TR Air Defence Programs

uçuyorum

Contributor
Messages
720
Reactions
9 1,168
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Provisional acceptance of the first İstif class ship will be made on 29 May.
I wonder if it will have the final version of the VLS it will serve with until a modernization and if it will be filled with siper and hisar missiles already
 

Strong AI

Contributor
Messages
491
Reactions
20 2,144
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
So i was watching the latest SIPER test video again and something caught my attention.

Screenshot_20230516-101218_YouTube.jpg


In this frame you can see, according to my interpretation, that the target is flying away (180 degrees) from the missile.
Could it be, that they tested the No Escape Zone Range of the SIPER missile?

Bonus NSFW Content :)

Screenshot_20230516-101550_YouTube.jpg
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,001
Reactions
64 7,293
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Could it be, that they tested the No Escape Zone Range of the SIPER missile?

Yeah, but testing NEZ against slow, subsonic, low altitude drone is not very ideal, is it?
It won't simulate a 4/5 gen fighter jet in terms of performance characteristics.
 

Strong AI

Contributor
Messages
491
Reactions
20 2,144
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yeah, but testing NEZ against slow, subsonic, low altitude drone is not very ideal, is it?
It won't simulate a 4/5 gen fighter jet in terms of performance characteristics.

But if they tested the max range of the NEZ, maybe they compensated those 4/5 gen fighter performance characteristics with a greater range of the drone to the launcher vehicle.
For example if ASELSAN aims for a max range (NEZ) of 80 km against 4/5 gen fighters, they could have tested SIPER against a drone with a distance of 100 km to the launcher vehicle. So the difference of 20 km could compensate for the difference of those flight performance characteristics.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,138
Solutions
2
Reactions
95 22,890
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yeah, but testing NEZ against slow, subsonic, low altitude drone is not very ideal, is it?
It won't simulate a 4/5 gen fighter jet in terms of performance characteristics.
Only for now, i think whole air defense systems will be re-tested with Super Simsek.
 

GoatsMilk

Experienced member
Messages
3,409
Reactions
9 8,956
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
As much as things like Kaan and Kizelelma are more exciting, these air defence systems in many ways are more important and critical to the defence of the nation. In Ukraine we see that if you have enough systems that even the Russians cannot enter your airspace.
 

Strong AI

Contributor
Messages
491
Reactions
20 2,144
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
SSB President İsmail Demir:
- SIPER Block 1 is ready to get in inventory, the latest published test was basically its last test.
- Block 1 is derived from HISAR-O+. They added a booster and improved its capabilities. (with a range of much more than 100 km)
- SIPER Block 2 will be a new missile
 

TsumugiShirogane

Active member
Messages
39
Reactions
78
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
As much as things like Kaan and Kizelelma are more exciting, these air defence systems in many ways are more important and critical to the defence of the nation. In Ukraine we see that if you have enough systems that even the Russians cannot enter your airspace.
"Even the Russians"? Don't use Russia as an example metric on how to design air defences, their jets' radars and EW suites are inferior and have zero stealth characteristics. The SU-57 has a similar RCS to that of a Super Hornet. Modern SAM systems are vulnerable to stealth platforms. Someone estimated the F-35 detection range on SIPER radar as around 80 kms, it can easily conduct its missions and even deep strike into territory outside double that range. SIPER, HISAR, S-400 and pretty much all SAM systems are non-strategic assets in a conventional conflict in the region where actually competent adversaries are. Only KAAN, which I still have my doubts it will be competent enough for the tall task, can challenge the skies.
 

GoatsMilk

Experienced member
Messages
3,409
Reactions
9 8,956
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
"Even the Russians"? Don't use Russia as an example metric on how to design air defences, their jets' radars and EW suites are inferior and have zero stealth characteristics. The SU-57 has a similar RCS to that of a Super Hornet. Modern SAM systems are vulnerable to stealth platforms. Someone estimated the F-35 detection range on SIPER radar as around 80 kms, it can easily conduct its missions and even deep strike into territory outside double that range. SIPER, HISAR, S-400 and pretty much all SAM systems are non-strategic assets in a conventional conflict in the region where actually competent adversaries are. Only KAAN, which I still have my doubts it will be competent enough for the tall task, can challenge the skies.

very interesting.

So are you implying that these air defence systems are null and void should Turkiye come up against F35's?
 

