TR Navy Turkish Navy|News & Discussions

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,495
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,836
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I understand the British, but do not understand our own navy
British would offer (actually they do) arrowhead instead of Type 23 if they presumed long term gains. And within right terms arrowhead comes much suitable for TN needs than Type 23.

If that is the case, i e putting them in the bag as part of a lump sum deal that would have involved some level of strategic partnership, then yeah, I’d swallow that sugar coated stuff happily but the impression I get now is that they just wanna sell stuff.

Don’t quote me on it, though. Only my personal observations.

The veteran members at the forum can give us more insight on those negotiations.
As stated above, arrowhead would give british more financial gain than stripped Type 23s. Also arrowhead falls within specifications that are defined by TN and british are open for any kind of modification and licence building the ships.
 

Sanchez

Experienced member
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
2,335
Reactions
79 10,676
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Hence my thinking that the navy is indeed interested in T23s and it's not just the Brits trying to offload them. I'd think they wouldn't even offer the A140 design to Turkey as we'd just reject it.
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,244
Reactions
140 16,241
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
British would offer (actually they do) arrowhead instead of Type 23 if they presumed long term gains. And within right terms arrowhead comes much suitable for TN needs than Type 23.


As stated above, arrowhead would give british more financial gain than stripped Type 23s. Also arrowhead falls within specifications that are defined by TN and british are open for any kind of modification and licence building the ships.
There seems to be two types of arrowhead ships; arrowhead-120 and arrowhead-140
First one a 4000ton and the latter a 5700ton frigate. They are both classed as light frigates.
First one a 120m long ship while the latter is 140m long.
Very capable platforms.
The longer one is also classed as Type31 frigate, and named as “Inspiration class”.
At 330million dollars each, they seem like a snip.

But I had rather build 4 more longer I-Class ships with a heavier tonnage, nearing 4500tons, in Turkey than spend money on these UK built ships.
Even if they are, the more expensive 114metre current ones are a better investment than any purchased ship.
Keep our money in the country.
Let everyone wonder what is under that hull.
If anything needs to be upgraded or changed, let it be under our control.
If we can build 3 ships in 36 months, then we can surely build 4 more if push comes to shove.

1682799305780.png
 
Last edited:

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,495
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,836
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
There seems to be two types of arrowhead ships; arrowhead-120 and arrowhead-140
First one a 4000ton and the latter a 5700ton frigate. They are both classed as light frigates.
First one a 120m long ship while the latter is 140m long.
Very capable platforms.
The longer one is also classed as Type31 frigate, and named as “Inspiration class”.
At 330million dollars each, they seem like a snip.

But I had rather build 4 more longer I-Class ships with a heavier tonnage, nearing 4500tons, in Turkey than spend money on these UK built ships.
Even if they are, the more expensive 114metre current ones are a better investment than any purchased ship.
Keep our money in the country.
Let everyone wonder what is under that hull.
If anything needs to be upgraded or changed, let it be under our control.
If we can build 3 ships in 36 months, then we can surely build 4 more if push comes to shove.

View attachment 56847
The difference is merely the endurance and seakeeping of the AH140 design in comparison to I-class. Unfortunately I-class may not be stretched to the size of AH140 but the mast could be retained as whole that would reduce the design efforts. If happens, those would be built in TR under a license, modified according to the TN needs with Turkish components and weapons but still, certified by Turkish Loyd.Not to be misunderstood, I am mentioning of this as a better alternative than Type-23s if there is such an urgency.

4 AH140 could be made and commissioned in 4 years, which is the foreseen duration for preparation of Type-23s for transfer and training of the crew and maintenance personnel.

I would be all in favor of a Turkish design like F142 (merely as an example, i am not very fond of the design*) but that is yet to mature and move forward from conceptual design stage to preliminary design stage. STM also had such a frigate design that hasn't gone public (not talking about TF-4500). Armerkom has studied on feasibility of such a design but that is yet to proceed (see how long TF-2000 took).
 

Knowledgeseeker

Experienced member
Moderator
Arab Moderator
Morocco Moderator
Messages
1,820
Reactions
20 4,647
Nation of residence
Norway
Nation of origin
Moroco
The difference is merely the endurance and seakeeping of the AH140 design in comparison to I-class. Unfortunately I-class may not be stretched to the size of AH140 but the mast could be retained as whole that would reduce the design efforts. If happens, those would be built in TR under a license, modified according to the TN needs with Turkish components and weapons but still, certified by Turkish Loyd.Not to be misunderstood, I am mentioning of this as a better alternative than Type-23s if there is such an urgency.

4 AH140 could be made and commissioned in 4 years, which is the foreseen duration for preparation of Type-23s for transfer and training of the crew and maintenance personnel.

I would be all in favor of a Turkish design like F142 (merely as an example, i am not very fond of the design*) but that is yet to mature and move forward from conceptual design stage to preliminary design stage. STM also had such a frigate design that hasn't gone public (not talking about TF-4500). Armerkom has studied on feasibility of such a design but that is yet to proceed (see how long TF-2000 took).

Yes, I remember that you earlier had said that the TF-2000 conceptual design phase will be completed by the end of 2024 and that they could make a lighter version derived from the TF-2000. So basically the I-class can not be stretched as many in the forum taught.
 

Knowledgeseeker

Experienced member
Moderator
Arab Moderator
Morocco Moderator
Messages
1,820
Reactions
20 4,647
Nation of residence
Norway
Nation of origin
Moroco
Burak Class Corvettes Are Now Patrol Ships During the TCG ANADOLU press tour, it was seen that the brochures distributed by DzKK had the words '4 CORVETTES' and '21 PATROL SHIPS' in the 'PLATFORMS' section.


It consists of 4 corvettes (Ada class), 21 patrol ships, 16 Tuzla class patrol ships and 5 Burak class ships. Only one of the Burak class ships, which entered service as 6 corvettes in the early 2000s, was retired (TCG BODRUM in 2022).


 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,495
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,836
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Burak Class Corvettes Are Now Patrol Ships During the TCG ANADOLU press tour, it was seen that the brochures distributed by DzKK had the words '4 CORVETTES' and '21 PATROL SHIPS' in the 'PLATFORMS' section.


It consists of 4 corvettes (Ada class), 21 patrol ships, 16 Tuzla class patrol ships and 5 Burak class ships. Only one of the Burak class ships, which entered service as 6 corvettes in the early 2000s, was retired (TCG BODRUM in 2022).


And soon to retire.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
4,743
Reactions
94 9,064
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
@Anmdt Couldn’t those Hisar based extended design ( the one was shared a month ago) be an option? Specially the one with 32 VLS. Or they still fall short and light?
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,495
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,836
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
@Anmdt Couldn’t those Hisar based extended design ( the one was shared a month ago) be an option? Specially the one with 32 VLS. Or they still fall short and light?
Unfortunately no, still too light in tonnage - size to encounter heavy seas and to have long-endurance. Navy is not looking at weapon payload there but long-endurance and larger size.
 

Ripley

Contributor
USA Correspondent
Messages
644
Reactions
15 1,831
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Turkey
Unfortunately no, still too light in tonnage - size to encounter heavy seas and to have long-endurance. Navy is not looking at weapon payload there but long-endurance and larger size.
Then it’s official now. Turkish Navy really needs a 4000 - 5000 tons ship between Istif and TF200.

If the TF2000 designed with the criteria of “Unconditional operation at sea state 5 and conditional operation with speed and heading limitations at sea state 6” then it’s fair to assume that required 5K ship should keep up with the former, hence an endurance around 5000 NM with operational capability at sea state 6.

And yet we can’t tweak around the Istif class hull anymore to meet such requirements.

The options are Type23, Arrowhead and it’s variant (type31), Dearsan F142 and STM design.

Type 23, with its strong suit, the sonar suite stripped off (no pun intended) indeed not attractive at all.
Arrowhead and its longer hull variant type31 not desired due to foreign designs rather than our own designs.
Dearsan F142 seem lacking TN requirements whereas STM is just a design study as I understand.

Wow! Though.
 

dBSPL

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Ambassador
Messages
2,291
Reactions
96 11,783
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Then it’s official now. Turkish Navy really needs a 4000 - 5000 tons ship between Istif and TF200.

If the TF2000 designed with the criteria of “Unconditional operation at sea state 5 and conditional operation with speed and heading limitations at sea state 6” then it’s fair to assume that required 5K ship should keep up with the former, hence an endurance around 5000 NM with operational capability at sea state 6.

And yet we can’t tweak around the Istif class hull anymore to meet such requirements.

The options are Type23, Arrowhead and it’s variant (type31), Dearsan F142 and STM design.

Type 23, with its strong suit, the sonar suite stripped off (no pun intended) indeed not attractive at all.
Arrowhead and its longer hull variant type31 not desired due to foreign designs rather than our own designs.
Dearsan F142 seem lacking TN requirements whereas STM is just a design study as I understand.

Wow! Though.
For these very reasons, I have the idea that the future heavy frigate planning, which we have been talking about for years as TF-100 and which still does not seem to start design activities in the near future, will be at least as heavy as the TF-2000, and maybe even built on the same hull. Like France's FREMM planning. Therefore, I have the idea that the +3 option in the TF-2000 planning, which is stated as 4 + 3, will be realised, perhaps more asw-dominated, but definitely. It may even be 4+4.
 

Ripley

Contributor
USA Correspondent
Messages
644
Reactions
15 1,831
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Turkey
TF100. I thought it has been left on the ash heap of history a long time ago which I never understood why, btw.
So, you’re thinking of something around 6000 tons with 16-32 cells VLS.
Could they work around TF2000 to create a lighter weight hull from it, a TF2000 series of ships like Milgem series, so to speak.
 

Knowledgeseeker

Experienced member
Moderator
Arab Moderator
Morocco Moderator
Messages
1,820
Reactions
20 4,647
Nation of residence
Norway
Nation of origin
Moroco
Could they work around TF2000 to create a lighter weight hull from it, a TF2000 series of ships like Milgem series, so to speak.

Two options are available on the table.

1. Armerkom and DPO worked on TF2000 in a way that a new lighter design can be derived. That would be after they finish the contract details concerning the design stage in late 2024.


2. Another option could be that they can start working on a lighter version now from another company that was rivaling the selected company.


I'm not a naval expert however sooner or later we will see a Frigate between the I-Class and the TF-2000 destroyer. Probably something around 5000-7000 tons with different mission profiles. 32 VLS with 32 air defense cells, or 16 air defense cell+ 16 Gezgin.
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,478
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
MKE will deliver the first national 76mm cannon to ASFAT in September to be mounted on TCG Akhisar OPV.
 

Profchaos

Active member
Messages
131
Reactions
1 278
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The difference is merely the endurance and seakeeping of the AH140 design in comparison to I-class. Unfortunately I-class may not be stretched to the size of AH140 but the mast could be retained as whole that would reduce the design efforts. If happens, those would be built in TR under a license, modified according to the TN needs with Turkish components and weapons but still, certified by Turkish Loyd.Not to be misunderstood, I am mentioning of this as a better alternative than Type-23s if there is such an urgency.

4 AH140 could be made and commissioned in 4 years, which is the foreseen duration for preparation of Type-23s for transfer and training of the crew and maintenance personnel.

I would be all in favor of a Turkish design like F142 (merely as an example, i am not very fond of the design*) but that is yet to mature and move forward from conceptual design stage to preliminary design stage. STM also had such a frigate design that hasn't gone public (not talking about TF-4500). Armerkom has studied on feasibility of such a design but that is yet to proceed (see how long TF-2000 took).
Is it possible to make an I class in the future with 8 antiships and 32 VLS?
+16 of the VLS will be located near the atmacas.
There are similar designs afaik.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,495
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,836
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Is it possible to make an I class in the future with 8 antiships and 32 VLS?
+16 of the VLS will be located near the atmacas.
There are similar designs afaik.
The passage way is in the mid, placing such a VLS (long as Mk41 strike length) blocks the hallway and makes it necessary to shrink surrounding rooms for a passageway(s).

Also, a direct access is often preferred in naval ships to reach from point A to B to reduce the time in emergencies.

But a short VLS similar to what going to be applied on might be utilized for slim missiles like Hisar-D, Siper B1 etc. However i think Navy takes AShM positions precious for using them with multiple type of missiles (Mix of land attack missiles etc.).
 

Brave Janissary

Well-known member
Messages
325
Reactions
5 665
The passage way is in the mid, placing such a VLS (long as Mk41 strike length) blocks the hallway and makes it necessary to shrink surrounding rooms for a passageway(s).

Also, a direct access is often preferred in naval ships to reach from point A to B to reduce the time in emergencies.

But a short VLS similar to what going to be applied on might be utilized for slim missiles like Hisar-D, Siper B1 etc. However i think Navy takes AShM positions precious for using them with multiple type of missiles (Mix of land attack missiles etc.).
Maybe not a mildas but special launcher for gökdemir.
 

Profchaos

Active member
Messages
131
Reactions
1 278
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The passage way is in the mid, placing such a VLS (long as Mk41 strike length) blocks the hallway and makes it necessary to shrink surrounding rooms for a passageway(s).

Also, a direct access is often preferred in naval ships to reach from point A to B to reduce the time in emergencies.

But a short VLS similar to what going to be applied on might be utilized for slim missiles like Hisar-D, Siper B1 etc. However i think Navy takes AShM positions precious for using them with multiple type of missiles (Mix of land attack missiles etc.).
What about a Very short VLS carrying Camm or Mica type missiles. A missile derived from gokdogan. You might even increase the number to 32 Camm type near the atmacas and 16 siper in the front. Is it possible ?
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,495
Solutions
2
Reactions
118 24,836
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
What about a Very short VLS carrying Camm or Mica type missiles. A missile derived from gokdogan. You might even increase the number to 32 Camm type near the atmacas and 16 siper in the front. Is it possible ?
Siper B1 / Hisar-D doesn't have a short range and these will be quad packable.

I see no point in carrying B2 in long term but 32 Cells might be fitted for individual launchers of Hisar-D (similar how it will be done in ADKG). Moreover, such an application may have great export chance as in modular VLS integration in place of 8 AShM.

Or as told in here if Navy is positive on that; They were positive for using it on lighter platforms via add-on modules.
Maybe not a mildas but special launcher for gökdemir.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom