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

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,502
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,884
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
He makes a valid point on weight concerns, how far afield do we need such an UCAV to fly out from LHD? Wouldn't a 200-250km LOS communication be enough ? Difficult to know how capable TB3 will be - the VTOL pods Aselsan are developing are capable of keeping 800kg aerial vehicle aloft.
How heavy is a Sat-Com unit? can it be provisional? like used in certain instances and removed in hangar when not needed?
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
I thought this UAV was going to be 1200kg in weight. Although we do not know whether that includes usable weight and fuel, even of it does it will be nearly twice the weight of TB2. Where did you get the 800kg weight?

Having re-read the WIPO Aselsan submitted, I believe it came from my imagination 😅 .

How heavy is a Sat-Com unit? can it be provisional? like used in certain instances and removed in hangar when not needed?

Aselsan <20kg
C2Tech <20kg

Suppose with some alterations to the flight characteristics it could be done.
 

Test7

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
4,785
Reactions
19 19,937
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Turkey
TUSAS- ANKA

Ex-TJ8OXMAUvZ8b_auto_x1.jpg

@BarbarosToprak2
 

the

Well-known member
Messages
321
Reactions
756
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey

dustdevil

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
271
Reactions
669
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Thank you for the proof, I’m very happy to see it live so I can believe it.

Do you have any info why the source (Azeri TV channel) was not mentioned nearly for a day?

Maybe the news sites or osint accounts did not know it was TV either, or worse they hid this information until they have the footage, to be the single source of the news by writing a simple but incomplete news statement. They can’t say “according to confidential sources” because statement was from Bayraktar this time...If they withold the news, somebody else reports it and they lose the chance to be the first source...

Either case, it’s very bad journalism which conditions public to believe anything they read or hear, and that is a national security risk...

Maybe I’m thinking too much, just tired of this “olduğu öğrenildi ama kaynak yok” type of news... I have no doubt the intent is good and I do enjoy all of those websites and wonderful news, but why stop at %70 instead of reaching %100 potential and rival sources like Jane’s at the same time giving credit to where it belongs and make news more reliable and verifiable.
 
Last edited:

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,502
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,884
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Thank you for the proof, I’m very happy to see it live so I can believe it.

Do you have any info why the source (Azeri TV channel) was not mentioned nearly for a day?

Maybe the news sites or osint accounts did not know it was TV either, or worse they hid this information until they have the footage, to be the single source of the news by writing a simple but incomplete news statement. They can’t say “according to confidential sources” because statement was from Bayraktar this time...If they withold the news, somebody else reports it and they lose the chance to be the first source...

Either case, it’s very bad journalism which conditions public to believe anything they read or hear, and that is a national security risk...

Maybe I’m thinking too much, just tired of this “olduğu öğrenildi ama kaynak yok” type of news... I have no doubt the intent is good and I do enjoy all of those websites and wonderful news, but why stop at %70 instead of reaching %100 potential and rival sources like Jane’s at the same time giving credit to where it belongs and make news more reliable and verifiable.
So that they will look cool as if they are an insider.
Unfortunately, except some, turkish defense news, or websites try to look interesting by looking like receiving information from inside.
While they often use common sources but hid the original source so that they will be quoted.

When asked to include the original source they would say ' we have our own special contacts, we dont look at those sources '
However, the real insiders rarely share the news from inside.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,502
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,884
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Turkish Navy is being Turkish Navy, we may not see TB3 until it flies unless they don't want it to be seen.
Like you can't see new things on their ships until it starts to be built or modified.
 
S

Sinan

Guest
He makes a valid point on weight concerns, how far afield do we need such an UCAV to fly out from LHD? Wouldn't a 200-250km LOS communication be enough ? Difficult to know how capable TB3 will be - the VTOL pods Aselsan are developing are capable of keeping 800kg aerial vehicle aloft.
Incase of using just LOS.
Let's say, we have 16 TB-2 on the LHD and we need to use 10 of them at the same time. Do we need 10 ground stations on LHD to control them? Or at least we need 10 receiver on LHD.

Let's say we have Satcom on TB-3.

Can TB-3s operate on Somalia? Does our satellite coverage enables this?

Anyways i checked it.

Ctech's Satcom operatos on Ku band and Ka band.
as @anmdt showed here. https://uydu.turksat.com.tr/en/satellite-coverage-ranges

Turksat 5B's KA band covers Somalia for example.

Afaik, our combined satellites (3A, 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B) cover entire Europe, Africa, Middle East, Central Asia.
 
E

Era_shield

Guest
He makes a valid point on weight concerns, how far afield do we need such an UCAV to fly out from LHD? Wouldn't a 200-250km LOS communication be enough ? Difficult to know how capable TB3 will be - the VTOL pods Aselsan are developing are capable of keeping 800kg aerial vehicle aloft.
Satcom is a small weight penalty but gives a big advantage for naval use. One of the reasons the Harrier development wasn't continued was its low combat radius (400-550km), yet that's still much bigger than LOS TB2.

