TR Missile & Smart Munition Programs

[dustdevil]

It's going to be an interesting missile, hoping it will have dual-mode RF/IIR seeker to make it extra spicy.

Air launched version, if there is enough fuel, may have a range longer than its name suggests. And because it’s not big like Atmaca, we can deploy it to many various vessels and coordinate launches with the battle network.

Then it can be as important as Atmaca, or maybe more important.. Also diameter of the engine (240 mm) means we can use it in different missiles (or this missile) and launch them from common VLS cells, maybe even dual or quad-packed like ESSM.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Air launched version, if there is enough fuel, may have a range longer than its name suggests. And because it’s not big like Atmaca, we can deploy it to many various vessels and coordinate launches with the battle network.

Than it can be as important as Atmaca, or maybe more important.. Also diameter of the engine (240 mm) means we can use it in different missiles (or this missile) and launch them from common VLS cells, maybe even dual or quad-packed like ESSM.

On it’s specs it says it can reach 0.9 Mach speed at an altitude of 5000ft. That means either any higher, then it may not have enough oxygen as the air is rarified and performance drops, or any lower, then the air is too dense for it to achieve high subsonic. But as the latter is directly related to missile aerodynamics, I would deduce that it is the former. So it is most comfortable below 5000ft.
If this is the case then when air launched at say 30000ft, would it not lose performance? There Is a bit of a dilemma in that “0.9 Mach at 5000ft“ statement. Unless after launch it needs to get down to 5000ft or lower as soon as possible to achieve high subsonic speeds. (That would in a way nullify the theory that if launched at high altitude it’s range would be significantly be longer)
Can someone clarify?

 

[dustdevil]

On it’s specs it says it can reach 0.9 Mach speed at an altitude of 5000ft. That means either any higher, then it may not have enough oxygen as the air is rarified and performance drops, or any lower, then the air is too dense for it to achieve high subsonic. But as the latter is directly related to missile aerodynamics, I would deduce that it is the former. So it is most comfortable below 5000ft.
If this is the case then when air launched at say 30000ft, would it not lose performance? There Is a bit of a dilemma in that “0.9 Mach at 5000ft“ statement. Unless after launch it needs to get down to 5000ft or lower as soon as possible to achieve high subsonic speeds. (That would in a way nullify the theory that if launched at high altitude it’s range would be significantly be longer)
Can someone clarify?

Probably there is a launching envelope for the missile and high altitude launch may be restricted by engine starting conditions. It’s hard to start in cold and less dense air.

The maximum thrust available from the engine will be lower at higher altitudes, but fuel consumption will be significantly lower too.

Even if we don’t know anything about the starting envelope, if we assume the missile is released at high altitude, it can glide to lower altitudes without thrust or less than maximum thrust (hi-lo-lo), the range will be higher than ground launched version (lo-lo-lo).

Another scenario is low or mid altitude launch, then the missile climbs to a higher altitude. The range will be less than high altitude launch but this may solve a starting problem, if any.

 

[Zafer]

It will definitely have much longer range when it is dropped from high altitude. However speed will be slower as oxygen levels are lower at altitude which leads to poorer combustion performance. There are conditions that work for and against better performance. Combustion is poorer at altitude but air resistance (drag) is lower allowing higher speed. Also the small wings and fuselage aerodynamics of the missile will do better in lower altitudes for ease of providing lift. I suppose ideal conditions are found at 5000ft altitude which lead to fastest speed. Due to smaller wings glide capability from altitude will be poor, nonetheless it will add a great deal to range albeit at slower initial speeds due to the speed imparted by the gunship.

 

[Anmdt]

On it’s specs it says it can reach 0.9 Mach speed at an altitude of 5000ft. That means either any higher, then it may not have enough oxygen as the air is rarified and performance drops, or any lower, then the air is too dense for it to achieve high subsonic. But as the latter is directly related to missile aerodynamics, I would deduce that it is the former. So it is most comfortable below 5000ft.
If this is the case then when air launched at say 30000ft, would it not lose performance? There Is a bit of a dilemma in that “0.9 Mach at 5000ft“ statement. Unless after launch it needs to get down to 5000ft or lower as soon as possible to achieve high subsonic speeds. (That would in a way nullify the theory that if launched at high altitude it’s range would be significantly be longer)
Can someone clarify?

I think those are specs of the engine,not tells anything about the missile but claiming engine can produce sufficient power at 5k feet ,at 0.9M speed

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1274997636987334657

From the graph given here we can assume, @20k feet the thrust is half of thrust at sea level, @30k feet as much as 1/3th of sea level.

How does turbojet thrust change with altitude?

I am studying the rate of climb of turbojets, I don't know how the thrust varies with altitude and in particular which are the differences between necessary thrust and effective thrust. Hope being...

aviation.stackexchange.com

https://www.safran-power-units.com/sites/microturbo/files/microturbo_fiche_tr40_-_uk.pdf

TR40, engine used on SOM and Atmaca can start with windmill up to 17k feet in range of 0.5-0.9M speed, while it can stay operational up to 20k feet. Similar specs can be assumed but there is also a booster on MRAShM which probably will be used on slower platforms like helicopters and UAVs.

 

[dustdevil]

The wing shape is very strange, lower wing looks longer or maybe there is a problem with the drawing... I hope we get a longer winged version.

TEI did an incredible thing and it's also strange that we see the engine before the actual missile. Roketsan should come up with numerous airframe designs without waiting for a government contract, and use this engine for maximum effect, like a smaller variant of SLAM-ER, JSOW-ER as mentioned, new powered glide bombs etc...

 

[Combat-Master]

Here's my attempt at scaling Atmaca to MRASHM

And Miguyan2000's

 

[Hexciter]

Here's my attempt at scaling Atmaca to MRASHM
View attachment 16893

What’s the measured diameters of missile bodies (without wings)?

 

[Combat-Master]

What’s the measured diameters of missile bodies (without wings)?

Yes, bodies measured here.

 

[Hexciter]

Yes, bodies measured here.

Atmaca’s body diameter is around 350 mm.

 

[Combat-Master]

Atmaca’s body diameter is around 350 mm.

It's a typo on my part fixed

 

[Yasar_TR]

As it is a sea skimming missile in design, it will have to get down to sea skimming altitudes to be effective and during the last 25-30 km it needs to be as fast as possible to get to it’s target since within that last 30km it will start to be visible to enemy radars.
Another point is that, this a fairly small missile in weight as well compared to Atmaca. Therefore explosive payload will be much less. Hence the destructive power. I hope, to compensate that we have now in hand explosives like the latest Harpoons are using. Less explosive weight but more explosive power. (Instead of 221kg warhead, newer Harpoon BlockII+ER now have 140kg warhead with more lethal destructive power).

 

[Bogeyman]

As it is a sea skimming missile in design, it will have to get down to sea skimming altitudes to be effective and during the last 25-30 km it needs to be as fast as possible to get to it’s target since within that last 30km it will start to be visible to enemy radars.
Another point is that, this a fairly small missile in weight as well compared to Atmaca. Therefore explosive payload will be much less. Hence the destructive power. I hope, to compensate that we have now in hand explosives like the latest Harpoons are using. Less explosive weight but more explosive power. (Instead of 221kg warhead, newer Harpoon BlockII+ER now have 140kg warhead with more lethal destructive power).

We won't have to use Atmaca on Greece's patrol ships. Because we don't have that luxury. We need plenty of alternatives to get the job done fast.

 

[Combat-Master]

We won't have to use Atmaca on Greece's patrol ships. Because we don't have that luxury. We need plenty of alternatives to get the job done fast.

"We don't have that luxury"

Combat-Master; *See's Turkish Corvettes, Frigates and Destroyers being equipped and designed with 12x Atmaca *

--

MRaShM has 40% smaller footprint than Atmaca, the size allows it to equipped on many smaller platforms similar to how Penguin Mk2 is employed.

I think it's about time we get some updated Missile Boats replace aging Kartal class

Eh heerrm

 

[Yasar_TR]

We won't have to use Atmaca on Greece's patrol ships. Because we don't have that luxury. We need plenty of alternatives to get the job done fast.

What has this got to do with the explosive power of the MRAShM?
Also I was pointing out that the missile flight profile and performance must have been optimised for sea skimming flight. Hence it is probably most comfortable and fastest at this mode.
By the way; I agree with what you say. But as you are referring to my post, I don’t see the relevenace!

 

[Huelague]

We won't have to use Atmaca on Greece's patrol ships. Because we don't have that luxury. We need plenty of alternatives to get the job done fast.

Exactly, like a mini Atmaca, with half size conditions.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Tomahawk artık deniz hedeflerini vurabilecek

Raytheon, ABD Donanması'na ilk Tomahawk Blok-V Yeni Nesil Füze Sistemi'ni teslim etti. Yeni füze, kara hedeflerine ilaveten deniz hedeflerini de vurabilecek.

www.savunmasanayist.com

US is bringing on a new sea warfare strategy. Tomahawk missiles will be able to hit moving sea targets. This will be some big step against the ever growing Chinese Navy. From around 2400km away with a CEP of 5m , they will be able to pick out the Chinese ships.
our Gezgin , as it is in it’s development stage, should be designed with a warhead that can take out moving sea targets too.
As it‘s engine is planned to be delivered this year I hope we will see some ingenious developments on this missile.

Gezgin Missile's Engine to Be Delivered to Turkey in 2021 - C4 Defence

New documents published on the ProZorro public platform show that Ivchenko-Progress purchased 200 parts for the AI-35 engine.

www.c4defence.com

 

[dustdevil]

Tomahawk artık deniz hedeflerini vurabilecek

Raytheon, ABD Donanması'na ilk Tomahawk Blok-V Yeni Nesil Füze Sistemi'ni teslim etti. Yeni füze, kara hedeflerine ilaveten deniz hedeflerini de vurabilecek.

www.savunmasanayist.com

US is bringing on a new sea warfare strategy. Tomahawk missiles will be able to hit moving sea targets. This will be some big step against the ever growing Chinese Navy. From around 2400km away with a CEP of 5m , they will be able to pick out ships of the Chinese ships.
our Gezgin , as it is in it’s development stage, should be designed with a warhead that can take out moving sea targets too.
As it is planned to be delivered this year I hope we will see some ingenious developments on this missile.
View attachment 17018

Gezgin Missile's Engine to Be Delivered to Turkey in 2021 - C4 Defence

New documents published on the ProZorro public platform show that Ivchenko-Progress purchased 200 parts for the AI-35 engine.

www.c4defence.com

It’s ultra-important for Gezgin to have this capability, maybe even more important than its original role.

one example: Turkish task force is on duty near Libya. We have 4 frigates. Enemy masses 12 frigates, some of them are AAW ones.

without Gezgin: Enemy launches a surprise attack, they lose 2 frigates but sink all of our frigates.

with Gezgin: Enemy launches a surprise attack, they lose 2 frigates but sink all of our frigates. 150 anti-ship Gezgin’s are launched from Turkey, they catch the enemy fleet with their anti-air missile magazines depleted.

So long range anti-ship capability gives us a chance for secondary strike and have a stabilizing effect on war. Instead of surprise attack the enemy must think of establishing peace.

 

[Quasar]

It’s ultra-important for Gezgin to have this capability, maybe even more important than its original role.

one example: Turkish task force is on duty near Libya. We have 4 frigates. Enemy masses 12 frigates, some of them are AAW ones.

without Gezgin: Enemy launches a surprise attack, they lose 2 frigates but sink all of our frigates.

with Gezgin: Enemy launches a surprise attack, they lose 2 frigates but sink all of our frigates. 150 anti-ship Gezgin’s are launched from Turkey, they catch the enemy fleet with their anti-air missile magazines depleted.

So long range anti-ship capability gives us a chance for secondary strike and have a stabilizing effect on war. Instead of surprise attack the enemy must think of establishing peace.

long range engagement against a moving target is not a very easy task for instance Tomahawk Block V has two-way satellite communications which is simply reprogram the missile in flight to a new aimpoint.

 

[dustdevil]

long range engagement against a moving target is not a very easy task for instance Tomahawk Block IV has two-way satellite communications which is simply reprogram the missile in flight to a new aimpoint.

Of course you don't blindly send salvos of missiles and expect them to find their targets. Even at maximum speed the enemy fleet would be inside a 60NM radius region from their original positions, some of them would be wounded or would be staying near their original position to help their survivors.

To put things into perspective: At high subsonic speeds that area is not that big. If you fly as a passenger 60 NM is usually the last 15 minutes of flight from destination with a much slower speed. If the aircraft is not slowing down, flying straight at ~Mach 0.78, it's less than 10 minutes.

Many methods could be used to locate those ships, including manned aircraft, UAVs, satellites etc., maybe new methods can be programmed into some Gezgins and cause them to survey the area by inter-weapon datalink and swarm algorithms. The coordinates may be relayed to Gezgins via one way datalink (via HF, Satellite broadcast etc) so it's not detected easily.

The point is to have a long powerful second strike capability against enemy fleets so they think twice before attacking. In history Ottoman fleet was destroyed many times, causing wars and territory to be lost afterwards.. In recent times, they tried to destroy it in courts too. We must never allow it to happen again.