• Forum restore complete (see latest announcement thread)

TR Air Defence Programs

Siper>MMU

Contributor
Messages
542
Reactions
2 1,191
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey

Radko

Experienced member
Messages
1,521
Reactions
14 2,872
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina
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

Contributor
Messages
725
Reactions
3 1,818
Nation of residence
Azerbaijan
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
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?
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
5,139
Reactions
104 10,047
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
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.
 
Last edited:

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,804
Solutions
2
Reactions
148 26,908
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
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

Experienced member
Messages
1,521
Reactions
14 2,872
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina
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

Experienced member
Administrator
Messages
5,362
Reactions
81 45,473
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
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

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,968
Reactions
61 5,303
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
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.

 
Last edited:

Bogeyman 

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
9,925
Reactions
76 33,074
Website
twitter.com
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
FxjDM5cWIAImWNk

FxjDPGTWIAMllmK



SİPER Product-1 Integrated System Level Launch Photos
 

cr33pt3d

Active member
Messages
78
Reactions
6 210
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
me dreaming of having quad-pack siper on I-class :unsure:, at least 8x4 ESSM and 8 x 2 siper (dual-packable ?) would be nice anyway. let's hope.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,968
Reactions
61 5,303
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
If they could quad pack SIPER( or Siper Block 0), why do we need G40? Mission will be completed isn't it?
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
5,139
Reactions
104 10,047
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
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.
 
Last edited:

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,968
Reactions
61 5,303
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
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

Committed member
Messages
167
Reactions
8 505
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
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.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
5,139
Reactions
104 10,047
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
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.

Yes, HISAR-D and SIPER block II. (Not the current block iirc. Let's not tag him anymore on this topic. He made it clear so many times, now he is really going to be annoyed😁)
 
Last edited:

AzeriTank

Contributor
Messages
725
Reactions
3 1,818
Nation of residence
Azerbaijan
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
İt makes more complicated. İf Siper Block 1 exist and could be quadpacked why will you need G40?
Why they are improving G40?
they just answered it, they would enlarge the Gokdogan missile and add some booster to fly longer distances. it will be with data link
 

Heartbang

Experienced member
Messages
2,588
Reactions
9 4,035
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
İt makes more complicated. İf Siper Block 1 exist and could be quadpacked why will you need G40?
Why they are improving G40?
If Gökdoğan is the Turkish AMRAAM, G40 would be the the Turkish AMRAAM-ER. Basically a chunkier, beefier, more capable Fox-3.

AMRAAM-ER equipped NASAMS-3 has a range of 50 km's compared to 30 km's with the regular AMRAAM's. Quite an improvement.

Also could be used in place of the ESSM's to do point defence in navy ships. In fact, it would be better than the block-1 ESSM's since those are semi-active radar homing missiles, meaning they require radar illumination from the ship itself, limiting their response against swarming missile fire.
 
Top Bottom