Turkish Naval Programs

Saithan

Experienced member
Denmark Correspondent
Founding Member
Messages
5,808
Reaction score
13,107
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Turkey
Any news on when the additional Ada will begin construction ?
 

Lonewolf

Committed member
Messages
289
Reaction score
182
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
At the end, they use same principle/technology as SOM for example. The whole different is the range.
Not really ,it should use a x band seeker in addition , also guidance would be less as range is huge ,so some level of automation is required
 

Yasar

Contributor
Moderator
Professional
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
4,775
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Not really ,it should use a x band seeker in addition , also guidance would be less as range is huge ,so some level of automation is required
SOM Missile has terrain recognition software in it‘s database. It travels accordingly and hits it’s target even if GPS is not available. Gezgin will have similar self guidance embedded in it’s memory banks as well.
 

Yasar

Contributor
Moderator
Professional
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
4,775
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yet none of these will provide what TF-2000 will provide, not even combined.
TF-2000 may have a dedicated theater planning room to command a portion of the fleet from a single place in addition to the typical operations rooms.
If it comes down to loosing a TF-2000 then it means the sovereignty is at stake and the war will go all-in with all ballistic and long-range deep strike assets.
Also to note lastly, TF-2000 doesnt practically come to replace aging class or improve capabilities, it is coming to introduce new capabilities that Turkish Navy has not had. It is going to promote Turkish Navy in the upper class of the Navies.
True! What TF-2000 will bring to the table is so much more and valuable that it is very tempting. But can we really afford 7 of them? If we can yes let’s have them. More the merrier!
Now last info being conveyed to the media was about having 4 of them. That is 4 billion dollars. I guess it is better than forking out 7 billion. May be we will have more TF-100 and I-Class frigates with the money saved?!!
 

Nilgiri

Seasoned Veteran
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Canada Moderator
India Moderator
Messages
4,770
Reaction score
9,380
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Yet none of these will provide what TF-2000 will provide, not even combined.
TF-2000 may have a dedicated theater planning room to command a portion of the fleet from a single place in addition to the typical operations rooms.
If it comes down to loosing a TF-2000 then it means the sovereignty is at stake and the war will go all-in with all ballistic and long-range deep strike assets.
Also to note lastly, TF-2000 doesnt practically come to replace aging class or improve capabilities, it is coming to introduce new capabilities that Turkish Navy has not had. It is going to promote Turkish Navy in the upper class of the Navies.

Dratted aerial projectiles!

Form a Testudo!

Steady march men!
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,758
Reaction score
9,911
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
SOM Missile has terrain recognition software in it‘s database. It travels accordingly and hits it’s target even if GPS is not available. Gezgin will have similar self guidance embedded in it’s memory banks as well.
Terrain recognition via contour matching has levels, the highest one provides much better mapping/matching and even may operate if the ground has not been mapped accurately enough in the past.
 

TheInsider

Contributor
Messages
864
Reaction score
3,133
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I do agree with your line of thought.
For a country like us and for our geography, having more I-Class ships and more 4500 ton class TF-100 frigates will be cheaper and easier to build. It would make our navy more mobile and active. TF-2000 at 8500tons, is a giant of a ship. Do we really need a ship this big? One has to think like a businessman in matters like this; Can we afford the loss of such a big asset? One TF-2000 is equal to nearly 4 Ada Class or 3 I-Class frigates. TF -100 will be half the cost of it.
These smaller ships should be given priority over the larger ones in order to replace ageing ships and to augment the numbers of our fighting ships. Then big boys can be built if finances will allow!
This is not true. I asked many people about this from STM and Armerkom. Financial analysis shows that currently, a TF-4500 costs close(relatively) to a TF-2000. I would rather have a TF-2000 at 800 million than to have a TF-4500 at 600 million. Cost-effectiveneswise TF-2000 is a better choice this is how the TN sees it.
 

Lonewolf

Committed member
Messages
289
Reaction score
182
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
This is not true. I asked many people about this from STM and Armerkom. Financial analysis shows that currently, a TF-4500 costs close(relatively) to a TF-2000. I would rather have a TF-2000 at 800 million than to have a TF-4500 at 600 million. Cost-effectiveneswise TF-2000 is a better choice this is how the TN sees it.
I don't think tf 2000 will cost 800 million ,it will definitely cross 1 billion , maybe even 1.2 billion .
 

TheInsider

Contributor
Messages
864
Reaction score
3,133
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I don't think tf 2000 will cost 800 million ,it will definitely cross 1 billion , maybe even 1.2 billion .
Don't take numbers seriously they are given as an example. Nobody knows exactly how much a TF-2000 or TF-4500 will cost in US dollars. But national contribution is so high that a high exchange rate(Lira/dollar) is becoming an advantage for those projects. So don't be surprised if TF-2000 costs under a billion.
 

Yasar

Contributor
Moderator
Professional
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
4,775
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
This is not true. I asked many people about this from STM and Armerkom. Financial analysis shows that currently, a TF-4500 costs close(relatively) to a TF-2000. I would rather have a TF-2000 at 800 million than to have a TF-4500 at 600 million. Cost-effectiveneswise TF-2000 is a better choice this is how the TN sees it.
A destroyer class ship of 8500 ton class is not going to be cheaper than a billion dollars.
Type45 class UK ship is over 1 billion pounds sterling. That means over 1.35billion dollars. Apparently it costs another 126 thousand pounds a day to keep it at sea.
Type 26 class frigate of UK is 7-8000 ton class and has cost UK 1.23 billion dollars a piece.
Arleigh Burke class at 8-8500 tons, cost In excess of 1.8 billion a piece.
7000 ton a piece, 2 x Andrea Doria destroyers cost 3billion dollars.
We may be a bit cheaper but not that cheap.
 

Lonewolf

Committed member
Messages
289
Reaction score
182
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
A destroyer class ship of 8500 ton class is not going to be cheaper than a billion dollars.
Type45 class UK ship is over 1 billion pounds sterling. That means over 1.35billion dollars. Apparently it costs another 126 thousand pounds a day to keep it at sea.
Type 26 class frigate of UK is 7-8000 ton class and has cost UK 1.23 billion dollars a piece.
Arleigh Burke class at 8-8500 tons, cost In excess of 1.8 billion a piece.
7000 ton a piece, 2 x Andrea Doria destroyers cost 3billion dollars.
We may be a bit cheaper but not that cheap.
Also the cost cutting will be on labour cost side only , equipment won't be that cheap , as above mentioned all countries make their own sub systems
 

TheInsider

Contributor
Messages
864
Reaction score
3,133
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
A destroyer class ship of 8500 ton class is not going to be cheaper than a billion dollars.

We will wait and see. But keep in mind that we will pay for most of TF-2000 with Turkish liras, Americans pay in US dollars and Brits pay in pounds. If things go like that 4x package of TF-2000 will cost under a billion $ per ship.


images-7-jpeg.31605
 

Yasar

Contributor
Moderator
Professional
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
4,775
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Also the cost cutting will be on labour cost side only , equipment won't be that cheap , as above mentioned all countries make their own sub systems
Mainly yes. But a lot of Turkish subsystems and equipment are going to be domestic and will have a cheaper labour component in it’s cost structure.
But due to producing a lot of stuff domestically it may also prove more expensive as some of these items will be devoid of economies of scale.
TCG Anadolu were to cost around a billion dollars. But I Demir stated that it cost us around 650million Euros. So we will see!
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,758
Reaction score
9,911
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Mainly yes. But a lot of Turkish subsystems and equipment are going to be domestic and will have a cheaper labour component in it’s cost structure.
But due to producing a lot of stuff domestically it may also prove more expensive as some of these items will be devoid of economies of scale.
TCG Anadolu were to cost around a billion dollars. But I Demir stated that it cost us around 650million Euros. So we will see!
Combined R&D, building, equipping (incl. missiles) and getting into the full operational state the TF-2000 will definitely pass $1B.
It costed around $900M-1B back in 2000, with a weaker sensor suite that costs 1/10th of the CAFRAD (also including the other related hardware this rate even goes lower), half the missile payload. Add the inflation in USD (%60 since 2000), or account it in place of the savings from the cost due to the local manufacturing and not adding profit; the base design from 2000s equals to above $900M in 2021 as-is.

Arleigh Burke costs $1.8B FY2011, the USD inflation since then is 25% which makes it $2.2B FY2021.
 

REBEL

Active member
Messages
116
Reaction score
143
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Combined R&D, building, equipping (incl. missiles) and getting into the full operational state the TF-2000 will definitely pass $1B.
It costed around $900M-1B back in 2000, with a weaker sensor suite that costs 1/10th of the CAFRAD (also including the other related hardware this rate even goes lower), half the missile payload. Add the inflation in USD (%60 since 2000), or account it in place of the savings from the cost due to the local manufacturing and not adding profit; the base design from 2000s equals to above $900M in 2021 as-is.

Arleigh Burke costs $1.8B FY2011, the USD inflation since then is 25% which makes it $2.2B FY2021.
Back in late 1990s, Tf-2000 was the ultimate solution for zone defence off the mainland, or for protection of a naval task force. We had setbacks, time and time again, due to financial restrictions, budget cuts, etc, and TF-2000 project was delayed for over 25 years. And with budget restrictions as so many projects (some prioritized) running simultaneously, there is a high probability we may not see an initial production before 2030.

Times have changed. We have invested a great deal on unmanned, networked war machines and systems in the past decade, and I wonder if the navy has a revised game plan, other than a massive scale, never before tried/built destroyer with an AESA radar on steroids (not to mention the build cost). Looking into finances you have detailed, I would not be surprised to see smaller, but no less efficient platforms to fulfill TF-2000‘s initially planned duties.

By the way, you have an interesting way to lay out the finances:)
 

Nilgiri

Seasoned Veteran
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Canada Moderator
India Moderator
Messages
4,770
Reaction score
9,380
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Back in late 1990s, Tf-2000 was the ultimate solution for zone defence off the mainland, or for protection of a naval task force. We had setbacks, time and time again, due to financial restrictions, budget cuts, etc, and TF-2000 project was delayed for over 25 years. And with budget restrictions as so many projects (some prioritized) running simultaneously, there is a high probability we may not see an initial production before 2030.

Times have changed. We have invested a great deal on unmanned, networked war machines and systems in the past decade, and I wonder if the navy has a revised game plan, other than a massive scale, never before tried/built destroyer with an AESA radar on steroids (not to mention the build cost). Looking into finances you have detailed, I would not be surprised to see smaller, but no less efficient platforms to fulfill TF-2000‘s initially planned duties.

By the way, you have an interesting way to lay out the finances:)

He is smart man. He is after the core meaning of the value (i.e subtract inflation).
 

yakusha

Member
Messages
23
Reaction score
157
Website
www.turkdefence.com
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Mr. İbrahim Sunnetci has published a new and short article about Barbaros Class Frigates Mid-life Upgrade Project Update.

 

Nutuk

Well-known member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
444
Reaction score
1,569
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
At first I had the same, WTF why would we equip old ships like Burak class with ADVENT.

But thinking further it makes sense, Burak class would become part of the radar network and get the combined radar picture with all tactical data.

The biggest force of the Turkish navy is slowly shaping: being netcentric. The command center would know any time where all her ships are
 
Top Bottom