TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,223
Reactions
136 16,094
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey

Few important bullet points made by Roketsan MD :
1. Tayfun is now in serial production line. Due to being totally indigenous, we can produce as many and as often as the need arises.
2. Tayfun can reach above atmospheric altitudes, in space.
3. Tayfun can execute manoeuvres to render itself difficult to be targeted by AD systems.
4. Tayfun embodies within itself all the most developed navigational and seeker systems, to improve its precision targeting capabilities.
5. Range of Tayfun can be altered easily. But the emphasis on this missile is with precision strikes. It can hit it’s target within an accuracy of 4 to 5metres.

1685519089307.jpeg

It is also stated that when looked in to the angle of launch being more acute than 45 degrees during the first test, it is prudent to point out that the maximum range is much more than what then was stated.

1685519442670.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,703
Reactions
91 8,963
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Gokhan seems to resemble Meteor.

F-16 Ozgur equipped with Aselsan’s MURAD AESA and Tubitak' EW pod + 2x Bozdogan (for WVR) 2x Gokdogan (for medium range) and 2x Gokhan (for long range) is the best A2A load-out for a Viper out there.

If Turkey has export right for F-16, this would have been outselling F-16 block 70/72.
 

boredaf

Contributor
Messages
1,362
Solutions
1
Reactions
16 3,755
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Make the payload releasable instead of this wasteful self-destruction. In a real war the side that wastes drones like this would be the losing side.
How is it a waste when the drone is specifically built to be a kamikaze drone? It is literally its sole purpose for existing. Both Ukraine and Russia are using suicide drones right now, especially Ukraine to great effect. They occupy a different job than ordinary drones.
 
E

Era_shield

Guest
How is it a waste when the drone is specifically built to be a kamikaze drone? It is literally its sole purpose for existing. Both Ukraine and Russia are using suicide drones right now, especially Ukraine to great effect. They occupy a different job than ordinary drones.
Just because something is a particular way doesn't mean it should be that way. It's wasteful to destroy the optics, battery, body and motors when it could instead deploy the destructive payload and be reused.

And no, Ukraine and Russia are both making their quadcopters drop grenades whenever possible. Self-destructing types like the Russian Lancet have wings and are effectively missiles, not quadcopters. Russia uses practically no self-destructing quadcopters. Ukraine uses a small number of them but only because the US gives them for free and Ukraine can't efficiently change them to a reusable type.
 

boredaf

Contributor
Messages
1,362
Solutions
1
Reactions
16 3,755
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Self-destructing types like the Russian Lancet have wings and are effectively missiles, not quadcopters.
First of all, no, both sides use FPV like drones as suicide drones. Here is just a few example videos. You can find literally dozens more like these.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/13qdumi
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/13t49ri
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/13us1ts
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/133t7jc
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/12zftlr
It's wasteful to destroy the optics, battery, body and motors when it could instead deploy the destructive payload and be reused.

Secondly, you're looking at it just by the cost of the drone itself, which is the wrong way to look at any type of munition in a war. In the videos I shared above, you can see they used these FPV suicide drones to attack soldiers, different types of armored vehicles and even tanks. Drones that drop grenades have to adjust and stay still, these things are flying grenades or cluster bombs themselves, finding their targets and then attacking them at 140 km/h. Perfect for taking down targets of opportunity and great ROI when you consider how cheap these drones are. I mean, partisans even used FPV drones to successfully attack Russian A-50 awacs, one of the single most important equipment for any modern military force:



Ukraine uses a small number of them but only because the US gives them for free and Ukraine can't efficiently change them to a reusable type.
Third, you're wrong again, as you're thinking only of Switchblades. Ukrainians have been building their own kamikaze drones for months now:


Here is a more recent report on it:


With a direct quote from a Ukrainian minister:
Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister for Innovation and Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov says the drones have already been distributed among 13 units of the Defense Forces, and some of them “have already destroyed dozens of enemy targets.” The minister emphasized the battlefield edge provided by FPV drones, capable of catching up with and eliminating a wide range of targets while safeguarding soldiers’ lives.

As I said before, these things are perfect for spotting and engaging targets of opportunity unlike drones that drop grenades which has to correct itself and stay still beforehand. Both has a place in the modern battlefield, just not the same place. Grenade/mortar dropping drones are more effective against enemy that is entrenched or otherwise staying still.

Just because something is a particular way doesn't mean it should be that way.

And finally, if that was the case, no military on the planet would invest in loitering munitions or kamikaze drones of any kind. But that isn't the case at all because nobody is looking at the cost of these kamikaze drones or loitering munitions like Kemankeş in isolation.
 
E

Era_shield

Guest
First of all, no, both sides use FPV like drones as suicide drones. Here is just a few example videos. You can find literally dozens more like these.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/13qdumi
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/13t49ri
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/13us1ts
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/133t7jc
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/12zftlr


Secondly, you're looking at it just by the cost of the drone itself, which is the wrong way to look at any type of munition in a war. In the videos I shared above, you can see they used these FPV suicide drones to attack soldiers, different types of armored vehicles and even tanks. Drones that drop grenades have to adjust and stay still, these things are flying grenades or cluster bombs themselves, finding their targets and then attacking them at 140 km/h. Perfect for taking down targets of opportunity and great ROI when you consider how cheap these drones are. I mean, partisans even used FPV drones to successfully attack Russian A-50 awacs, one of the single most important equipment for any modern military force:




Third, you're wrong again, as you're thinking only of Switchblades. Ukrainians have been building their own kamikaze drones for months now:


Here is a more recent report on it:


With a direct quote from a Ukrainian minister:


As I said before, these things are perfect for spotting and engaging targets of opportunity unlike drones that drop grenades which has to correct itself and stay still beforehand. Both has a place in the modern battlefield, just not the same place. Grenade/mortar dropping drones are more effective against enemy that is entrenched or otherwise staying still.



And finally, if that was the case, no military on the planet would invest in loitering munitions or kamikaze drones of any kind. But that isn't the case at all because nobody is looking at the cost of these kamikaze drones or loitering munitions like Kemankeş in isolation.
I'm well aware of everything you just posted, and I addressed most of it in my original post. You are again confusing what is and what should be - just because Ukraine lacks the resources to make quadcopters with ballistic targeting does not mean they wouldn't if they could, or that Turkiye shouldn't.

Btw, quadcopters that drop munitions don't have to hover or stay still. You think because that's all you've seen that that's all that's possible, but this is wrong. Kargu could (and should) be made to do an automated swooping maneuver that releases a ballistically targeted grenade/mortar that lands on a running soldier's head 100m below it. Turkiye already has the technology to do this. This would give the drone 99% the targeting effectiveness and 90% the range of an FPV drone while increasing the sortie-per-dollar and sortie-per-day rates by orders of magnitude. The only reason Ukraine isn't already doing this is that their drones are mostly commercial conversions that don't have the ability to do any kind of ballistic targeting and they haven't yet been able to develop the much more efficient type of drone I'm describing.
 

dBSPL

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Ambassador
Messages
2,257
Reactions
91 11,632
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Waov. The first time i heard about Barbaros.(or i might have forgotten)

View attachment 58014
İmpressive. here is the Mavivatan.
Although the Çakır and Atmaca missile families fill the gap in the medium-long range, I don't think they will cover all the layers on A2/AD concept. I mean, there can be much more diversity in coastal defense batteries. I think it is only a matter of time before the Raven emerges at short ranges and a new missile group at very long or supersonic cruise speeds.

I am almost certain that once SAGE's ramjet works reaches a certain level of maturity, we will try to utilize this technological advantage in almost every missile group.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom