TR Air Defence Programs

[Siper>MMU]

View attachment 57598 View attachment 57599
Also it is specified as detection, which is a bit blurred

I remember incorrectly sorry..
Still according to the equation it has a range of 340km against 1m² targets..

 

[Radko]

I remember incorrectly sorry..
Still according to the equation it has a range of 340km against 1m² targets..

in theory yes, but for some reason it doesn't (see the Russian version having 250km for 2m²), I guess StealthFlanker wrote a good explanation about that>

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1294067259900489730

 

[Afif]

Guys Russian PESA 92N6E (Export variant, Russian variant claims 400km against 1m²) has a range of 250km against 1m² targets.

ERIS has a detection range of 450+km against 1m² targets.

ÇFAKR has GaN front end modules and it's architecture is AESA. 150km is not correct.

As I pointed out in my previous post, (even though we don't know specifically about ÇFAKR but) Aselsan's ÇFR ( x band element of ÇAFRAD) and Thales APAR ii ( X band element of dual bands suite for naval platforms) both are latest gen GaN based dual Axis AESA and can track up to 1000 targets simultaneously, has a range of 150km. (Officially stated)

So CFAKR having 150km range is not that far-fetched. (And it is not a big issue as it is part of integrated dual bands solution, ERIS+ÇFAKR)

 

[Huelague]

150km against what, in which mode etc etc

Is that NEZ?

 

[Siper>MMU]

in theory yes, but for some reason it doesn't (see the Russian version having 250km for 2m²), I guess StealthFlanker wrote a good explanation about that>

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1294067259900489730

If we take 250km for 2m² into account we still get more than 200kms for 1m². And these are for an older tech radar. "Official" claims are mostly meaningless

 

[Radko]

If we take 250km for 2m² into account we still get more than 200kms for 1m². And these are for an older tech radar. "Official" claims are mostly meaningless

Well I agree on that, without context range doesn't tell much, we don't even know if Turkish values are understated or Russian ones are inflated/overstated (various examples of both respectively)

 

[AzeriTank]

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.

you again doesnt make sense and somehow i got a feeling that you try your best to get as much info as possible, which is not good.
Eurofighter and Rafael is said able to see jets from 100km away with IRST, which Akinji could do the same too flying for 24 hour. if IRST able to see som from 30km away, wouldnt it see f35 from more distance as f35 engine works at 1800c heat?

 

[AzeriTank]

View attachment 57598 View attachment 57599
Also it is specified as detection, which is a bit blurred

in Russian it says detection and automatic tracking you probably know it too

 

[Afif]

you again doesnt make sense and somehow i got a feeling that you try your best to get as much info as possible, which is not good.

What do you mean?

Eurofighter and Rafael is said able to see jets from 100km away with IRST, which Akinji could do the same too flying for 24 hour. if IRST able to see som from 30km away, wouldnt it see f35 from more distance as f35 engine works at 1800c heat?

I am talking about cruise missile's Detectablity when it appears over the horizon. (Which is usually 30-40km for land attack missiles, lesser for AShM due to even lower cruising altitude)

With respect to JASSM or SOM, F-35's heat signature is not the references here, only RCS is.

But to answer your question- a modern ultra-sensetive IRST would probably able to see a F-35 from 50-60km away.

 

[Anmdt]

Could be against 1m² or 4m² if I had to guesstimate, as @Anmdt (not sure) pointed out before EİRS should have something around 400km for 1m²

And i doubt if CFR or CFAKR is given for 1m2 or neither for 150 km (at least not anymore). It is illogical for land and sea bases radars to have same range. Sea based radars have typically longer ranges thanks to the energy supply and cooling oppurtinities.
Besides, the radar tech comes front with clutter rejection, ECM, EW resistance, operationability in adverse weather conditions, fail-safe design, reliability of tracking and target designation. Russian pesa radar would be gone if a module is burnt but CFAKR may remain operational up to a percantage of module loss.

 

[Radko]

And i doubt if CFR or CFAKR is given for 1m2 or neither for 150 km (at least not anymore). It is illogical for land and sea bases radars to have same range. Sea based radars have typically longer ranges thanks to the energy supply and cooling oppurtinities.
Besides, the radar tech comes front with clutter rejection, ECM, EW resistance, operationability in adverse weather conditions, fail-safe design, reliability of tracking and target designation. Russian pesa radar would be gone if a module is burnt but CFAKR may remain operational up to a percantage of module loss.

