TR Air Defence Programs

[sh. Abdj]

Iranian claimed they already developed “Warp” propulsion and working currently on a “Deadstar”.

As for propulsion they proved they have some good technology. The hypersonic Rockets worked. But the Air defense was in very bad condition. They have the hardware to do big things but the detection and lock in was so bad. On paper they have S400 like local air defence but it failed missrebly in a real test. But again why Turkeye will be more successful?! Is it detection system much better? Is it locking systems better? Why Turkeye is not accelerating AIWACS programs and mass producing it as it have mountainous map and Airplanes can use that to make it so hard for ground radar to detect them.

 

[TR_123456]

As for propulsion they proved they have some good technology. The hypersonic Rockets worked. But the Air defense was in very bad condition. They have the hardware to do big things but the detection and lock in was so bad. On paper they have S400 like local air defence but it failed missrebly in a real test. But again why Turkeye will be more successful?! Is it detection system much better? Is it locking systems better? Why Turkeye is not accelerating AIWACS programs and mass producing it as it have mountainous map and Airplanes can use that to make it so hard for ground radar to detect them.

Türkiye produces weapon systems at NATO standart at least,that is why Türkiye is succesful.
You guys have this hype of Iranian military achievements when there are none.

 

[sh. Abdj]

Raw missile and radar performance aside, Iran's air defence network is without a doubt less advanced than Türkiye's. Turkish air defence systems were built from the ground up to leverage a huge network of advanced radars (ALP series) that are optimized for varied scenarios and threats. Even emerging threats from quadrocopters and loitering munitions are taken into consideration in the Steel Dome air defence network.

Now all that remains is filling the inventory up with all these new systems, and also introducing a domestically produced system in the same class as Bavar 373. Currently S-400 fills that gap.

Iran's air defences don't form an integrated network, no matter what they say.

With all this said, air defences are only one component of a powerful military. You can't just rely on air defences and ballistic missiles, you need to be able defend, strike back and CONTROL your enemies skies. This is where Iran falls flat.

Still all the Turkish systems are lacking number and experience to develope. Remember the Patriots early bad performance with ballistic missiles in Iraq War compared to the modern much successful performance. Sadly other than Baykar no other company is working on fast acceleration of production. Turkeye is surrounded by very dangerous neighbors that could start a war anytime in case of change in their leadership, and for the current crazy Isreali leadership they could start a war on Syria in any minute. In short Turkeye should be producing like it is in war, and although Turkeye is working little fast but still not war like emergency. Iran mistakes and success in this short war should be studied seriously and Ukraine lessons also should be studied seriously. The work on big number of Air defence as intense as the small Isreal should be accelerated meanwhile the work on Russia like big long range kamikaze drone(1,000km+) production (about 200 daily) should be considered and mass production of 1,000km+ Ballistic missiles that the president already ordered to accelerate should be considered (300+ monthly). The defense and the ability to respond and cause pain are deeply related. Government should encourage more innovative companies like Baykar to enter in these three fields: Rockets, Ballistic missles, long range Kamikaze drones, and Air defence. As we had seen in Iran Case praised Air defence Systems didn't find any real success especially compared to the hype and complexity while simple systems from new factories and young engineers had some success.

 

[sh. Abdj]

There are differences between turkey and Iran. Their most capable system is s300, which is even with updates 20-30 years old and uses pesa, I believe, radar which is compared to aesa, annd easy to jam.
They have much more systems but ours are more modern. Secondly, I believe the problem with Iran's AD umbrella being wiped out in a matter of days, was personnel incompetence. One general was sleeping at home. Everyone knew the attack was imminent. But the radars were not operating. In short, Iran can have the best tech but its worthless when you’re personnel can’t operate it properly I mean look at Saudi military campaign in Yemen.

