• Forum restore complete (see latest announcement thread)

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

boredaf

Experienced member
Messages
2,265
Solutions
1
Reactions
42 6,641
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey

Murad 100-A will be integrated in to Anka-3.

This is good news. Anka-3 with an Aesa radar will be deadlier than ever. It will be able to strike targets really deep in to enemy territory.

Come on TEI ! It is high time to get that TF6000 engine ready now !

View attachment 78952
Where, exactly? Not only it doesn't have the nose for it but engine intake starts right above it. They'd be far better off finding a LO solution for Fulmar 200 pod (or integrate something similar within the body) instead of trying to fit Murad in Anka-3. Trying to fit subsonic Anka-3 into A2A role is ridiculous, just focus on it as an A2G platform and let it excel in what it does. Not every platform should or even can be a jack of all trades.
 

Mis_TR_Like

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
1,977
Reactions
50 7,506
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Northern Cyprus
Where, exactly? Not only it doesn't have the nose for it but engine intake starts right above it. They'd be far better off finding a LO solution for Fulmar 200 pod (or integrate something similar within the body) instead of trying to fit Murad in Anka-3. Trying to fit subsonic Anka-3 into A2A role is ridiculous, just focus on it as an A2G platform and let it excel in what it does. Not every platform should or even can be a jack of all trades.
I'm pretty sure AESA radars can be adapted into different shapes. So the T/R modules can be spread in a flatter shape across the nose instead of the traditional circular or square designs.
 

boredaf

Experienced member
Messages
2,265
Solutions
1
Reactions
42 6,641
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
I'm pretty sure AESA radars can be adapted into different shapes. So the T/R modules can be spread in a flatter shape across the nose instead of the traditional circular or square designs.
I'm guessing that would require whole new set of tests on the ground and in air. As I said, I really fail to see the logic in spending time and resources on that, especially if the idea is to use it for a2a engagements.
 

Mis_TR_Like

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
1,977
Reactions
50 7,506
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Northern Cyprus
I'm guessing that would require whole new set of tests on the ground and in air. As I said, I really fail to see the logic in spending time and resources on that, especially if the idea is to use it for a2a engagements.
I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea. Anka 3 due to its tailless design will be the stealthiest of our 3 current stealth platforms.

For BVR engagements neither maneuverability nor speed are necessarily important.
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
4,270
Reactions
258 22,299
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
I'm curious where on the Anka-3 they're going to integrate the Murad 100a AESA radar without changing the antenna's shape.
Where, exactly? Not only it doesn't have the nose for it but engine intake starts right above it. They'd be far better off finding a LO solution for Fulmar 200 pod (or integrate something similar within the body) instead of trying to fit Murad in Anka-3. Trying to fit subsonic Anka-3 into A2A role is ridiculous, just focus on it as an A2G platform and let it excel in what it does. Not every platform should or even can be a jack of all trades.
If you look at the below picture and the 3D model, there is a sizeable radome there to fit some form of a radar in.
The designers of the plane, namely Tusas, say they will “ integrate” the Murad radar. So they know how to do it.
Operative word there is “integrate”.
We are not designers of this aircraft. Let the competent people come up with the solution.

As per @Mis_TR_Like has pointed out, BVR engagements don’t need a “fighter jet”. A2A and A2G operations can be accomplished by this “stealth”;aircraft when it has an Aesa radar on board.
Stealthiness iş the name of the game. With RAM paint, stealthy engine and its specific shape it should be superior to any 4th and 4.5th generation plane. It may be comparable to or even be better than some so called 5th generation fighters.
Even if the Murad’s A2A capability is not to be used, an Aesa radar will give this plane so much more potency that it will make it a real game changer.
B21 and B2, both have Aesa radars. I wonder why???

1767869237239.jpeg
 

boredaf

Experienced member
Messages
2,265
Solutions
1
Reactions
42 6,641
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
B21 and B2, both have Aesa radars. I wonder why???
Not to engage a2a, B-2 has never done it and even for B-21 they were just studying the option and nothing more. And this wouldn't be the first time TAI officials talked out of their arses mate, they were going to deliver a dozen Hürkuş last year, as well as T929, remember? They keep trying to push Hürjet as a viable naval platform to be used in bloody 2030s-40s. Just because they want to or plan to do it, it doesn't mean it makes sense.

Anka-3 already has limited space in it, they haven't even been able to get rid of the gimbal underneath it, nor the antenna. It is a fools errand to try to turn a design that has had decades of success as a bomber into an interceptor or fighter . And we already have a design that can do that job! Instead of trying to get into a pissing contest with Baykar they should focus on making our first proper bomber first.

If the goal is to use it to improve its a2g performance, I'm all for it, but if they are doing it in order to try and force it into a role that design was never meant for in general, then TAI is once again trying to do everything all at once and it'll just slow things down unnecessarily.
 
Last edited:

Tornadoss

Experienced member
Messages
1,554
Reactions
7 3,090
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
As anka-3 not meant to be a2a engagements the radar doesn't need o be looking forward, it can be looking more downward. And all this antennas right now will not be in the final product, they are there till stealth replacements will be developed and integrated.
 

Merzifonlu

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
814
Reactions
28 2,496
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
@Yasar_TR

I have no doubt that the Murad-100a AESA radar will be integrated, but the institution that will solve this problem will be Aselsan, not Tusaş. They will simply change the antenna's form factor.
 

IC3M@N FX

Contributor
Messages
699
Reactions
3 30 1,432
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
The radar antenna will likely adopt a more rectangular geometry. This results in a horizontally slimmer but wider antenna design. The trade-off may be a slightly reduced downward field of view, but this is compensated by a larger horizontal aperture and improved radar performance. Ultimately, it represents a classic engineering compromise between antenna geometry, coverage angles, and overall capability.
 

Merzifonlu

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
814
Reactions
28 2,496
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
The Anka-3 features a gently rounded nose, meaning the rectangular antenna shape wouldn’t need much flattening. As a result, this radar could even operate in the S-band.

I’m guessing the antenna will be mounted in the nose area in a two-part V-shape, angled slightly toward the ground rather than facing straight ahead. This tilt should make its rectangular shape appear more square, which would help in achieving S-band characteristics.

I think the radar’s primary role will be scanning the ground in SAR mode instead of detecting airborne threats.
 
Top Bottom