Turkey Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Gloire_bb said:

Kizilelma is a CTOL aircraft.
Just by this reason alone, a proper deck is viable, unless you want to rewatch 1950s porn called jet ops from a straight deck.
Then come normal aircraft facilities, and proper hull for fleet operations(not for hauling stuff) - and we're already talking about a proper carrier.

p.s. Mediterranean is big; TN operates well beyond the sea of Marmara.

1-2 carriers, reasonable carriers, can be built for a price tag of 2-3 contemporary frigates.
If the aviation part is solved - they give to the fleet a qualitative boost that neither 4-6 nor even 20-30 frigates can ever hope to provide.

Click to expand...

Not really. The cost of Anadolu, for example, has gone way past 1 billion dollars and currently the actual cost of the ship stands undisclosed. This is for a 25000 ton LHD which doesn't even have an air wing yet. The new conventional 280m carrier means a far larger vessel than the Anadolu. It will be even larger than the French Charles de Gaulle carrier, which cost the french 3 billion euro plus 20 years ago. For this carrier, the production cost is certainly going to cross 4 billion dollars. This is not even considering the cost of the carrier's escort group, and then there is the air wing this carrier needs and the TN will be easily spending 5-6 billion dollars or higher.

This is money that could buy 10-12 I+ class Frigates or MILDEN subs, or maybe 6 TF-2000s. I'd prefer they go for the more distributed capabilities instead of putting so many eggs in one basket.

And, as i said, I fail to see what a carrier brings to the table in a conflict in the Mediterannean, Aegean or Black sea? That is where the TN should aim to to achieve superiority before it thinks of building this kind of 'prestige project'.

sequ said:

Their ambition goes beyond the Med and Red Sea. Think of Africa and Asia.

Click to expand...

I understand that. But I think this is a mistake and a very questionable diversion of resources. Power projection is useful, but not as critical as near seas naval supremacy. It is like building a B-2 plane before you have an F-35.

This is a nice article, btw

schrage musik said:

I understand that. But I think this is a mistake and a very questionable diversion of resources. Power projection is useful, but not as critical as near seas naval supremacy. It is like building a B-2 plane before you have an F-35.

Click to expand...

A carrier will enter service by late 30's or early 40's. By then the near sea fleet has also grown considerably larger and more capable. As well as the Turkish economy to support such a fleet.

Goktug missiles ready for acceptance tests:


It's been a long time since we've heard about Tubitak-Sage developments. News about Kuzgun, Som, Goktug, Gezgin have all dried up for almost a year or so. Perhaps the resignation of Okumus has something to do with it.


Also this new SSB director, Gorgun was always a happy fellow at Aselsan. His face turned more stern since he's the boss now lmao. He made some people quit.

schrage musik said:

The new conventional 280m carrier means a far larger vessel than the Anadolu. It will be even larger than the French Charles de Gaulle carrier, which cost the french 3 billion euro plus 20 years ago.

Click to expand...

(1)length isn't directly indicative of neither size nor cost.
(2)CdG is a nuclear carrier with significant and expensive export in it.
(3)steel part isn't that important in price, and steel-wise LHD can be in fact quite close to the carrier.
Modern medium carrier can be roughly built as ~twin set of destroyer/frigate tourbines, frigate set of electronics(+dedicated flight control ones). AD armament can also be shared. On top come the aircraft facilities, and, if we're ambitious, EMCATs.
Overall it goes to 2...3 contemporary and comparably fit frigates in price.

schrage musik said:

This is money that could buy 10-12 I+ class Frigates or MILDEN subs, or maybe 6 TF-2000s. I'd prefer they go for the more distributed capabilities instead of putting so many eggs in one basket.

Click to expand...

If the idea is that subs or destroyers/frigates somehow replace aircraft - at least we shallconsider, i don't know, helicarriers airship destroyers.
Which are sci-fi stuff.

Otherwise, comparing doesn't make any sense - a single aircraft, in one sortie, can scout as much or more surface than those 6 destroyers will take several days(!) to sweep. Ah, and it can attack and repeat as much as necessary, for as much as depth of carrier magazines will allow.
And that's just for basic control.
Last time comparing any form of ships with aircraft for naval warfare was meaningful was, egh, in the 1930s?

schrage musik said:

This is not even considering the cost of the carrier's escort group, and then there is the air wing this carrier needs and the TN will be easily spending 5-6 billion dollars or higher.

Click to expand...

Carrier escort group isn't something that needs to be procured separately - it's drawn from the existing surface force. In fact it gives it meaning.
Air wing, if procurement is done right, also comes from the overall pool of maritime aviation.

Gloire_bb said:

Overall it goes to 2...3 contemporary and comparably fit frigates in price.

Click to expand...

wow you make the Chinese Navy look quite stupid there. Imagine them having to fight the USN and yet they have built some 44 054A/B frigates when they could have built.... 22 aircraft carriers instead !!!! or let's be generous and apply the other end of your estimate.... The Chinese navy could have built by now almost more 15 carriers. Add the 3 they have now, and it would be a navy with 18 aircraft carriers. And they had the 052Ds and 055s to escort them. Not even the USN would dare pick up a fight with them. They'd win without even having to fight. What kind of stupid planners do they have.

schrage musik said:

wow you make the Chinese Navy look quite stupid there. Imagine them having to fight the USN and yet they have built some 44 054A/B frigates when they could have built.... 22 aircraft carriers instead !!!! or let's be generous and apply the other end of your estimate.... The Chinese navy could have built by now almost more 15 carriers. Add the 3 they have now, and it would be a navy with 18 aircraft carriers. And they had the 052Ds and 055s to escort them. Not even the USN would dare pick up a fight with them. They'd win without even having to fight. What kind of stupid planners do they have.

Click to expand...

Come on, you know this is a strawman

sequ said:

Come on, you know this is a strawman

Click to expand...

all i'm trying to say is, if his claim was true, then the Chinese Navy would have built a lot more carriers and a lot less frigates. Literally every navy that wants to project power globally would do the same. Even France can afford just 1 carrier.

schrage musik said:

all i'm trying to say is, if his claim was true, then the Chinese Navy would have built a lot more carriers and a lot less frigates. Literally every navy that wants to project power globally would do the same. Even France can afford just 1 carrier.

Click to expand...

A conventional carrier are not that costly by itself, probably about 6 billion, it's clearly more than 2 frigates even if they cost more than one billion like the future US Constellation class.

But if you add 50 fighter jets on the deck it add about 5 billion on the ship cost... outch.

Sure that a carrier is a luxury and one of the biggest task is to build/buy the fighters to put on it. That's a lot of research to deal with to have a functionnal carrier in 20 years but if you don't have a compatible fighter jet it's even harder.

Can Kaan be adapted for carrier use?