TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

[TheInsider]

Ongoing and possible supersonic and hypersonic missile projects.
Air-to-Air
Gökhan/ER (liquid fuel Ramjet, Mach 3- 4.5)
Gökbora (solid fuel Ramjet, Mach 3- 4)
Gökdoğan/ER (solid fuel rocket, Mach 4)
Bozdoğan (solid fuel rocket, Mach 4)

Air to Ground
IHA-230 (solid fuel rocket, supersonic)
IHA-300 ER (solid fuel rocket, supersonic)
IHA-500+ (possible hypersonic aeroballistic missile similar to Israel's ROCKs)
Akbaba HARM (solid fuel ramjet, Mach 2.5-4, Air-to-air secondary capability)

Cruise Missiles
Supersonic Anti-Ship Cruise missile (liquid fuel ramjet, Mach 2.5-4)
Supersonic Cruise Missile (liquid fuel ramjet, Mach 2.5-4)
Air-launched supersonic cruise missile (liquid fuel ramjet, possible project)

Ballistic Missiles
Bora/Khan (solid fuel rocket, supersonic)
Tayfun Block 2 (solid fuel rocket, supersonic)
Tayfun Block 3 (solid fuel rocket, hypersonic)
Tayfun Block 4 (solid fuel rocket, hypersonic)
Cenk(solid fuel rocket, hypersonic)
Yıldırımhan (liquid fuel rocket, hypersonic/possible high hypersonic-mach 10+ capability )
Timur (solid fuel rocket, hypersonic/possible high hypersonic-mach 10+ capability )

Most of our high-speed missile projects target mid-supersonic to transitional/low/barely hypersonic speeds. There is a reason for that. At those speeds, you don't need to deal with a lot of headaches related to the hypersonic speed regime. Those weapons are not exotic weapons they are accurate, easier to produce cheap enough to be deployed in numbers but they are still a lot more effective compared to subsonic or low supersonic weapons. As the technology matures i expect hypersonic cruise missiles(scramjet), hypersonic gliding vehicles to appear in the next decade.

 

[Huelague]

Gezgin?

 

[Ripley]

Meanwhile, let’s not forget that Turkey is a signatory state to Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and International Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation AKA Hague Code of Conduct (HCOC).
Turkey has voluntarily signed these treaties and is bound by their regulatory limitations.

 

[Sanchez]

Gezgin?

Gezgin is subsonic.

 

[Yasar_TR]

This is interesting ;

Take an engineer’s protractor and enlarge the picture so that the missile is ~70mm and the width is ~6mm (that corresponds to ~7m length and ~60cm diameter.)
Then that boat becomes nearly 12 m. Considering the fact that we are looking at it from slightly behind and at an angle, it is in reality longer than 12 metres.

Although they keep sharing news pieces that the missile hit a “moving” target when clearly it wasn’t moving and that the boat targeted was 7m long ; there is clearly some misinformation here probably being fed to the public intentionally.

We have not been fed with the whole picture here. I can’t imagine the head of Roketsan or SSB giving wrong information. But a moving target means a moving target. (Not a free bobbing boat in the mid seas)

This is how you hit moving targets:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarplanePorn/comments/1j7u2i7
or

2.618 Aufrufe · 56 Reaktionen | 🇹🇷 Bayraktar AKINCI strikes moving target with TOLUN-IIR Turkey’s Bayraktar AKINCI has successfully hit a moving target with pinpoint accuracy using the TOLUN-IIR, marking a major milestone in precision-strike capabil

🇹🇷 Bayraktar AKINCI strikes moving target with TOLUN-IIR Turkey’s Bayraktar AKINCI has successfully hit a moving target with pinpoint accuracy using the TOLUN-IIR, marking a major milestone in...

www.facebook.com

It is not as if we can’t do it; Or we haven’t done it. But we haven’t been shown it.

 

[Zafer]

It is a fishing boat which is usually 12 meter or longer which corresponds to 40ft, there is no 7 meter fishing boat looking like this one with double decks.

 

[Strong AI]

Afaik this is the only official information which mentions Tayfun Block 3 has a seeker head. There is no official information about the size of the target. The target probably drifted during missile launch and impact. If this was the first test, it makes sense the target wasn't actively moving, just testing the seeker head first.
By stating "moving target" they probably want to emphasise Block 3 is an ASBM.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2073401900788039991

 

[TheInsider]

There are a lot of sources thay says the target is 7meters long. Image is not clear and perspective can deceive eyes.

NATO'da Bir İlk: TAYFUN BLOK 3 Gemiyi Vurdu | SavunmaSanayiST

ROKETSAN'ın TAYFUN BLOK-3 Balistik Füzesi, Karadeniz'deki testte seyir halindeki deniz hedefini ilk atışta tam isabetle vurdu.

www.savunmasanayist.com

TAYFUN BLOK-3 hareketli deniz hedefini tam isabetle vurdu

Türkiye'nin milli imkanlarla geliştirilen balistik füzesi TAYFUN'un BLOK-3 versiyonu, dünyada sayılı örneği bulunan bir başarıya imza atarak denizdeki hareketli ve insansız hedefi cerrahi hassasiyetle imha etti.

www.trthaber.com

Savunma sanayiinde yeni eşik: TAYFUN BLOK-3'ten tarihi atış - CNN TÜRK En Son Haberler | Video

