TR Air Defence Programs

[zio]

If we have anti balistic capability,it would close the hole of the our steel dome system. There are some missing parts like airborne awacs of our own.However any country with air defence systems with different origins could not start to make up from beginning to have their dome system that would be too costly.

 

[Boykaz]

Gökdemir air defence systems

This promotional video has not been shared before

 

[Yasar_TR]

Air defence systems are a must. We know that. But how good are they?

Israel boasts that their Iron dome is 85% efficient. Yet in reality this is lower. So much so that after the recent events, Israel refuses to give figures about the interception efficacy of their system.

Iron Dome | Cost, Missile, Success Rate, & Israel | Britannica

Iron Dome is a short-range mobile air defense system developed for Israel by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries, with additional support from Raytheon. First deployed in 2011, Iron Dome constitutes the innermost layer of the tiered Israeli air defense network.

www.britannica.com

Israel Not Publishing Iron Dome Performance Data

Unlike in previous Gaza wars, Israel is not publishing the numbers of Palestinian rockets it shoots down during Operation Swords of Iron as it eyes a possible flare-up on the northern...

www.fdd.org

We don’t have to talk about the Russian S300 and S400 systems. They have shown themselves to be easy targets in Ukraine.
US has multi layer systems like Patriots. Thaad and SM series missile systems that perform quite well. Yet can still be victims to missiles. Also these are not really a “Swiss Knife” type of defensive weapons that can be applied to all.

It is a fact that AD systems are not cheap. Their missiles are costly. You may have to use a couple of million dollar missile to ntercept a cheap UAV or cheap short range missile.

So it is a fact that even the best of the best is not a foolproof answer to protect your country’s skies.

Air defence systems are there to decrease the amount of damage you may incur in the event of aerial bombing. Best defence is a good offence. A good offence that can take out your opponents AD systems and aerial assets, will be the best deterrent there is. They have to know that they will lose hell of a great deal more if they try to confront you.
For that we need to develop hypersonic weapons which will have hypersonic speeds at the terminal phase as they hit their targets.
Due to termİnal velocity law a ballistic missile’s terminal speed is limited by it’s weight and it’s aerodynamic design/drag coefficient.
An ICBM that weighs close to a 100ton can hit the target at speeds in excess of 8mach. Yet a ballistic missile like trg300 or Bora may only manage 1-2 mach at best.
Yet there are guided hypersonic artillery rounds that can be fired from howitzers. These have special design features that allow the projectile to have very low drag due to aerodynamic design. BAE Systems have tested these using 127mm naval guns. These rounds can have ranges close to 110 km. Where as an ESSM may cost 2 million dollars and a RAM 1 million, these rounds will be around 75-100K.
Because of the kinetic energy they carry they may not even need to carry explosives to cause destructive damage at the target.

BAE Systems Develops XM1155-SC Artillery Ammunition Able to Double Fir

google_ad_client = "pub-4068738923530102"; /* 468x15 data sheet menu top dark green */ google_ad_slot = "3500417247"; google_ad_width = 468; go

armyrecognition.com

View attachment 1723204927337.jpeg

 

[Angry Turk !!!]

Best defence is a good offence

True and we need to improve in that aspect a lot. We need more destructive weapons. Go big or go home kind of stuff.

 

[Kartal1]

Air defence systems are a must. We know that. But how good are they?

Israel boasts that their Iron dome is 85% efficient. Yet in reality this is lower. So much so that after the recent events, Israel refuses to give figures about the interception efficacy of their system.

Iron Dome | Cost, Missile, Success Rate, & Israel | Britannica

Iron Dome is a short-range mobile air defense system developed for Israel by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries, with additional support from Raytheon. First deployed in 2011, Iron Dome constitutes the innermost layer of the tiered Israeli air defense network.

www.britannica.com

Israel Not Publishing Iron Dome Performance Data

Unlike in previous Gaza wars, Israel is not publishing the numbers of Palestinian rockets it shoots down during Operation Swords of Iron as it eyes a possible flare-up on the northern...

www.fdd.org

We don’t have to talk about the Russian S300 and S400 systems. They have shown themselves to be easy targets in Ukraine.
US has multi layer systems like Patriots. Thaad and SM series missile systems that perform quite well. Yet van still be victims to missiles. Also these are not really a “Swiss Knife” type of defensive weapons that can be applied to all.

It is a fact that AD systems are not cheap. Their missiles are costly. You may have to use a couple of million dollar missile to ntercept a cheap UAV or cheap short range missile.

So it is a fact that even the best of the best is not a foolproof answer to protect your country’s skies.