Heartbang

Experienced member
Messages
2,344
Reactions
7 3,547
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Don't use Russia as an example metric on how to design air defences
Soviet Russia IS the one who invented surface-to-air defences. They are the ones who perfected it and subsequently used it to tear the US a new one in Vietnam.
Yes, they are currently lagging behind in that field, but that's not because they lack the expertise to make good SAM systems. They're lacking in other stuff.
Someone estimated the F-35 detection range on SIPER radar as around 80 kms,
Would be nice if you shared the relevant study.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,001
Reactions
64 7,293
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Would be nice if you shared the relevant study.

Bro, i think @TsumugiShirogane is referring to our previous speculation about SIPER having detection range of 80-100km against F-35.
(Previously, @Anmdt explained ERIS has 450km range against 1m2 RCS. And we did a rough calculation based what is known about F-35's RCS w.r.t that)
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,001
Reactions
64 7,293
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Modern SAM systems are vulnerable to stealth platforms.

In some sense everything is vulnerable, we have to be more specific in this regard.

Someone estimated the F-35 detection range on SIPER radar as around 80 kms, it can easily conduct its missions and even deep strike into territory outside double that range.

True, but we could pretty much say same thing about modern 4.5 gen fighters like Typhoon, Rafale F-15/16/18 equipped with stand-off cruise missiles. (Like JASSM, scalp, Taurus, JSM or SOM)
What is special about F-35 is that, its LO allows it use cheap stand-in weapons in higher quantities (in a potential SEAD/DEAD missions) like Glide bombs. For example, each F-35 can carry 8x SDB while carrying 2x AMRAAM.
So, in theory 8x F-35 carrying 64 SDB could overwhelm a SIPER battery on its own.

But again, slow glide bombs are very easy to shoot down with cost effective C-RAM. For example, a SIPER battery could be augmented with a Korkut battery. Which can comfortably deal with glide bombs once within range. And expensive SIPER interceptors can be reserved against high value targets like Fighter jets, cruise/anti radiation missiles, and of course, SRBMs. That is why it is very important to have a layered, comprehensive air defence solution rather then expensive stand-alone batteries.

SIPER, HISAR, S-400 and pretty much all SAM systems are non-strategic assets in a conventional conflict in the region where actually competent adversaries are. Only KAAN, which I still have my doubts it will be competent enough for the tall task, can challenge the skies.

I couldn’t disagree more. Layered air defence systems are as strategic as it gets. In today’s warfare, that is what literally keeps an Air Force physically in the fight.

KAAN wouldn’t have any chance to begin with if it was taken out on the ground with sophisticated cruise/ballistic missile strikes by 'competent adversaries'.
 

TsumugiShirogane

Active member
Messages
39
Reactions
78
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Soviet Russia IS the one who invented surface-to-air defences. They are the ones who perfected it and subsequently used it to tear the US a new one in Vietnam.
Yes, they are currently lagging behind in that field, but that's not because they lack the expertise to make good SAM systems. They're lacking in other stuff.
They did, and now it's history. It's 2023 right now, Russian doctrine is outdated and would crumble in a conflict against any of the modern NATO militaries. Current Russian SAM networks, all of them, could easily be detected and struck or jammed by the F-35, because it has an RCS of below 0.0001m^2 and by the time they'd see a tiny speck on their screen, let alone guide any munitions with FCR, a missile would be heading their way. US officials said it performed beyond the announced specifications. You have any idea how powerful that plane is?
As for my claim, Afif had calculated that number in a prior post. He said as such above.
In some sense everything is vulnerable, we have to be more specific in this regard.
The JSF will pick up a SAM transmitter and will be able to relay it's location or engage way before the SAM radar sees a dust particle on its screen..
True, but we could pretty much say same thing about modern 4.5 gen fighters like Typhoon, Rafale F-15/16/18 equipped with stand-off cruise missiles. (Like JASSM, scalp, Taurus, JSM or SOM)
What is special about F-35 is that, its LO allows it use cheap stand-in weapons in higher quantities (in a potential SEAD/DEAD missions) like Glide bombs. For example, each F-35 can carry 8x SDB while carrying 2x AMRAAM.
So, in theory 8x F-35 carrying 64 SDB could overwhelm a SIPER battery on its own.

But again, slow glide bombs are very easy to shoot down with cost effective C-RAM. For example, a SIPER battery could be augmented with a Korkut battery. Which can comfortably deal with glide bombs once within range. And expensive SIPER interceptors can be reserved against high value targets like Fighter jets, cruise/anti radiation missiles, and of course, SRBMs. That is why it is very important to have a layered, comprehensive air defence solution rather then expensive stand-alone batteries.
F-35 is 100x-500x less observable than those jets, and can get closer to the said systems to deploy arms or jam them. I believe the SAM detection range would be around 60-70km in a realistic scenario. Even if they detect it, the interceptor FCR can't guide the missile to a target with such a low radar signature. It can sneak up all the way to our air space. Every ground asset shows up bright as day with their location on the opposing jets screen, while all the AWACS and SAM systems see is a tiny speck. Only a similar VLO jet would be able to engage it.
I couldn’t disagree more. Layered air defence systems are as strategic as it gets. In today’s warfare, that is what literally keeps an Air Force physically in the fight.

KAAN wouldn’t have any chance to begin with if it was taken out on the ground with sophisticated cruise/ballistic missile strikes by 'competent adversaries'.
The only use for them would be against the ballistic missiles and the older aircraft.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,001
Reactions
64 7,293
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
The JSF will pick up a SAM transmitter and will be able to relay it's location or engage way before the SAM radar sees a dust particle on its screen..

Yes, it is true. But then again, strategic SAM sites are not intended to be hidden when they are set up and activated.


F-35 is 100x-500x less observable than those jets, and can get closer to the said systems to deploy arms or jam them. I believe the SAM detection range would be around 60-70km in a realistic scenario. Even if they detect it, the interceptor FCR can't guide the missile to a target with such a low radar signature. It can sneak up all the way to our air space. Every ground asset shows up bright as day with their location on the opposing jets screen, while all the AWACS and SAM systems see is a tiny speck. Only a similar VLO jet would be able to engage it.

The only use for them would be against the ballistic missiles and the older aircraft.


Let me put it more clearly, SIPER doesn't always have to be able engage F-35 successfully to perform its duty. Nor the F-35's ability to get close would radically change the dynamic.

1. Any stand-off cruise/anti radiation missile now matter how advanced it is (launched by F-35) would be picked up by the sensors as soon as they arrives on the horizon. Thus, can be comfortably shot down with agile and sophisticated interceptors.

2. Any Salvo of stand-in weapons launced by F-35s (like glide bombs) could be easily shot down with cost effective C-RAM (augmenting the SIPER battery) as I mentioned before.

In both scenario, layered air defence systems survives and its mission is accomplished, as it successfully protected whatever ground asset it was assigned to.

Strategic AD systems are mainly valued in terms of how much they can defend, (see, how Patriot PAC-3 performed exceptionally in Ukraine few days ago) not how far they can shoot (That is the Russian standard)

Shooting down enemy aircrafts is the primary job of the Air Force.

In a nutshell, here how it works.
Layered AD systems protect the air bases against all kind of attacks. Thus, keeping the Air Force physically in the fight, Rather then getting taken out by enemy missile strikes on the ground.

So, you can't minimize its importance no matter what. Because, no Layered AD solution equals most of air assets out of commission. (within few days of a high intensity conflcit)
 
Last edited:

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,276
Reactions
28 4,047
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
1. Any stand-off cruise/anti radiation missile now matter how advanced it is (launched by F-35) would be picked up by the sensors as soon as they arrives on the horizon. Thus, can be comfortably shot down with agile and sophisticated interceptors.

2. Any Salvo of stand-in weapons launced by F-35s (like glide bombs) could be easily shot down with cost effective C-RAM (augmenting the SIPER battery) as I mentioned before.
What about stealth cruise missiles?
İ am asking, apart from Siper, how could current western SAM systems deal with modern stealth cruise missiles?
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,001
Reactions
64 7,293
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
What about stealth cruise missiles?
İ am asking, apart from Siper, how could current western SAM systems deal with modern stealth cruise missiles?

Cruise missiles usually features low RCS on avarage. But some are optimized for better stealth like JASSM, KH-101, JSM, SCALP or SOM.

But the thing is, when they arrived over the horizon, (30-40km away) today's sensors (That include IRSTs) are so sensitive no matter how low your RCS is, at some point you can't mask your self anymore.

Easy way to think about this is, if a stealth 5th gen fighter like F-35 can get caught from 50-60km by new gen AESA, JASSM can’t hide for too long either.

And then let's not forget, how slow subsonic cruise missiles are.

Let's say if it got detected from 20-30km away (conservative estimate) AD system would have engagement window of 60-90 seconds.

And for a modern AD systems that can react in less then 10 seconds and guide 16-24 interceptors to the targets simultaneously, it is big fat window of engagement.
 
Last edited:

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom