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

[AWP]

I found this picture, not really sure if it's the original design or some PS for youtube thumbnail, but it show what I am really after

 

[AWP]

Some thoughts.

1. The added weight might have outweighed the lower drag benefits
2. Adding weight to the landing gear might have required larger/heavier closing/opening mechanisms

1- it won't make much of an impact during the landing or taking off because it's on low speed . But putting the cover will help with the drag while airborne and I am 100% sure that it has notable effect on the fuel consumption.

2- You might be right after all I am not an aerospace engineer, But this won't add much to the aircraft maybe around 30kg ?!

 

[Rodeo]

While watching some ww2 footage I have noticed on some airplane that the landing gear have a cover on it so when it retract inside the cover fit the plane perfectly .

Why we didn't seen any attempt by Baykar to solve that issue on Akinci landing gear ?

You could extend the question by asking, why doesn't MQ9 have the cover?

Here's one in ground

And in midair

 

[DBdev]

1- it won't make much of an impact during the landing or taking off because it's on low speed . But putting the cover will help with the drag while airborne and I am 100% sure that it has notable effect on the fuel consumption.

2- You might be right after all I am not an aerospace engineer, But this won't add much to the aircraft maybe around 30kg ?!

30kg is huge for a small and cheap drone like TB2. Surveillance drones will generally prefer extra 10-15% airtime (30kg fuel is like 40liters of gasoline) over a few percent more extra speed.

 

[B_A]

It certainly is. There are many important strategic areas. End-system and branding is only one side of it, but that is not even sole strategic issue. The government had very wrong monetary policies, and these mistakes were equally contaminated by the owners of capital who used monetary development as a tool of wealth, even though the conditions were very favorable during the same period. Many good things have happened. There have been very strategic investments, but we have not been able to realize our true potential.

IMO, Turkiye needs a new and very ambitious roadmap in strategic high-tech areas. In fact, this should be an extension of the medium-term economic program to be announced in September. The conjuncture is incredibly favorable for such an expansion from 2024 to the 2030s, and I hope we can act without delay this time.

We need do everything to make our civilan industry as good as S.KOREAN

 

[Agha Sher]

30kg is huge for a small and cheap drone like TB2. Surveillance drones will generally prefer extra 10-15% airtime (30kg fuel is like 40liters of gasoline) over a few percent more extra speed.

We are talking Akinci. TB2s landing gear are not retractable

 

[dBSPL]

This is AKINCI

This is TAPAS, which is targeting approximately the same spec range of ANKA-I, let alone AKINCI.

And this is the last situation it was seen

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1693378109372760484

Design efforts, and test have been ongoing for years, and it is uncertain how long they will continue, while AKINCI gained combat proven status years ago.

 

[Afif]

Looks like DRDO failed to give enough attention and allocate sufficient resources (human and financial) to this program over the years. Thus, it still stuck.

Although, to be fair they got lot on their plate.
High priority strategic project like ICBM, SLBM, SSBN, SSN, exo-atmosphoric interceptors always suck up the best resources.

 

[LIbyan Soldier]

This is AKINCI

This is TAPAS, which is targeting approximately the same spec range of ANKA-I, let alone AKINCI.

And this is the last situation it was seen

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1693378109372760484

Design efforts, and test have been ongoing for years, and it is uncertain how long they will continue, while AKINCI gained combat proven status years ago.

I spoke about this TAPAS crash on other thread but someone deleted my comment i don't know why

 

[Agha Sher]

I spoke about this TAPAS crash on other thread but someone deleted my comment i don't know why

Apparently, you cannot post about crashes in peace time. Weird I know. Specifically, any critique of india is strictly forbidden. Mods go distances to protect their feelings

 

[Rodeo]

This is AKINCI

This is TAPAS, which is targeting approximately the same spec range of ANKA-I, let alone AKINCI.

And this is the last situation it was seen

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1693378109372760484

Design efforts, and test have been ongoing for years, and it is uncertain how long they will continue, while AKINCI gained combat proven status years ago.