Air defence systems are there to decrease the amount of damage you may incur in the event of aerial bombing. Best defence is a good offence. A good offence that can take out your opponents AD systems and aerial assets, will be the best deterrent there is. They have to know that they will lose hell of a great deal more if they try to confront you.
For that we need to develop hypersonic weapons which will have hypersonic speeds at the terminal phase as they hit their targets.
Due to termİnal velocity law a ballistic missile’s terminal speed is limited by it’s weight and it’s aerodynamic design/drag coefficient.
An ICBM that weighs close to a 100ton can hit the target at speeds in excess of 8mach. Yet a ballistic missile like trg300 or Bora may only manage 1-2 mach at best.
Yet there are guided hypersonic artillery rounds that can be fired from howitzers. These have special design features that allow the projectile to have very low drag due to aerodynamic design. BAE Systems have tested these using 127mm naval guns. These rounds can have ranges close to 110 km. Where as an ESSM may cost 2 million dollars and a RAM 1 million, these rounds will be around 75-100K.
Because of the kinetic energy they carry they may not even need to carry explosives to cause destructive damage at the target.

BAE Systems Develops XM1155-SC Artillery Ammunition Able to Double Fir

google_ad_client = "pub-4068738923530102"; /* 468x15 data sheet menu top dark green */ google_ad_slot = "3500417247"; google_ad_width = 468; go

armyrecognition.com

View attachment 70022
View attachment 70024
View attachment 70023

Very good assessment in my opinion.

I remember talking about this a couple years ago with @Anmdt and @Cabatli_TR

 

[Kaan Azman]

HVP's main design features that contribute to maintaining high speeds are

1-Sharp-angled cone: You would like to have a shockwave with angle close to your form angle, higher speeds result in sharper shock angles and they likely designed the front in accordance with the speeds it will experience.
2-Low friction materials: Other than form drag, friction of air contributes to a slow-down as much as the simple drag. You would like to have a very smooth surface to negate this, this is why you see some missiles with very well polished tips.
It is meant to be a cost-effective alternative but you still need highly resistant (Both to heat and stress) materials and find ways to process them efficiently.

 

[boredaf]

Air defence systems are a must. We know that. But how good are they?

Israel boasts that their Iron dome is 85% efficient. Yet in reality this is lower. So much so that after the recent events, Israel refuses to give figures about the interception efficacy of their system.

Iron Dome | Cost, Missile, Success Rate, & Israel | Britannica

Iron Dome is a short-range mobile air defense system developed for Israel by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries, with additional support from Raytheon. First deployed in 2011, Iron Dome constitutes the innermost layer of the tiered Israeli air defense network.

www.britannica.com

Israel Not Publishing Iron Dome Performance Data

Unlike in previous Gaza wars, Israel is not publishing the numbers of Palestinian rockets it shoots down during Operation Swords of Iron as it eyes a possible flare-up on the northern...

www.fdd.org

We don’t have to talk about the Russian S300 and S400 systems. They have shown themselves to be easy targets in Ukraine.
US has multi layer systems like Patriots. Thaad and SM series missile systems that perform quite well. Yet van still be victims to missiles. Also these are not really a “Swiss Knife” type of defensive weapons that can be applied to all.

It is a fact that AD systems are not cheap. Their missiles are costly. You may have to use a couple of million dollar missile to ntercept a cheap UAV or cheap short range missile.

So it is a fact that even the best of the best is not a foolproof answer to protect your country’s skies.

Air defence systems are there to decrease the amount of damage you may incur in the event of aerial bombing. Best defence is a good offence. A good offence that can take out your opponents AD systems and aerial assets, will be the best deterrent there is. They have to know that they will lose hell of a great deal more if they try to confront you.
For that we need to develop hypersonic weapons which will have hypersonic speeds at the terminal phase as they hit their targets.
Due to termİnal velocity law a ballistic missile’s terminal speed is limited by it’s weight and it’s aerodynamic design/drag coefficient.
An ICBM that weighs close to a 100ton can hit the target at speeds in excess of 8mach. Yet a ballistic missile like trg300 or Bora may only manage 1-2 mach at best.
Yet there are guided hypersonic artillery rounds that can be fired from howitzers. These have special design features that allow the projectile to have very low drag due to aerodynamic design. BAE Systems have tested these using 127mm naval guns. These rounds can have ranges close to 110 km. Where as an ESSM may cost 2 million dollars and a RAM 1 million, these rounds will be around 75-100K.
Because of the kinetic energy they carry they may not even need to carry explosives to cause destructive damage at the target.

