TR Navy Navy|News & Discussions

[Strong AI]

I think we should procure J-35 from China for our aircraft carrier. Naval Kaan is near impossible, HÜRJET is not a capable plane. USA won't sell us F-35C, even if they sell us it's cost is our national sovereignty. Most important part of an aircraft carrier is it's planes, and we don't have any good plane to operate in our aircraft carrier.

View attachment 71825

Now tell us what can this plane do more than a twin-engine KE or twin-engine ANKA-3?

 

[uçuyorum]

I think this aircraft carrier will not be our only, just the first. But I am talking beyond 20 years if at all.

 

[boredaf]

I think this aircraft carrier will not be our only, just the first. But I am talking beyond 20 years if at all.

Why do we need more than one, when even one is not a necessity for the security of our country in the first place? Not to mention all other ships that has to go with that AC, from warships to auxiliaries?

 

[uçuyorum]

Why do we need more than one, when even one is not a necessity for the security of our country in the first place? Not to mention all other ships that has to go with that AC, from warships to auxiliaries?

Strategy of china and india was also to start with old soviet carriers and build up improved ones with that experience. This AC is a good capability on its own but strategically more of a stepping stone for a longer game.

 

[somegoodusername]

Now tell us what can this plane do more than a twin-engine KE or twin-engine ANKA-3?

Decision-maker. There are thousands of machines, devices that could be unmanned or automated but haven’t been, due to the desire to keep a human decision-maker involved in the process. Don't fall into this "unmanned mania" too early.

 

[boredaf]

Strategy of china and india was also to start with old soviet carriers and build up improved ones with that experience. This AC is a good capability on its own but strategically more of a stepping stone for a longer game.

Both of those countries have unimpeded access to open ocean, two of our three seas have no use for carriers, and the other one is boxed in (as vast as it is) by Gibraltar and Suez. Good luck getting an aircraft carrier out on the ocean if the tide turns and they decide to close the gates on us.

This AC is more of a vanity project than an absolute necessity in my eyes. We barely have overseas presence far away to justify it, and what we have we'd be far better served by having permanent military/naval bases on those countries. Several billions we are going to have to spend to build the carrier, warships to protect it and auxiliaries to support it (on top of planes) would be far better served expanding our warships and submarines or diverting those resources to other branches. Hell, you can probably make Trakya and 2 more like it focused on drones for the price one carrier alone let alone multiple.

And what longer game are you talking about? We aren't even the dominant power in our region, what game necessitates using our limited resources on more than one carrier?

 

[uçuyorum]

Both of those countries have unimpeded access to open ocean, two of our three seas have no use for carriers, and the other one is boxed in (as vast as it is) by Gibraltar and Suez. Good luck getting an aircraft carrier out on the ocean if the tide turns and they decide to close the gates on us.

This AC is more of a vanity project than an absolute necessity in my eyes. We barely have overseas presence far away to justify it, and what we have we'd be far better served by having permanent military/naval bases on those countries. Several billions we are going to have to spend to build the carrier, warships to protect it and auxiliaries to support it (on top of planes) would be far better served expanding our warships and submarines or diverting those resources to other branches. Hell, you can probably make Trakya and 2 more like it focused on drones for the price one carrier alone let alone multiple.

And what longer game are you talking about? We aren't even the dominant power in our region, what game necessitates using our limited resources on more than one carrier?

The navy has its own ambitions, they had since 70s-80s, that's why we got Anadolu, now that they finally have appreciation, funding and capacity to build their platforms while air force and army are lacking in their planning, they are pushing for it. Somalia and Libya are already very important, and regardless of our current situation, they have to think with future in mind.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Both of those countries have unimpeded access to open ocean, two of our three seas have no use for carriers, and the other one is boxed in (as vast as it is) by Gibraltar and Suez. Good luck getting an aircraft carrier out on the ocean if the tide turns and they decide to close the gates on us.

This AC is more of a vanity project than an absolute necessity in my eyes. We barely have overseas presence far away to justify it, and what we have we'd be far better served by having permanent military/naval bases on those countries. Several billions we are going to have to spend to build the carrier, warships to protect it and auxiliaries to support it (on top of planes) would be far better served expanding our warships and submarines or diverting those resources to other branches. Hell, you can probably make Trakya and 2 more like it focused on drones for the price one carrier alone let alone multiple.

And what longer game are you talking about? We aren't even the dominant power in our region, what game necessitates using our limited resources on more than one carrier?

I fully agree with you with respect to the unnecessity of a Carrier for our Navy. More than a vanity project it is probably a political project though.
However, even the study of the project will open our horizons.
2 LHDs,, one of them a UAV carrier, and at least 2 more LSTs would normally suffice for us.
But this political move now is in a way godsend to us. For one thing this aircraft carrier we are talking about, won’t happen before 2040. (Look at the TF2000 example). But come 2030’s and further, both our economical standing should improve and the world sociopolitical outlook will change. To be ready to project force away from our own seas and protect our overseas concerns and assets will come in real handy.

With respect to being locked in to the Mediterranean, I again agree with you. But Italy has the same situation. After 1960, they no longer have any overseas territory. So they too don’t need a carrier. Yet they have a carrier in hand. (Garibaldi was recently decommissioned)
They don’t really need to project power overseas. They definitely don’t need a carrier for Sardinia and Sicily. LHDs would have sufficed.
But they want to be able to keep the expertise of high end ship building alive in the country and be a part of the world community to protect NATO and European assets.

 

[boredaf]

I fully agree with you with respect to the unnecessity of a Carrier for our Navy. More than a vanity project it is probably a political project though.
However, even the study of the project will open our horizons.
2 LHDs,, one of them a UAV carrier, and at least 2 more LSTs would normally suffice for us.
But this political move now is in a way godsend to us. For one thing this aircraft carrier we are talking about, won’t happen before 2040. (Look at the TF2000 example). But come 2030’s and further, both our economical standing should improve and the world sociopolitical outlook will change. To be ready to project force away from our own seas and protect our overseas concerns and assets will come in real handy.

With respect to being locked in to the Mediterranean, I again agree with you. But Italy has the same situation. After 1960, they no longer have any overseas territory. So they too don’t need a carrier. Yet they have a carrier in hand. (Garibaldi was recently decommissioned)
They don’t really need to project power overseas. They definitely don’t need a carrier for Sardinia and Sicily. LHDs would have sufficed.
But they want to be able to keep the expertise of high end ship building alive in the country and be a part of the world community to protect NATO and European assets.

Italian comparison isn't exactly fair mate, they don't have the tense relationship with the West we do and are far less likely to suffer because of that. It is very weird that even people who are vehemently against the West don't seem to consider this when they want an aircraft carrier, not talking about you, they just brush it off as if we are guaranteed access to oceans forever. Also, Italty have had access to naval jets we never had, and still don't btw best we have are plans for now, and their aircraft carrier is actually smaller than the one we are planning.

And I don't see a carrier changing a lot for us on the political stage as well, we are already participating almost everything we can with NATO and its not like they are hurting for carriers at the moment, existing fleets can barely cover them already. Hell, even Royal Navy can't protect its carriers without compromising its naval presence elsewhere, that's why they made a deal with Netherlands. Not only we could be better served by focusing on TF2000 and maybe even a bigger missile cruiser but we could also contribute to NATO carrier groups in that way.

It is an enormous undertaking for us and in my opinion not playing to our strengths. We can probably build Trakya and then add another pair just like Anadolu and Trakya for the price of one carrier (from design to launch). But as you said, we are at least about 15 years away, we'll see how things will change.

 

[UkroTurk]

Is it possible to see 25mm Naval CIWS on Barbaros class since the upgrade consists of 2X STOP 25mm?

Are there big differences between Korkut25 CIWS with naval STOP25mm?
Why would not STOP use ATOM ammunition?

Burst mode: Rate of fire 600 per minute. Semi auto 200.
Ammunition capacity dual feed 250

Is new 25mm cal naval CIWS on the way?

 

[Aqerdf]

Speaking of the Barbaros, what's the latest situation of this upgrade programme, does anyone know ? Thanks.

@UkroTurk i guess it's just a matter of adding software/quad aura/muzzle sensor/loading 25mm atom cartridge type of situation. Anmdt knows better...

 

[Aqerdf]

Would waste already marinized turret i guess. Together with extra purchasing cost for new turret.

 

[Strong AI]

TCG AKHİSAR

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1868577113688957406

 

[Strong AI]

Shared by TSK

 

[Saithan]

Shared by TSK

View attachment 72957

Is that a submarine ?

 

[Strong AI]

Is that a submarine ?

I think Reis-class

 

[Strong AI]

#ASELSAN’s ARTCom 9671 HF and ARTCom 9671 V/UHF radios have been integrated into the NATO Ship Shore Ship Buffer Communication System for the first time, enabling their use in the field. In this context, old generation radios used in Link-11 operations have been replaced by cutting-edge domestic and national radios which enhanced the efficiency of field operations.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1874732268561760634

 

[Scott Summers]

Greatest naval excersice in our history is coming.

Blue Homeland - Turkey to Deploy 100 Ships in Aegean

Blue Homeland - It comes just weeks before the anticipated meeting between Greek PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis and Turkish President Erdoğan

www.tovima.com

 

[Hannibal]

If everything goes to plan, by 2040 Turkish Navy will consist of:

Aircraft Carrier​

• 1 (MUGEM aircraft carrier)

Amphibious Assault Ships​

• 2 (TCG Anadolu + TCG Trakya)

Destroyers​

• 12 (Including TF-2000 class destroyers and general-purpose destroyers)

Frigates​

• 28 (Combination of Barbaros, I-class frigates, and some future platforms)

Corvettes​

• 4 (Ada-class corvettes)

Offshore Patrol Vessels​

• 16 (Combination of Tuzla-class, and Hisar-class OPVs)

Assault Ships​

• 19 (Includes various fast attack craft and gunboats)

Submarines​

• 20 (Combination of Gür-class, Reis-class, MILDEN-class submarines)
• 5 STM500
• 10 TRANCA Mini Submarines

This would comfortably make the Turkish navy the best in Europe (probably by 2035), and 3rd or 4th in the world, behind USA, China, and on the same level as Japan.

 

[Afif]

View attachment 72992
View attachment 72993

If everything goes to plan, by 2040 Turkish Navy will consist of:

Aircraft Carrier​

• 1 (MUGEM aircraft carrier)

Amphibious Assault Ships​

• 2 (TCG Anadolu + TCG Trakya)

Destroyers​

• 12 (Including TF-2000 class destroyers and general-purpose destroyers)

Frigates​

• 28 (Combination of Barbaros, I-class frigates, and some future platforms)

Corvettes​

• 4 (Ada-class corvettes)

Offshore Patrol Vessels​

• 16 (Combination of Tuzla-class, and Hisar-class OPVs)

Assault Ships​

• 19 (Includes various fast attack craft and gunboats)

Submarines​

• 20 (Combination of Gür-class, Reis-class, MILDEN-class submarines)
• 5 STM500
• 10 TRANCA Mini Submarines

This would comfortably make the Turkish navy the best in Europe (probably by 2035), and 3rd or 4th in the world, behind USA, China, and on the same level as Japan.

You can't have the best navy in Europe without SSNs fleet. There is no alternative to it.