TR Attack & Utility Helicopter Programs

[uçuyorum]

I know there isn't much news on this front but I think it's worth going back to talk about our needs for more military transport and utility helicopters. We have a decent amount of attack helicopters, but T70 production has been going far behind schedule due to many factors and T925 engine procurement problem isn't solved yet either. We have big hopes for Gökbey but it hasn't even done its initial deliveries. All in all our ground forces have less than 100 utility helicopters of various types. We are expected to produce 38 T70 before deal runs out the last I've heard which is split between the forces. This is a significant setback because we were expecting this program to fulfill most of our needs.

Considering the geography of our border regions, it can be difficult to rely on mechanized and motorized infantry all the time, and recent sad events are showing the difficulty of establishing permanent or temporary bases deeper in. In light of these we have an increasing urgency of helicopters for rapid mobility.

Now Blackhawk is really known to be the work horse in this field, and I do not know if Gökbey is suitable for the same role, considering its tonnage. While TAI is intending it for primarily civilian useage, gendermarie general command Is the first customer and therefore it should be suitable for military operations to some extent, but question is will it be able to carry the equipment for surviveability, things like laser warning receivers and dircm, and ballistic protection while also having enough capacity?
We have the version with TS1400 in the works which will take a bit more still for delivery, a naval version is also being developed that we know of. We will need few hundred of these total across all of our army branches to fulfill our needs.

Lets not forget that our 10 OPV, 8 İstif that are being built, as well as Anadolu need helicopters.

 

[Sanchez]

You can use T625 with TS1400 as a stand in for S70, but it will never replace the versatility S70 have. So far, we are not building a S70 replacement with T925 now being at 12k tons, and T700 engine replacement is not even announced.

So yeah, I agree that a huge bottleneck is right around the corner and it will hit gendarme and army aviation hard in the next 10 years, while navy aviation will start feeling the bottleneck as more platforms become online, again in a similar 10 year timeframe. We love to talk about navy plans and how they are always one step ahead but remember, Meltem program was also run by the navy.

 

[uçuyorum]

You can use T625 with TS1400 as a stand in for S70, but it will never replace the versatility S70 have. So far, we are not building a S70 replacement with T925 now being at 12k tons, and T700 engine replacement is not even announced.

So yeah, I agree that a huge bottleneck is right around the corner and it will hit gendarme and army aviation hard in the next 10 years, while navy aviation will start feeling the bottleneck as more platforms become online, again in a similar 10 year timeframe. We love to talk about navy plans and how they are always one step ahead but remember, Meltem program was also run by the navy.

They get beween 11-18% of defence budget. In US, navy and air force are both about 35%.

 

[Aqerdf]

If there's no T70 or TEI-T700;

Fastest option is going for T625-T629, if we want to pump (every kind of) choppers in triple digits before 2030.

Second fastest is going with T925-T929 with either Ukrainian TV3s or Russian TV3s. With this, in total we can pump (every kind of) choppers double digit numbers (to 2030)

Third fastest option is going with triple engine for T9XX choppers, with TS1400+. (triple digit T6XX choppers and a handful of T9XX choppers, in every kind of version, before 2030)

This would be my speculation.

 

[Merzifonlu]

I think our fastest option for navy is navalize (and lightened by approx. 1 ton) T9XX choppers, with 3 x TS1400 engine. And navalize Gökbeys. For the rest of our armed forces, the non-navalize version of these two helicopters can be used.

Yes, the transmission of a 3-engine system will be complex and expensive. But if we design the engine segment and transmission by taking into account the engine power that will increase in the future, we can reach a long-term and permanent solution.

 

[dBSPL]

The reason I am sharing the specs of the improved and marinised Super Lynx is to showing how capable a navalized variant of the T625 can be. Two helicopters in the same class with similar MTOW and flight endurance, similar volumes, using the same powerpack range.

Spoiler: AgustaWestland AW159 Wildcat

It is an improved variant of Westland Super Lynx to serve in the battlefield utility, search and rescue and anti-surface warfare roles. The type can perform aerial reconnaissance, anti-submarine warfare (ASW), anti-surface warfare (ASuW), utility, fire control, command and control, and troop transport duties. The type is also reported to possess significant ISTAR capabilities

- It is powered by two 1,362 hp (1,016 kW) LHTEC CTS800 turboshaft engines which drives the rotorcraft's BERP IV rotor blades
- airframe has been marinised for operations in the naval environment and provides for a greater airframe lifespan of 12,000 flight hours.
- Wheeled undercarriage is also strengthened for naval landings
- Increased use of composites in the aircraft, including the tailboom

- A Wildcat can carry four launchers, each with five Martlets. It can also carry 4x Sea Venom (FASGW Heavy) missiles for engagement against land targets.
- It is used by various navies with Sting Ray torpedoes and Mk.11 depth charges, K745 Blue Shark torpedoes and Spike NLOS ATGM-based antiship missiles.
- The avionics package includes TDL-16 capability as well as a wide range of systems such as AESA X band radar and sonobuoy dispensers.

 

[uçuyorum]

The reason I am sharing the specs of the Super Lynx is to showing how capable a navalized variant of the T625 can be. Two helicopters in the same class with similar MTOW and flight endurance, similar volumes, using the same powerpack range.

Spoiler: AgustaWestland AW159 Wildcat

It is an improved variant of Westland Super Lynx to serve in the battlefield utility, search and rescue and anti-surface warfare roles. The type can perform aerial reconnaissance, anti-submarine warfare (ASW), anti-surface warfare (ASuW), utility, fire control, command and control, and troop transport duties. The type is also reported to possess significant ISTAR capabilities

- It is powered by two 1,362 hp (1,016 kW) LHTEC CTS800 turboshaft engines which drives the rotorcraft's BERP IV rotor blades
- airframe has been marinised for operations in the naval environment and provides for a greater airframe lifespan of 12,000 flight hours.
- Wheeled undercarriage is also strengthened for naval landings
- Increased use of composites in the aircraft, including the tailboom

- A Wildcat can carry four launchers, each with five Martlets. It can also carry 4x Sea Venom (FASGW Heavy) missiles for engagement against land targets.
- It is used by various navies with Sting Ray torpedoes and Mk.11 depth charges, K745 Blue Shark torpedoes and Spike NLOS ATGM-based antiship missiles.
- The avionics package includes TDL-16 capability as well as a wide range of systems such as AESA X band radar and sonobuoy dispensers.

I am more hopeful for Naval variant, but it's unlikely it will carry all the payloads Seahawk carry at once which is a limitation. I am more concerned about land operations where it will have to face stringers and gunfire.

 

[dBSPL]

I am more hopeful for Naval variant, but it's unlikely it will carry all the payloads Seahawk carry at once which is a limitation. I am more concerned about land operations where it will have to face stringers and gunfire.

The Gökbey helicopter, with its indigenous power group, could be the most suitable solution for the navy. Not the most ideal, but as cost-effective as possible in really large numbers. Instead of waiting until we have the capacity to produce the ideal, I am in favor of utulitizing the possibilities as fast as possible.

 

[uçuyorum]

I also want to know if there are any plans to modernize the AH1W, since a replacement isn't coming soon. Would be cool if we changed electro optics and integrated Cirit and Omtas / Umtas at minimum, since they are normally able to carry Hellfire.

 

[Zafer]

 

[Zafer]

A 3 engine helicopter is safer as when one engine fails you still have 67% of engine power in place while one of the 2 engine son a 2 engine helicopter fails you only have 50% of the power remaining. In this case the 3 engine machine completes the mission but a 2 engine machine needs to abort.

 

[Merzifonlu]

A 3 engine helicopter is safer as when one engine fails you still have 67% of engine power in place while one of the 2 engine son a 2 engine helicopter fails you only have 50% of the power remaining. In this case the 3 engine machine completes the mission but a 2 engine machine needs to abort.

Safer? I actually doubt it. In mechanical systems, the increase in the number of moving parts also increases the risk of failure. Since a transmission operated by 3 engines would be more complex, I think this power group would not be safer in total.

However, since our engine companies are busy with developing of turbofan engines, meeting our urgent heavy class helicopter needs is only possible with a transmission operated by 3 x TS-1400 engines.

 

[uçuyorum]

Gökbey with indigenous engine is expected to be delivered 2026. A three engine version is a brand new helicopter so imagine how long that would take... I wonder if it would be easier to try and develop an engine for T925 or find it some other way. Would be nice if Ukraine gave us the license but it seems they specifically want to avoid giving us that so we have to rely on them otherwise they fear once we get what we want we will abandon them or something yet they also say the can't deliver more than 14...

 

[Zafer]

Safer? I actually doubt it. In mechanical systems, the increase in the number of moving parts also increases the risk of failure. Since a transmission operated by 3 engines would be more complex, I think this power group would not be safer in total.

However, since our engine companies are busy with developing of turbofan engines, meeting our helicopter needs is only possible with a transmission operated by 3 engines.

