TR Navy Naval Programs

[dBSPL]

So, you're saying TF2000 is quite the Beast with all this nice stuff. How many do we want to build?

It will certainly be a milestone in our naval history. Producing a warship of this combat load and tonnage with an 85% localization rate with the very first ship must be more daunting than the ship itself.

Program's total production target is speculated as 7 and 8 units, according to the latest decisions, I think the planning has been finalized as 8 (correct me if I am wrong). However, in a projection that will cover the entire 2030s, I have the opinion that this hull will planning to built to higher numbers. (Because if there is a planning similar to the I class, at least 3 private shipyards will now have the capability to build destroyer hull blocks and superstructure.) A lite class could be designed for export, and in the future, in line with the navy's ocean doctrines, a heavy frigate with a production cost target lower than the current AAW destroyer could be included in the planning, which was speculated as TF-100 years ago.

 

[Sanchez]

It will certainly be a milestone in our naval history. Producing a warship of this combat load and tonnage with an 85% localization rate with the very first ship must be more daunting than the ship itself.

Program's total production target is speculated as 7 and 8 units, according to the latest decisions, I think the planning has been finalized as 8 (correct me if I am wrong). However, in a projection that will cover the entire 2030s, I have the opinion that this hull will planning to built to higher numbers. (Because if there is a planning similar to the I class, at least 3 private shipyards will now have the capability to build destroyer hull blocks and superstructure.) A lite class could be designed for export, and in the future, in line with the navy's ocean doctrines, a heavy frigate with a production cost target lower than the current AAW destroyer could be included in the planning, which was speculated as TF-100 years ago.

I'm fairly certain that with the expected announcement soon of the construction start in the Istanbul navy shipyard, they will tout the 4 number as they did with Istif at the time. But also fairly certain that if the economy allows it, number navy wants is 8. Not 7, but 8. It will be 4+4.

To add, they only mention kamikaze usvs so far, but if the space allows it, a sensor usv carried by the TF-2000 could be a gamechanger for ASW and ASuw. This thing will be able to carry 3 helicopters. Add some sonobuoy and torpedo carrying USVs and it becomes the most powerful ASW destroyer in the world. If we are going to have 8 of them, it's only natural to specialize, we don't need 8 AAW destroyers.

 

[UkroTurk]

Hisar hava savunma sistemine tarihi ayar: Ateş gücünü turboya alacak

Roketsan’dan beklenmedik bir müjde geldi. Savunma sanayi alanında önemli bir adım atan Roketsan, Hisar hava savunma sistemini turboya alacak teknolojiyi duyurdu.

www.egetelgraf.com

Roketsan has stated that they are now confident about quad packability of Hisar missiles.
That is going to pave the way of increasing fire power of our defence equipment.

I am asking to website:
When and where Roketsan has just revealed "unexpected good news"?

Or the author has just met it?

I hope they will also reveal AntiSurface configuration of SİPER B2.

How fast and how far could SIPER 2 hit surface targets ?
250km range at mach 5?

Active seeker of SİPER could detect and engage main radar of warships as well as SAM systems.

 

[Saithan]

I was thinking the destroyers could be interesting pick for some of our allies. like Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia. Especially if we're cost efficient and can deliver 100% without having to wait on export permit from our adversaries (I'm just going to call them that, the term "so-called-allies" is way too long).

But Today Hürriyet has an article about Indonesia being interested in Istiff class frigates which are really good imo but delivery date is 2025-2026 which seems a bit too close...

 

[Anmdt]

I am asking to website:
When and where Roketsan has just revealed "unexpected good news"?

Or the author has just met it?
View attachment 70713

View attachment 70712


I hope they will also reveal AntiSurface configuration of SİPER B2.

How fast and how far could SIPER 2 hit surface targets ?
250km range at mach 5?

Active seeker of SİPER could detect and engage main radar of warships as well as SAM systems.

Did you all miss it, there will be "single cell" MIDLAS. This is a good capability for flexible installation, and which may also introduce shorter cells (self-defence length) only for Hisar-D installation.

I was thinking the destroyers could be interesting pick for some of our allies. like Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia. Especially if we're cost efficient and can deliver 100% without having to wait on export permit from our adversaries (I'm just going to call them that, the term "so-called-allies" is way too long).

But Today Hürriyet has an article about Indonesia being interested in Istiff class frigates which are really good imo but delivery date is 2025-2026 which seems a bit too close...

Nothing is certain on the model or contractor, whether it is ASFAT, STM or TAIS or any other private shipyard (Dearsan). The statement was also an improve so it may contain error, misspell and so on. It may be "launched" in 2 years, hard for an exact delivery. Might be delivered in 2.5 to 3 years but Indonesia is clearly demanding a local production thus again make such a timeline hard to be achieved.

 

[Anmdt]

We have actually seen that Navy is open-minded for TF-2000 and other platforms to the point they may consider loitering and FPV - swarm drones for self-defence measures. They may also install and use other low-cost weapons if the producers introduce it, such as UMTAS-GM 1/2, Cirit, Sungur.

The more systems are introduced, the more challenging it becomes for logistics and management. They will possibly use a modular station (not mobile) for at 4 spots allowing for an option between air-defence / self-defence etc.

Aselsan should also make an 35mm RCWS capable of using ATOM with a standalone single face AESA radar (facing at the same direction as gun points).

 

[Afif]

The given range is against fighter-sized targets (~1m^2)

Chenk-400N has a detection range of 160km against fighter sized target according to Aselsan. How is smaller X band Chenk-300N has 180km range against the same? In the article it says, instrumented range.

ASELSAN Develops CENK 300-N AESA Radar for FACs | TURDEF

ASELSAN has shown that the CENK 300-N AESA search radar is under development for fast attack craft.

turdef.com

Effective range against 1m^2 RCS targets is likely lower. Like how it is with Kalkan (= 100km instrumented range and 60km effective range against fighters)

 

[Radko]

Chenk-400N has a detection range of 160km against fighter sized target according to Aselsan. How is smaller X band Chenk-300N has 180km range against the same? In the article it says, instrumented range.

Effective range against 1m^2 RCS targets is likely lower. Like how it is with Kalkan (= 100km instrumented range and 60km effective range against fighters)

They have more than one operational modes

 

[Afif]

They have more than one operational modes

I don't remember denying that bro. It is assumed that we are taking about volume search mode utilizing several beams at once. (Single beam) cued search would allow longer range detection, yes.

 

[boredaf]

We have actually seen that Navy is open-minded for TF-2000 and other platforms to the point they may consider loitering and FPV - swarm drones for self-defence measures. They may also install and use other low-cost weapons if the producers introduce it, such as UMTAS-GM 1/2, Cirit, Sungur.

The more systems are introduced, the more challenging it becomes for logistics and management. They will possibly use a modular station (not mobile) for at 4 spots allowing for an option between air-defence / self-defence etc.

Aselsan should also make an 35mm RCWS capable of using ATOM with a standalone single face AESA radar (facing at the same direction as gun points).

I think taking advantage of the fact that we now have Venom LR and making a new turret for it with a radar like you said, along with 30mm ATOM would be great. It would be a light enough RCWS that can be used on not just on TF-2000 but also on smaller ships for self defence and different vehicles as a proper turret.

Edit: @Anmdt can MIDLAS be built in sections that could allow it to be placed like MK57 on Zumwalt, or would that require too much tinkering/new tech?

 

[Afif]

I think taking advantage of the fact that we now have Venom LR and making a new turret for it with a radar like you said, along with 30mm ATOM would be great. It would be a light enough RCWS that can be used on not just on TF-2000 but also on smaller ships for self defence and different vehicles as a proper turret.

Edit: @Anmdt can MIDLAS be built in sections that could allow it to be placed like MK57 on Zumwalt, or would that require too much tinkering/new tech?

Man, it isn't even mostly about the VLS. Look at the hull design. It boraden as it go downward. On other hand, conventional designs are the opposite.

 

[Anmdt]

Man, it isn't even mostly about the VLS. Look at the hull design. It boraden as it go downward. On other hand, conventional designs are the opposite.

Neverthless it is the same on both hulls, it broadens and then gets narrow, while conventional hulls are larger above water (flare at the bow and stern sections) and narrower at the waterline while both sharing the same or close waterline beam width (or similar draft to beam and beam to length ratios).

It is more about the VLS, Mk.57 could be the only VLS that is made to fit on sides with safety while others are adaptations leaving the safety at designer's hands (leaving space between the cells and board shell, applying protections, armor etc.). Mk.57 has both a space given between the hull, and has self protection and fail-safe design to get one cell damaged and preventing a spread. When a Mk.41 cell fails it also damages the surrounding cells.

And most lethal threats are expected to arrive close to the waterline (valid until few years ago), a peripheral application has a naturally given large space-escape volume on a tumblehome hull vs conventional hull.

*Purely for scientific use and by luck, the ONRT hull resembles Zumwalt.

T2015 - onrt

An easy comparison between DDG-51, DDG-1000.

 

[Anmdt]

I think taking advantage of the fact that we now have Venom LR and making a new turret for it with a radar like you said, along with 30mm ATOM would be great. It would be a light enough RCWS that can be used on not just on TF-2000 but also on smaller ships for self defence and different vehicles as a proper turret.

Edit: @Anmdt can MIDLAS be built in sections that could allow it to be placed like MK57 on Zumwalt, or would that require too much tinkering/new tech?

Better to stick with central magazines and adopt ExLS - like design for modular application on places like side of the hangar, above the deck. This is another 'Made in America' design which they didn't seem to carry on for latter designs.

 

[Kaan Azman]

View attachment 70725

Did you all miss it, there will be "single cell" MIDLAS. This is a good capability for flexible installation, and which may also introduce shorter cells (self-defence length) only for Hisar-D installation.


Nothing is certain on the model or contractor, whether it is ASFAT, STM or TAIS or any other private shipyard (Dearsan). The statement was also an improve so it may contain error, misspell and so on. It may be "launched" in 2 years, hard for an exact delivery. Might be delivered in 2.5 to 3 years but Indonesia is clearly demanding a local production thus again make such a timeline hard to be achieved.

Well, I didn't and I saw the opportunity hehehehe

 

[Huelague]

16 of the 32 VLS are Atmaca and Gezgin missiles

Why ATMACA needs VLS?

 

[Kaan Azman]

got no idea but I'm ready for an extended range variant

 

[Sanchez]

Why ATMACA needs VLS?

Because they decided to not allocate additional space for ASM launchers on TF-2000. Old design did have them, newer one doesn't.

 

[Brave Janissary]

View attachment 70725

Well, I didn't and I saw the opportunity hehehehe
View attachment 70726

Congrats, but carrying atmaca's to behind of main cannon and locate a 8-16 cell midlas to center of the ship isnt more logical ?

With help of that ship can launch asroc vls kind ammo if we make it and also add to ship a düfas.

And that of course raise to strenght of ships capability in the are of anti submarine warfare.

 

[UkroTurk]

@Kaan Azman why did you prefer LEVENT/Hisar combination rather than Hisar/Gökdeniz CIWS?

What would be the advantage of LEVENT + Hisar over Hisar + Gökdeniz combination?

IMHO Gökdeniz would be better as it could stop rapid missiles as well as tiny drones , ATGMs etc.

Hisar plus Levent would not make difference . No offense bro. I appreciate your works.

So we are looking forward to seeing Hisar plus Gökdeniz combination on ada Class.

 

[Saithan]

@Kaan Azman kisacasi bizim @UkroTurk diyo ki, "ben de isterem, benim ki ni de ciz"