Iran still have alot of Air defence Assets. The change is that the gape became more due to the Isreali campaign. But these systems are not competent. One of the main problems the Iranians face is things passing between mountains where the ground radars fail to detect them on time, while they don't have any advance AIWACS to solve this problem. Sadly Turkeye AIWACS program is not enough to cover The country vast terrain. I have no doubt that Turkey have better software wich will materials to better lock in and following of targets plus better share of data than Iran but Iran have faster rockets with longer ranges and still found it hard to down any fighter on long range. Ukrainians with western technology are also suffering against less developed Russia Air force on long range. In modern warfare the only real proven Airplane downing concept success belong to long range Air to Air missles supported by AIWACS.

 

[sh. Abdj]

Pakistani hit on Rafale was also a strong proof of this fact

Yes that depended on advance AIWACS and advanced air radars. Pakistan was also fighting in mountainous terrain, and the ground Radars mostly would have failed to detect the Indian Aircrafts flying between the mountains. But the Air Radars saved the day.

 

[Oublious]

Still all the Turkish systems are lacking number and experience to develope. Remember the Patriots early bad performance with ballistic missiles in Iraq War compared to the modern much successful performance. Sadly other than Baykar no other company is working on fast acceleration of production. Turkeye is surrounded by very dangerous neighbors that could start a war anytime in case of change in their leadership, and for the current crazy Isreali leadership they could start a war on Syria in any minute. In short Turkeye should be producing like it is in war, and although Turkeye is working little fast but still not war like emergency. Iran mistakes and success in this short war should be studied seriously and Ukraine lessons also should be studied seriously. The work on big number of Air defence as intense as the small Isreal should be accelerated meanwhile the work on Russia like big long range kamikaze drone(1,000km+) production (about 200 daily) should be considered and mass production of 1,000km+ Ballistic missiles that the president already ordered to accelerate should be considered (300+ monthly). The defense and the ability to respond and cause pain are deeply related. Government should encourage more innovative companies like Baykar to enter in these three fields: Rockets, Ballistic missles, long range Kamikaze drones, and Air defence. As we had seen in Iran Case praised Air defence Systems didn't find any real success especially compared to the hype and complexity while simple systems from new factories and young engineers had some success.

lol

All that amount missiles what Iran did, in the end zionist fighters wher flying above Tehran and they could do nothing but watch each others.

 

[sh. Abdj]

lol

All that amount missiles what Iran did, in the end zionist fighters wher flying above Tehran and they could do nothing but watch each others.

Yes bro this is the scary part. Iran had much more Air defence systems than Turkeye that are faster and with longer range than all what Turkey have. Still they failed in detecting and locking on the Zionists Airplanes. I know Turkeye is more advanced in detection, locking on targets, and data link but still Turkey needs to excelerate its Air defence programs like it is already in war. Iran was lucky that its ballistic missiles program showed alot of success and was a deterant or Zionists would have been bombing them till today. However alot of lessons should be learned from this short war.

 

[sh. Abdj]

Türkiye produces weapon systems at NATO standart at least,that is why Türkiye is succesful.
You guys have this hype of Iranian military achievements when there are none.

Yes and Nato countries except for USA although proved to have better quality still incapable of long or intense war due to the mindset of low production rate. The only country with effective air defence compared to the country size is the zionist state and that is due to its size, experience and determination. Ukrainians used alot of effective tactics with good success rate compared to the limited number of batteries and the size of the country. Even Russian with the biggest Air defence network in the world had some success compared to the big size of the country but they didn't encounter 5th gen enemy fighters yet. Anyway as long as bombs are not dropping on Turkeye they should have an intense Air defence for all the country with alot of AIWACS which they are still lacking behind in. Again many things can pass between the mountains and surprise the country. And with crazy Zionists having the most Advanced F-35s nearby no body is safe. So Air defense projects with other strategic projects should be working like real war time.

 

[boredaf]

Yes bro this is the scary part. Iran had much more Air defence systems than Turkeye that are faster and with longer range than all what Turkey have. Still they failed in detecting and locking on the Zionists Airplanes. I know Turkeye is more advanced in detection, locking on targets, and data link but still Turkey needs to excelerate its Air defence programs like it is already in war. Iran was lucky that its ballistic missiles program showed alot of success and was a deterant or Zionists would have been bombing them till today. However alot of lessons should be learned from this short war.