Even though the TB2 (and probably TB3) are slow, imagine a fleet of them flying low below the radar horizon for 500+km using autonomous inertial navigation (over sea or over land), then when they are close enough to the target, connecting their Satcom, rising to attack altitude, doing their job, then dropping to the floor again and returning to the mother ship. It could give a powerful, long range offensive capability without even risking a single pilot's life, and it's cheap too.
 
T

Turko

Guest
Using Bayraktar is great and gives unprecedented advantage against ground and Sea targets but what about air superiority? What would do Bayraktars if enemy's air force attack on LHD and Bayraktars? That's why TCG ANADOLU urges areal air defense systems.
 

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
4,683
Reactions
7 7,389
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Given the weight ballpark value of 1200kg a wingspan of 15m is required for the TB3 if the design features of TB2 aerodynamics are to be carried over. However considering the runway length and whether the plane must take off under its own power or to be accelerated by cable a design change to the lift capacity of the airframe can be resorted to. This can be considered along with any airspeed requirement change of the platform as the changes in aerodynamics will effect both the take off capability and the flight characteristics. Available engine power will determine all changes.

 
Last edited:

Mis_TR_Like

Contributor
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
1,405
Reactions
26 5,457
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Northern Cyprus
Using Bayraktar is great and gives unprecedented advantage against ground and Sea targets but what about air superiority? What would do Bayraktars if enemy's air force attack on LHD and Bayraktars? That's why TCG ANADOLU urges areal air defense systems.

TF-2000 will provide protection. But eventually we are going to need air-superiority fighters, whether manned or unmanned, to be carrier-deployable.
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,247
Reactions
141 16,269
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Given the weight ballpark value of 1200kg a wingspan of 15m is required for the TB3 if the design features of TB2 aerodynamics are to be carried over. However considering the runway length and whether the plane must take off under its own power or to be accelerated by cable a design change to the lift capacity of the airframe can be resorted to. This can be considered along with any airspeed requirement change of the platform as the changes in aerodynamics will effect both the take off capability and the flight characteristics. Available engine power will determine all changes.
Important point! Engine power!
Even with 15m wingspan (with only 17m available on deck, for safe operation this is cutting it close) and ski lift it would be difficult for 1200kg to be airborne. Just look at all the propeller driven Second World War carrier based planes of similar weights. They all have around 1500HP engines. OK we have come a long way since then. But basic aerodynamics have not changed.
TB3 may have shorter wingspan but bigger wing area (a delta design?) .
TB3 may need 2 x AI450 engine with 750HP power level. I can’t see it developing enough speed and lift at such short distance with PD180 unless a catapult like system is employed to achieve necessary take off speed. Remember also that the standard carriers have around 30knots in speed to help generate lift. TCG Anadolu does not go above 21 knots. So there is a deficiency in speed as the plane starts it’s run. In short it will be a difficult job to do to get 1200kg of mass off that ship.
But having said that if it weren’t within the scope, Selcuk Bayraktar would not have started to tackle it. We will wait and see !
 

dustdevil

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
271
Reactions
669
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Important point! Engine power!
Even with 15m wingspan (with only 17m available on deck, for safe operation this is cutting it close) and ski lift it would be difficult for 1200kg to be airborne. Just look at all the propeller driven Second World War carrier based planes of similar weights. They all have around 1500HP engines. OK we have come a long way since then. But basic aerodynamics have not changed.
TB3 may have shorter wingspan but bigger wing area (a delta design?) .
TB3 may need 2 x AI450 engine with 750HP power level. I can’t see it developing enough speed and lift at such short distance with PD180 unless a catapult like system is employed to achieve necessary take off speed. Remember also that the standard carriers have around 30knots in speed to help generate lift. TCG Anadolu does not go above 21 knots. So there is a deficiency in speed as the plane starts it’s run. In short it will be a difficult job to do to get 1200kg of mass off that ship.
But having said that if it weren’t within the scope, Selcuk Bayraktar would not have started to tackle it. We will wait and see !
I think it depends on how much ground run is needed for acceleration. I did not calculate anything othen than for TB2 200meters of run is possible with PD180 with 180hp. In TB2/Akıncı videos they usually run about 300 meters. But if PD180 can give more than 220hp+ for the takeoff run only, with some kind of constant speed propeller (if it was not employed yet on TB2) with a tractor configuration for a bigger propeller and ground clearance and better airstream over wings, maybe it could be possible with 1200 kgs+ too.

If not, probably single AI450 can do it. Dual / coaxial propellers in tractor/pusher config with two PD180 is another possibility, but it’s all speculation for now.
 
Last edited:

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
4,683
Reactions
7 7,389
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
An interesting Tilt Rotor UAV design from the Mechanical Engineering Faculty of Karatay University
I don't see why they made such a design.
It has no merit as far as eye can see.
It is a bicopter but the wings are curly and there is no shaft running from one motor to the other.
In such designs like the V-280 Valor and the Ospreys each engine can drive both proprotors and provide redundancy in case of one engine failure. But this design is unlikely to have that feature.

Totally useless. It is not like there is no precedence, they should just open their eyes and look around. :mad:
 
F

FalconSlayersDFI

Guest
Just asking my Turkish friends out here that how much of this pictographic is true? As one can notice no main Turkish component out here.
1617546853737.png
 
Top Bottom