BAE Systems Develops XM1155-SC Artillery Ammunition Able to Double Fir

google_ad_client = "pub-4068738923530102"; /* 468x15 data sheet menu top dark green */ google_ad_slot = "3500417247"; google_ad_width = 468; go

armyrecognition.com

View attachment 70022
View attachment 70024
View attachment 70023

US military cancelled the ERCA programme this munition was going to be used with this year, after a test shot or two. Not sure what happened to the ERPA since then.

 

[zio]

What happened to meteksan seymen GPS jamming project?

 

[Yasar_TR]

Army wants to develop hypervelocity artillery shells for air defense against manned and unmanned aircraft

HVP prototypes should fire from rifled and smooth-bore 155-millimeter cannons, and interface with off-board sensors to intercept the incoming threat.

www.militaryaerospace.com

US Army has pressed the button to use 155mm Hyper Velocity Projectile howitzer rounds for airdefence purposes. They are confident by 2027 they can start testing 8-9 Mach projectiles with a prototype ready for 2028.

Quote:
The HVP for air defense applications seeks to reduce munition costs and enhance the value of wheeled 155-millimeter artillery systems firing HVPs. The HVP prototypes will communicate with off-board sensors that track the HVP and the threat to be intercepted. BAE Systems has developed a hypervelocity projectile for potential naval use.
The HVP prototypes should fire from rifled and smooth-bore 155-millimeter cannons; interface with Army-provided off-board sensors to intercept the incoming threat; interface with a data transmission device to receive pre-launch mission data; maintain projectile maneuverability through interception; keep flight time to a minimum; be powerful enough to shoot down fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters; UAVs; and cruise missiles. Army officials also are interested in rapid ammunition resupply, as well as supportability, safety, and cyber security.
Unquote.

We shouldn’t lose much time and start experimenting on this technology. As with UAV case, we should be in the forefront of the development process .

 

[Kaan Azman]

I'm not very sure about HVP on 155 mm. Yeah it is far cheaper than your daily MRSAM but the fire rate is going to be very, very low. To perform the engagement that a single SAM launcher performs, you would need a whole pack of howitzers. Think of it like using a single shot sniper with big reserve and a semi auto one with smaller reserve in an FPS game.

Naval guns are a different story though. They can fire more rapidly than 155 mm howitzers. Hell, this even makes me reconsider multi-barrel naval guns as you can fire salvos.

 

[Yasar_TR]

HİSAR-O SAMs Replace MIM-23 Hawks in Libya | TURDEF

ASELSAN's more modern HİSAR-O100 systems have replaced Al Watiya Airbase's MIM-23 Hawk medium-range air defence systems.

turdef.com

Turkiye has replaced the old school Hawk SAM systems stationed at Al-Wattiya base in Libya , with Hisar-O 100 AD systems. With dual-pulse motors and much improved seeker heads the Hisar-O missiles bring 21st century technology to the protection of the air base.

 

[Sanchez]

This is being regurgitated for the last few days, but original claim is from last year. We had argued whether a transfer was indeed made or not, which was later refuted. Turns out it was true.

Libya Operations & Updates

I don't know what's going on is this Sanayi ve Savunma reliable source ? Anadolu Agency is a reliable source. Meanwhile, Gabya class frigates are anchored in the port.

defencehub.live

 

[Yasar_TR]

I'm not very sure about HVP on 155 mm. Yeah it is far cheaper than your daily MRSAM but the fire rate is going to be very, very low. To perform the engagement that a single SAM launcher performs, you would need a whole pack of howitzers. Think of it like using a single shot sniper with big reserve and a semi auto one with smaller reserve in an FPS game.

Naval guns are a different story though. They can fire more rapidly than 155 mm howitzers. Hell, this even makes me reconsider multi-barrel naval guns as you can fire salvos.

You are correct. Firing speed is slower. But then again Firtina-1 has a firing mode of 3 shells in 15 seconds with different elevations that allows it to hit same target at the same time. In reality it can fire 3 rounds in 15 seconds. However, the more you fire in succession the quicker you destroy your barrel. US army has asked their technical team to overcome the destructive effect of the quick successive firing and increase the speed of reloads.
127mm naval gun can shoot 32rounds per minute. So that could be the target speed I guess!
But on the up side; an AD battery has in its canisters 6-8 missiles. A howitzer can have 48 to 60 rounds ready to fire successively. Reload of expended shells, also, is faster.
You can also make up for the speed deficiency by using 2 howitzers in tandem.

Firtina T-155

Firtina T-155 155mm self-propelled tracked armored howitzer Turkey technical data fact sheet pictures video

armyrecognition.com

 

[Anmdt]

I'm not very sure about HVP on 155 mm. Yeah it is far cheaper than your daily MRSAM but the fire rate is going to be very, very low. To perform the engagement that a single SAM launcher performs, you would need a whole pack of howitzers. Think of it like using a single shot sniper with big reserve and a semi auto one with smaller reserve in an FPS game.

Naval guns are a different story though. They can fire more rapidly than 155 mm howitzers. Hell, this even makes me reconsider multi-barrel naval guns as you can fire salvos.

Simply because naval cannons have no restriction of space of height and can utilize all means of automatic reloading, cooling. But USN has discarded 155 mm project for naval cannons, as well.

You are correct. Firing speed is slower. But then again Firtina-1 has a firing mode of 3 shells in 15 seconds with different elevations that allows it to hit same target at the same time. In reality it can fire 3 rounds in 15 seconds. However, the more you fire in succession the quicker you destroy your barrel. US army has asked their technical team to overcome the destructive effect of the quick successive firing and increase the speed of reloads.
127mm naval gun can shoot 32rounds per minute. So that could be the target speed I guess!
But on the up side; an AD battery has in its canisters 6-8 missiles. A howitzer can have 48 to 60 rounds ready to fire successively. Reload of expended shells, also, is faster.
You can also make up for the speed deficiency by using 2 howitzers in tandem.

Firtina T-155

Firtina T-155 155mm self-propelled tracked armored howitzer Turkey technical data fact sheet pictures video

armyrecognition.com

Naval cannons have a barrel cooling, and wide space for installation/foundation/dampers. It eases the entire operation, flushing the barrel, cooling non-stop.

 

[Kaan Azman]

USN has discarded 155 mm AGS entirely for CPS missiles, well, sucks for them to miss the opportunity.

Speaking of wear and stuff, I'm sure a hyper-velocity bullet to hit hypersonic speeds is prone to put more heat (metaphorically) on the barrel compared to a conventional round.

To be honest, we should consider DART-like ammunition or ATOM for 127 mm (TF-2000 and Barbaros) and 76 mm naval guns.

 

[Heartbang]

But USN has discarded 155 mm project for naval cannons

USN has discarded 155 mm AGS entirely for CPS missiles, well, sucks for them to miss the opportunity.

...Because they made the ammo for that gun incompatible with regular 155 mm Howitzers.

Then they refused to buy the bloody ammo because it was "too expensive"

There are lessons to be learned here for us.

 

[Sanchez]

...Because they made the ammo for that gun incompatible with regular 155 mm Howitzers.

Then they refused to buy the bloody ammo because it was "too expensive"

There are lessons to be learned here for us.

AGS used a 62 caliber gun to achieve that muzzle velocity and range as LRLAP weighs more than double of a standard 155mm shell. At the time, M109 howitzer used a 39 cal gun. T155 uses a 52 cal gun. There was no possibility to use LRLAP on standard 155mm guns. Cost ballooned because US cancelled most of the Zumwalt class, not because ammo itself was directly expensive.

 

[Heartbang]

AGS used a 62 caliber gun to achieve that muzzle velocity and range as LRLAP weighs more than double of a standard 155mm shell. At the time, M109 howitzer used a 39 cal gun. T155 uses a 52 cal gun. There was no possibility to use LRLAP on standard 155mm guns. Cost ballooned because US cancelled most of the Zumwalt class, not because ammo itself was directly expensive.

"The AGS uses the same 155 mm caliber as most American field artillery forces, although it is unable to fire the same ammunition due to differences in the size and shape of both projectile and firing charges."

Its not a caliber thing.

Advanced Gun System - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Afif]

"The AGS uses the same 155 mm caliber as most American field artillery forces, although it is unable to fire the same ammunition due to differences in the size and shape of both projectile and firing charges."

Its not a caliber thing.

Advanced Gun System - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Gun's length is caliber. That's why other 155mm guns in US army service can't fire LRLAP as pointed out by @Sanchez .

 

[Yasar_TR]

Naval cannons have a barrel cooling, and wide space for installation/foundation/dampers. It eases the entire operation, flushing the barrel, cooling non-stop.

You are correct from heat damage point of view.
But there is also the raw physical damage due to high kinetic energy that is imparted by the round to the barrel lining which effects the wear negatively, as the round leaves the barrel at extreme speeds.
No cooling will have any effect on this type of physical wear. Also higher pressure of propellant will induce wear irrespective of cooling process.

It is important that the rifled lining of the barrel is in good condition. As the round is pushed out by the exploding propellant, it is vital that no gasses are leaking and escaping ahead of the round and decreasing muzzle velocity.
The HVP rounds that BAE Systems have developed are designed such that they are very aerodynamic and consist of a surface that help propel them out of the barrel at very high speeds. Nevertheless due to the high exit speeds, the abrasive forces acting on the barrel lining are so intense that New technologies regarding materials must be developed to increase the lining life.