Son Dakika Türkiye Gündem Haberleri - ROKETSAN tarafından geliştirilen TAYFUN BLOK-3 balistik füzesinin canlı harp başlıklı test atışı başarıyla gerçekleştir...

www.cnnturk.com

ROKETSAN üretimi füze, hareketli su üstü hedefini başarıyla imha etti

ROKETSAN tarafından milli imkanlarla geliştirilen TAYFUN BLOK-3 füzesinin test atışı başarıyla gerçekleştirildi. Canlı harp başlığı kullanılan testte, hareket halindeki su üstü hedefi arayıcı başlıkla kilitlenerek imha edildi

www.haberturk.com

TAYFUN Blok 3'ten bir ilk: Hareketli hedef vuruldu

ROKETSAN tarafından geliştirilen TAYFUN Block 3 balistik füzesi, yeni test atışında hareketli gemi hedefini vurdu!

www.defenceturk.net

 

[Bogeyman]

Afaik this is the only official information which mentions Tayfun Block 3 has a seeker head. There is no official information about the size of the target. The target probably drifted during missile launch and impact. If this was the first test, it makes sense the target wasn't actively moving, just testing the seeker head first.
By stating "moving target" they probably want to emphasise Block 3 is an ASBM.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2073401900788039991

During the test, a free-floating unmanned surface vessel/ship, identified as an enemy element, was engaged with a missile reaching hypersonic speeds. Using a live warhead, the target was locked onto with the seeker head and successfully destroyed. This test marked the first time a ballistic missile has targeted a free-floating unmanned surface vessel/ship at sea with complete success.

This was certainly not the first test, as a real warhead was used. The use of real warheads in missile testing is usually done after the project has reached a certain level of maturity.

 

[Zafer]

One deck's height is about 6 ft, 183+ cm accomodating 95% of height of people, calculate from there.

 

[TheInsider]

Correct. It was certainly not the first test. IMHO, this was the last test of the prototype qualification. After this deliveries will start and a random serial production missile will be tested among the first delivered products. This is called an acceptance test.

 

[Bogeyman]

Correct. It was certainly not the first test. IMHO, this was the last test of the prototype qualification. After this deliveries will start and a random serial production missile will be tested among the first delivered products. This is called an acceptance test.

I can't wait to hear the news that it's been added to the inventory.

 

[TheInsider]

I can't wait to hear the news that it's been added to the inventory.

That might shake some things in our immediate neighbourhood.

 

[MonteCarlo]

IMHO hitting a drifting 7/12 meters long boat is enough to call it a moving target. To hit a 7 meter target which is speeding you would need a precision in the class of MAM-L. And even then you are almost always firing 2 mam-Ls to hit a USV just to make sure, like it was done at last 2 Naval exercises. Waiting something like that from a ballistic missile with 700+ km range would be absurd

Edit: as another note you probably wouldn't be able to hit the same target with harpoon block 2 from 100+ km range which is crazy to think about lol

 

[Yasar_TR]

IMHO hitting a drifting 7/12 meters long boat is enough to call it a moving target. To hit a 7 meter target which is speeding you would need a precision in the class of MAM-L. And even then you are almost always firing 2 mam-Ls to hit a USV just to make sure, like it was done at last 2 Naval exercises. Waiting something like that from a ballistic missile with 700+ km range would be absurd

I am afraid I can’t agree with you .
If a missile is deemed to be AShM class it has to be able to hit a vessel moving at up to 25 to 30 knots. (Most modern carriers need to have almost this speed to help with take off as well as recovery of aircraft).

- There are certain tests that need close scrutiny and have to be done without explosives and real targets in order to obtain correct data..
- To test an AShM with explosives to hit a towed ship is dangerous and expensive business.
- This is why quite often more than one specific test is carried out for a missile before it is accepted.
- As far as I know there were no videos of moving ship targeting for Atmaca missile. There is no way our Navy would have accepted to install them on our ships if they did not carry out a truly moving target firing. But due to certain details these tests are not for our eyes.
- Same will happen with Tayfun. To hit a static target with explosives was more effective to show to the public. But real moving target test was most likely already carried out.

 

[MonteCarlo]

M

I am afraid I can’t agree with you .
If a missile is deemed to be AShM class it has to be able to hit a vessel moving at up to 25 to 30 knots. (Most modern carriers need to have almost this speed to help with take off as well as recovery of aircraft).

- There are certain tests that need close scrutiny and have to be done without explosives and real targets in order to obtain correct data..
- To test an AShM with explosives to hit a towed ship is dangerous and expensive business.
- This is why quite often more than one specific test is carried out for a missile before it is accepted.
- As far as I know there were no videos of moving ship targeting for Atmaca missile. There is no way our Navy would have accepted to install them on our ships if they did not carry out a truly moving target firing. But due to certain details these tests are not for our eyes.
- Same will happen with Tayfun. To hit a static target with explosives was more effective to show to the public. But real moving target test was most likely already carried out.

My argument wasn't that this test is enough to admit it to the inventory but rather that there is nothing "misleading" about calling this test a moving target test. Of course you would also need to test it against a manuevering real size warship. The thing I was emphasizing is that this test is definitely not same as the tests we saw for for Tayfun block 2 with anchored CEP circle and there is nothing wrong with calling it a moving target test