TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

Oublious

Experienced member
The Netherlands Correspondent
Messages
2,218
Reactions
8 4,803
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
I think i understand what I am saying.
Please read my post properly!
What I am saying is, in last 7 months of war ukrain's old and unsophisticated soviet era air defense systems acheived roughly 50/ 60 percent success rate against the russian cruise missile attacks. And lot of it are stealthy and modern missiles like the kh101 and kalibrs.

So based on that i am speculating that, a sophisticated modern air defense system with network centric capability equipped with aesa radar and more capable interceptor will have much higher success rate against these cruise missiles. ( probably 80/90 percent )

So that's may be problematic for air forces that relies heavily on subsonic cruise missiles for deep strikes.

and I definitely didn't said, they hit a missile so the time for subsonic cruise missile is game over!


No single airdefence systems can protect you against a cruise missile attack. You can have the best radar of the world you can not protect, the reaction time against a low flyinh cruise missile to short, as you can see if ther was 10 cruise missile flying they managed to hit 1, maybe 3 in good conditions. The only thing you can do is AWACS flying 24/7, a powerful radar in the ground can not protect.

Russian do not have PGM in stock, they are not able to use ther fighters against Ukrain sam system, so they are using ther cruisemissiles.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,797
Reactions
98 9,198
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
No single airdefence systems can protect you against a cruise missile attack. You can have the best radar of the world you can not protect, the reaction time against a low flyinh cruise missile to short, as you can see if ther was 10 cruise missile flying they managed to hit 1, maybe 3 in good conditions. The only thing you can do is AWACS flying 24/7, a powerful radar in the ground can not protect.

Russian do not have PGM in stock, they are not able to use ther fighters against Ukrain sam system, so they are using ther cruisemissiles.
As i said, a morden air defence system with network centric capability.

On a relative flat terrains you can detect a cruise missile from 30/40 km away with a good radar as it is usually flies at altitude of 20m to 50m ( as you know, unlike their anit ship counterparts land attack cruise missile cannot fly lower than that for obvious reason ) at speed of mach 0.75 to 0.95, an integrated air defence system will have reaction time of roughly 70 to 90 second.

And this is a big fat window of engagement for modern air defense systems lik s400, mim-104 pac 3, barak 8, iris t slm, sky sebra or hisar o+ given these systems only take 8/10 second to respond.

So, If we do the math for example with the sky sebra, which can guide 24 missile simultaneously and can fire 3 missile per second it will simply run out interceptors before any cruise missile close in within five miles. ( and that would be a clearly a win for air the defense system. )

And Even if it is a much less favorable condition, let's say radar only detected a bunch cruise missile at 20km the window of engagement will be 45 second.

and even in worst condition the if radar detect the missiles only at15km away because of radical mountainous terrain ( but that much late detection is unlikely ) the window will be roughly 35 second and that will be still just enough for sky sebra to expand all of its interceptors.
 
Last edited:

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,535
Solutions
2
Reactions
119 25,123
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
As i said, a morden air defence system with network centric capability.
That kind of a airdefence system would also be capable of BMs, artillery rockets, artillery, supersonic cruise missiles. So what is the point here?

War is not a simple chess board game, it is complicated. If you fire cruise missiles without a proper EW, SEAD/DEAD, intelligence on AD systems and units it is simply pointless, it doesn't even require a complicated network centric forces but simple units scattered in field to intercept those once sighted from simple E/Os directed at possibly incoming angle.

You see a video then come here as if there is no expert in TurAF who studies this ' hey bros, your air-force's tactics are obsolete better think to change it', like do you have any idea how USAF / USN relies on cruise missiles as primary stand-off weapons with alternatives? Like have ever checked how their main fleet (submarines, destroyers) units are oriented to use cruise missiles as primary offensive deep strike weapon in conventional warfare?. Yet they will introduce hypersonics but tomahawk will remain to be primary there.

We are open to discuss effectiveness of cruise missiles in conventional warfare under certain conditions not in this thread but dedicated thread, Q&A; your stance is offensive and you know it well. I don't know what is your purpose but it doesn't smell good to me.
 
Last edited:

Cabatli_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
5,360
Reactions
81 45,455
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The Turkish strike concept is based on the saturation of different types of very high precision missiles targeting the protected land or naval targets. In this context, subsonic missiles will be used effectively to create deadly pressure on protected targets. In addition, Turkish Subsonic missile systems will be more effective than Russian missiles, thanks to their infrared image based target tracking and navigation capabilities especially in mountainous areas. The enemy will have little chance to think against well-planned saturation that these missiles coming from different directions will perform.

The second missile family group created is based on the development of more lethal missile system with more advanced thrust in order to attack systems with higher protection. Turkiye is at very very advanced stages in this field and continues on its way with sure steps. This effective strike strategy will be provided at supersonic speeds thanks to Ramjet propulsion.


In addition, Turkiye has announced that it is working on Scramjet rocket engines and will produce systems that can reach hypersonic speeds which will be much more lethal in the medium term.

When we add Turkiye's highly advanced AESA based electronic attack systems to this scheme, a tremendous power multiplier will emerge. Once the target has been detected by a drone or USV, the strike options will be numerous.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,797
Reactions
98 9,198
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
That kind of a airdefence system would also be capable of BMs, artillery rockets, artillery, supersonic cruise missiles. So what is the point here?

War is not a simple chess board game, it is complicated. If you fire cruise missiles without a proper EW, SEAD/DEAD, intelligence on AD systems and units it is simply pointless, it doesn't even require a complicated network centric forces but simple units scattered in field to intercept those once sighted from simple E/Os directed at possibly incoming angle.

