Search results

Here we see the difference between Navy and Air Force. Navy invested heavily on indigenous platforms and subcontractors and even suffered things like Balyoz for it but they kept planning long term detailed and focused on independence and their own technical officers. Now all they needed was...

TAI and TEI shares do not give much control to americans, just a share of profits and information.

Bayraktar means standard bearer

?

An aircraft carrier is inherently more political than most other platforms as it signals a significant shift in geopolitical approach and priorities.

Let's clarify one thing, US is basically the only nation that has a carrier fleet that's basically designed to fight near peer adversaries, and maybe China will get there. Otherwise the force projection other countries use are against much weaker countries with little to no air power or defenses...

We also more ZAHA(Not Wilfried). W.r.t carrier need, again, we don't need this carrier for defending our borders, but the geopolitical situation in the next 10 years or so will make this even more necessary I think, asia pacific and africa in general will change drastically. And the carrier...

Is he the one that spinned BMC around after the disasters

Uk decided not to use catapults since it would have costed as much as a new carrier as well

I'm officially jealous. Look at those nozzles

First, we have good relations with Morocco and Gibraltar is subject to UNCLOS so we can pass. We have presence in Somalia and since Milgem is being built in Karachi shipyards as well we have a friendly shipyard with technical know how of our systems should we need repairs and what not. But even...

That number is massively inflated. TCG Anadolu costs around 500m €, even HMS Queen Elizabeth costs 3 billion $. I'd imagine the ship we will make is around 1-2 billion $ . In addition, no we can't use KE from current Anadolu without serious modification. A larger carrier flying KE and also Anka...

Active seeker of missiles have limited range with its own power output but can still detect signals from a more powerful radar. But say a larger missile like Siper Urun-2 is probably much more capable.

If you have 4 static radars you won't need it but rotating radars will lose target for a good while during rotation. That's why you have AKR-D. In terms of active seeker, small seeker on missiles are no match for a full sized radar, those will become more relevant as target is closer.

I meant instead of Atmaca launchers since VLS is already limited.

Speaking of gezgin, 16 cruise missiles in Istif is more than usual isn't it? Even much larger ships use mostly 8. Is it possible to change half of these to gezgin based on mission?

There is no need for optical sensor. If you have 3d models of terrain geometry you can sort of create a point cloud from measurements by like a microwave radar like thing and use kalman filters to estimate location from libraries.

I hope it's Istif with more air defence missiles because in its current state it's a rather expensive ship for its current weapons payload. Would have been just right with 64 ESSM. Otherwise investing just a bit more to make a larger ship will make it much more optimized in that regard. I hope...

I think it was mentioned here not exactly sure but it will have EO and a few extras like a winch?

You clearly don't. It has nothing to do with plane getting close, it's about proximity of targets to frontline troops. Theres nothing more useless than 12.7 gun for a plane like this beyond training purposes.