TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,473
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
bro you are mixing datalink with a simple radio waves.. there is a reason each air to air missiles cost more than1000000$. if you want to put the same amount of money on anti tank missile, it doesnt make sense.. also too small for that
What's the difference, same sort of one-way or Two-way R/F link... We can see same type used on HISAR too..
 

AzeriTank

Contributor
Messages
692
Reactions
2 1,760
Nation of residence
Azerbaijan
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
Especially in conventional warfare, where enemy has soft kill systems, fire and forget etc. is not going to be as reliable as wired guidance

Fiber optic data link cannot be jammed unlike other guidance systems. Its not an old system. Spike Family, French MMP etc. have fiber optic guidance capability.
You know how soft kill works right? one of them for example, it simply drop smokes so stop your laser range finder see the tank, at the same time tank try to move its location so when anti tank missile get there, it cannot hit it as you cannot see it too.. lets say you got wired system, what will it change?

Thats what i simply said above, your data link can work to some degree, show me a single of those anti tank missiles which hits 16km away with data link? there is reason they have low range
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,189
Solutions
2
Reactions
100 23,174
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Maybe it is crazy what i am saying but could we use this system with Ballistic Missiles? Imagine a stealth uav penetrate enemy airspace and spot target?
That is why people have been telling Baykar should focus on a platform with small signatures to do IR- targeting and intelligence gathering when needed. This is also needed for the Navy, something can sneak in through radar and IR detection systems to gather EL or COMM data to pinpoint attacks in medium ranges.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,189
Solutions
2
Reactions
100 23,174
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Based on my hearing wired system is typically needed in first few kilometres to update or lock-onto target case of heavy jamming on wide bands, releasing it afterwards a lock-on. It is better than ending up without firing any missiles, successfully, and IIR-IR-RGB guidance would keep on track after a lock.
And since launchers are mainly designed for an ambush, hit and run it is better if they are not detected at the first very moment by being visible to the targets, the indirect detection methods take time, creates time for the units to run or move.
You know how soft kill works right? one of them for example, it simply drop smokes so stop your laser range finder see the tank, at the same time tank try to move its location so when anti tank missile get there, it cannot hit it as you cannot see it too.. lets say you got wired system, what will it change?

Thats what i simply said above, your data link can work to some degree, show me a single of those anti tank missiles which hits 16km away with data link? there is reason they have low range
 

Huelague

Experienced member
Messages
3,614
Reactions
4 3,863
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey

Kartal1

Experienced member
Lead Moderator
Messages
4,455
Reactions
81 16,729
Nation of residence
Bulgaria
Nation of origin
Turkey
We developed enough guided missiles but Turkish Army needs also indigenous rocket propelled granades or recoilless gun. As you guess I'd go for Carl Gustav.
Something in the concept of Carl Gustaf will be very welcomed by me. It doesn't mean it have to be exactly the Carl Gustaf system. I would like to see something in the scale of the Carl Gustaf M4 variant. Known feedback from the soldiers is that Carl Gustaf's earlier versions are heavy and bulky and by the initiatives to improve it lighter and more useful variants came. I would like Turkish engineers to develop a comparable thing capable of firing both dumb and guided munitions when needed. With such a system the TSK will be able to suppress enemies accurately and effectively on ranges of up to 1000m with dumb and if we are able to develop a guided munition comparable to the one Raytheon developed for the Carl Gustaf we could engage targets with pinpoint accuracy on ranges over 2000m and that capability is really something we should look into. It will be highly effective against infantry, armored vehicles and will probably have limited effect on modern MBTs but for purely anti-tank roles we have larger and more capable system with top attack capability in the face of Kara Ok.
 

dustdevil

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
271
Reactions
669
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The data link can't be jammed but the guidance loop itself still can be. The launcher needs to see the missile to compute the guidance correction, which is why the ATGM has a flare or other emitter behind it. The target can jam the the ATGM by either blinding the launcher so it can't see the flare or tricking it into thinking the flare is moving when it's not. Also, the RF data link to an ATGM can be made fairly resistant to jamming. These things are always a cat and mouse game. The important thing is to keep innovating so you can stay one step ahead of the adversary.
With the fiberoptic link you don't need to see the missile. The missile has a camera, the video is relayed to the launcher, operator steers the missile based on video, the guidance loop and feedback is in the data link.
 
E

Era_shield

Guest
With the fiberoptic link you don't need to see the missile. The missile has a camera, the video is relayed to the launcher, operator steers the missile based on video, the guidance loop and feedback is in the data link.
That's true, but the downside is that the sensor is destroyed with each firing. So you either need to use a cheap sensor (which potentially reduces the range, susceptibility to countermeasures, or time to fire), or use a good sensor and the price of the missile goes up a lot. That's why ATGMs rarely use this method. Nonetheless, if there's a real war between advanced peer adversaries I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot more of this type of guidance. For now though it's considered overkill.
 

dustdevil

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
271
Reactions
669
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
That's true, but the downside is that the sensor is destroyed with each firing. So you either need to use a cheap sensor (which potentially reduces the range, susceptibility to countermeasures, or time to fire), or use a good sensor and the price of the missile goes up a lot. That's why ATGMs rarely use this method. Nonetheless, if there's a real war between advanced peer adversaries I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot more of this type of guidance. For now though it's considered overkill.
Used rarely? Spike family uses this method and it's used by many nations. MMP also uses it.