Not only they couldn't stop Israel, they virtually begged the whole way through so that it wouldn't escalate and they get their arses handed to them even more. And the damage they did was minimal, despite using so many missiles. The only lesson to learn from Iran at any time is to not turn into them.

 

[AlperTunga]

With our air defence systems we don't need to cover the whole Turkey. Israel or Greece wouldn't risk flying all that distance to attack residential areas. Israel can however try to justify an attack on important military facilities, claiming they pose a potential threat to them. We just need to make sure that critical places are very well protected. My question now: If Israel attacks TUSAS (TAI) facilities with its F35s, at which distance can we detect those planes or their missiles? If we detect the missile say only at a close distance can we still shoot it with our Hisar A? How about a Korkut like system which can fire many dispersing munition. How many such systems would we need to protect TAI? Or whatever the number of Hisar A or Korkut, because of some technical aspects (detection, speed of munition etc) it is not possible to protect. I mean I don't think Korkut etc. are that expensive systems so we should produce them in very large numbers (if they are at all useful) in the next couple of year. This is essential because our air force is not up to par due to mistakes done in the past (which we somehow always do and seem never to learn our lesson).

 

[AlperTunga]

My question is still valid. Let's say we can detect only at 10km. Can our short range systems (or similar ones in the world) shoot the missile from F35? Even if we have 50% success rate, that would mean Israel would need to make many sorties. Also, that would mean instead of 5 Korkut we should have 10 Korkut to protect the place. Unless the success rate is 1%!

 

[TheInsider]

@Sanchez @Yasar_TR @TheInsider could someone please answer?

Aren't stealth aircraft optimized against S-Band radars? Doesn't this information contradict itself?

"ALP 300-G, is a new generation S-Band radar developed for long range early warning, with its AESA and digital beamforming antenna architecture. ALP 300-G has the ability to detect and track air breathing targets, anti-radiation missiles and stealth/low RCS targets from very long ranges."

https://wwwcdn.aselsan.com/api/file/ALP_300-G_ENG.pdf

The lower the frequency of the radar, the less useful the stealth is. The lower the frequency, the more difficult it is to obtain a quality track to lock onto the target. S-band emerges as a sweet spot; it is lower in frequency compared to X-band radars, but with advanced data processing, GaN, element-level digitization, you can still get a firing solution. The most important part of the puzzle is to get the radars to work together with advanced synchronization and data fusion it is a step further than basically hooking up all radars into a network and creating a combined air picture. Next generation Aselsan radars like EIRS has advanced synchronization and data fusion capability.

To counteract those developments, 6th gen aircraft ditch vertical tails and keep a diamond/baklava slice or triangle shape and use next-generation stealth coatings and RAM paints.

 

[UkroTurk]

5 Korkut we should have 10 Korkut to protect

Protect what? How many strategic places we have? At war , even hospitals are more strategic than rocket launchers. Could you put every corner 5 Korkut? It is not realistic?

 

[AlperTunga]

Ok

I didn't question your question. I just wanted to point out that you will never get real and credible values.
Also war is dynamic, there are many factors you need to include.

I know. I thought about it again. If short term systems were the solution, then probably they would have worked for Iran as well. I mean here no "rocket" science is needed and their performance is largely similar all over the world. This probably explains why everyone is trying to detect at long range. I was just wondering whether "the law of large numbers" can help here or is it rather waste of money. And also to understand why short range systems fail. Because their speed is not enough? Or we need so many to cover every angle in the air?

 

[AlperTunga]

Protect what? How many strategic places we have? At war , even hospitals are more strategic than rocket launchers. Could you put every corner 5 Korkut? It is not realistic?

I said clearly I am talking about TUSAS (TAI) where Kaan is developed. I am talking about the most critical places. This may sound cruel but hospital is not a "very critical" place. Those people are already not combat capable and why should the enemy waste its efforts to bomb a hospital??

 

[MonteCarlo]

My question is still valid. Let's say we can detect only at 10km. Can our short range systems (or similar ones in the world) shoot the missile from F35? Even if we have 50% success rate, that would mean Israel would need to make many sorties. Also, that would mean instead of 5 Korkut we should have 10 Korkut to protect the place. Unless the success rate is 1%!

I think that Korkut is a very necessary sytem for important facilities but I also fear that we won't deploy it in facilities that are in or close to cities because our obsession with "collateral damage"

 

[TR_123456]

My question is still valid. Let's say we can detect only at 10km. Can our short range systems (or similar ones in the world) shoot the missile from F35? Even if we have 50% success rate, that would mean Israel would need to make many sorties. Also, that would mean instead of 5 Korkut we should have 10 Korkut to protect the place. Unless the success rate is 1%!

Ask yourself this question.
If detected from 10km away,how much time would you have to engage the missile.
That will answer your question.

 

[AlperTunga]

Ask yourself this question.
If detected from 10km away,how much time would you have to engage the missile.
That will answer your question.

was already thinking about it. If the enemy missile and the air defence munition/missile has the same speed and after detection it is fired instantly (not a human operator) then they should meet half way, that is at 5km. If the enemy missile is four times faster, then it will be neutralized at a distance of 2km. Of course, assuming our engagement is perfect. Are you saying we don't have automatic engagement? if that's the case then of course it won't work at such short distance.

 

[Huelague]

was already thinking about it. If the enemy missile and the air defence munition/missile has the same speed and after detection it is fired instantly (not a human operator) then they should meet half way, that is at 5km. If the enemy missile is four times faster, then it will be neutralized at a distance of 2km. Of course, assuming our engagement is perfect. Are you saying we don't have automatic engagement? if that's the case then of course it won't work at such short distance.

Our (new) AD is highly AI implemented.

 

[Yasar_TR]

@Sanchez @Yasar_TR @TheInsider could someone please answer?

Aren't stealth aircraft optimized against S-Band radars? Doesn't this information contradict itself?

"ALP 300-G, is a new generation S-Band radar developed for long range early warning, with its AESA and digital beamforming antenna architecture. ALP 300-G has the ability to detect and track air breathing targets, anti-radiation missiles and stealth/low RCS targets from very long ranges."

https://wwwcdn.aselsan.com/api/file/ALP_300-G_ENG.pdf

My radar knowledge is not great. It is limited to university physics level.
S band and X band is what F35 is optimised against. S band is the wavelength that microwaves sit. Aesa radars operate at that band. So it is understandable for F35 to have defence against them. However, as @TheInsider has explained there are ways to implement radars to circumvent certain stealth characteristics.
S band has a frequency level where Alp -300G can locate f35. It may not give precise lock capability in theory. But we don’t know what Aselsan has done there.

Most radars bombard planes with signals and measure Back Scatter. Stealth planes absorb most of these and radars can’t receive enough back any data to calculate position. However there is also Front Scatter that can be used. Below article written by a radar specialist to hold some light to how stealth planes can be located. It is just one of the ways they can be visible.

The technical explanation is that FSR ( front scatter radar) is a bistatic setup with a bistatic angle very close to 180 degrees, that exploits co-phase interference of the EM waves from the illuminated side of the target to get a forward-scatter cross-section that is several dB higher than conventional backscatter RCS.

Most radars are like shooting trillions of bouncy balls at the sky and then trying to figure out where a plane is, based on where the balls bounce back from or how they bounce back. If you make your plane very sticky, the balls don't bounce off it, so you can't find the plane any longer. FSR is like having tower A shoot balls directly at tower B continuously. If a sticky plane flies in between A and B, then B will know something's up when the balls stop coming all of a sudden.

So a set of radar systems in communication with each other can and should locate a stealth plane.
Although stealth technology has given planes like f35 a certain edge, the radar technology is developing and it is not long before radar systems beat stealth.