The likelihood of an engine failure is the same in both systems and a transmission is a far simpler system that an engine. So comparing 67% power to 50% power left when an engine fails the remaining engines are not overloaded in the 3 engine system while the remaining single engine on a twin engine system gets overloaded and can only run a short amount of time. This makes the single engine system very unsafe and if you do not abort and return base in time you can fail the remaining single engine. And this is not only my opinion, I read about it being safer.

 

[Zafer]

Gökbey with indigenous engine is expected to be delivered 2026. A three engine version is a brand new helicopter so imagine how long that would take... I wonder if it would be easier to try and develop an engine for T925 or find it some other way. Would be nice if Ukraine gave us the license but it seems they specifically want to avoid giving us that so we have to rely on them otherwise they fear once we get what we want we will abandon them or something yet they also say the can't deliver more than 14...

TAI came up with how many helicopter designs already in a few years, a variation should not take too long. And obviously 3 engine design capability will allow us to make even larger helicopters once we have 3k hp engines in the future, 25+ ton helicopters can be possible. It is a brilliant expansion of capabilities in any case.

 

[Kartal1]

T-625, T-629, T-925 and T-929 all must be navalized. If we manage to pull that off I think we will be good for the future. I think T-625 and T-925 will be a good combination for the backbone of our armed forces. Even if it's not the familiar S-70 I think T-925 will be a good replacement. Looking at the future of our helicopter fleet I see a lot of similarities to the Italian one with a couple of differences. Until the national platforms listed above and especially T-925 are ready I think we should try everything possible to keep our S-70/T-70 fleet operational trough upgrades, retrofits etc.

The biggest thing I am worried about is the low number of CH-47's. When we had the chance we should've used the opportunity to purchase more of them. There are some alternatives in Russia, but I don't think it will be a wise move to purchase anything Russian at this point.

 

[boredaf]

T-625, T-629, T-925 and T-929 all must be navalized. If we manage to pull that off I think we will be good for the future. I think T-625 and T-925 will be a good combination for the backbone of our armed forces. Even if it's not the familiar S-70 I think T-925 will be a good replacement. Looking at the future of our helicopter fleet I see a lot of similarities to the Italian one with a couple of differences. Until the national platforms listed above and especially T-925 are ready I think we should try everything possible to keep our S-70/T-70 fleet operational trough upgrades, retrofits etc.

The biggest thing I am worried about is the low number of CH-47's. When we had the chance we should've used the opportunity to purchase more of them. There are some alternatives in Russia, but I don't think it will be a wise move to purchase anything Russian at this point.

It is seriously rare for me to read something I agree completely on the Internet, but this comment was seriously it

I wonder if we can extend our license for S-70?

 

[Kartal1]

It is seriously rare for me to read something I agree completely on the Internet, but this comment was seriously it

I wonder if we can extend our license for S-70?

Well, it depends mainly on the geopolitical situation, but not only. We have a very good interaction with Sikorsky being the one of their largest customers. I would say that it is not impossible, but we shouldn't put all our eggs in this basket. S-70s and their variants are contributing a lot to our armed forces, but we must be prepared to cut the ropes and go with our national vision. I view this capability as strategic, especially in Turkiye's geography.

 

[Azeri441]

T-625, T-629, T-925 and T-929 all must be navalized. If we manage to pull that off I think we will be good for the future. I think T-625 and T-925 will be a good combination for the backbone of our armed forces. Even if it's not the familiar S-70 I think T-925 will be a good replacement. Looking at the future of our helicopter fleet I see a lot of similarities to the Italian one with a couple of differences. Until the national platforms listed above and especially T-925 are ready I think we should try everything possible to keep our S-70/T-70 fleet operational trough upgrades, retrofits etc.

The biggest thing I am worried about is the low number of CH-47's. When we had the chance we should've used the opportunity to purchase more of them. There are some alternatives in Russia, but I don't think it will be a wise move to purchase anything Russian at this point.

whats the point of navalizing all those helicopters? There is no point in the naval T-625 when you have a naval version of the T-629, or a naval version of T-629 when you got ATAK-2, creating a naval version of the helicopter is not simple and Turkey only has a need of up to 50 helicopters max, and export market is already pretty tiny and already dominated by the West.

 

[Kartal1]

whats the point of navalizing all those helicopters? There is no point in the naval T-625 when you have a naval version of the T-629, or a naval version of T-629 when you got ATAK-2, creating a naval version of the helicopter is not simple and Turkey only has a need of up to 50 helicopters max, and export market is already pretty tiny and already dominated by the West.

You may be right regarding T-629, but I am thinking of replacement for our lighter fleet of UH-1s. Gokbey would fill this gap perfectly.