TR Naval Programs

[Sanchez]

Need to add +2 I-stif and 2 OPV to the estimated amount. Why, national interests in Libya and its EEZ.

TBH i'm counting every Hisar added to the fleet as a +1 new ship. Buraks they are replacing are on death bed with little to no operational capacity for some time afaik. SSİK did say more OPHs but no clear numbers there. We should be seeing new contracts for at least 2-4 ships this year i think. Bringing Hisars up to 8 vessels, would be a great boon.

 

[UkroTurk]

I know bro, I still have the journal "ulusal strateji" from 1999 in which the navy was advocating for an aircraft carrier. But tell that to some who cannot differentiate between state policy and political party policy.

All these political arguments kill the discussions and make it stray from technical to political preferences. Makes me kinda fed up.

Please don't take it personal. We are not saying "Before AC , first we should build 100 frigates then 20 destroyers then time for AC like PLAN"

We would agree the size of Royal Navy surface fleet.

But our Navy fleet is really poor.

İnstead of AC , If President of Türkiye offered building 3 destroyers plus 10 medium frigates, 15 corvettes , wouldnt TN be happy ? ( İ am Just exaggerating don't take it as serious. )

Heavy frigates aren't the Priority currently?

 

[B_A]

The geographical situation of Turkish navy is like world war German and cold war Soviet (also the ottoman empire but that's too ancient)

Western naval powers can block them(and us) very easy in war time.
So we depend on submarines to the high sea.The aircraft carrier and surface fleet are mainly for defend and little war against little countries.

Japanese Chinese or Indian are different stories,their navy can easily go to high ocean to fight US.

 

[Zafer]

We are not China we need to move smarter rather than harder, LOL.

 

[B_A]

We are not China we need to move smarter rather than harder, LOL.

1or 2 CV is needed but no more.

We need 40+ submarine including 10 nuclear one.

Chinese will finally have 8-10 CV group

 

[Huelague]

There is the obvious solution to that problem, go nuclear in due time.

There is a reason why we involve Pakistan to our TFX project. LRBM and Nuke technology from Pakistan.

 

[Sanchez]

A nice set of graphics could help better illustrate where we at right now.

Released yesterday, top ten largest navies by tonnage on Jan 1 2024.

Turkey is 11th on this list, per the author, just shy of 300000 tonnes at 297000. Once Istanbul is officially inducted into the service, we will have a 300000 tonnes navy. When Derya is inducted, possibly the 10th largest, beating Indonesia.

 

[Anmdt]

A nice set of graphics could help better illustrate where we at right now.

Released yesterday, top ten largest navies by tonnage on Jan 1 2024.

Turkey is 11th on this list, per the author, just shy of 300000 tonnes at 297000. Once Istanbul is officially inducted into the service, we will have a 300000 tonnes navy. When Derya is inducted, possibly the 10th largest, beating Indonesia.

Nice set of information but the most ridiculous order (top navies by tonnage) ever to show where we are now. We will then count each land vehicle to rank the ground forces, including Scooby-Doo minibuses.

 

[dBSPL]

A nice set of graphics could help better illustrate where we at right now.

Released yesterday, top ten largest navies by tonnage on Jan 1 2024.

Turkey is 11th on this list, per the author, just shy of 300000 tonnes at 297000. Once Istanbul is officially inducted into the service, we will have a 300000 tonnes navy. When Derya is inducted, possibly the 10th largest, beating Indonesia.

We also have some very special conditions. First of all, the Black Sea to the north of us is a maritime zone under our control, restricted to the navies of non-contiguous countries, where the US and Chinese and western European navies cannot be based, but can only act through proxy forces. We are not an archipelago country like Indonesia, but also not Mexico, between two unconnected seas that passage between under not our control. One of these geographical features dictates a very large inventory consist of fast crafts, while the other requires building almost disconnected forces in each sea. We have the advantages of two peninsulas with inland seas in territorial defense and control of trade routes (the Island Sea issue is ofc worth discussing), and the task group that will be deployed in case of a crisis may have extraordinary muscle power. If this navy reaches the tonnage to be included in the list above, its effects will be felt in a wide region.

