TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

[Turko]

German corvette with 2 RAM

 

[Nilgiri]

Some random rants:

ESSM-> Semi active missile, mostly comes out from common missile magazine, ship radar has to illuminate the target.
RAM-> Missile has sensors, separate magazine, separate sensors

In missile exchange

- if your VLS magazine is hit
- if your radar malfunctions
- if EW is applied
- if target has low RCS
- if enemy deploys false targets to deplete your ESSM battery


You lose CIWS capability (not counting on Phalanx/Gökdeniz... they all have dead sectors and can't engage multiple same time of arrival, smart pop-up missiles, they won't stop fast missiles like Brahmos, the debris will hit the ship).....

For CIWS scenarios, even if ESSM performs %60 and RAM+ESSM performs %70 it is going to make a difference, so much that your enemy might base his decisions to attack or disengage based on those probabilities (they know about our ships and they will calculate and allocate resources, we will do the same).

Has the Turkish Navy ever conducted a drill using 5-10 real anti-ship missiles and tried to measure ESSM/RAM/Phalanx/Gökdeniz/SeaZenith performance against saturation attacks?

Probably not.... probably many navies did not even try (except Australians tried some scenarios which was not a saturation drill). US is US and Turkish Navy is different, but which was has the complete layered defence (E-2 Hawkeye, satellite sensors, underwater sensors, AAW frigates, interceptor aircraft, group of ships, tomahawk missiles) and can choose not to install a perfect CIWS system and get away with it?

Current capabilities of our navy which needs to improve):

- AWACS-> relies on airforce
- Satellite sensors, limited coverage, not sure realtime networked data is available to navy
- AAW frigates-> SM-1 & Smart
- underwaters sensors, if any probably local and not global coverage like US SOSUS
- interceptor aircraft, relies on airforce
- group of ships, nothing spectacular
- long range anti-ship missiles, no (200 km is not long range to deter serious navies)

Many capabilities are getting better, but there is a long long way to go....


I'd like to see those:

- Aselsan should make an aircraft mounted version of EIRS radar
- We should put tens of satellites into low earth orbit, for networking and for remote sensing
- TF2000 and smaller versions having scaled down systems should form a network, smaller vessels like OPVs and FACs should join too with their sensors and weapons
- For navy we need equivalent of SM2/3/6, ESSM with Gökdoğan sensor, Siper, specialised missiles against antiship missiles etc.
- Towed arrays, passive sensors in nearby seas
- Navy should start to fly fighter aircraft, even from land initially
- We should make ship building cheaper and use all our shipbuillding capacity i.e. instead of waiting I class for 3-4 years, we should concurrently produce 3-4 in different shipyards
- Gezgin in the antiship mode


We should direct serious money and research time into CIWS/point defence as it can make a big difference in battle, along with long range weapons and a robust network oriented, scalable battle management system for any size of ships, maybe extending this to coastal installations and other domains...

Excellent post. Much obliged.

 

[dustdevil]

We should do everything but we can't squeeze too many things in a short time as it will cause some alarm bells to ring. The main thing we can do is to conduct as many research projects as we possibly can and strengthen our industry base. The ability to make many things locally is more valuable than making many of the same ships.

I would rather increase the self reliance level to past 80% before making many weapons. We can't make marine turbine engines yet. We can only make as many ships as the number of engines we can find for them. We are not there yet.

The goal should be to bring peace and security to the area, of course, and to become self reliant and to create a more capable navy which can deter a bit more serious threats....not starting an arms race, or spending taxes only on military hardware...

 

[Combat-Master]

Did anyone else notice the wing configuration on Medium range anti-ship missile?

It doesn't seem to have traditional X wing configuration we are use to seeing.. Angle does not appear to be perpendicular to the opposite wing on the lower side of the missile - As an example, could be similar to early artists rendering of Gabriel-V Anti-Ship missile.

 

[Siper>MMU]

Did anyone else notice the wing configuration on Medium range anti-ship missile?
View attachment 18549
It doesn't seem to have traditional X wing configuration we are use to seeing.. Angle does not appear to be perpendicular to the opposite wing on the lower side of the missile - As an example, could be similar to early artists rendering of Gabriel-V Anti-Ship missile.
View attachment 18550

I guess its for preventing wings from overlaping with helicopters pylon.

 

[Nutuk]

If launched from a 1-1,2 mach flying aircraft at 20k~ feet altitude. Aim9-X can reach 3 mach.

Agree with Yasar here

The initial speed (launch from aircraft) will add to range, not necessarily to max speed.

for max speed the design of the missile plays the largest role

 

[Nutuk]

100m/s is 360km/h

Unless your car is driving faster than that you won't achieve a faster speed by throwing the ball out of a moving car

 

[Yasar_TR]

For Turkish readers a simplified informative essay on air to air missiles.

Havadan Havaya Füze ve Türkiye | Havadan Havaya Füze Nedir?

Havadan Havaya Füze ne demek? Türk Hava Kuvvetleri'nin Havadan Havaya Füze envanteri ve çalışmaları. TÜBİTAK-SAGE'nin geliştirdiği BOZDOĞAN ve GÖKDOĞAN Füzeleri

www.savunmasanayist.com

 

[Combat-Master]

I guess its for preventing wings from overlaping with helicopters pylon.

 

[dustdevil]

The maximum attained speed of a rocket of course changes with launcher platform's speed. Let's say the rocket engine burns for 5 seconds, launched from a moving platfom at the end of the rocket burn, the speed and range will be higher.

edit: for the same trajectory

 

[Yasar_TR]

@boracetkin ’s wording is slightly wrong. But I understand what he means.
A ball thrown out of a car travelling at 100m/second , with a speed of 100m/sec “relative to the car” , will have a cumulative speed of 200m/sec at zero time. However it will decelerate quicker than the ball released at that speed due to higher air drag.
But this has nothing to do with what I was trying to say. That is another story! I was trying to make a point of long burn short burn issue for ”different” missiles.
It all depends on how quickly and how much the solid fuel is burnt to achieve thrust. Some solid fuel motors may need longer burn time while it burns slower. Some motors burn quicker and use more fuel and achieve higher speeds. It is all to do with motor design. I am sure @boracetkin knows this.

 

[Combat-Master]

Looking at the telemetry, it seems every point in the diagonal represents 5km distance - which when compared to the radius around the F-16 is about 25km - taking into account max range of the missile is to be at 25km. When we apply the distance to the cone which starts to encapsulate the target drone at around 40km. Does this mean the tiny seeker on Bozdogan can track a small drone like Simsek at around 40km ? Also, it could be they chose this engagement angle with the sun in the backdrop to further test the seeker?

 

[dustdevil]

I tried to calculate too, my estimates are:

20-25 km for missile lock
10-15 km for launch
Slightly shorter flight distance due to target incoming. I used a 5 km uncertainty because I was lazy to use the real speed of sound, also did not use MS paint with precision.

Based on F-16 speed guess* (since no afterburner, and this could be their normal speed) of 0.8 to 1 Mach, FL200 to 300. (Reduces to 0.8 times those values for 0.8 mach @ FL300)

Şimşek target drone is flying 1000-2000ft below F-16, if not the same level, observing the HUD. Missile speed could be 2.4 to 3 Mach if F-16 is 0.8 to 1.0 Mach.

The distances between points are not equal, that’s why I did not guess using them.

The complete circle is shooting range, almost equal to LAU to other LAU, the outer one is locking range. Could be only for test purposes.
Note the circle stops moving after launch, so its center is where computer thinks missile is launched.

 

[Combat-Master]

I did some calculation with closure rates and distance travelled in a second. 20-25km.

How did you calculated that each dot represents 5km?

Missile reaches one point to the other in average speed of 1.25 km/s. That's around 3.6 mach, missile is stated to be around 3-4mach.

 

[Combat-Master]

Makes sense, but missiles rocket motor is probably still burning. It may either gaining speed or losing.

Would be nice to know whether Bozdogan has a dual-pulse rocket motor, some sources state that it does, but no official information has been released. If it does, it could be that we are just witnessing the sustainer burn/burn out with second terminal stage propelling it to Mach 4+

Would especially like to know why it weighs so much compared to it's equivalents

 

[dustdevil]

Missile reaches one point to the other in average speed of 1.25 km/s. That's around 3.6 mach, missile is stated to be around 3-4mach.
View attachment 18571

Makes sense, but missiles rocket motor is probably still burning. It may either gaining speed or losing.

If they are flying near FL200 it’s even more, like 3.9 Mach if 1250 km/h is assumed. But this time F-16 must cruise at 1.3 Mach based on relative motion (roughly 3 times) on the screen. They don’t seem to use afterburners, of course they could be slowing down...

 

[Test7]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1384138956829192200

 

[Philip the Arab]

Well.. We need to work harder on these IR sensors.

What do you mean? The quality is not good enough in your opinion?

 

[Siper>MMU]

What do you mean? The quality is not good enough in your opinion?

Not as good as Spike family. Actually as I know we are using uncooled IR sensors instead of cooled ones on Spike's.

Edit: Spike has uncooled sensors too. That means we are waaaaay behind them.

 

[Yasar_TR]

If they are flying near FL200 it’s even more, like 3.9 Mach if 1250 km/h is assumed. But this time F-16 must cruise at 1.3 Mach based on relative motion (roughly 3 times) on the screen. They don’t seem to use afterburners, of course they could be slowing down...

According to veteran F16 pilots, especially block 30 and 40 planes with f110GE engines can super cruise in mid to high altitude in clean set up quite easily. That is if you take super cruise as speed of 1+ Mach without afterburners.
US defence department has changed the definition of “super cruise“ to 1.5+Mach without afterburners after f22.