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

[Saithan]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1880543090727121364

Says that TB3 will be able to deal with small and medium targets thanks to MAM-T.

Which vessels are considered medium size, FAC up to 50m ?

But at the moment the only video we have is of landing unarmed if I remember right.

 

[uçuyorum]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1880543090727121364

Says that TB3 will be able to deal with small and medium targets thanks to MAM-T.

Which vessels are considered medium size, FAC up to 50m ?

But at the moment the only video we have is of landing unarmed if I remember right.

Probably smaller targets like patrol boats or small missile boats

 

[Yasar_TR]

Bayraktar TB3’ten çift MAM-T atışı: Tek delik? | SavunmaSanayiST

Bayraktar TB3 SİHA, MAM-T mühimmatı ile atış testi gerçekleştirdi. 2 adet MAM-T mühimmatının tek delikten geçmesi ise tarihi bir başarıyı beraberinde getirdi.

www.savunmasanayist.com

A nice and very important detail has been overlooked.
During this firing test, 2 MAM-T bombs were sent to the target. Incidentally, both bombs hit the target at the same spot. Second one going through the hole of the first one. Good targeting!

 

[Saithan]

Bayraktar TB3’ten çift MAM-T atışı: Tek delik? | SavunmaSanayiST

Bayraktar TB3 SİHA, MAM-T mühimmatı ile atış testi gerçekleştirdi. 2 adet MAM-T mühimmatının tek delikten geçmesi ise tarihi bir başarıyı beraberinde getirdi.

www.savunmasanayist.com

A nice and very important detail has been overlooked.
During this firing test, 2 MAM-T bombs were sent to the target. Incidentally, both bombs hit the target at the same spot. Second one going through the hole of the first one. Good targeting!

if that targetting could be done automatically then that would indeed be extremely impressive. And could turn even small size UCAV into dangerous platforms for naval vessels.

 

[IC3M@N FX]

Is there actually a better engine than TEI PD170 for higher payloads for MALE drones like TB2/3 and Anka S?

 

[Saithan]

Is there actually a better engine than TEI PD170 for higher payloads for MALE drones like TB2/3 and Anka S?

https://www.tei.com.tr/en/products/tei-pd222st-turbodiesel-aviation-engine

PD220

 

[uçuyorum]

https://www.tei.com.tr/en/products/tei-pd222st-turbodiesel-aviation-engine

PD220

But high altitude performance suffers in comparison

 

[IC3M@N FX]

Yes...is not really better Engine then PD170

PD222

PD170

PD270?
20000ft 250hp
30000ft 170hp

Would not be bad then you could carry 450-500kg payload, the TB3 would benefit immensely. It could carry 2-4 MAM-T and 1x air-to-air missile against enemy drones with dual/quad pneumatic racks + 1-2 Tolun SDB or 2 UAV 122 missiles and the ASELSAN Antidot 2 pod.

It could thus become a small workhorse for the armed forces.

 

[Yasar_TR]

They are both 2.1 litre diesel engines. If memory serves they are built on the same old Mercedes engine block.
PD222, has a single turbo charger, where as PD170 has a two stage turbo charger and uses less fuel and has better high altitude performance.
PD222 was specifically developed with high power at low altitude to give better take off performance as it was really meant for being used on drones taking off from TCG Anadolu.
If you enlarge the engine, then you are adding more weight and size to the drone. The only engine type that will give better performance is a turboprop.
P&W PT6A-110 with around 354HP weighs about 150kg dry. But they will cost more to buy, run and maintain. They are thirstier engines too. (Shorter range)

Mercedes manages to develop 265HP from a 2.1litre twin turbo OM654 engine. So there may be room for more power to be squeezed from our PD170. But one is a road going engine and ours is an aviation engine. So not the same parameters to compare.

 

[Saithan]

They are both 2.1 litre diesel engines. If memory serves they are built on the same old Mercedes engine block.
PD222, has a single turbo charger, where as PD170 has a two stage turbo charger and uses less fuel and has better high altitude performance.
PD222 was specifically developed with high power at low altitude to give better take off performance as it was really meant for being used on drones taking off from TCG Anadolu.
If you enlarge the engine, then you are adding more weight and size to the drone. The only engine type that will give better performance is a turboprop.
P&W PT6A-110 with around 354HP weighs about 150kg dry. But they will cost more to buy, run and maintain. They are thirstier engines too. (Shorter range)

Mercedes manages to develop 265HP from a 2.1litre twin turbo OM654 engine. So there may be room for more power to be squeezed from our PD170. But one is a road going engine and ours is an aviation engine. So not the same parameters to compare.

it may not be economic, but if necessary, wouldn't it be acceptable to have an engine that is more thirsty if it can ensure our UCAV can carry heavier payload at Medium Altitudes ? let's say the operational range is 300-500 km.

 

[dBSPL]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1880543090727121364

Says that TB3 will be able to deal with small and medium targets thanks to MAM-T.

Which vessels are considered medium size, FAC up to 50m ?

But at the moment the only video we have is of landing unarmed if I remember right.

Without including the difference in impact velocity, probably the Çakır missile and the MAM-T have similar weight class warheads. A +60kg high-explosive and fragmentation warhead can disable a frigate if it hits its main mast. I need an expert opinion here, but I am of the opinion that can also penetrate the hull/superstructure of most combatant ships, not just patrol boats.

 

[uçuyorum]

Without including the difference in impact velocity, probably the Çakır missile and the MAM-T have similar weight class warheads. A +60kg high-explosive and fragmentation warhead can disable a frigate if it hits its main mast. I need an expert opinion here, but I am of the opinion that can also penetrate the hull/superstructure of most combatant ships, not just patrol boats.

It's about wether the ship has air defence or not more likely

 

[Yasar_TR]

it may not be economic, but if necessary, wouldn't it be acceptable to have an engine that is more thirsty if it can ensure our UCAV can carry heavier payload at Medium Altitudes ? let's say the operational range is 300-500 km.

Of course! It all depends on what we are expecting from the UCAV. TB3, as it is can loiter in the air for 24 hours giving TCG Anadolu, valuable intel and/or protection.
A turboprop powered UAV, will have better altitude and payload performance. But will not stay in the air as long. Neither will any jet powered platform; be it Hurjet or F35B. But they all serve a different purpose.
Ideally, TB3 with F35B operating from TCG Anadolu will be a great match. They will complement each other’s weaknesses.
KE, to a certain extent will do a similar job. But the deck of TCG Anadolu will have to be cut up to fit an arresting wire system - unless we can get over that problem with a portable arrester. But there is also the problem of KE’s non existent engine. (May be they should start considering the RR Adour).

 

[dBSPL]

It's about wether the ship has air defence or not more likely

Yes and equally about the saturation. MAM-T is a maneuverable bomb with a proximity sensor. Although unpropelled, they may not be easy targets for countermeasure systems.