TR Aircraft Carrier & Amphibious Ship Programs

[Hannibal]

Does anybody know how many take-off runways the carrier will have in CATOBAR configuration?
3 takeoff
1 landing
??

 

[Sanchez]

Maybe we can buy nuclear reactors for carrier from China, they are working on it. And buy EMALS from them until we can develop indigenously?

Apologizing for my bluntness but who are you for China to even think about transferring two of their most prized technologies with you? These are not old B611 SRBMs. No one is sharing tech for naval nuclear reactors to be used for power projection save for their closest allies. We are not allies with China, we are not even at their periphery.

 

[boredaf]

Buying is not sharing the technology, and we are not a threat to China.

We are in NATO, we are by definition a threat to China and not to mention our troops already fought against their proxies in Korea. And buying *is* sharing as it would allow us, or anyone in the NATO we would allow, to take a look at under the hood so to speak. Why do you think so many of what Ukraine captured from Russia ended up in US or UK?

 

[chngr]

Both Nimitz and Gerald Ford class carriers are about 50 metres longer than our plans, how are they almost similar?

i'm talking about LANDING runway...angled one

its very important for aircraft capacity

MUGEM vs Kitty Hawk

 

[dBSPL]

The questions that are usually asked are the difficulty of acquiring the catapult system, its high cost, the fact that it increases the cost of shipbuilding, and the expert workforce, know-how and time required to develop it if it is a domestic solution.

However, if we assume that we will not have access to the F-35B; would it be less costly and faster to develop the CATOBAR variant of the KAAN or to develop a STOBAR combatant with a new airframe?

Other options are to conduct a shipbuilding program relying on the F-35B that we can obtain 'maybe one day in the future' (in return for fully complying with US policies and giving up on some critical national security issues); or to go for a ready-made STOBAR solution that already has non-NATO examples.

The last option is to convert light attack jets into sea-based control aircraft and focus directly on unmanned combatants.

 

[UkroTurk]

How much will MUGEM app cost us?


Non-nuclear , 65000 ton HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08) costs 3 billion pound. American nuclear Ford class AC 13 billion USD dollars.
French future nuclear AC will cost 10billion usd.

Construction of AC is not a Construction of LHD that cost us 650 million USD.

Then Turkish Navy will invest min 3 billion in MUGEM for what?

 

[uçuyorum]

How much will MUGEM app cost us?


Non-nuclear , 65000 ton HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08) costs 3 billion pound. American nuclear Ford class AC 13 billion USD dollars.
French future nuclear AC will cost 10billion usd.

Construction of AC is not a Construction of LHD that cost us 650 million USD.

Then Turkish Navy will invest min 3 billion in MUGEM for what?

I doubt it will be as expensive as Queen Elizabeth, probably somewhere halfway between that and Anadolu initially. However, the aircraft wing to put on the carrier might cost another billion by itself.

 

[UkroTurk]

I doubt it will be as expensive as Queen Elizabeth, probably somewhere halfway

MUGEM will weight 60000ton as same as Queen Elizabeth.

3 billion cost was 10years ago, i didn't calculate inflation of prices
Queen Elizabeth Christined 10 years ago and commissioned in 2017

 

[Huelague]

We are in NATO, we are by definition a threat to China and not to mention our troops already fought against their proxies in Korea. And buying *is* sharing as it would allow us, or anyone in the NATO we would allow, to take a look at under the hood so to speak. Why do you think so many of what Ukraine captured from Russia ended up in US or UK?

You know that China helped to build our BM program (Yildirim-1)?

 

[Yasar_TR]

MUGEM will weight 60000ton as same as Queen Elizabeth.

3 billion cost was 10years ago, i didn't calculate inflation of prices
Queen Elizabeth Christined 10 years ago and commissioned in 2017

Britain now has two aircraft carriers at sea

HMS Prince of Wales is once again back at sea having departed Portsmouth, joining sister ship HMS Queen Elizabeth in waters around the UK.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

Two ships, QE2 & Prince of Wales together cost 7.6 billion pounds in 2017. Inflation corrected to today’s money, that is 10.3 billion pounds which translates to 13.3 billion dollars. They were each, supposed to be home to 36 F35B jets. Although UK cut the overall order of F35 planes by nearly half, 73 F35B jets have been bought. 36 F35s naked will be worth 4.2 billion dollars. Add to that the helicopters like Merlins, Apaches, wildcats and Chinooks; best part of 5.5 billion dollars per ship is also needed. So each ship fully equipped will be worth 11.5 billion dollars. Add to this, 96 million dollars a year of operating costs too. That is the running cost of the ship itself. The aircrafts’ running costs are separate.

How much does a Queen Elizabeth class carrier cost per year?

A Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier costs £96 million per year to operate.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

 

[dBSPL]

The design and classification of the ship, the building of the hull and superstructure blocks, all the systems, the installations, equiping, (except for the ship propulsion systems) and all weapon systems and the air platforms it will carry will be the product of domestic companies and workforce. Although there are cost factors originating from imported intermediate products in many subsystems, we generally have the infrastructure to develop and produce naval vessels at much lower costs than Western Europe or USA. I cannot be sure about the ship that has not been produced yet at this size and will be the first in its class, but if we go by a ready example; I cannot even give a 1% chance that a frigate similar to the I class that will come out of British design offices can be launched in British shipyards at the same costs as the TCG Izmir or TCG Izmit. (The story of the Istanbul frigate is a little different and a bit of a mess was made in that process.) And if I'm not mistaken, Britain's last aircraft carrier program, although it saved about 5-6 shipyards from the brink of bankruptcy, was a very unsuccessful project model from a cost-oriented perspective.

 

[dBSPL]

Just thinking out loud: If the purchase of EF for the air force is finalized, can we become an industrial participant of this aircraft by undertaking the development cost of the STOBAR variant of EF, which has been prepared for several tenders before but has not received an order and therefore has not yet emerged, but the project was ready to start?

(The following excerpt is a worth reading post with concentrated information on the development of Navalize Typhoon in past.)

The option of a ‘marinised’ Typhoon has been studied several times, first as the only STOBAR aircraft type to be considered by the original FCBA/JCA studies.

Early pre-feasibility studies of a Eurofighter Typhoon (N) (using the possible service name - Sea Typhoon) were undertaken in early 1996 by British Aerospace's Military Aircraft and Aerostructures. (BAE Systems initially suggested that costly airframe strengthening and a new undercarriage for Typhoon (N), as traditionally required for the ‘navalisation’ of a land based aircraft, could be avoided by using sophisticated computer controlled precise landing systems and other aids to reduce arrested landing stresses to within existing Typhoon limits. These ideas were not accepted by the MOD, however, and a fully navalised STOBAR Typhoon was drawn up).

A further 27 month contract was let in 1997 to study both catapult-launched (CTOL) and STOBAR variants in more detail.

Both variants would have required a large conventional aircraft carrier with an angled flight deck and arrester wires.

Both featured a strengthened undercarriage and an arrestor hook, and consideration was given to providing a larger thicker wing with power folding and more powerful vectored thrust EJ200 engines.


In May 2001 Sir Robert Walmsley, Head of the Defence Procurement Agency, dismissed the possibility of a navalised Eurofighter pointing out that Typhoon was "not currently designed so that it could use a carrier. We could change the design but we would be faced with a huge piece of work. The materials would probably have to be changed in order to avoid corrosion; the weight of the undercarriage would have to be doubled to support carrier landing which would eat into the payload margin; and the wing roots would have to be strengthened in order to take the full inertia forces on landing. That sounds to me like a very substantial redesign. It is always possible, but it would cost a huge amount of money and it would certainly add very considerably to the cost of the aircraft.”

There had also been fears that the flight deck clearance of external weapons would be dangerously low for the robust nature of carrier launch and landing events, and that the canards would dangerously restrict the pilots view during high angle of attack carrier landings. These fears were dismissed after studies.

Walmsley’s conclusions were not shared by those who’d undertaken the studies, and the possibility of a navalised Typhoon re-emerged in late 2005, as a "Plan B" in the event of a JSF cancellation.

BAE engineers had concluded that navalising Typhoon appeared to be "practical and relatively inexpensive", and that navalising later RAF tranches "might be of interest". The view over the nose was not necessarily inadequate and there were a number of options for reducing sink rate. Of these only the increased angle of attack option would would require the addition of a pilot periscope or a higher seat position and higher canopy roofline.

The studies indicated a 340 kg weight increase for the STOBAR version, and 460 kg for the CTOL catapult launched variant.

STOBAR was considered preferable to CTOL, flight control system changes would be necessary to guarantee "precision landings" but there would be little change to structural layout, and there would certainly be no need for a major rework for the aircraft to survive arrested landings.

The Typhoon’s advanced flight-control system could be programmed to reduce the stresses of landing, particularly if integrated with a carrier-landing datalink. This would have a number of advantages. For instance, sudden pitching of the carrier deck would be recognised by the system, which would feed in last-second control corrections, ensuring that the aircraft landed within set limits. This would permit the airframe to be strengthened only as required for operations within those parameters.

Thrust vectoring, already being planned for the Typhoon, coupled with a high-lift wing design, could provide near-optimal short-takeoff-and-landing capabilities for a ‘Sea Typhoon.’ The use of a ski ramp would only enhance STOL performance.

As an alternative to JSF, it was claimed that Typhoon (N) would offer higher speed, range and payload, although it would be less stealthy. A Typhoon (N) would also have the advantage of considerable commonality with the 232 Eurofighter Typhoon's already planned for the RAF – if, indeed, the third Tranche was not completed in a Typhoon (N) configuration.

The UK was not the only potential customer for a navalised Typhoon, Eurofighter GmbH briefed the Italian Navy during 2000 about a low-cost, reduced weight, arrestor landing/angled deck variant of the while the company offered ‘another customer’ (probably India) a “more radically modified naval version of the aircraft”, presumably the STOBAR variant studied for the UK.

Naval Eurofighter Typhoon projects

This may well be bollocks and sloppy journalism, though I understand that the Typhoon (N) “is not dead” and that the studies are still being looked at and kept under review. The option of a ‘marinised’ Typhoon has been studied several times, first as the only STOBAR aircraft type to be...

www.secretprojects.co.uk

 

[BalkanTurk90]

Any news about AC 5gen fighter aircraft ??
I dont think navy will only take trainer aircraft and drones in that AC
If u want full Carrier than 5gen fighter aircraft is the must .
TAI can work to make a derivate from KAAN Like shorter 17-18 meter , Folded Wings and other changes for AC .

 

[uçuyorum]

Just thinking out loud: If the purchase of EF for the air force is finalized, can we become an industrial participant of this aircraft by undertaking the development cost of the STOBAR variant of EF, which has been prepared for several tenders before but has not received an order and therefore has not yet emerged, but the project was ready to start?

(The following excerpt is a worth reading post with concentrated information on the development of Navalize Typhoon in past.)

Naval Eurofighter Typhoon projects

This may well be bollocks and sloppy journalism, though I understand that the Typhoon (N) “is not dead” and that the studies are still being looked at and kept under review. The option of a ‘marinised’ Typhoon has been studied several times, first as the only STOBAR aircraft type to be...

www.secretprojects.co.uk

Not possible without other partners I think. UK and Italy use F35B, so only spain could be a canditate but they don't have a full carrier, F35B is more suitable for them because they have harriers on their LHD. I think it's inevitable. It would be an interesting development if we partnered for 2 carries and naval eurofighter though, but I don't think other partners would approve that anyways

 

[dBSPL]

Not possible without other partners I think. UK and Italy use F35B, so only spain could be a canditate but they don't have a full carrier, F35B is more suitable for them because they have harriers on their LHD. I think it's inevitable. It would be an interesting development if we partnered for 2 carries and naval eurofighter though, but I don't think other partners would approve that anyways

If I were to give my opinion, if a country puts its money and bears the cost and risk of a variant and capacity expansion of a platform on which they are already making money for the partner countries in question, it is not pragmatic to be against it, and it would only be the product of political stupidity. I have hope that with the second Trump term, the EU region will face some harsh realities and this political stupidity will be left behind a little, including Germany, but of course this is my personal opinion. Because of that, I'm more interested in what would be a real alternative to the F35B if we don't have access to it, rather than other questions.

My Q; What if Turkish naval forces does financing the development of actual size fighter aircraft that will meet the needs of the naval combatant air forces exactly, over the the project that its model is ready, the feasibility has been done, but no client has been found before.

There is no doubt that the consortium countries are not interested in this variant. Countries in the EF consortium, including Spain, are not expected to engage in this type of development when they already have access to the F35B. As stated in the part I have already quoted, this 'project' has remained as a plan B. Apart from that, it may have been offered to India and Brazil, i dunno, it is necessary to scan the sources.. What we know that the engineering side of the project was largely ready and a number of institutions in the UK have put a lot of thought into it. This is the part I attach importance to, the engineering solutions of what to do and how to do it have already been worked on more than once.

But with an important nuance, Not, for example, that the Arab emirates fund Lockheed's F-16 variant development in the US, but whether there can be variant development that includes Turkish aerospace industry participation. The experience and cooperation to be gained here could pave the way for the development of a navalized jet within the domestic fifth generation jet development program in the future. This accumulation can also be achieved through the Hürjet Naval, but on the one hand, a platform that can meet the needs of naval combat aviation at the 'minimum level' may emerge, while on the other hand, there may be the opportunity to acquire a full combat jet.

This could be a strategic direction in terms of opening up access to a STOBAR jet that will meet your needs exactly, even if the sole user remains the Turkish naval forces. Like I said I'm just thinking out loud, this way we may have access to a fighter aircraft with an extra corrosion-resistant fuselage, flight avionics that provide more precise landing and take-off, reinforced landing gear, the ability to land on unprepared and short runways, and certified with all naval warfare munitions. Again, my personal opinion is that if we had such an aircraft, I would not equate the potential acquisition amount to MUGEM's typical air task force. Btw, I apologize to the forum if I took the current topic out of context, I like to chatter sometimes...

