TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

[Heartbang]

Cakir will most likely be followed by HKG-84 released from Akinci, will give any ship a bad day. Cheap and effective so no need for SOM-J or even Atmaca. .

youd need a guidance kit designed to hit moving targets in all weather conditions. Laser guidance isnt an all weather solution. it needs clear skies to operate effectively

 

[Combat-Master]

To further the point on developing Cakir Mini-Cruise Missile to be as compact as possible;

MIECZNIK Polish Frigate Program, latest design features 16x RBS Mk3/4 surface to surface missiles, because NSM is so compact they are able to spread out these missiles from mid to aft, increasing offensive capability whilst also ensuring survivability of missiles as they are so spread apart.

Reducing CAKIR size, would allow Turkish ship designers to incorporate multi-purpose cruise missile like CAKIR into Frigates and Destroyers. Whilst allowing the weapons officers to choose alternative low cost missiles to strike targets.

CAKIR would give a cost-effective Atmaca AShM and Gezgin LACM like capability out to 150km. Whilst also complementing them.

Just do it Roketsan.

 

[Combat-Master]

Kara-ATMACA and Cakir to share same IIR seeker ?

ÇAKIR​	KARA ATMACA​

 

[Anmdt]

Kara-ATMACA and Cakir to share same IIR seeker ?

ÇAKIR​	KARA ATMACA​
View attachment 42322​	View attachment 42325​

Are they going to make this seeker DIRCM resistant? I remember Roketsan had such a concept for counter-counter IR seeker.

 

[Bogeyman]

Optical flow assisted IRCCM algorithm for sea skimming anti-ship missile systems
Kemal Arda Özertem
Dept. of Guidance Design, Roketsan

Are they going to make this seeker DIRCM resistant? I remember Roketsan had such a concept for counter-counter IR seeker.

I advise you to check the archive.

 

[Combat-Master]

Are they going to make this seeker DIRCM resistant? I remember Roketsan had such a concept for counter-counter IR seeker.

Yes, triple mode IIR seeker. They are also developing some sort of AI system based on target movement and categorisation.

@Bogeyman - Presentation of the triple mode seeker study

Optical design of triple-mode seeker.ts - AnonFiles

anonfiles.com

 

[Combat-Master]

4x FNSS KAPLAN 10 with OMTAS ARCT launchers

 

[Khagan1923]

I found another angle. Take a look at that!

View attachment 42501
View attachment 42499

This one is due to its shape most likely a Gezgin mock-up. The other one is Siper.

Just as a comparison

MdCN from France.

Tomahawk from the US.



Very similar shape, isn't it?

Tübitak had already announced last IDEF that they have more missiles to share next IDEF...

 

[Cabatli_TR]

Radar absorbing body feature of Çakir missile family

C4 defence

 

[manifesto]

I don't know but Cakir is coming to me more dangereous and game changer according to atmaca. Thank you so much our ergineers.

 

[Combat-Master]

I don't know but Cakir is coming to me more dangereous and game changer according to atmaca. Thank you so much our ergineers.

Wait for ATMACA Block II which will have same features as Cakir with double the range and triple the warhead.

 

[Tornadoss]

When I compared Atmaca test and NSM tests, NSM seems to have bigger explosion and more visible damage. They have similar weight of warhead? What is the difference warhead type?

 

[kenny]

https://youtube.com/shorts/eIpEpg_dX40?feature=share komşiiii

 

[Cypro]

When I compared Atmaca test and NSM tests, NSM seems to have bigger explosion and more visible damage. They have similar weight of warhead? What is the difference warhead type?

Atmaca has a bigger warhead than NSM (220 vs 150kg), it could be the ship size used in the test videos, point it hit etc. Or maybe the Atmaca test does not show full capability. Both missiles are not intended to create a huge blast over the ship but just sink a ship by a direct hit. So I would value the end result.

 

[Zafer]

Atmaca hit the ships hull while NSM hit structures on the deck from what I see. So the Atmaca's blast was more contained.

 

[Tornadoss]

Atmaca has a bigger warhead than NSM (220 vs 150kg), it could be the ship size used in the test videos, point it hit etc. Or maybe the Atmaca test does not show full capability. Both missiles are not intended to create a huge blast over the ship but just sink a ship by a direct hit. So I would value the end result.

In wiki it says 150 kg, on Konnberg websıte, couldn't see warhead size, and on Raytheon website, it says 500 pound but maybe this is more developed version.

Atmaca hit the ships hull while NSM hit structures on the deck from what I see. So the Atmaca's blast was more contained.

This might be reason.

 

[CAN_TR]

When I compared Atmaca test and NSM tests, NSM seems to have bigger explosion and more visible damage. They have similar weight of warhead? What is the difference warhead type?

Because ATMACA pierced through the hull and big part of the "explosion" is inside, the target ship sunk within few minutes.

Salute to TC ISIN, a workhorse of the Navy, i wish it could have become a museum.

 

[MADDOG]

Because ATMACA pierced through the hull and big part of the "explosion" is inside, the target ship sunk within few minutes.

Salute to TC ISIN, a workhorse of the Navy, i wish it could have become a museum.

I'm really gonna miss that ship. My father used to work on her. He was a Naval officer, thus I had the chance to see her in the flesh. TCG Akın and TCG Işın. Two unforgettable names for me. Salute to them both!

 

[Combat-Master]

In wiki it says 150 kg, on Konnberg websıte, couldn't see warhead size, and on Raytheon website, it says 500 pound but maybe this is more developed version.

This might be reason.

Marketing gimmick, just like what Israeli defence companies do. They hype up the capability of the weapons. NSM supposedly has a 500-pound like effect warhead. Then you look at the composition of the warhead, and it's really not that different then any other insensitive explosive like RDX. A load of hype, and people no less knowledgeable fall for it. Just like marketing video of the NSM missile that hits above deck, any 200 pound bomb could clear a ships deck.

500lb class like effect warhead but, it's actual warhead weight is 264lbs

 

[Hexciter]

What the Konsberg's do is replace iron with titanium to make warhead lighter and keeping expolosive high. Cost of titanium will be very high. Problem here whether the titanium sharapnels will be worser/same/better effect compared to iron ones?