TR Naval Programs

[Anmdt]

To me, i still would want that third radar group. For conduct extreme level of jamming.

Some Arleigh Burke's have these afaik. Those latest ugly looking ones ? After the mod. ?

The AYR is (was) identical to the CFR. Therefore their orientation was 45 degrees apart. If you are referring to the use of higher power for better penetration of the jamming barrier, nobody uses wide sprectrum brute force jamming in the 21st century.

What looks like radar on AB are actually jammers, planar array electronic warfare antennas.

Too much information ..
I barely understand

So Türkish AESA radars are not 2 axis?
Cenk-S and MAR-D?

Here is how the dual axis scan looks like! I would love to see how our radars working and emitting signals

Allah rızası için biri iki AESA radarın farkını çocuga anlatır gibi anlatsın.

Neden bize iki tane radar paneli lazım?
O zaman Cenk-S veya mar-D surface tarama yapamıyor? Tüm AESAlar multibeam ama en son teknoloji AESAlar dual axes multi beam.




View attachment 65753

MAR-D is 1 axis scanning aesa, another axis is what is mechanically steered. (Vertical axis is scanned electronically).

CENK-S is 2 axis electronically steered, with one axis also mechanically steered.

Both can scan the horizon surface, the vertical electronic steering makes it better.

You need at least 3 radars for 360 degree coverage (it's also about the side lobes, but not my field, I don't know).

 

[Aqerdf]

Yep, i meant those jammer antennas, sorry. :/

@Heartbang that's the one, yep.

I read or watch somewhere, it was about last Siper-1 test afaik. The search radar guided the missile alone. At that time, it was said that the radar is so capable that: for these ranges (100km) it can give weapon grade track and guidance.

Maybe same thing is also happening for TF-2000.

 

[UkroTurk]

AYR is ( was ) identical to the CFR. Therefore their orientation was 45 degrees apart from each other. If you are referring to use of higher power for better penetration through jamming barrier, nobody uses broadband brute force jamming in 21st century.

What looks like a radar on AB is actually jammers, planar array electronic warfare antennas.


MAR-D is 1 axis scanning aesa, another axis is what mechanically steered. (Vertical axis is electronically scanned).

CENK-S is two axis electronically steered with one axis being steered mechanically as well.

Both can scan the horizon-surface, the vertical electronical steering makes it better.

You need minimum 3 radars for 360 degrees coverage (also is about the sidelobes but not my field, i don't know)

Still i cant understand what is difference between ÇAFRAD ( without AYR) and SPY-6? How SPY-6 could cover horizon-surface?

 

[Anmdt]

Yep, i meant those jammer antennas, sorry. :/

@Heartbang that's the one, yep.

I read or watch somewhere, it was about last Siper-1 test afaik. The search radar guided the missile alone. At that time, it was said that the radar is so capable that: for these ranges (100km) it can give weapon grade track and guidance.

Maybe same thing is also happening for TF-2000.

I must have said it somewhere in the earlier pages, just because it can be done doesn't mean it's adequate. There is bare minimum and then there is the optimum point. Bare minimum is providing mid-course guidance via data links and tracking via UMAR; ideal point is using UMAR for long range detection, classification, using CFAKR for tracking, observing for munitions separation, also classification and providing mid-course guidance and alternatively tracking for low altitude small RCS targets such as gliding munitions or cruise missiles. The later is what an MFR does.

 

[Anmdt]

Still i cant understand what is difference between ÇAFRAD ( without AYR) and SPY-6? How SPY-6 could cover horizon-surface?

SPY-6 is Yaprak sobiyet
CAFRAD is Baklava
Both have pistachio, one has cream in it, but yields to be more expensive and requires mastery.

 

[UkroTurk]

SPY-6 is Yaprak sobiyet
CAFRAD is Baklava
Both have pistachio, one has cream in it, but yields to be more expensive and requires mastery.

Bilal'e anlat demedim yav

Mastery of Waveforming or beam forming?
Is it?

The difference is Adaptive digital beam forming?

 

[Afif]

nobody uses broadband brute force jamming in 21st century.

Wait what? I thought noise jamming is the only practical option against modern AESA. (Due to their ability to switch frequency 1000 times per second, deceptive jamming/DRFM Jamming isn't very practical, no?)

Isn't that why AN/ALQ-249 has several hundreds KW power output?

 

[uçuyorum]

Wait what? I thought noise jamming is the only practical option against modern AESA. (Due to their ability to switch frequency 1000 times per second, deceptive jamming/DRFM Jamming isn't very practical, no?)

Isn't that why AN/ALQ-249 has several hundreds KW power output?

Normally F18 should have 140 kVA total, unless pods have extra power source

 

[Afif]

Normally F18 should have 140 kVA total, unless pods have extra power source

Like AN/ALQ-99, NGJ has its own inbuilt power source afaik.

 

[Anmdt]

Bilal'e anlat demedim yav

View attachment 65764

View attachment 65761

Mastery of Waveforming or beam forming?
Is it?
View attachment 65763
The difference is Adaptive digital beam forming?

This is how @AlterUnd (and yes, we are not the same person) explained the differences between some radar systems that appear to be the same to me. Beamforming things are beyond my knowledge but I googled to find out SPY 6V1 has a fair amount of cabinets with each holding several racks, can not imagine the cooling capacity combined with radar and these cabinets. I don't know the processing power of the TF-2000.

Wait what? I thought noise jamming is the only practical option against modern AESA. (Due to their ability to switch frequency 1000 times per second, deceptive jamming/DRFM Jamming isn't very practical, no?)

Isn't that why AN/ALQ-249 has several hundreds KW power output?

Spreading a few hundred Kw over a wide spectrum results in a small amount of power at each frequency, and this would do nothing for a clutter-handling AESA radar. Just making a wild guess here, 'flattening the curve' would make it easier to handle.

Or isn't it the other way round? DRFM is the novel and evolving technique that reads the received signal and generates a false signal to deceive the radar, making it less susceptible to being detected as jamming (although nowadays there are ways to detect, and there are new ways to generate a false response).

And I think more than the noise itself, it is about randomising the jammed channel, or jamming several narrow channels at once and hopping between frequencies in a random way to render radar useless. It also evolves at both ends, radars can follow, guess the possible free channels and try to operate there.

 

[Aqerdf]

Yep, now i understood more, thank you for the effort.

What would be your comment about this new ÇAFRAD's weight and cost figures ?

Although AYR(?) is looks like gone, the total package still having same weight just as before. And now it is cheaper.

If AYR was gone, there's less modules so less costly that's okay.

But weight should also be down ? How the total package has still has same weight i couldn't understand.

 

[AlterUnd]

and yes, we are not the same person

Ew, God forbid.

 

[AlterUnd]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1762832074401059102

Auto translation;

I'm sorry, but where are the crazy stabilisation requests from Aselsan and the demonstration of it? Why aren't the experiments carried out on a multi-axis table?
Aselsan's products are not directly bought and put on the platform, but they are "tested". What is the reason for this privilege?

Had no time to rewrite, or I have no intention of promoting my own Twitter account. But the biggest downgrade I have ever seen in my life after watching 15+ years of development history in Turkey, in relation to the stabilised turrets.

This is not a stabilised turret, but a remote control turret painted in Navy Grey.

WTF, for real?

 

[uçuyorum]

From what I see OPV have a lot of cheaper, experimental and new solutions on them in general, so I think that's part of the intention? Because they are less critical and will mostly take on lower profile missions like against pirates etc. They are using it as an opportunity for development of developments perhaps. I think they were supposed to even use MKE 20mm CIWS at some point but they decided to have at least 1 reliable anti air system.

 

[Sanchez]

Wish we had some kind of defence media that could ask this question. Who's Unirobotics and why are they being propped up to replace Stamp and Stop directly by SSB and the navy.

Hisar Class ships are still at least 100 million apiece, Using a new, untested non stabilized gun, while we already have Stamp and Stop, built at least close to 100 and still in service in multiple navies all over the world is so weird to me ever since this was announced.

 

[Anmdt]

From what I see OPV have a lot of cheaper, experimental and new solutions on them in general, so I think that's part of the intention? Because they are less critical and will mostly take on lower profile missions like against pirates etc. They are using it as an opportunity for development of developments perhaps. I think they were supposed to even use MKE 20mm CIWS at some point but they decided to have at least 1 reliable anti air system.

Since when bearing R&D costs of a new system has been cheaper than acquiring what is available in the serial production line? Or why Targan is not going through similar tests as STAMP once did; this really confuses me as well. It can be cheaper, but it has to prove certain features during factory acceptance tests.

These systems are last line of defence for USV and UAVs nowadays. Even farther than Main gun, providing 160 degrees coverage on each side. There is nothing else, unless we put our guys at risk with manual MGs: which is pretty much what going to happen when Targan fails, a brave soldier will go up to there, mount the MG and engage FPV / USV then we will hear his "heroic" martrydom.

 

[Strong AI]

Unirobotics | TRAKON TARGAN

www.unirobotics.com.tr

 

[PutinBro]

In the last shared design of TF-2000, there are differences in the ÇAFRAD sequence.
3 different (UMR, AYR, ÇFR) radar arrays consisting of 4 fixed faces have changed in the new design.
While UMR maintains its place on the ship, the AYR sequence above it is not included on the ship.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1762761724237627473

 

[Khagan1923]

There are 48 Cells btw behind the main mast. You can make out the third row

So 32 Cells in the front and 48 Cells behind the main mast.

Wouldn’t say adding 16 more Cells gonna save cost but what do I know.

 

[uçuyorum]

There are 48 Cells btw behind the main mast. You can make out the third row


View attachment 66113

So 32 Cells in the front and 48 Cells behind the main mast.

Wouldn’t say adding 16 more Cells gonna save cost but what do I know.

Putting 16 cells instead of 16 side launchers might make it more compact