF-21 it would be a CATOBAR (different to QE with F-35B), electromagnetic catapult and arresting gear (estimated $1,3 billion costs alone for France) and fixed wing AEW like E-2D imported from US. Estimated initial cost for 1 aircraft carrier is about $10 billion (without cost for minimal airwing: 28 KF-21, 2 AEW, 2 rescue helis).

And ROKN would need at least 2, at best 3 CSG for realistic operational deployment. Time span about 10-11 years to build up 1 CSG. Optimistic estimates if nothing goes wrong (ROK has world-class shipbuilding companies and most efficient megasize-shipyards but no experience in designing, building and operating naval aircraft carriers).

 

[Agha Sher]

Gentlemen, an aircraft carrier is totally overkill for Turkiye. Turkiye does not have a need to project power on the other side of the world. Likewise, Turkiye does not have direct access to an ocean either.

In case of a major conflict, the CSG will most likely be stuck outside of the Mid with no port. All other CSG states have direct access to the oceans and/or dozens of islands across the world acting as ports and bases.

It simply doesn't make sense for Turkiye. This is a prestige and ego project. Better invest the money in national submarines, large frigates and destroyers.

TCG Anadolu and potentially TCG Trakya is more than enough.

 

[Zafer]

I am thinking HMS Queen Elizabeth's 65.000 ton weight is as far as it goes with an aero-derivative petrol burning engine readily available. Beyond this point you would need nuclear propulsion. She is using 2x 36 MW turbines for power generation if we follow a similar path we can power a 55k ton ship with even a lesser engine like one derived from a TFX engine. If we can afford to give a decade to this ship we can as well power it with our domestic engine.

 

[BalkanTurk90]

Turkiye analyzes the changing trend very well and takes serious steps in this regard. With the proliferation of unmanned aircrafts/drones, aircraft carriers will also enter the process of changing and will be built in an order which manned/unmanned mixed fleets will be carried. In this direction, our industry which has built and delivered a 28000ton LHD in 7/8 years, will built a 55000 ton aircraft carrier in a period of 9-10 years. At best, we can think that this ship will be ready for delivery by 2035, if construction starts in 2025. In 2035, Turkiye's manned/unmanned fleets will have already reached a serious level of maturity with their own gas turbine engine solutions. All that remains is an aircraft carrier which these platforms will take off and steps taken are not related to the planning of today but of the next 15/20 years. in this direction, Carrier fleet will be clearly formed like that;

• 2x Drone/Helicopter Carrier/LHD Mini-AC (TCG Anadolu-28000ton class, TCG Trakya- ~30000ton(?))
• 1x TT Aircraft carrier 550000ton(Manned/Unmanned Combat/Fighter aircrafts)

2 LHD and 1 AC will be great update for turkish navy but to protect those you will need 40 warships (frigates / destroyes) comparing to Japan or S kore . 5 / 6 warships per AC that mean 15 - 20 warships will be busy only protecting LHDs/AC while 20 Will be around Turkiye or in ports + some 30 submarines .
Whilr as we speak Turkiye is building only 4 frigates like its denmark or belgium

 

[AVCI]

Gentlemen, an aircraft carrier is totally overkill for Turkiye. Turkiye does not have a need to project power on the other side of the world. Likewise, Turkiye does not have direct access to an ocean either.

In case of a major conflict, the CSG will most likely be stuck outside of the Mid with no port. All other CSG states have direct access to the oceans and/or dozens of islands across the world acting as ports and bases.

It simply doesn't make sense for Turkiye. This is a prestige and ego project. Better invest the money in national submarines, large frigates and destroyers.

TCG Anadolu and potentially TCG Trakya is more than enough.

But what if a port of an ocean-bound ally is assigned to you ?

 

[Bürküt]

But what if a port of an ocean-bound ally is assigned to you ?

Like Somalia?

 

[Agha Sher]

But what if a port of an ocean-bound ally is assigned to you ?

You can never rely on that during a major conflict. Look at russia, even their vassals are turning them their back.

Also, you don't dock at any given port. This location must have proper defenses or the CSG is exposed.

 

[Fighter_35]

RTE means 1 size bigger by saying "1 misli büyüğü '. It does not mean double the size but one times larger . So he mentions a small aircatft carrier like Korean new project i suppose

 

[Zafer]

My suggestion for a full size carrier with two copies

• 55k ton displacement​
• 275m length​
• Gas turbine / electric propulsion
• With fighters
  • TB3
  • Kızılelma
  • Anka3
  • Hürjet
  • Kızılelma 2 (twin engine)
  • Single TFX engine fighter

 

[Era_shield]

Gentlemen, an aircraft carrier is totally overkill for Turkiye. Turkiye does not have a need to project power on the other side of the world. Likewise, Turkiye does not have direct access to an ocean either.

In case of a major conflict, the CSG will most likely be stuck outside of the Mid with no port. All other CSG states have direct access to the oceans and/or dozens of islands across the world acting as ports and bases.

It simply doesn't make sense for Turkiye. This is a prestige and ego project. Better invest the money in national submarines, large frigates and destroyers.

TCG Anadolu and potentially TCG Trakya is more than enough.

Already it could've been used for Libya, and certainly in 20+ years when it goes into service the world will be quite a different one than what we see today and it will be critical to be able to project power in distant places. The post-WW2 world everyone was accustomed to, where international trade was safe and you didn't need to secure your own trade routes, was a totally unique time in world history and is going away. Turkiye knows this and is already planning for that future.

 

[Mehmed Ali]

Aircraft carrier, Trakya and even more then 2 destroyers aren't necessary for defence of Turkiye or its waters. What I believe, if this projects go ahead, Turkiye is playing the game in the long run. In not so long future " brotherly " countries to the East will come to the big trouble with the powers to which they suck up at the moment ( choose any) , so in that case Turkiye can be the knight in shiny armour. Or in the similar scenario besides those " brotherly " countries " Turkiye would go with one of the 3 factors there. Apart of this scenario I don't see any logic in this. This game can only bring more trouble for Turkiye and besides it takes 2 to tango. Turkiye has no any reliable or viable partner for this.

 

[AVCI]

You can never rely on that during a major conflict. Look at russia, even their vassals are turning them their back.

Also, you don't dock at any given port. This location must have proper defenses or the CSG is exposed.

TDK has enough experience about where a port should be established and under what conditions. When a decision is made to establish such a base/port, all parameters related to it are evaluated, and military and political analyzes are made.

 

[Zafer]

Aircraft carrier, Trakya and even more then 2 destroyers aren't necessary for defence of Turkiye or its waters. What I believe, if this projects go ahead, Turkiye is playing the game in the long run. In not so long future " brotherly " countries to the East will come to the big trouble with the powers to which they suck up at the moment ( choose any) , so in that case Turkiye can be the knight in shiny armour. Or in the similar scenario besides those " brotherly " countries " Turkiye would go with one of the 3 factors there. Apart of this scenario I don't see any logic in this. This game can only bring more trouble for Turkiye and besides it takes 2 to tango. Turkiye has no any reliable or viable partner for this.

Türkiye has more interests in places than its continuous waters alone. You want to transfer your technological capabilities to your power projection abilities. We are not afraid of troubles when we need to protect our interests.