TR Naval Programs

[Bogeyman]

What if making two faced radar antenna? -Front face Cenk-S and back face compact MAR-D- rotating together?

CENK-S for long range High altitude Air search, Mar-D for close range, low altitude surface control.

You also could switch between two of them. You wouldn't waste lifespan of your long range expensive CENK-S while working MAR-D-.
View attachment 64617

Skip to 3:20

I doubt we can generate the electricity needed for this on board.

 

[uçuyorum]

AKREP FCR exists for a reason. It can 'stare' in a sector and track the target without mechanical interruption. The overall performance here relies on Advent and the radar signature library to detect, classify and pass to fire control, tracking radars by assigning them accordingly.


Speaking of which, ARDA and CAFRAD CFR may be similar in architecture, but CFR is backed by better processing power and more T/R, better hardware. Nevertheless, 4x ARDA would be very useful as a secondary radar, providing 360° coverage and continuous tracking in any sector. The question now is whether we can omit the AKREP and put 2 x ARDA in each spot to make up for the 360 degrees. Would 2 x ARDA be good enough for tracking?

How many targets can Akrep follow though? Granted, with 16 missiles You can't engage too many targets anyways. But if it gets 64 Sapan Blok 2 it may be more relevant

 

[Bogeyman]

I doubt we can generate the electricity needed for this on board.

A ship does not constantly operate its radars or electronic warfare suite at 100% capacity. Therefore, the electricity need in times of crisis is not the same as the electricity need in normal times. When intense electronic warfare is used, the ship may run out of fuel in a short time. (I don't remember this issue exactly in my memories, but I remember a few sample cases like this) Therefore, capacity scaling should be done accordingly.

 

[dBSPL]

Excerpt from "A REVIEW OF FRANCE'S NEW GENERATION BARRACUDA CLASS NUCLEAR-PROPELLED SUBMARINES (SSN)" in DzKK official gazette January 2024 issue

"With the recent commissioning of the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant, Turkey will take its place among the countries using nuclear energy. Subsequently, it is foreseen that knowledge and experience in nuclear energy in all sectors, both civilian and military, will increase in a short period of time and this energy will be integrated into new capacity building areas.

In addition, the introduction of nuclear technology in Turkey is also a turning point for the planned national nuclear-powered submarine programme in the medium term. It is inevitable that the transition to nuclear-propelled submarines will lead to critical developments for the Turkish Naval Forces.

In particular, the indigenous heavy torpedo AKYA and the submarine-launched ATMACA G/M will add strength to the power of our submarines, and with the acquisition of long-range GEZGİN cruise missile capability by our nuclear submarines, our submarines will become one of the most effective weapons in the world.

In the process of transition to nuclear energy, considering our limited knowledge and experience in the field, it is considered that there are various issues that need to be taken into consideration for our Naval Forces. Apart from the operation and maintenance of the nuclear reactor, which is a highly technical issue, it is important that projects in line with our concept of submarine utilisation and preliminary preparations for the training of submariner personnel be initiated now. Thus, the foresighted plans to be made as early as the project design phase will provide guidance in solving problems before they arise."

https://www.dzkk.tsk.tr/Content/Upload/Docs/Ocak_2024_Dergi.pdf

So the whole picture emerged. All the pieces have now fallen into place in a meaningful way.

What has been officially or semi-officially announced:
- A large number of heavy OPVs that will have a direct impact on the mission intensity of the frigates, and the second group of four frigates being brought first line, in the frigate leg of MILGEM
- 280-meter full scale aircraft carrier and indigenous combat elements will be deployed on board
- 8-10 thousand tons of missile destroyers and a large number of strategic missile systems will be deployed on board
- 2 LHDs with drone mothership capability and a large number of long-range armored landing ship, thus increasing amphibious landing capabilities as well as dramatically increasing power projection.

And unformal declaration of obvious: we now know why the vertical launch capability was requested in the MILDEN project.

If we take this SSIK and the statements before and after it as a whole, I think this period is an important date that will be remembered for years to come as the beginning of many things, not only for our naval forces but for the whole region.

 

[Bogeyman]

So the whole picture emerged. All the pieces have now fallen into place in a meaningful way.

What has been officially or semi-officially announced:
- A large number of heavy OPVs that will have a direct impact on the mission intensity of the frigates, and the second group of four frigates being brought first line, in the frigate leg of MILGEM
- 280-meter full scale aircraft carrier and indigenous combat elements will be deployed on board
- 8-10 thousand tons of missile destroyers and a large number of strategic missile systems will be deployed on board
- 2 LHDs with drone mothership capability and a large number of long-range armored landing ship, thus increasing amphibious landing capabilities as well as dramatically increasing power projection.

And unformal declaration of obvious: we now know why the vertical launch capability was requested in the MILDEN project.

If we take this SSIK and the statements before and after it as a whole, I think this period is an important date that will be remembered for years to come as the beginning of many things, not only for our naval forces but for the whole region.

The magazine mentions that a nuclear-powered submarine is desired in the medium term. Medium term means around 10 years for the naval forces. So will MILDEN be nuclear propelled?

 

[Sanchez]

The magazine mentions that a nuclear-powered submarine is desired in the medium term. Medium term means around 10 years for the naval forces. So will MILDEN be nuclear propelled?

From a sailor's perspective where they plan 20-30 years ahead, I'd think medium would mean 15-20 years. I expect MilDen to be diesel electric with AIP as others, but after that...

 

[Bogeyman]

From a sailor's perspective where they plan 20-30 years ahead, I'd think medium would mean 15-20 years. I expect MilDen to be diesel electric with AIP as others, but after that...

True. Dzkk's plans are working very slowly. They live in a universe different from our understanding of time.

 

[dBSPL]

From a sailor's perspective where they plan 20-30 years ahead, I'd think medium would mean 15-20 years. I expect MilDen to be diesel electric with AIP as others, but after that...

The design and verification of nuclear propulsion is itself a 10-15 year process. I agree with those who draw a projection that the most realistic estimates will probably start in the 2040s at the earliest.

On the other hand, we see the most typical examples of Turkish-type project development in the military field; more specifically, when I look at the last five naval platform programs, all but one of them have either gone far beyond the targets set at the beginning of the project, or an abnormally challenging level has been set from the very beginning.

 

[BaburKhan]

January 19: A Big Day “four” Turkish Navy | TURDEF

Four new capabilities for the Turkish Navy, TCG Istanbul F-515, TCG Derya A-1590, TCG Arif Ekmekçi (A-575) and Marlin will enter the Turkish Navy inventory.

www.turdef.com

 

[UkroTurk]

A ship does not constantly operate its radars or electronic warfare suite at 100% capacity. Therefore, the electricity need in times of crisis is not the same as the electricity need in normal times. When intense electronic warfare is used, the ship may run out of fuel in a short time. (I don't remember this issue exactly in my memories, but I remember a few sample cases like this) Therefore, capacity scaling should be done accordingly.

I have no clue. Logically , if CENK-S needs Megawatt Energy and consumes more fuel, having additional MAR-D will enable fuel saving. When you don't need long range, high altitude S-band frequency, you could switch MAR-D which is X-band for self defense mode.

I assume we are all agree with that self defense mode of a warship is vital. Self defense is more prior than long range detection.


You can't just turn self defense systems and radars off for sake of fuel.



On the other hand i don't think CENK-S requires megawatt supply like SPY-6.

On internet it is being said AESA of USN ships effects on fuel consumption 10-20 %.

Look at the new Barbaros modernisation, they will have 2x MAR-D plus PESA plus AKR etc. Supply of electricity doesn't seem big problem since we don't use 4x SPY/6 panels.

One SPY/6 AMDR is run by 1000-volts of DC power.

 

[uçuyorum]

I have no clue. Logically , if CENK-S needs Megawatt Energy and consumes more fuel, having additional MAR-D will enable fuel saving. When you don't need long range, high altitude S-band frequency, you could switch MAR-D which is X-band for self defense mode.

I assume we are all agree with that self defense mode of a warship is vital. Self defense is more prior than long range detection.


You can't just turn self defense systems and radars off for sake of fuel.



On the other hand i don't think CENK-S requires megawatt supply like SPY-6.

On internet it is being said AESA of USN ships effects on fuel consumption 10-20 %.

Look at the new Yavuz modernisation, they will have 2x MAR-D plus PESA plus AKR etc. Supply of electricity doesn't seem big problem since we don't use 4x SPY/6 panels.

CENK is said to be roughly 3 times that of Smart S

 

[UkroTurk]

Speaking of which, ARDA and CAFRAD CFR may be similar in architecture, but CFR is backed by better processing power and more T/R, better hardware. Nevertheless, 4x ARDA would be very useful as a secondary radar, providing 360° coverage and continuous tracking in any sector. The question now is whether we can omit the AKREP and put 2 x ARDA in each spot to make up for the 360 degrees. Would 2 x ARDA be good enough for tracking?

You are the Boss. I have no clue. Put then 4 ARDA plus AKREP ı don't think ARDA costs and consumes a lot.

At least Ada Class deserves 4x ARDA

 

[UkroTurk]

CENK is said to be roughly 3 times that of Smart S

Price or energy consumption?

Smart 145kw so 3x 145: app 450kW?
Mar-D might need 145kW
ARDA -X: ? But ground vehicle could supply 4 AESA panels

So the question is our warships could generate 600kW for AESA radars?


EDIT:

Wait! AESA radars don't seem consume too much unless They make Electronic Attack.

Why do solid state AESA radars tend to have lower peak power than CFA fed PESA radars like SPY-1 and does that matter?

Answer (1 of 3): Radar power is incredibly important, for 2 reasons. First, it directly improves the sensitivity of the system and thus the effective range. A 10 times more powerful radar will allow you to see about 80% farther. That’s a big deal. Second, high-end AESA radars are increasingly use...

www.quora.com

 

[Bogeyman]

I have no clue. Logically , if CENK-S needs Megawatt Energy and consumes more fuel, having additional MAR-D will enable fuel saving. When you don't need long range, high altitude S-band frequency, you could switch MAR-D which is X-band for self defense mode.

I assume we are all agree with that self defense mode of a warship is vital. Self defense is more prior than long range detection.


You can't just turn self defense systems and radars off for sake of fuel.



On the other hand i don't think CENK-S requires megawatt supply like SPY-6.

On internet it is being said AESA of USN ships effects on fuel consumption 10-20 %.

Look at the new Yavuz modernisation, they will have 2x MAR-D plus PESA plus AKR etc. Supply of electricity doesn't seem big problem since we don't use 4x SPY/6 panels.

The capacity of the radars may not affect fuel consumption much. But electronic warfare is not like that. If you press high power with your electronic warfare capabilities at critical times, the fuel tank will reach the bottom. Therefore, you need to consider the cost of the entire operation to the ship and average it.

Beyond consuming the fuel tank, you must create a power package suitable for the high power needs of electronic warfare systems. AESA radars and increasing number of modules will result in higher power demand. Therefore, if you do not want to compromise your electronic warfare capabilities in times of war, you need to distribute your power plan carefully. Adapt what you think about Cenk-S to mini Çafrad. You will understand what I mean.

 

[UkroTurk]

The capacity of the radars may not affect fuel consumption much. But electronic warfare is not like that. If you press high power with your electronic warfare capabilities at critical times, the fuel tank will reach the bottom. Therefore, you need to consider the cost of the entire operation to the ship and average it.

Beyond consuming the fuel tank, you must create a power package suitable for the high power needs of electronic warfare systems. AESA radars and increasing number of modules will result in higher power demand. Therefore, if you do not want to compromise your electronic warfare capabilities in times of war, you need to distribute your power plan carefully. Adapt what you think about Cenk-S to mini Çafrad. You will understand what I mean.

BTW Çafrad is tested on TCG Göksu.
So can you see the frigate can generate enough power even for ÇAFRAD.

I haven't heard about mini Çafrad.


2024: ARDA

I can't understand why ÇAFRAD has both X-band ÇFR and AYR? AYR just for semi-active ESSMs? Still old ESSM stockpile? or AYR for Electronic Attack ?

 

[B_A]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1745313335434698965

The Naval Journal published an important review article on France's Barrucuda Class Nuclear Propulsion Submarine (SSN).

In the article written by Navy Lieutenant Colonel Deniz Aytan, important compilations on nuclear-propelled submarines were included. In the article, especially the Barrucuda Class Nuclear Propelled Submarines of the French Navy were examined in detail. The article also includes important references to the 'National Nuclear Propelled Submarine', which is planned to be built in the medium term.

 

[Anmdt]

BTW Çafrad is tested on TCG Göksu.
So can you see the frigate can generate enough power even for ÇAFRAD.

I haven't heard about mini Çafrad.


2024: ARDA
View attachment 64626


I can't understand why ÇAFRAD has both X-band ÇFR and AYR? AYR just for semi-active ESSMs? Still old ESSM stockpile? or AYR for Electronic Attack ?
View attachment 64627

View attachment 64628

It has been tested with its own generator, cooling system, etc.

 

[Anmdt]

BTW Çafrad is tested on TCG Göksu.
So can you see the frigate can generate enough power even for ÇAFRAD.

I haven't heard about mini Çafrad.


2024: ARDA
View attachment 64626


I can't understand why ÇAFRAD has both X-band ÇFR and AYR? AYR just for semi-active ESSMs? Still old ESSM stockpile? or AYR for Electronic Attack ?
View attachment 64627

View attachment 64628

AYR is for illumination, data-links and so on, and CFR could also perform these tasks by allocating resources through trade-offs of search function. The reason the Navy does not remove it may be the future need for large bandwidth data links that may arise with smart munition networks. (e.g. TF-2000 will be able to adopt a munition fired by F-16s, drones, other ships, etc.).

Mar-D might need 145kW

MAR-D MKI was 6kW, not sure of MKII but could be higher. AN SPY-1 of the first few blocks consume 6MW and not all panels are active at the at the same time. So 4 x AESA panels will not be rated at 4 x power withdrawal, unless each panel is connected to a separate processing unit. Note: Each panel requires cooling and associated auxiliaries.

 

[TheInsider]

Price or energy consumption?
View attachment 64625
Smart 145kw so 3x 145: app 450kW?
Mar-D might need 145kW
ARDA -X: ? But ground vehicle could supply 4 AESA panels

So the question is our warships could generate 600kW for AESA radars?


EDIT:

Wait! AESA radars don't seem consume too much unless They make Electronic Attack.

Why do solid state AESA radars tend to have lower peak power than CFA fed PESA radars like SPY-1 and does that matter?

Answer (1 of 3): Radar power is incredibly important, for 2 reasons. First, it directly improves the sensitivity of the system and thus the effective range. A 10 times more powerful radar will allow you to see about 80% farther. That’s a big deal. Second, high-end AESA radars are increasingly use...

www.quora.com

Peak power is not continuous power. It is a momentary power spike. Mar-D consumes around 6kW.

 

[UkroTurk]

So we can put AESA radars as much as we desire