It's not excessive. ANKA, too, crashed two times during its development.

 

[Sanchez]

This is AKINCI


This is TAPAS, which is targeting approximately the same spec range of ANKA-I, let alone AKINCI.


And this is the last situation it was seen


Design efforts, and test have been ongoing for years, and it is uncertain how long they will continue, while AKINCI gained combat proven status years ago.

Unlike Akıncı, Tapas is twin Rotax powered, similar to Aksungur. Though it does indeed look similar to Anka per payload capacity.

It's pretty much wrong this was its 2nd test flight though. In june, they announced its 200th test flight.

 

[dBSPL]

It's not excessive. ANKA, too, crashed two times during its development.

Well, That was not the nuance here. This aircraft program has a spec range at the MALE level that positions it as an alternative to US manufacturers, and mostly as an alternative system to Turkish products. The main user will be the armed forces of the producer country, but it is being actively marketed to foreign markets. Armenia is one of these countries.

The system made its maiden flight in 2016. In 2016, the TB-2 was demonstrating its operational capability, and some MALE class advanced models such as the ANKA-S and ANKA-intelligence had become operational. In the intervening seven years, Baykar has added the KE to AKINCI, while TAI has completed the ANKA-2 and is counting the days for the ANKA-3. All these are state-of-the-art productions with less manpower and despite much less outsourcing probably on avionics side.

The system made its maiden flight in 2016. After seven years, uncertainties still remain in front of the project. This latest test accident is just the latest link in this chain. I think no one is sure whether this aircraft will still be operational. DRDO, and I don't know the legal basis of the project, but maybe the defense ministry can solve this problem by adding more resources. India has high military ambitions and living the dream of the next superpower, which is the vision of many Indian defense enthusiasts. But this vision is only valid if you can overcome resource planning problems in all areas of defense and aerospace and not have to sacrifice some specific areas. Otherwise, the scale in real is just comparable with some regional defense industry buildup like TR, or Korea. You can have ICBMs, but in return, if your competition in conventional systems is as far away as possible from the superpowers, at that point, the North Korean leadership has also the capability of intercontinental reach.

The million-dollar question here is whether it is easier for successful defense and aerospace ecosystems in conventional systems to access capabilities for strategic assets in the face of security paranoia, or whether it is more challenging for a country that is already on the other wing to put its conventional capabilities into a certain workable structure in a situation where it will be isolated from external support.

For TR, the political cost of a declaratory entry into ICBM and related warheads could be very high and disruptive atm. Instead, however, TR can continue its development by using paradigm shifts in conventional warfare systems, aiming for leadership in some specific areas. In the near future, when TR will overcome of any critical aspect of foreign dependence, the same industrial infrastructure's transition to strategic systems will be suddenly.

What I want to show is that Turkiye is not far from India in terms of military instruments and related industrial infrastructure, and with far fewer resources and manpower, it would not be difficult to compete with it in almost everything.

 

[B_A]

Well, That was not the nuance here. This aircraft program has a spec range at the MALE level that positions it as an alternative to US manufacturers, and mostly as an alternative system to Turkish products. The main user will be the armed forces of the producer country, but it is being actively marketed to foreign markets. Armenia is one of these countries.

The system made its maiden flight in 2016. In 2016, the TB-2 was demonstrating its operational capability, and some MALE class advanced models such as the ANKA-S and ANKA-intelligence had become operational. In the intervening seven years, Baykar has added the KE to AKINCI, while TAI has completed the ANKA-2 and is counting the days for the ANKA-3. All these are state-of-the-art productions with less manpower and despite much less outsourcing probably on avionics side.

The system made its maiden flight in 2016. After seven years, uncertainties still remain in front of the project. This latest test accident is just the latest link in this chain. I think no one is sure whether this aircraft will still be operational. DRDO, and I don't know the legal basis of the project, but maybe the defense ministry can solve this problem by adding more resources. India has high military ambitions and living the dream of the next superpower, which is the vision of many Indian defense enthusiasts. But this vision is only valid if you can overcome resource planning problems in all areas of defense and aerospace and not have to sacrifice some specific areas. Otherwise, the scale in real is just comparable with some regional defense industry buildup like TR, or Korea. You can have ICBMs, but in return, if your competition in conventional systems is as far away as possible from the superpowers, at that point, the North Korean leadership has also the capability of intercontinental reach.

The million-dollar question here is whether it is easier for successful defense and aerospace ecosystems in conventional systems to access capabilities for strategic assets in the face of security paranoia, or whether it is more challenging for a country that is already on the other wing to put its conventional capabilities into a certain workable structure in a situation where it will be isolated from external support.

For TR, the political cost of a declaratory entry into ICBM and related warheads could be very high and disruptive atm. Instead, however, TR can continue its development by using paradigm shifts in conventional warfare systems, aiming for leadership in some specific areas. In the near future, when TR will overcome of any critical aspect of foreign dependence, the same industrial infrastructure's transition to strategic systems will be suddenly.

What I want to show is that Turkiye is not far from India in terms of military instruments and related industrial infrastructure, and with far fewer resources and manpower, it would not be difficult to compete with it in almost everything.

Actually UCAV is a very difficult area,Japanese,British,French spent many year without result.

 

[Afif]

Any serious discussion about Long term Turkish defence ambitions cannot be done without mentioning the Nukes and ICBMs, and the conventional assumption always seems to be, you need nukes to deter nukes.
However, the self evident hurdle of tremendous political and economic cost that would come with any meaningful attempt to developing global strategic strike capability, is what prevent us.

Globalisation and the unprecedented connectivity and interdependence made the use of nuclear weapon very unlikely. Until 1999 the public and expert consensus seems was, nuclear armed nations cannot fight any war short of nuclear escalation, However, Kargil conflict showed us Nuclear power can fight conventional war without climbing up the escalation ladder. And today, PRC and USA with its allies decisively preparing for a large scale conventional war in Indo-pacific if Cold War 2.0 ever turns into hot war. However, for the above mentioned reasons the threat of nuclear escalation is considerably laser than what it used to be in second half of the 20th century.

But nevertheless, an effective deterrence capability against nuclear armed adversaries is still the holy grail of any Nation state. And it will continue to remain so. While the cost in pursuit of such ambition is tremendous, Türkiye or any Nation that value its existential security cannot avoid this in the long run.

While acquiring credible nuclear deterrence of our own could be the ultimate goal, but considering the cost, in short and medium term it is not practical.

Perhaps crossing beyond the realm of conventional thinking 'you need nukes to deter nukes' we can take a new approach.

Well, not entirely new but the public discourse largely forgot about the other dimensions of WMD. In particular, biological weapon of mass destruction.

It doesn’t require billion dollar multiple enrichment plants, decade long expensive delivery systems development process. (ICBM, SLBM and SSBN)

And more important of all, with adequate measures, the main hurdle of tremendous economic and political cost that comes with nuclear weapon development can be avoided.

Because it can be done by handful of genius scientists in a relatively small lab. Thus, it is practically possible to keep the program completely secret.

And for minimum deterrence, It is not necessary to publicly issue the threat of Biological WMD. It is enough to let know the political and military leadership of nuclear armed adversaries of the biological WMD that you posses. But if any tense strategic stand off require, public disclosure of your capability is within option.

Even though strategic Nuclear global reach is still the most prized possession, the irony here is that United States can actually shoot down handful of ICBM launched by a small of medium power, thus, putting the credibility of small/medium power's retaliatory capability at risk, but there is no stopping the Biological weapon of mass destruction. It does not require missiles or the conventional means for its delivery. Nor can it be neutralised by a massive 'First Strike'.

“A biological attack could conceivably result in large numbers of civilian casualties and cause severe disruption to economic and societal infrastructure.

A nation or group that can pose a credible threat of mass casualty has the ability to alter the terms under which other nations or groups interact with it. When indexed to weapon mass and cost of development and storage, biological weapons possess destructive potential and loss of life far in excess of nuclear, chemical or conventional weapons. Accordingly, biological agents are potentially useful as strategic deterrents, in addition to their utility as offensive weapons on the battlefield.”

Thinking Strategically About Biological Weapons: Offense, Defense, Deterrence and Power Balance

The paper examines the strategic utility of biological weapons in the hands of state actors. The work was written in an attempt to rectify a lack of theoretical and strategic discussion of these weapons in the existing literature. Through discussion of theoretical concepts and empirical data the...

web.archive.org

I wonder why nobody thinks along these lines these days. I would really like hear our esteemed member’s opinion on this. @dBSPL @Sanchez et al.


Edit- I just realised this discussion is not suitable for this thread. Maybe any of the mods could move in some place more suitable.

 

[Sanchez]

Turkey won't get nukes until the day a nuclear power threatens Turkish sovereignty. US is not that because they don't go flailing around screaming nukes a la 50s. Russia is not that because NATO. Israel also isn't because their posture is wholly defensive or actively defensive, and even at his most MB heavy days, Erdogan never went ahead threatening Israeli existence. Iran could be in the future. I believe Turkey will get nukes within 5 years of Iran getting theirs at the latest, whenever that happens.

For chemical and biological weapons, we don't do the dirty stuff. We never did, not even in WW1. I doubt we will do so in the future. Size of our economy and geopolitical position allow us to be too big to kill. It would change the balance of everything in Eurasia. For anything smaller, we got a bigass army and a pretty long reach when we need it.

 

[Angry Turk !!!]

to be too big to kill

Big mistake thinking like that. Tell that all the big empires that died. Nukes are a must. There is no "to big to fail/die" never was and never will.

 

[Heartbang]

I believe Turkey will get nukes within 5 years of Iran getting theirs at the latest

Too long of a timeframe, we should be working on it NOW.

For chemical and biological weapons, we don't do the dirty stuff.

Perhaps we should, since deterrence in the space of chemical and biological weapons doesn't work like nuclear deterrence.
Nuclear explosions are infinitely more flashy(ha!) events, with everyone knowing who packs what, its more likely a party that uses nukes won't be able to dodge the consequences.
But a competent biological attack is near-untraceable. Thus exponentially increasing the chances of an attack.

In short: M.A.D doctrine is incompatible with chemical and biological weapons. You either have them or you WILL get rekt by them.

 

[AWP]

You could extend the question by asking, why doesn't MQ9 have the cover?

Seriously why ? and why the Predator-C have it while others don't ?

the reason of me asking about Akinci because a variant of Akinci will be an air superiority drone, so the RCS will matter in this case.

 

[Sanchez]

Big mistake thinking like that. Tell that all the big empires that died. Nukes are a must. There is no "to big to fail/die" never was and never will.

Too long of a timeframe, we should be working on it NOW.

Perhaps we should, since deterrence in the space of chemical and biological weapons doesn't work like nuclear deterrence.
Nuclear explosions are infinitely more flashy(ha!) events, with everyone knowing who packs what, its more likely a party that uses nukes won't be able to dodge the consequences.
But a competent biological attack is near-untraceable. Thus exponentially increasing the chances of an attack.

In short: M.A.D doctrine is incompatible with chemical and biological weapons. You either have them or you WILL get rekt by them.

I'm not saying what should happen. I'm saying what will happen. Turkey won't go for nukes before Iran reaches missile quality nukes. I don't have any idea on a possible Turkish program. Also don't know if there are guarantees by others or anything. Just that if need be they will spend %10 of GDP in a year to get them, any way possible. We don't do preventative maintenance lol.

Turkey also won't go for biological or chemical weapons. I also don't agree on the deterrence provided by such weapons being important. All users of it either also have nukes or are failed states, for a reason.