TR Air Defence Programs

[Afif]

ÇFAKR can guide 10 missiles (can create 10 guidance beams) simultaneously to different targets at 150km. ÇFAKR can guide missiles up to "x" km on a single target or if targets are nearby in a tight formation with a single high-power beam. Of course, it can create 2,3 beams, etc that can still guide missiles over 150km. 150km is given for a maximum of 10 beams.

I wanted to ask but forgot.

Isn't 10 guidance beam a bit low for a such large X band AESA FCR? I mean, even SAMP/T's old Arabel PESA radar could engage 16 target simultaneously.

Also 150km for 10 guidance beams seems to be short for such large AESA sensor.

What is '290km' that was cited then?

 

[TheInsider]

I wanted to ask but forgot.

Isn't 10 guidance beam a bit low for a such large X band AESA FCR? I mean, even SAMP/T's old Arabel PESA radar could engage 16 target simultaneously.

Also 150km for 10 guidance beams seems to be short for such large AESA sensor.

What is '290km' that was cited then?

Single beam performance

 

[Afif]

Single beam performance

Against 1m2 RCS target?

Also, couldn't 1 beam simultaneously engage multiple targets in different parts of the horizons. (Not in Tight formation) because AESA can direct its beam in micro seconds?

 

[TheInsider]

Against 1m2 RCS target?

Also, couldn't 1 beam simultaneously engage multiple targets in different parts of the horizons. (Not in Tight formation) because AESA can direct its beam in micro seconds?

Yes, but It has disadvantages radar is a complex topic. That single beam already works in pulses if a radar has %10 duty cycle it means it only actively radiates 6 seconds out of 60 seconds if you divide 6 seconds active time by 10 you will end up 0,6 seconds. Total energy sent to a target falls and chance of getting an echo back falls. Math doesn't %100 works like that but the issue is really complex. If radar can continuously focus on one target for an extended period of time it performs better.

 

[Aqerdf]

SIPER II's brochure i think:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1762390083670307045

 

[Afif]

Can guide 20 missiles to 10 targets simultaneously.
@TheInsider what if some targets are tight formation, wouldn't a single beam from total 10 be able to engage more than one target then?

Also, I assume by the numbers of tracks, it meant weapon quality track? Otherwise 100 is low. (Even Chenk has 500 track load and UMR 1000.)

 

[UkroTurk]

SIPER II's brochure i think:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1762390083670307045

"Solid propellant "Monoblok".."
So Block 2 has no booster and reaches 150km range.

Why do they produce block 1 instead of block 2 ? İt is written:" block 1 is to be in inventory this year"
Should we expect: block 1 will be produced without booster as medium range interceptor.
They don't want lose Block 1s slim shape for quad packing?

 

[Anmdt]

View attachment 66033


Can guide 20 missiles to 10 targets simultaneously.
@TheInsider what if some targets are tight formation, wouldn't a single beam from total 10 be able to engage more than one target then?

Also, I assume by the numbers of tracks, it meant weapon quality track? Otherwise 100 is low. (Even Chenk has 500 track load and UMR 1000.)

The battery engagement level is given for 1 CFAKR, the latest and most modern Siper battery has one UMAR, 2 CFAKR, 12 ready to fire missiles linked to each CFAKR.

The accuracy of the search radar and the accuracy of the tracking radar are also different. The main task of a search radar is to first detect, then classify and then roughly track the classified target and update this information to the tracking radar.

Let's say a search radar has a bias of 50 metres, this goes down to less than 1 metre for tracking radars.

"Solid propellant "Monoblok".."
So Block 2 has no booster and reaches 150km range.

Why do they produce block 1 instead of block 2 ? İt is written:" block 1 is to be in inventory this year"
Should we expect: block 1 will be produced without booster as medium range interceptor.
They don't want lose Block 1s slim shape for quad packing?
View attachment 66034
View attachment 66035

You can't fire the Siper B2 at every target, and later versions of the B1 will be carried in greater numbers than the usual.

 

[Afif]

Let's say tracking radar has 50 meter bias, this goes as little as to sub-1 meter for search radars.

I am little confused. How is that?

 

[Anmdt]

I am little confused. How is that?

Updated the post.

 

[TheInsider]

View attachment 66033


Can guide 20 missiles to 10 targets simultaneously.
@TheInsider what if some targets are tight formation, wouldn't a single beam from total 10 be able to engage more than one target then?

Also, I assume by the numbers of tracks, it meant weapon quality track? Otherwise 100 is low. (Even Chenk has 500 track load and UMR 1000.)

Missile guidance capability is related to the AESA datalink system. Engagement=illumination. The system can illuminate 10 targets at the same time per ÇFAKR radar and can provide mid-course guidance to 20 missiles(2 per target) via AESA datalinks (extremely hard to jam).

Yes tracks are highly precise tracks. The system can tell the difference between a bomb released from a fighter and a fighter. The system can also identify which fighter it is and whether the released effector is a bomb or a missile.

 

[Afif]

Missile guidance capability is relatedto the AESA datalink system. Engagement=illumination. The system can illuminate 10 targets at the same time per ÇFAKR radar and can provide mid-course guidance to 20 missiles(2 per target) via AESA datalinks.

Yes tracks are highly precise tracks. The system can tell the difference between a bomb released from a fighter and a fighter. The system can also identify which fighter it is.

Yes, yes. I understand that. I am asking, what if some targets are so close to each other (in a tight formation) that they can be tracked within the scope of a single illumination beam out of 10 beams? (Given CFAKR can create 10 beams simultaneously) and thus be engaged.

In this way, CFAKR will be able to engage more than 10 targets simultaneously, no?

 

[TheInsider]

Yes, yes. I understand that. I am asking, what if some targets are so close to each other (in a tight formation) that they can be tracked within the scope of a single illumination beam out of 10 beams? (Given CFAKR can create 10 beams simultaneously) and thus be engaged.

In this way, CFAKR will be able to engage more than 10 targets simultaneously, no?

Probably.

 

[DBdev]

A missile fired even outside of the missile's NEZ is very effective if the target doesn't know it is coming.

Passive 100+ KM IRST air defense network IRNET hidden in proper height, thickness forests against spy-SATs, placed at 1km or so altitude (below fog, above hill tops) would be much more effective against an F-35 than any radar based active, more vulnerable to detection, SEAD/DEAD system.

Besides if KAAN manages to be true stealth like F-35 war will be fought in the realm of IIR not electromagnetic waves. They will see each other in IR long before radar screens. So we should be studying 100+KM IRST directed missile tech anyway. IRST can queue BURFIS using sensor fusion to focus all it's energy on that spot but that will alert the F-35 we will lose the advantage.

On the other hand, IR wouldn't be very effective against an F35 hiding in thick storm clouds though. So we will still need RADNET, BURFIS.

 

[cr33pt3d]

A missile fired even outside of the missile's NEZ is very effective if the target doesn't know it is coming.

Passive 100+ KM IRST air defense network IRNET hidden in proper height, thickness forests against spy-SATs, placed at 1km or so altitude (below fog, above hill tops) would be much more effective against an F-35 than any radar based active, more vulnerable to detection, SEAD/DEAD system.

Besides if KAAN manages to be true stealth like F-35 war will be fought in the realm of IIR not electromagnetic waves. They will see each other in IR long before radar screens. So we should be studying 100+KM IRST directed missile tech anyway. IRST can queue BURFIS using sensor fusion to focus all it's energy on that spot but that will alert the F-35 we will lose the advantage.

On the other hand, IR wouldn't be very effective against an F35 hiding in thick storm clouds though. So we will still need RADNET, BURFIS.

exaclty what i was thinking of.

what do you guys think about this solution, cheap, 7/24 search and track, attach it to the ground station, connect this to network and game over.

 

[DBdev]

exaclty what i was thinking of.
View attachment 66039

what do you guys think about this solution, cheap, 7/24 search and track, attach it to the ground station, connect this to network and game over.

It is not hidden from spy-SATs or the enemy EOTS, so a longer range enemy missile fired from an F35 will easily take it out. A mast peeking under a hill top thick forest is a better solution. It will never be detected if camouflage is done properly before it is too late.

 

[cr33pt3d]

i don't mind it beeing detected. F35 can engage it with Amraam at a range 100km, giving away it's position. in your case less detection range, meaning f35 is already above your territory. my solution gives you extra time to scramble your jets. anyway just ideas floating around worth investigating.

 

[Radko]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1762462062989508748

According to Mr.Akyol, they have used radars developed for AD to track ISS lol

 

[Zafer]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1762462062989508748

According to Mr.Akyol, they have used radars developed for AD to track ISS lol

A large target at 400 km means a small success.
We need better proofs for success.

 

[DBdev]

If we were to actually have an independent space program we first must be able to track as small as possible debris in orbit. Which can be devastating at those extreme speeds.

Space debris greater than 10 centimeters can effectively be tracked using ground radar (US Space force is now working on tracking smaller baseball sized objects) , with collision avoidance alerts going out to spacecraft operators to adjust their assets’ orbits accordingly. But small debris is an unaddressed and growing threat. Alarmingly, while estimates suggest that more than 100 MILLION objects greater than a millimeter in size are whizzing around Earth, less than 1 PERCENT of this dangerous debris is currently being tracked.

Satellite Map | Explore Active Satellites Orbiting Earth

Satellite map of active satellites orbiting the Earth. View satellites along with information about the purpose, operator, orbital parameters, launch date & location of the satellite.

geoxc-apps.bd.esri.com