TR UAV/UCAV Programs | Anka - series | Kızılelma | TB - series

[Iskander]

I see that you should first know a few terms:

TOW = Take-off weight
MTOW = Maximum Take-off weight
PL = Payload
FOB = Fuel on Board
OEW = Operating Empty Weight
ZFW = Zero Fuel Weight
MZFW = Maximum Zero Fuel Weight

look easily :

View attachment 70578

OEW + PL +FOB = TOW

ZFW + FOB = TOW

MZFW - OEW = PL

ZWF must not be higher than MZFW before flight.
TOW must not be higher than MTOW before flight.

sorry very roughly so that everyone understands....


BAYKAR has measured and evaluated all its data on land. But data taken at sea will result in a new hull and wing design
and new landing gear, and other tires with different inflation dates.
If BAYKAR does not do this, then there is no operational safety.

It is also quite possible that BAYKAR does not think about landing ANADOLU. They see TB3 only as ammunition. Launch from the ship, landing on land. TB3s are then always added by logistics as building kits on the ship. Such construction kits will be always present on the ship???

TB3 would be able to start either way, with tricks for Turkish people. The thing will never be able to land on ANADOLU.

You are right, I have problems with the English language and especially with technical terms. And in general, I am not an aviation specialist.
Maybe that's why everything seems easier to me
Why did you decide that Bayraktar did not provide for TB3 to land on the deck? Strange.
Imagine that somewhere in the Indian Ocean TB3 takes off from the deck and after bombing, say, Australia or India
And so poor TB3 flies back to Turkey, covering... 10,000 km.
Can you imagine it?
I can't do this. Yes, this is impossible. Moreover, it is simply absurd.
So obviously, knowing technical aviation terms won't help you much

On TB3 the chassis is reinforced. The wings are 2 meters longer than those of the TB2, and the engine is more powerful.
What else don't you like?
Well, yes, after many takeoffs and landings (sorry ) on deck, some changes will probably have to be made.
But the fact that it will take off from the deck with the prescribed maximum load and return there - there cannot be two opinions on this matter.

 

[Anmdt]

TCG Anadolu is essentially and primarily an amphibious assault ship.
It can achieve it’s intended potential potential, without UAVs or UCAVs. It just needs navalised helicopters. It will also need, Unmanned Sea Vessels to improve its combat capabilities, now that we have them available.
If we can ever get our hands on a dozen f35Bs then it will jump to a totally different level. But that is another scenario.

Having TB3 operate from it’s deck will certainly make it even more capable and potent than what it already is today.

Bayraktar as a company and Selcuk Bayraktar as it’s owner, has got too much riding on this TB3 project to let it falter. He has already mentioned that on computer simulations they can land and take off with a TB3. So let the guy prove his words.
As per my previous posts on the matter, TB3 should have no difficulty in taking off from TCG Anadolu. It has a powerful engine. It has long enough wings to provide more lift. How much of the full payload it has to sacrifice, should be known to Baykar before they start the sea trials. But all will be tweaked further once sea trials start when they have to negotiate real life sea state conditions. One thing that TB3 has on it’s side, is the fact that it will have approximately 20+ knots extra take off speed due to Anadolu’ s own speed.
Problem is in the landing; and it is in two folds: First of all it has to stop within a 150m distance. Secondly it has to somehow prevent itself from damaging that big lift at the back of the ship.
There are some “mobile aircraft arresting systems” (MAAS) like the ones Curtis Wright manufacture, that can be of some use, not just for TB3 but for KE too; if their use on a sea platform is even at all possible, especially for stopping a 1.5 ton UCAV.

Curtiss-Wright EMS - Arresting Systems / ESCO - Mobile Arresting Systems

www.cw-ems.com

At the end of the day, proof of the pudding is in the eating. Sea trials are starting. We will shortly see if Selcuk Bayraktar’s statement was true or not.

There is a lot to improve on the go, we have no chance or oppurtunity to get an input from trained pilots or AC operator technicians.

Evidently the first protype has been through excessive stress levels (mechanically speaking) during the first ski-jump trials. They should be examining wings and patching remakes on PT-3/4. We have mininum of years before we can operate TB-3 carefree on Anadolu as we operate TB2, Anka, Akıncı on Land.

GA-ASI has a strong lead in here, it is not even a competition in my terms, all they need to do prove the CONOPS and integration. Those people have access to the resources that we may possibly may access versions as old as dating back to WWII or pre WWII.

Let's accept a fact guys, USN's annual carrier based flight time and landing - take off counts may surpass of what NATO do, in sum. From tip to toe, this provides an unmatching input, feedback and resources through people on field and through documentation.

Partly speaking based on real life experiences, some informatio is invaluable. That's why Baykar makes a new prototype to each iteration and maybe the one that goes actual ship based tests / qualification tests will be PT-4 or 5. Baykar does not worry to burn cash here since this project is promising, and like Mojave will be marketed to the countries who might be interested in unpaved runway operations.

 

[TheInsider]

Even if the TB-3 manages to take off and land on Anadolu, it will still be underpowered compared to the Mojave UAV. We need much more powerful turboprop engines.
View attachment 70612
View attachment 70613

No, the Combat load of naval TB3( Empty UAV+fuel+280kg payload=1450kg) is lighter than the useful payload capacity(1542kg) of Mojave UAV. Aerodynamic design of TB3 is far superior to Mohave. They are not in the same class. TB3 has a take-off /stall speed of ~70knots 20knots of which will be provided by TCG Anadolu itself. PD-222 will also be available for TB3. Anyway, you will see it with your own eyes soon.

 

[Quasar]

 

[Sanchez]

They are not in the same class.

Except they pretty much are. STOL UAVs. They will be competitors along with Sea Protector STOL. One being a much lighter model doesn't mean they wont compete.

I really wish Baykar came up with a turboprop TB2 or a single engine Akıncı.

 

[dBSPL]

Except they pretty much are. STOL UAVs. They will be competitors along with Sea Protector STOL. One being a much lighter model doesn't mean they wont compete.

I really wish Baykar came up with a turboprop TB2 or a single engine Akıncı.

While the tests of the TB-3 on the TCG Anadolu continue, I'm guessing a new family member of Bayraktar will be shared with the press, around end of 2025 or 26. A STOL naval aircraft with a take-off power of about 450+ shp. Baykar may start under-license production of this engine by then. So a sort of single-engine AKINCI. However, the airframe will probably similar to tactical blocks instead of AKINCI. 2 years ago, an illustration was published in the Ukrainian press, it could be something similar. Maybe Baykar will use the experience gained from the KE to do innovative work on maximum RCS optimization in turboprop MALE class.