The more distinctive feature of the 5 navies and 2.5 globalpowers out of the 7 major powers (USN-CN-RN, +2 NATO navy), excluding Japan and India, is that they have advanced sea basing and overseas base support in accordance with their global naval doctrines. The most important organizational development of the Turkish Navy in the last quarter of a century is precisely related to this issue.

All of the countries on this list are also oceanic countries. Although Turkiye is essentially a Mediterranean country, its navy will de facto become an ocean navy in the near future. There are many things worth talking about here, but let me draw attention to one: the Iraq-Turkiye prosperity road initiative. (And the Yemen issue, the Palestine war and the Suez Canal should be evaluated on the same plane.) I'm not even talking about overseas bases, an example of expansion that is characteristic of the global navies in the chart above. Turkish interests are increasingly affected by a wider geography and therefore they feel the need to play an active role in a wider geography. Navies are the most important assets of a country that sustain its interests.

 

[Sanchez]

Nice set of information but the most ridiculous order (top navies by tonnage) ever to show where we are now. We will then count each land vehicle to rank the ground forces, including Scooby-Doo minibuses.

Oh come on, this is no global firepower. Of course it fluctuates and not every ton is equal. But it does somewhat give an idea on which is where if you have some idea of what to look for, like the huge number of AORs US employs, lack of AORs French employ, submarines the Russians employ, RFA being counted as part of RN etc. Indonesian Navy doesn't have the surface power and it greatly lacks in submarines, can hardly be called a blue water navy, but they do have a pretty big amphib element, being an island nation, which has its own power to it. As a littoral power, where do we fit in?

If this navy reaches the tonnage to be included in the list above, its effects will be felt in a wide region

Exactly my point.

 

[Anmdt]

Oh come on, this is no global firepower. Of course it fluctuates and not every ton is equal. But it does somewhat give an idea on which is where if you have some idea of what to look for, like the huge number of AORs US employs, lack of AORs French employ, submarines the Russians employ, RFA being counted as part of RN etc. Indonesian Navy doesn't have the surface power and it greatly lacks in submarines, can hardly be called a blue water navy, but they do have a pretty big amphib element, being an island nation, which has its own power to it. As a littoral power, where do we fit in?

Exactly my point.

Unless a navy is run by 2-digit IQ commanders, AOR - combatants would be in natural balance, whereas amphibious and submarine forces should be excluded from this because they are part of the specific doctrines (Hence your example of Indonesia). Spanish Navy lacks a submarine force but has solid combatant, AOR and amphibious fleets.

Will Iranian Navy become the 7th Navy next year if They add 2 more Makran-class tankers and calls them FOB? If they add 2 more later, would they beat India in the list?

How is this any different from Global firepower that has counted every vehicle as '1' unit and then put countries in order based on this.

 

[B_A]

Unless a navy is run by 2-digit IQ commanders, AOR - combatants would be in natural balance, whereas amphibious and submarine forces should be excluded from this because they are part of the specific doctrines (Hence your example of Indonesia). Spanish Navy lacks a submarine force but has solid combatant, AOR and amphibious fleets.

Will Iranian Navy become the 7th Navy next year if They add 2 more Makran-class tankers and calls them FOB? If they add 2 more later, would they beat India in the list?

How is this any different from Global firepower that has counted every vehicle as '1' unit and then put countries in order based on this.

Navy tonnage still had some meaning.( something like Makran-class tankers arent in most of top navies)

That s not like the ship number,which north korean had many mini ship.

 

[B_A]

The UK Navy is considering the possibility of divesting or early retirement of one of the Albion-class LPDs after HMS Ocean due to personnel and sustainment issues.

Many European navies are facing similar problems. There are personnel problems, and most navies have not developed doctrinal approaches appropriate to the post-cold war era, and therefore have inventory structures that are difficult to adapt to today's conditions. Below tier 1, medium-sized navies have also a terrible combat readiness problem.