 

[Fairon]

I think if we go for the naval aircraft development route for the MUGEM, we should make it a joint project between Air Force and Navy.(Not F35 but more like Rafale)

Air Force probably will need a single engine multirole aircraft that accompanies Kaan in the future(because of the possible KAAN cost) and Navy will need an aircraft for the MUGEM. This way the cost will be much more justifiable.

 

[dBSPL]

I think if we go for the naval aircraft development route for the MUGEM, we should make it a joint project between Air Force and Navy.(Not F35 but more like Rafale)

Air Force probably will need a single engine multirole aircraft that accompanies Kaan in the future(because of the possible KAAN cost) and Navy will need an aircraft for the MUGEM. This way the cost will be much more justifiable.

I am not as hopeful as some friends about this single-engine KAAN. The reason for this is the possible platforms of the TAF combat fleets that are slowly becoming apparent for next 20 years. Especially when compared to the payload capacity and typical operational radius, a scale is seen to have formed. Even if the Navy were to make room for it, the design and development of such a new airframe would likely take until the 2040s to deliver it to the Navy, considering current ongoing programs.

(illustration tr_tech X.com)

With twin +6000lbf engine configuration, both KE and ANKA variants will continue their expansion. On top of all this, although there are various debates among defense enthusiasts, one way or another the LCA variant for the Hürjet is now almost certain. In other words, there will be a payload capacity ranging from 1 tons to possibly 4 tons on 5 platforms with a similar flight envelope to main combat jets. Except for long range strike drones without afterburners, in case of longer range and a payload requirement of more than 5 tons, the main combat platform KAAN will be responsible, meanwhile I think the capacity will be much less in full stealth mode.

The aircraft that will be navalized will weigh more at least half ton, maybe more. Due to the nature of the STOBAR operation, it is also very difficult to take off these aircraft from the carrier with its full payload capacity. While there will be so many options below of scale, I believe that if a navalized variant is to emerge through the next gen fighter KAAN program, the fastest way to do this is to work on navalizing the existing airframe, perhaps with a foldable wing configuration like the F35C, without compromising the aircraft's current targeted power output and capacity as much as possible.

I think the most important issue here will be that we can produce the engine domestically. Thus, both production and maintenance-operation expenses will remain domestically to the maximum extent.

 

[UkroTurk]

Just thinking out loud: If the purchase of EF for the air force is finalized, can we become an industrial participant of this aircraft by undertaking the development cost of the STOBAR variant of EF, which has been prepared for several tenders before but has not received an order and therefore has not yet emerged, but the project was ready to start?

(The following excerpt is a worth reading post with concentrated information on the development of Navalize Typhoon in past.)

Naval Eurofighter Typhoon projects

This may well be bollocks and sloppy journalism, though I understand that the Typhoon (N) “is not dead” and that the studies are still being looked at and kept under review. The option of a ‘marinised’ Typhoon has been studied several times, first as the only STOBAR aircraft type to be...

www.secretprojects.co.uk

I am raising the stake and

 

[Anmdt]

UK Ministry of Defense was considering "disposing of" one of the two Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858054220500332845

Gov should consider this, you can get one of these for dirt cheap and convert it into CATOBAR for a future naval Kaan, it can accommodate 3 electromagnetic catapults if you remove the ramp. Can save a lot of money/time and make Turkish navy a true blue water navy.

Man, please follow and post credible sources. Not someone's comment on an article that wasn't even read thoroughly.

However, they believed it would be unlikely that ministers would get rid of one of the carriers because they would have to pull out of a commitment to be permanently available for Nato duties. “I don’t think we would downgrade our commitment at a time when the US are signalling moving away,” the source said, adding that a Trump’s victory in the American presidential election made a reduction in Britain’s Nato commitments unlikely.

Original source;

War games expose aircraft carriers as the Royal Navy’s weak link

HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, which cost £6.2 billion, are vulnerable to missiles. Should they be scrapped in the defence review?

www.thetimes.com

Get rid of these wannabe experts for God's sake.

 

[dBSPL]

Retired Admiral Cihat Yaycı said that he knew that a naval variant of the KAAN, capable of vertical landing, being worked on to be evaluated in the next period. He starts the sentence like a wish, but he emphasizes several times that he knows it. Even if it's an evaluation phase right now, it's big news.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858955647980892517

(paşa hariçten gazel okumuyorsa büyük haber, foruma aktarırken hayli tereddütte kaldım)