TR Aircraft Carrier and Amphibious Ship Programs

[chngr]

MUGEM should have EMALS

MUGEM bigger than it seems...Landing runway length almost similar as US supercarriers...Maybe it can operate KAAN like big birds with EMALS

Until we can have carrier with EMALS..We should buy F-35B for our LHDs

 

[Ripley]

Until we can have carrier with EMALS..We should buy F-35B for our LHDs

Of course, you mean “if we could only buy F35Bs” because as we all know it simply is beyond our desires due to political tensions and unnamed embargoes

 

[boredaf]

Landing runway length almost similar as US supercarriers.

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

 

[Zoth]

MUGEM should have EMALS

MUGEM bigger than it seems...Landing runway length almost similar as US supercarriers...Maybe it can operate KAAN like big birds with EMALS

Until we can have carrier with EMALS..We should buy F-35B for our LHDs

Someone with more knowledge should correct me but without a nuclear reactor, providing the energy needed for EMALS is really difficult, not impossible but not efficient at the same time. In a smaller ship you can possibly get an EMALS working with a diesel/gas turbine but what's the point, you can just go with stobar or catobar for a smaller ships that launch small aircraft.

EMALS is designed to launch relatively big jet fighters with close to full load capacity and that requires so much energy surge in a very short span of time, to achieve this with a classic diesel/gas turbine system, you would need so many batteries and generators that it would take so much space and add into weight.
The reason why nuclear is a default for EMALS is not random, best way to provide a lot of energy with relatively small space.

 

[Yasar_TR]

MUGEM should have EMALS

MUGEM bigger than it seems...Landing runway length almost similar as US supercarriers...Maybe it can operate KAAN like big birds with EMALS

Until we can have carrier with EMALS..We should buy F-35B for our LHDs

We all have aspirations for better and more powerful weapons. But there are limits to what we can afford and what we can technically manufacture.
Electro Magnetic Aircraft Launch System is a very expensive system. Even more expensive is to develop it. That is why the French are contemplating purchasing the US system at a price of 1.321 billion dollars. (See below US govt document)

Apart from USA and China no other country have immediate access to this technology. India is working towards attaining it.

Developing it may take longer than we can envisage. Spain, Italy and Thailand use V/STOL planes on their carriers. UK carriers have redundant parallel runway with all catapult system ready to be installed, should the need arise. But in the meantime they operate F35B Vertical take off and landing capable planes. Russians have one STOBAR ski lift carrier that is still not operational. Indians operate STOBAR system on their carriers. Japan has a number of Helicopter Dock Destroyers that will operate F35Bs as well.

Most economical and convenient system, if conventional aircraft’s are to be used, is the STOBAR with a ski lift take off. But it may restrict your operating weight for the planes, to narrow tolerances. EMALS gives you more widespread use; But at a price. And re: @Zoth ’s post, Nuclear power is not a prerequisite. Chinese Navy Ship Fujian is claimed to be able to generate enough energy without the need for nuclear power for it’s EMALS.

France – Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) | Defense Security Cooperation Agency

www.dsca.mil

 

[Baklava Consumer]

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

 

[Baklava Consumer]

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?

 

[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.

 

[Baklava Consumer]

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.

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

 

[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