TR Naval Programs

[Anmdt]

That is shortsightedness. What would we have done if we had no DM2A4 to furnish the Reis Class with?
When US stopped the sale of MK41 VLS, we built our own VLS; namely MIDLAS.
Besides as well as “us” knowing this torpedo “well”, so do our adversaries. So they probably already devised defence procedures against it. Akya, on the other hand, is a closed box.

I agree with your question on Orka. That is a real game changer weapon. It can be deployed from air as well as from USVs. The sooner we have it in our inventory the better.

That is Meltem with lightweight torpedoes.
View attachment 71064

That is a Seahawk helicopter deploying a lightweight torpedo.

View attachment 71065

That is a USV with a torpedo

View attachment 71066

@Sanchez is right, Reis Class does not come with the Akya capability right away and needs a rework (on the component level) for integration & testing (qualification in a nutshell). For the time being AKYA production rates are no match to keep up with the stock (old torpedoes are either modernized or spent in exercises, or decommissioned).

6 Reis -> 6 x 20 = 120 torpedoes needed within 5 years from now on plus the training torpedoes and the ones to spent during qualification. This is the number excluding the modernization programs which will render some torpedoes useless as they are out of the date.

(Also note, this is a single time load of a Reis, approximating one holds 8 in cell, and 12 in the hull to reload, entirely excluding a scenario which hull returns to base for replenishment).

50 DM2A4, 50 Mk48 and ~90 AKYA in 10 years seem like a decent stock to me. If any of the outsourced torpedoes are embargoes we will simply burn money to increase production.

AKYA also needs a maturing process, which is ongoing to be introduced after LRIP.

 

[TR_123456]

The whole purpose of Akya torpedo was to replace the ageing DM2A4 (Seahake) torpedoes. So why are we still trying to buy these from Germany?

View attachment 71062
According to Naval News Akya already proved itself by sinking it’s target in a test firing in December 2023.
After this test with the real warhead, AKYA HWT achieved initial operational capability.
It is confusing that we are still after a foreign weapon that we and most of our adversaries know the details of .

SINKEX: Turkiye's first indigenous heavyweight torpedo AKYA sinks target at live test - Naval News

On Dec. 27, 2023, the Turkish Navy successfully carried out the first live firing test of the AKYA HWT with a real warhead in the East Med.

www.navalnews.com

Didnt we buy the 6 U214's all inclusive?
Maybe that is why.
AKYA could have been made for the Milden and the older subs(after upgrade) in mind.

 

[IC3M@N FX]

Possibly reverse engineering? In the current serial production block/version XY of the Seahaks to improve their own Akya torpedoes?
Because it makes no sense for me to rely on German ammunition either... instead of converting the old submarines to the Turkish ammunition types (last cheaper), let's be honest, you can also develop your torpedoes in the same diameter and length of the Seahake, then it would only be a question of software to accept them as torpedoes and shoot them down, unless..... we are lied to all the time and our torpedo ammunition are blenders and are no good.

 

[Osman]

Do we know the mod of the seahakes that will come? If it is the newest dm2a4 ER, with slow attack mode its range is 150 km. DM2A4 is really a good torpedo and other variants' range with slow attack mode is 100 km (see Sünnetçi's article below) I dont know if Akya reached these ranges (most probably) but Akya should need some time to improve its capabilites. Besides, we still use mk 37s and tigersharks (which had some guidance promlems twice in our exersices). And our submarine fleet will become larger (14- 16 subs instead of 12) within 4 or 5 years. And I heard that submarine crew prefer having different types of torpedoes in their subs in order to decrease risks and increase the surprise effect against enemy's anti torpedo measures. Therefore ı dont question the navy's choice.


Please read İbrahim Sünnetçi's article on torpedoes in TN's inventory. You will see the capabilities of dm2a4.

Türkiye'de Torpido Çalışmaları ve DzKK Torpido Envanteri

DzKK Ora. Adnan ÖZBAL, Cumhurbaşkanı Recep Tayyip ERDOĞAN ve MSB Hulusi AKAR'a AKYA Milli Ağır Torpido mock-up'ı üzerinden torpidonun kabiliyetleri hakkında bilgi verirken görülüyor (Fotoğraf: Cumhurbaşkanlığı).

tr.linkedin.com

 

[UkroTurk]

I could understand the torpedo deal since there were complicated submarines..but why did they buy hundred RIM-116 while there were Göksur /Levent?

Throwing RAM launchers, creating Software for ship naval management system, producing 100 göksur missiles.. all of them would cost more than current situation?

I can't understand really so all Göksur, gürz, Levent etc are fake .

 

[chngr]

I could understand the torpedo deal since there were complicated submarines..but why did they buy hundred RIM-116 while there were Göksur /Levent?

Throwing RAM launchers, creating Software for ship naval management system, producing 100 göksur missiles.. all of them would cost more than current situation?

I can't understand really so all Göksur, gürz, Levent etc are fake .

Yeah cost much more...Why should we throw away the ready and good system we have?

 

[Shtr]

Maybe they forced us to buy remaining other packages.

 

[uçuyorum]

We don't "have" göksur and levent yet. Time is money, gentlemen

 

[boredaf]

I can't understand really so all Göksur, gürz, Levent etc are fake .

What kind of a logic is this? Honestly, do you guys really pay no real attention to process behind these things and just assume as soon as a name is mentioned we can use them? They are being developed *right now*, do you expect us to install them tomorrow?

Over and over, in almost all threads it has to be repeated that development and deployment (in meaningful numbers) of weapon systems of all kind (and ships, and vehicles, and planes etc) all take time. There is a lot of testing and tweaking involved and there can be setbacks in any phase of development, it is normal, borderline expected to have some even.

In this case, we have ships and submarines at hand that use these weapons systems and need munitions (missiles and torpedoes), why wouldn't we also order some while developing ours? Funding for development and procurement are usually separated from each other at any rate (or should be), so, one shouldn't effect the other at all.

 

[Anmdt]

I can't understand really so all Göksur, gürz, Levent etc are fake .

Just don't let yourself be poisoned by certain low-level defence industry media or individuals posting in Twitter in TR. Especially those that use a lot of "!!!".

 

[somegoodusername]

Mate, if you don't produce your own air defense system, you won't have air defense in a prolonged war. Our missile stockpiles would deplete within months if we entered a real heavy intensity conflict. They wouldn't sell to us if we were fighting against another treacherous NATO country, and they wouldn't have the time to supply us even if we were on the same side. We're not like the Norway, which have a low risk of conflict.

Those RAM missiles we are buying from Germany does not make a stock, they are just filling the empty RAM systems on the ships. Leaving a little to side.

 

[Quasar]

I start beliving that our submarine's (esepically MILDEN and national mini subs) arsenals should include not only the heavyweight torpedoes but also lightweight torpedoes and sub-Atmaca or Sub-Çakır this would allow for more flexible engagements against smaller and unconventional vessels and potentially land targets as well...... I should admit lightweight torpedoes should be not any less complex than heavyweight torpedoes in production... in this case arm your subs with what you can produce faster....I am not talking about totally replacing heavyweight torpedoes but not to waste high value weapons on low value targets.

According to U.S Naval İnstitute ‘’ A proficient crew can launch its first four weapons in about two minutes. To reload each tube takes 10 to 20 minutes—up to an hour for all four—depending on the arrangement of the room’’

‘’ Unless it is counterattacked, an SSN typically will linger through an engagement to wire-guide a torpedo and maximize the hit probability. During the reload time, the submarine is most vulnerable to counterattack.’’

Refferences are from U.S Navai Institute's article Torpedoes: Get Smaller to Think Bigger​

 

[Sanchez]

According to U.S Naval İnstitute ‘’ A proficient crew can launch its first four weapons in about two minutes. To reload each tube takes 10 to 20 minutes—up to an hour for all four—depending on the arrangement of the room’’

‘’ Unless it is counterattacked, an SSN typically will linger through an engagement to wire-guide a torpedo and maximize the hit probability. During the reload time, the submarine is most vulnerable to counterattack.’’

Unlike the Virginia Class boats' 4, 214s have 8 tubes and can carry 10 to 14 spares as far as I can remember. For Virginia, it's 25+. For Americans, using LWTs they can reload faster could be advantageous, but less so for us.

 

[Quasar]

Unlike the Virginia Class boats' 4, 214s have 8 tubes and can carry 10 to 14 spares as far as I can remember. For Virginia, it's 25+. For Americans, using LWTs they can reload faster could be advantageous, but less so for us.

So you want to use Akya for anything you encounter in Agean and Mediteranian to cost of Somalia? the idea is not only about quantity of tubes or how fast you reload them but more about the fact that heavyweight torpedoes are not always the best choice for every and each military engagement .... diversify your armament .... at least this is what US is planing to do in Pasific and there are things we can take from this approach and in fact most probably we will implement it may be even befor US

 

[Sanchez]

So you want use Akya for anything you encounter in Agean and Mediteranian to cost Somalia?

For the kinds of targets a submarine is tasked to eliminate, yes. Most if not all LWTs are not anti ship weapons but anti submarine weapons and they are employed aboard ASW ships, ASW helicopters and MPAs, not submarines. Submarines also employ HWTs to engage other submarines, not LWTs. LWTs are defensive weapons to defend against submarines with much shorter range and warhead. HWTs are pure attack weapons to attack shipping, enemy ships and other submarines.

However I do not disagree there's space to be explored here. Maybe long range LWTs could be a solution to some problems.
Edit. @Quasar New Swedish light weight Torped 47 with ranges comparable to HWTs could be an interesting read. It's a mix between HWT and LWT at 400mms compared to standard 324 or 530 and would require changing launchers on ships and have a much smaller warhead but it's one possible solution to carry more torpedoes.