The RF datalink may not work behind the walls or obstacles, the bandwidth is limited so the image is not as good as fiber optic, one can't shoot it from inside of a concrete building and remain hidden while the missile goes out of sight. Use the same sensor with the fiber optic link, you'd have a more reliable missile except the fiber releasing part. If money is a problem strap a cheap phone camera to the missile and send it to 20 km, it will work.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,189
Solutions
2
Reactions
100 23,174
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
It was 2015-2016 when UMTAS was integrated and tested first time at sea from a Yonca-Onuk boat,
and later in 2019-2020 the similar tests conducted from a Burak class corvette.
 
E

Era_shield

Guest
Used rarely? Spike family uses this method and it's used by many nations. MMP also uses it.

The RF datalink may not work behind the walls or obstacles, the bandwidth is limited so the image is not as good as fiber optic, one can't shoot it from inside of a concrete building and remain hidden while the missile goes out of sight. Use the same sensor with the fiber optic link, you'd have a more reliable missile except the fiber releasing part. If money is a problem strap a cheap phone camera to the missile and send it to 20 km, it will work.
The total number of Spike with LOAL and MMPs in service is a tiny fraction of ATGMs. By the way, all the long range (10km+) Spike missiles use RF, not fiber optic.

And yes, you can strap an optical camera onto it but then you would quickly stop dong that when you realised that simple camouflage that even terrorists can use can counter it.

RF has its downsides too, but as I said, these things are always a game of cat and mouse.
 
T

Turko

Guest
Guys i don't want to ruin the topic but in my humble opinion we also need less than SOM more than UMTAS missiles like SPEAR 3. The spear 3 is crazy cruise missile while it has little turbo jet engine which gives 100km range. Mini cruise missile with 100km range. Turkish Navy , TurAF would like and use it immensely.
 

Kartal1

Experienced member
Lead Moderator
Messages
4,455
Reactions
81 16,729
Nation of residence
Bulgaria
Nation of origin
Turkey
Guys i don't want to ruin the topic but in my humble opinion we also need less than SOM more than UMTAS missiles like SPEAR 3. The spear 3 is crazy cruise missile while it has little turbo jet engine which gives 100km range. Mini cruise missile with 100km range. Turkish Navy , TurAF would like and use it immensely.
This is where Kuzgun and KGK-ER comes.
 

Kartal1

Experienced member
Lead Moderator
Messages
4,455
Reactions
81 16,729
Nation of residence
Bulgaria
Nation of origin
Turkey
KGK-er will have rocket engine however it is bounded an aircraft to reach long range.

I've no clue about Kuzgun. Does it have jet engine like cruise missiles?
I am not sure what kind of propulsion Kuzgun will have but looking at the specs it is very likely Kuzgun to use jet engine. I am looking at the capability of Spear 3 and at the capability of Kuzgun with their operational profiles and have to say that they are very comparable and Kuzgun even have an upper hand in terms of guidance system and modularity. They are both the same weight and length. The range is very close to that of Spear 3 minus 30km but who knows what will be the real specs after tests and further optimization are completed.
 

guest12

Well-known member
Messages
412
Reactions
2 876
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Guys i don't want to ruin the topic but in my humble opinion we also need less than SOM more than UMTAS missiles like SPEAR 3. The spear 3 is crazy cruise missile while it has little turbo jet engine which gives 100km range. Mini cruise missile with 100km range. Turkish Navy , TurAF would like and use it immensely.
Wait for Middle Range Anti-Ship Missile and you will get your wish.
 

dustdevil

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
271
Reactions
669
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The total number of Spike with LOAL and MMPs in service is a tiny fraction of ATGMs. By the way, all the long range (10km+) Spike missiles use RF, not fiber optic.

And yes, you can strap an optical camera onto it but then you would quickly stop dong that when you realised that simple camouflage that even terrorists can use can counter it.

RF has its downsides too, but as I said, these things are always a game of cat and mouse.
Sorry for answering in parts:


1- You said it's rare . Fair point if you compare it with all of the ATGM inventory of all counties. If this paper is correct the number of produced missiles (more than 32000) and production forecast (+15000 missiles after 2018) seems important to me. Also consider future MMP production as it's selected for European BLOS programme.



2- About missiles with good sensors being expensive vs dumber missiles. TV guidance for munitions is not new. Almost the same sensors would be on RF versions with NLOS man-in-the-loop capability like UMTAS/OMTAS and Spike NLOS variants. So if you think of sensors, combine RF+IIR autonomous+fiber optic missiles together versus all dumb and cheap missiles.

3- A cheap camera or sensor can't detect a vehicle?

Sure, with bad weather it's hard to do... but let me give some examples:

A high speed RC platform with a cheap camera. I think I can detect human sized targets, if unsure you can get closer as a fiber optic datalink will give you realtime 4k+ video easily. If stabilisation becomes a problem, which I think it is not, it can also be solved at the launcher hardware.

What about high speed of the missile causing operator errors?

Speeds perception is relative and perception changes depending on the object distances. See this:


With different lenses you can change it....

4- What about low light conditions, do we need super expensive cameras?

Well maybe for a complete night without a moon, but technology has progressed to a point that a low light cheap camera can perform in twilight better than a human eye.



And nothing stops you from installing a night vision google...

Of course no state will do it. My point is the cost of the missile is getting lower. Maybe Spike is expensive because of R&D costs and because it's a bit rare as you said, so they can charge higher if you need this capability. With radio controlled drones, terrorists or infantry may create problems but it can be stopped with jammers, with fiber optic links it's very hard to stop. Without missiles with sensors (this applies to a subset of RF controlled missiles and fiber optic missiles together), there is no beyond line of sight capability if you want man-in-the-loop, battlefield surveillance, damage assessment and human flexibility in one package.


And the future: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcZFQ3f26pA
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom