TR UAV/UCAV Programs | Anka - series | Kızılelma | TB - series

[godel44]

What’s the point of Anka-3 carrying a Som-J? Being a stealth platform it can already get close enough to the target to use a variant of MK-82 whereas even Phantoms can fire SOM-J from 250+ km. We will be running out of expensive missiles like SOM quickly in a war and we will have to utilize the large stock of dumb bombs.

 

[YeşilVatan]

What’s the point of Anka-3 carrying a Som-J? Being a stealth platform it can already get close enough to the target to use a variant of MK-82 whereas even Phantoms can fire SOM-J from 250+ km. We will be running out of expensive missiles like SOM quickly in a war and we will have to utilize the large stock of dumb bombs.

Being stealth is not a video game cheat code. You still get detected if you get close. Also, information on enemy radar network is rarely available. Better to have the capability to yeet a missile 250km away than not having it.

 

[UkroTurk]

View attachment 69715
ROKETSAN might have forgotten ANKA-3 for SOM-J ad but I didn't

Bro, make KE manned. c'mon, please bitte lütfen пожалуйста

 

[boredaf]

What’s the point of Anka-3 carrying a Som-J? Being a stealth platform it can already get close enough to the target to use a variant of MK-82 whereas even Phantoms can fire SOM-J from 250+ km. We will be running out of expensive missiles like SOM quickly in a war and we will have to utilize the large stock of dumb bombs.

Are you serious? Just because it is stealth, which just means it is harder to detect not invisible, it doesn't mean it is okay to risk it unnecessarily. Of course we are going to give it heaviest missile it can carry with the longest range, that would make the most sense out of anything. Say Anka-3 can carry Som-J (or a new some variant that both Anka-3 and KE use) that means it can release it from 250 kms away, with a relatively low risk because there are only a handful of air defence systems that can hit it from that far away.

In comparison, even with guidance/glide kits, a MK-82 only has a range of 28 kms, which is basically asking for Anka-3 to get shot down.

 

[YeşilVatan]

Bro, make KE manned. c'mon, please bitte lütfen пожалуйста

I distinctly remember Kozan Selçuk Erkan stating that he asked Baykar people about it, and they flat out rejected the idea.

I mean, you never know with baykar, when the plane 'matures' they might decide to make it manned with some changes. But right now they have enough workload and making a manned plane has so many extra steps that consume time and resources it's not even funny. I think Baykar is just trying to make the first operational iteration and get it in the inventory as quickly as possible. Then they will incrementally upgrade the software.

Maybe in the future they will just put a cockpit in a version and make a unmanned fighter squadron command aircraft, if the need arises. The way '6th gen' discourse is headed; being able to command loyal wingmen is a huge part of the job. Maybe in later blocks KE will need a commander in the air that's produced by Baykar, so they'll just make one of them the manned command aircraft.

I have high hopes for Kızılelma. I pray it goes well.

 

[Oublious]

Are you serious? Just because it is stealth, which just means it is harder to detect not invisible, it doesn't mean it is okay to risk it unnecessarily. Of course we are going to give it heaviest missile it can carry with the longest range, that would make the most sense out of anything. Say Anka-3 can carry Som-J (or a new some variant that both Anka-3 and KE use) that means it can release it from 250 kms away, with a relatively low risk because there are only a handful of air defence systems that can hit it from that far away.

In comparison, even with guidance/glide kits, a MK-82 only has a range of 28 kms, which is basically asking for Anka-3 to get shot down.

wich airdefence can hit from that distances?

 

[uçuyorum]

Are you serious? Just because it is stealth, which just means it is harder to detect not invisible, it doesn't mean it is okay to risk it unnecessarily. Of course we are going to give it heaviest missile it can carry with the longest range, that would make the most sense out of anything. Say Anka-3 can carry Som-J (or a new some variant that both Anka-3 and KE use) that means it can release it from 250 kms away, with a relatively low risk because there are only a handful of air defence systems that can hit it from that far away.

In comparison, even with guidance/glide kits, a MK-82 only has a range of 28 kms, which is basically asking for Anka-3 to get shot down.

Winged kits like KGK can hit 100 km+

 

[zio]

I see an aircraft on air ünye-ordu looks like akıncı which make me think about a new test missile fire from Sinop.I guess its kara atmaca

 

[Afif]

The idea of LO is to penetrate deep into enemy airspace and carry out stand-in strikes. Stand-off cruise missile strike can be executed by non stealthy platforms. However, one can only have so many expensive stand-off cruise missiles. And this is where stealth comes in, it carries multiple Tolun I & II and KGK type smart ammunitions with a range of roughly 100km. With such ranges you can't insert a strike package of 4th gen platforms. Modern IADS are too lethal for that.

A stand-off cruise missile cost roughly 800k to 1 millions. A KGK or Tolun is probably cost around 25k-50k. With ANKA-3 you can deliver 20 of these at least for a cost of a cruise missile. Of course that doesn't mean ANKA-3 shouldn't carry SOM-J. It should, but this is not where its value lies.

 

[godel44]

Are you serious? Just because it is stealth, which just means it is harder to detect not invisible, it doesn't mean it is okay to risk it unnecessarily. Of course we are going to give it heaviest missile it can carry with the longest range, that would make the most sense out of anything. Say Anka-3 can carry Som-J (or a new some variant that both Anka-3 and KE use) that means it can release it from 250 kms away, with a relatively low risk because there are only a handful of air defence systems that can hit it from that far away.

In comparison, even with guidance/glide kits, a MK-82 only has a range of 28 kms, which is basically asking for Anka-3 to get shot down.

Yep, I am pretty serious. If you "give it heaviest missile it can carry with the longest range" you will run out of SOM missiles pretty fast. In war time stocks get depleted and you have to make heavier use of the cheaper and less smart munition. Sure, Anka-3 needs to be capable of using SOM as being capable is always preferable, but its main use case is to leverage the lower quality munition in closer range.

 

[boredaf]

Winged kits like KGK can hit 100 km+

That still puts in Patriots range, along with other aa systems and for me what matters the most is to keep the drone intact. This isn't going to be a cheap TB-2, it is going to be a flying wing drone with ideally our own engine and RAM paint. Not only it would be expensive to lose it, it would give information away as well. Take care of air defence with expensive stuff, then we can roll them over with cheaper ones with shorter range.

wich airdefence can hit from that distances?

S-400/500, David's Sling and one more, I think it was a new Chinese one. I'm pretty sure next upgrade of Patriot will push around that as well.

 

[boredaf]

Yep, I am pretty serious. If you "give it heaviest missile it can carry with the longest range" you will run out of SOM missiles pretty fast. In war time stocks get depleted and you have to make heavier use of the cheaper and less smart munition. Sure, Anka-3 needs to be capable of using SOM as being capable is always preferable, but its main use case is to leverage the lower quality munition in closer range.

It's first and foremost importance is being able to destroy enemy air defence from a range, hopefully without being detected in a surprise attack. Afterwards we can rain as many cheap munitions as we want, but trying to get it to shorter range to cheap out on missile costs makes no sense because drone itself will be 30 or 40 times more expensive than SOM-J.

 

[uçuyorum]

That still puts in Patriots range, along with other aa systems and for me what matters the most is to keep the drone intact. This isn't going to be a cheap TB-2, it is going to be a flying wing drone with ideally our own engine and RAM paint. Not only it would be expensive to lose it, it would give information away as well. Take care of air defence with expensive stuff, then we can roll them over with cheaper ones with shorter range.



S-400/500, David's Sling and one more, I think it was a new Chinese one. I'm pretty sure next upgrade of Patriot will push around that as well.

A stealthy platform like Anka 3 will likely not be easily targeted at max range of patriot system, which is the whole point of stealth. Patriot could shoot down an F16 at 100km but F35 would have to get within 30km or so

 

[boredaf]

A stealthy platform like Anka 3 will likely not be easily targeted at max range of patriot system, which is the whole point of stealth. Patriot could shoot down an F16 at 100km but F35 would have to get within 30km or so

But air defence systems wouldn't be the only danger against it, would it? Even if they can't target it, possibility of detection is a danger in itself. It's not like an enemy is going to go "Well, it wouldn't be fair to send our jet against a drone, let the lad complete its mission" if they catch it on the radar or satellite. Further away it is from the enemy safer it will be, risking a drone worth 10s of millions of dollars to cheap out on missile costs is just illogical.

 

[godel44]

But air defence systems wouldn't be the only danger against it, would it? Even if they can't target it, possibility of detection is a danger in itself. It's not like an enemy is going to go "Well, it wouldn't be fair to send our jet against a drone, let the lad complete its mission" if they catch it on the radar or satellite. Further away it is from the enemy safer it will be, risking a drone worth 10s of millions of dollars to cheap out on missile costs is just illogical.

Again, it’s not about cheaping out but distributing the risk according to the capabilities of the platform. American stealth bombers are much more expensive but they still often use smart bombs like HGK. There will definitely be a SEAD/DEAD stage at the beginning with the best platforms and weapons but after that you will have to continue the war with few SOMs and a relative abundance of MK-based bombs. What platform could use the latter on important targets most safely? It is definitely the stealth platform because the air defense risks you mention would be even worse for non-stealth platforms. So you would use Anka-3 for this task as a calculated risk rather than not using MK bombs at all. On the other hand, any platform big enough can use the SOM safely.

 

[Agha Sher]

Looks a lot more refined than earlier prototypes

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1818366299237761533

 

[Afif]

Looks a lot more refined than earlier prototypes

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1818366299237761533

Yes, they eliminated those non stealthy actuators on vartical stabilizers. (And perhaps under the wings also)

 

[Strong AI]

Looks a lot more refined than earlier prototypes

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1818366299237761533

Beauty.
Greek airspace nightmare.

 

[Zafer]

Wheels are the right size and not small as before

 

[Boykaz]