Meanwhile, the Turkish navy is conducting simultaneous exercises in three seas with a +100-piece fleet, and is slowly sharing its platform plans for the next 30 years with the public.

France has a special position due to its naval policies and political interests, and we cannot ignore ambitious modernization plans like Italy. Of course, there are many naval projects that we follow with interest. However, the situation is that the economies of these countries do not have the huge gap against potential competitors in their spheres of influence as they did 30 years ago, and they have been slow to renew their strategies and planning in line with the changing world conditions. On top of all this, there is an aging population and human resource problems.

The world is in a period of change. In fact, it is certain that this will be one of the major nodes in the history of the world we are living in, which happens every few hundred years. It will not be limited to the transfer of assets, but will be characterized by the transfer of power, and this process will create new military powers, countries that seemed insignificant just a few decades ago will become important actors of the new era with the leverage of geopolitics.

I think Turkiye is like the Prussian of 1850s,we need to have enough wise to avoid any direct war with great powers(US EU and China)

 

[Anmdt]

Navy tonnage still had some meaning.( something like Makran-class tankers arent in most of top navies)

That s not like the ship number,which north korean had many mini ship.

Please do enlighten me how Makran adds any capability that most top navies do not have or how having 3 of Makran multiplies this capability, i am waiting.

 

[dBSPL]

I think Turkiye is like the Prussian of 1850s,we need to have enough wise to avoid any direct war with great powers(US EU and China)

I think we should not evaluate naval assets only in war scenarios. Navies serve much greater purposes. War is an outcome when diplomatic efforts no longer works, and getting to that point does not happen with the efforts of just one side. In any case, as the mass grows, its deterrence increases and prevents you from losing the ground and make the diplomacy table harder to break.

 

[B_A]

Please do enlighten me how Makran adds any capability that most top navies do not have or how having 3 of Makran multiplies this capability, i am waiting.

You dont understand my word.

I said that most of top 10 Navies in the world didnt have something like Makran(which is useless)So the Navy tonnage still had some meaning.

We can just ignore the iranian(and North Korean)

 

[Anmdt]

You dont understand my word.

I said that most of top 10 Navies in the world didnt have something like Makran(which is useless)So the Navy tonnage still had some meaning.

We can just ignore the iranian(and North Korean)

Rules apply to anyone, and in 2025 Iranian Navy will be 7th. Combined with IRGC may well be 6th or 5th.

 

[B_A]

Please do enlighten me how Makran adds any capability that most top navies do not have or how having 3 of Makran multiplies this capability, i am waiting.

Yes so we cant do something like the German done.We need a Navy to protect our right but not a super navy to make the Super naval powers feel threat.We should let Chinese do it.

 

[Nutuk]

Please don't take it personal. We are not saying "Before AC , first we should build 100 frigates then 20 destroyers then time for AC like PLAN"

Please don't take it personal. We are not saying "Before AC , first we should build 100 frigates then 20 destroyers then time for AC like PLAN"

Won't happen!

It is like did we build engines before building armored vehicles, tank??? Did we build ship engines, VLS before building frigates? Do we build naval aircraft before and aircraft carrier?

Some things are build when there is a demand, when there is a need. An aircraft carrier will act as an engine that produces needs. Sounds odd but things work like this, when an aircraft carrier needs a battle group it will be build, not the other way around.

 

[uçuyorum]

Won't happen!

It is like did we build engines before building armored vehicles, tank??? Did we build ship engines, VLS before building frigates? Do we build naval aircraft before and aircraft carrier?

Some things are build when there is a demand, when there is a need. An aircraft carrier will act as an engine that produces needs. Sounds odd but things work like this, when an aircraft carrier needs a battle group it will be build, not the other way around.

And how did that work for us so far?
That's not how planning should work. We should think all aspects ahead of time. It has cost us many things, and may cost us a defeat