Yeah, AESA FTW

 

[Cabatli_TR]

Mr Demir:

"We are talking about ranges that will exceed 120-130 kilometers in SİPER. We aim for those values even at altitude." (Anti-Ballistic missile defence variant)

 

[UkroTurk]

I heard Mr Demir said :
"the surface to air missile flying MACH3 speed, can engage the target with mach 5 speed. It is the most difficult task."
" Our radars can detect and engage rapidly supersonic targets"
"Range is not the main issue, the most important thing is killing capacity and we have it"
As far as i understood he meant: Rocketsan achieved this technology and SIPER could make it but not in Long range.

On the other hand they didn't openly state antiballistic capabilities of SIPER.

Türkiye'nin milli savaş makinaları... İsmail Demir ve çalışma ekibi CNN TÜRK'te anlattı - Son Dakika Haberler CNN Türk | Video

Son Dakika Türkiye Gündem Haberleri - Savunma Sanayii Başkanı İsmail Demir, çalışma ekibi ile birlikte CNN TÜRK canlı yayınında merak edilen soruları yanıtla...

www.cnnturk.com

 

[Bogeyman]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1664295158391734273

SİPER Product-1 Integrated System Level Launch Photos

 

[cr33pt3d]

me dreaming of having quad-pack siper on I-class , at least 8x4 ESSM and 8 x 2 siper (dual-packable ?) would be nice anyway. let's hope.

 

[Strong AI]

GÖKDOĞAN is BVR
BOZDOĞAN is WVR

TÜBİTAK SAGE Director Gürcan Okumuş:

- Our GÖKDOĞAN missile was successfully launched by being integrated into the tactical wheeled launch vehicle developed by ASELSAN within the scope of point air defense. Similarly, the data-linked version of our BOZDOĞAN Missile is being worked on for integration into ship platforms. The integration process for the use of both of our missiles for air defense engagements from land and/or sea is being carried out and capability gains continue. Hardware, software and algorithm updates required for the use of our missiles in air defense are being carried out. Evaluations of capabilities that increase range, such as increasing the diameter of the rocket engine or adding a booster, are also being carried out.

- Work continues for the launch of our BOZDOĞAN Missile from the hot launch system. With the thrust vector control system in the BOZDOĞAN Missile, vertical launch with hot launch without loss of range is being studied.

- Within the scope of the G-40 project, it is aimed to increase the range of our GÖKDOĞAN Missile. In this context, project design studies are being carried out. However, it has not returned to a project requirement so far. Similarly, studies have been carried out with TÜBİTAK-SAGE's own resources within the scope of vertical launching of both of our missiles with cold launch, and technology has been gained. The preliminary feasibility of design studies are being carried out for the cold vertical launch of our BOZDOĞAN Missile with a data-linked version, and for the launch of our GÖKDOĞAN Missile by providing lateral thrust with a change of orientation control system that will operate independently of engine thrust.

- Air defense missiles can be used to neutralize helicopters and similar targets that pose a threat to submarine systems and to perform self-defense of the submarine. Studies on concept options have been carried out within TÜBİTAK SAGE.

TÜBİTAK-SAGE | Söyleşi/2: TÜBİTAK-SAGE Enstitü Müdürü Gürcan Okumuş

TÜBİTAK-SAGE Müdürü Gürcan Okumuş ile TÜBİTAK-SAGE’nin devam eden projeleri ve gelecek vizyonu üzerine söyleşi gerçekleştirdik. Keyifli okumalar dileriz. 1.Soru |

mavivatan.net

 

[UkroTurk]

If they could quad pack SIPER( or Siper Block 0), why do we need G40? Mission will be completed isn't it?

 

[Afif]

If they could quad pack SIPER( or Siper Block 0), why do we need G40? Mission will be completed isn't it?

There is no way they are quadpacking current SIPER interceptor. (Did you see how fat its booster?)

However, even when they quadpack the later block of SIPER, G40 will still have its relevance.

New block of SIPER are expensive and meant for long range and high altitude.

They are not (economically) feasible for quick reaction point defence.

That's where G40 comes in.
It would be similar to ESSM (expect ESSM has TVC while G40 will have orientation control system. Probbaly something like CAMM has)

On the other hand, SIPER will have similar role to SM-2 interceptor.

 

[UkroTurk]

Did you see how fat its booster?)

İ meant if Siper Block O without booster could be quadpacked.

Anyway we should understand that Siper won't be quadpacked. That's why they are improving G40.

 

[godel44]

You might want to look through earlier pages. If I remember correctly, @Anmdt had said a few times that Hisar-D (based on Hisar RF) and Siper's first block (based on Hisar-RF + booster) will be quadpacked as this is a requirement by the Navy. Ibrahim Sunnetci also confirmed the quadpacked Siper a few months ago. It seems quadpacking will not finish in time for the first frigate, though.