I get the idea that Air Force and Army planning lagged behind in terms of concrete results. What do you think is the reason for that? How can other two branches (and Gendarmerie I guess) solve their problem with planning ahead?
Edit: or more succinctly, what seperates Navy from other branches that they deliver on these projects?
For a more accurate answer of your comparative question, the opinions of more competent people can give a healthier idea, while there is a naval expert like ANMDT in our forum who opens the horizons of all of us, what I have to say on this subject will not go beyond unnecessary speculation. However, I think we can all agree that our Navy is markedly different in terms of strategy development.
Mine is an opinion that does not go into the reasons. As an outsider, I see the navy as more prepared at the end of day, and having alternatives for many situation. More importantly, while conditions change over time, the Naval Forces looking more dynamic. For a long time, there were difficulties in acquiring new main combat platforms, but at the end of the day, we now have a much bigger opportunity in exchange for this risk, we can put the national frigates on the slipway three at a time! I don't know if there is a need to keep repeating these things, but we have also turned these frigates into platforms that are free from foreign dependence to an extent that would have been unimaginable for an outsider looking in 20 years ago. And this is not the limit, the next phase will be the deployment of strategic systems on these platforms that cannot be accessed even with unlimited money.
Until this point, no one outside of a narrow circle of interest had even noticed that the Turkish navy was making such a breakthrough. It is the work of a quiet but determined dedication. A dedication that cannot be weakened even by the slanders thrown on the honorable Turkish navy, even by throwing them into dungeons.