You see a video then come here as if there is no expert in TurAF who studies this ' hey bros, your airforce's tactics are obsolote better think to change it', like do you have any idea how USAF / USN relies on cruise missiles as primary stand-off weapons with alternatives?

We are open to discuss effectiveness of cruise missiles in warfare under certain conditions not in this thread but dedicated thread, Q&A; your stance is offensive and you know it well. I don't know what is your purpose but it doesn't smell good to me.
Unfortunately, this is always ended up happen. I merely express my thoughts without any offensive language or anythig provocative and yet people think i am claiming to be expert or my purpose is sinister! But in reality I never described any air to ground strategy or tactics of TURAF or USAF in my post. I just described a simple 'only cruise missiles vs air defence' hypothetical senario something similar to how russia is doing in ukraine. And that's it. And i never said TURAF should change it tactics because I think so. And I am suprised that you found my language offensive!
 
Last edited:

Kitra

Active member
Messages
124
Reactions
5 307
Nation of residence
Sweden
Nation of origin
Turkey
unsophisticated soviet era air defense systems acheived roughly 50/ 60 percent success rate against the russian cruise missile attacks.

Where did you get these numbers from ? I hardly think that neither Russians or the Ukrainians are going to share such information and any guess work from Twitter is utterly useless.

Also, what does the number represent? Is 50% of engaged targets destroyed or 50% of all fired Russian missiles destroyed or 50% for a certain type of (ballistic?) missiles? For example, the videos you shared shows relatively high altitude targeting (probably drones at 2-5km altitude). I'm not even sure if those old Soviet SAM systems can engage targets at 20m altitude.

Also, Russia hit a lot of cities today with said subsonic cruise missiles which indicate that they do have a place if used properly (instead of wasting them on civilian apartment blocks).
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,535
Solutions
2
Reactions
119 25,123
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
only cruise missiles vs air defence
If this is your point then simply create a new thread for this in Q&A or General warfare threads. That would be most suitable. So we can discuss it thoroughly, not just in vicinity of UKR-RU war or TurAF.
 

rif.ahm

Active member
Messages
34
Reactions
58
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
That kind of a airdefence system would also be capable of BMs, artillery rockets, artillery, supersonic cruise missiles. So what is the point here?

War is not a simple chess board game, it is complicated. If you fire cruise missiles without a proper EW, SEAD/DEAD, intelligence on AD systems and units it is simply pointless, it doesn't even require a complicated network centric forces but simple units scattered in field to intercept those once sighted from simple E/Os directed at possibly incoming angle.

You see a video then come here as if there is no expert in TurAF who studies this ' hey bros, your airforce's tactics are obsolote better think to change it', like do you have any idea how USAF / USN relies on cruise missiles as primary stand-off weapons with alternatives? Like have ever checked how their main fleet (submarines, destroyers) units are oriented to use cruise missiles as primary offensive deep strike weapon in conventional warfare?. Yet they will introduce hypersonics but tomahawk will remain to be primary there.

We are open to discuss effectiveness of cruise missiles in conventional warfare under certain conditions not in this thread but dedicated thread, Q&A; your stance is offensive and you know it well. I don't know what is your purpose but it doesn't smell good to me.
How is it offensive? He is just being curious & wants to have a discussion on this matter. Pretty amazed to see the response from a senior member.
 

Radonsider

Contributor
Messages
1,470
Reactions
14 2,807
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Unfortunately, this is always ended up happen. I merely express my thoughts without any offensive language or anythig provocative and yet people think i am claiming to be expert or my purpose is sinister! But in reality I never described any air to ground strategy or tactics of TURAF or USAF in my post. I just described a simple 'only cruise missiles vs air defence' hypothetical senario something similar to how russia is doing in ukraine. And that's it. And i never said TURAF should change it tactics because I think so. And I am suprised that you found my language offensive!
Don't bother much man
 

Hexciter

Experienced member
Messages
2,575
Reactions
4 11,452
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
When properly used ALCMs are efficient, what you see in this video is merely a "lucky shot". Don't judge any system's effectiveness based on how Russia utilizes them.
It has already been proven how incompetent RAF at conventional warfare.
RAF = Royal Air Force
RuAF = Russian Air Force
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,535
Solutions
2
Reactions
119 25,123
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
How is it offensive? He is just being curious & wants to have a discussion on this matter. Pretty amazed to see the response from a senior member.
Treating TurAF as a 3rd world country's airforce is "slightly" (as i offensive to me. TurAF isn't established few decades ago and they are aware of the developments.
RAF = Royal Air Force
RuAF = Russian Air Force
Much appreciated.
 

Cabatli_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
5,360
Reactions
81 45,455
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Mr Gürcan Okumuş: "We aim to conduct the firing tests of SOM missiles, in which national components will be used in 2023. In this way, the foreign dependency of SOM missile, which will have entirely national subsystems will be eliminated and ot will pave the way for export of SOM missiles to allied countries" @Defence Turkey
 

Cabatli_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
5,360
Reactions
81 45,455
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Mr Gürcan Okumuş:"Scramjet engine development are carried out in two main branches: modeling, simulation and testing activities. A hypersonic expansion tube is used for testing this type of engine" @Defence Turkey
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,475
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Mr Gürcan Okumuş: "We aim to conduct the firing tests of SOM missiles, in which national components will be used in 2023. In this way, the foreign dependency of SOM missile, which will have entirely national subsystems will be eliminated and ot will pave the way for export of SOM missiles to allied countries" @Defence Turkey

This is good, S.Korea was interested in SOM.
 

Cabatli_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
5,360
Reactions
81 45,455
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Mr Yiğit Koray Genç (Roketsan Naval&Cruise missils systems manager) gave a response to a question.

@Defence Turkey

"There are studies on the roadmap related to this (SUPERSONIC Cruise Missile)"
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom