Mr. Ibrahim also stated that a new missile that can be packaged as an ESSM-like quad-pack is being developed with modifications to be carried out on the Hisar RF-D (the missile we see as Siper Blok-1).
I feel your pain. It could be developed even faster if you think about it. But I ain't gonna complain as HİSAR-D Block 2 will retain advantages like TVC and dual pulse engine. Would rather like to see G40 re-evolved into an extended range GÖKDOĞAN as an alternative missile for GÖKDEMİR and possibly aircraft. AMRAAM-ER is being studied as an interim extended range air to air missile after its journey with NASAMS.Do you really think They won't produce G40?
I think they are cheating.
UMTAS-GM Block 1/2 missiles are meant to be canister launched like SPIKE NLOS; unlike UMTAShere is difficulty in placing Umtas in canisters because of it's unholdable wings
YALMAN can be a starting point. I am just sick of this lack in flexibile thinkingKnowing TSK, hell needs to freeze first before they go for a multirole platform tasked with both AA and anti armor.
Even using Kaplan STA as a starting point for a standoff support system was a huge step that surprised me. We know they worked in implementing Cirit a decade ago on ACVs and fixed pedestal mounts. You are right that it was a starting point. An AA-AG mix though, employs two different class of soldiers, artillery(?) and air defence.YALMAN can be a starting point. I am just sick of this lack in flexibile thinking
Knowing TSK, hell needs to freeze first before they go for a multirole platform tasked with both AA and anti armor.
They aren't being inflexible just for the fun of it. It is easier and safer to have a vehicle dedicated to one thing, shorad in this instance, than trying to make a jack of all trades vehicle and make its crew divide their attention and expertise. Same thing goes for vehicles with anti-armor role or fire support role.YALMAN can be a starting point. I am just sick of this lack in flexibile thinking
I feel like the introduction to multirole systems should be done through integrating SUNGUR on new variant of YALMAN, KMC-U, which will have a wider array of missile options plus 7.62 machine gun. It is clearly stated that both laser and IIR guided missiles can be launched so I don't see any obstacles other than modifying FCS.Even using Kaplan STA as a starting point for a standoff support system was a huge step that surprised me. We know they worked in implementing Cirit a decade ago on ACVs and fixed pedestal mounts. You are right that it was a starting point. An AA-AG mix though, employs two different class of soldiers, artillery(?) and air defence.
ÖKK could be an interesting tester of such a platform. A KMC-U on a Pars 6x6, armed with UMTAS-GMs and Sungur.I feel like the introduction to multirole systems should be done through integrating SUNGUR on new variant of YALMAN, KMC-U, which will have a wider array of missile options plus 7.62 machine gun. It is clearly stated that both laser and IIR guided missiles can be launched so I don't see any obstacles other than modifying FCS.
I think it would be an interesting concept. Although as you said I'm not sure about how practical it might be as this could be some kind of a stand alone umbrella for a convoy, or a village and what if we think like you, and separate the AIR to AIR and it's not within range of the vehicle that detected it? That's why it is better to have multirole vehicle that could suppress all possible targets. Some kind of a bubble around a perimeter with multilayered protection within it's range.They aren't being inflexible just for the fun of it. It is easier and safer to have a vehicle dedicated to one thing, shorad in this instance, than trying to make a jack of all trades vehicle and make its crew divide their attention and expertise. Same thing goes for vehicles with anti-armor role or fire support role.
If a convoy or location is important enough to require mechanized protection we can afford to put 2 vehicles there. As a concept it might be interesting but I don't think it would help us to halve either air defense or anti-armour or infantry capability of a vehicle just so we can have 1 less vehicle in a convoy.I think it would be an interesting concept although not sure about how practical it might be as it could be some kind of an umbrella for a convoy or a village and what if the air to air is not within range? That's why a multirole vehicle that could have a bubble of multilayered protection of it's range is ideal.
Another thought think small scale internal conflict so rather than a town think a village, as it seems BURC is designed for low-intensity conflict (LIC).If a convoy or location is important enough to require mechanized protection we can afford to put 2 vehicles there. As a concept it might be interesting but I don't think it would help us to halve either air defense or anti-armour or infantry capability of a vehicle just so we can have 1 less vehicle in a convoy.