Turkish Naval Programs

[Armchair]

I think this will be very difficult. Perhaps the options could be:
1. M-346 (with afterburning engines and made carrier capable)
2. Yak-130 (same as above)
3. Super Tucano (same as above)

The Anadolu was originally designed without fixed wing in mind. Adding fixed wing was an afterthought mid-way due to the availability of the F-35. Perhaps its just best to operate it as an LHD and with UCAVs (TB-2 / etc).

 

[Mithridates]

VTOL UCAV might be a better approach for TCG Anadolu. It's obviously doable with prop-based, but jet might be a different ballgame. Still, a UCAV of that nature would have much more utility than naval ops, the TuAF can use it as well.

iran recently produced VTOL recon drones for our ships, the pelican:

i would suggest something similar but bigger for turkey as they have enough experties for that matter.
but the concern is they do not want a drone with limited payload (at best 40 kg) they want some tons of mission payload which drones can't deliver.

does anyone know if f-18 can operate from anadolu or not??

 

[Nutuk]

Our company BNA is working on a VTOL but it looks a bit different than the Iranian one

 

[Mithridates]

Our company BNA is working on a VTOL but it looks a bit different than the Iranian one

you got a licence to produce turboprop from ukraine if i'm not wrong. use that to build something like this:

 

[Saithan]

you got a licence to produce turboprop from ukraine if i'm not wrong. use that to build something like this:

View attachment 638845

We’ll start with Akinci and take it from there

 

[Neptune]

We should forget every single aircraft in question. Its either the F-35B or UAVs. Harrier's a last resort in case program gets delayed and only if Spain, Italy or UK is willing to lease some of theirs.

And UAVs by a long shot are not 100% feasible for carrier based flight operations. Maybe it can provide fire support to naval infantry but they also need to provide CAP and SEAD if necessary. Long story short, if there was a feasible use of them in the absence of manned aircraft, US Navy would have opted for them long ago. Its logical to operate UAVs on Anadolu but only for auxiliary and ISR purposes.

At the end of the day, it comes to F-35B unless someone makes, yet another very "clever" decision.

By the time TURMARFOR* gets fully operational, we would probably be readmitted into the JSF program anyways so F-35B it is. The quesion should be whether TCG Trakya is completely cancelled or delayed, thus will it effect the number of planned F-35B acquisitions.

* The future Turkish high readiness maritime task force we declared to NATO which will be led by Anadolu, meaning that all other escort assets should be ready and in service too, 2025 minimum. This might raise a window of opportunity here too. If I remember correctly the sanctions imposed to us by the American Congress have an exception clause if the acquisitions are made for the use in NATO related tasks. Now, I am not sure if the F-35 ban act passed by American Congress also has such an exception but this could mean it would be (not 100% certain) easier for us to procure TCG Anadolu specific platforms should the Naval Forces wishes to such as LCAC landing vehicles, V-22 Ospreys, CH-53E/K and more Seahawks (including the maritime utility/transportation variants).

Some of Turkish OPV solutions:
Delta Marine (Subcontractor of Milgem Project, Also cooperates with TAIS):
84 meters, landing platform, RWS (2-3), fore 76 mm cannon.
View attachment 637182

RMK Marine (Contract builder of 80 meters coast guard ships, in collaboration with Fincantieri):
It offers two versions:
66 meters, 2xRWS, 1xFore cannon, positions for SAM (Stringer type) 2x2 SSM launchers (Multi Mission Corvette)
View attachment 637211
66 meters (It is written as such in the brochure but i belive it is either about 56-60 meters or MMC version is about 80 meters), 2xRWS, 1xFore cannon without landing deck (an OPV solution)
View attachment 637212
3-D of MMC-OPV:
View attachment 637183


TAIS (Assocciation of ADIK-Sefine-Sedef):
90 meters OPV, Offspring (Modified version) of Ada-class 3xRWS, 1x Forecannon, Multiple RHIB with stern ramp for Special Forces-COIN Operations.
View attachment 637186

74 meters version, compact-smaller version of 90 meters OPV:
View attachment 637188


SEFT Design :
It is slightly overloaded with weapons but assume it as stripped of RAM and SSM launchers. Offers RHIB.
View attachment 637187


Dearsan (NTPB contractor):
Dearsan has presented some coast-guard vessels, opv and corvette designs in IDEF 19. Enlarged versions fo NTPB suits well for this, as well as 90 meters corvette offered for Turkmenistan also possess some potential. 2 of the corvettes presented below can be converted to OPV when needed. However, in my opinion when we need an OPV of +90m, Ada class (as in TCG Ufuk example) can be easily converted for such needs with light arms, Aselsan STOP-Muhafız RWS.

Modified NTPB with landing deck and 2xRWS for Coast Guard.
View attachment 637200


Final notes:
Unlike the cutting edge Fast Attack Craft requested by Navy (High speed-heavily armed-sleek) , an OPV is much easier to design and build with the current experience of multiple shipyards and design offices. We will have variety of options once Navy has published such a request. It will be a nice competition. Some of these designs have competed in tenders of foreign navies, they may possess foreign systems for convenience.

Enjoyed reading it bro, thanks for informing us.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

It would a mistake for PN to ignore having a mini carrier force AND also to completely ignore having a capable marine expeditionary force to capture territory and then blackmail India later on, if not for a grander strategy.

I also proposed the same mini carrier idea couple years back. Most pdfers outright rejected it with usual excuses. @Bilal Khan (Quwa) was of the opinion STOBAR and VSTOL were more pertinent solutions. Not an expert. But not having a light or small carrier that can operate in Arabian Sea close to home and in Indian Ocean to harass India might cost us.

We should forget every single aircraft in question. Its either the F-35B or UAVs. Harrier's a last resort in case program gets delayed and only if Spain, Italy or UK is willing to lease some of theirs.

And UAVs by a long shot are not 100% feasible for carrier based flight operations. Maybe it can provide fire support to naval infantry but they also need to provide CAP and SEAD if necessary. Long story short, if there was a feasible use of them in the absence of manned aircraft, US Navy would have opted for them long ago. Its logical to operate UAVs on Anadolu but only for auxiliary and ISR purposes.

At the end of the day, it comes to F-35B unless someone makes, yet another very "clever" decision.

By the time TURMARFOR* gets fully operational, we would probably be readmitted into the JSF program anyways so F-35B it is. The quesion should be whether TCG Trakya is completely cancelled or delayed, thus will it effect the number of planned F-35B acquisitions.

* The future Turkish high readiness maritime task force we declared to NATO which will be led by Anadolu, meaning that all other escort assets should be ready and in service too, 2025 minimum. This might raise a window of opportunity here too. If I remember correctly the sanctions imposed to us by the American Congress have an exception clause if the acquisitions are made for the use in NATO related tasks. Now, I am not sure if the F-35 ban act passed by American Congress also has such an exception but this could mean it would be (not 100% certain) easier for us to procure TCG Anadolu specific platforms should the Naval Forces wishes to such as LCAC landing vehicles, V-22 Ospreys, CH-53E/K and more Seahawks (including the maritime utility/transportation variants).



Enjoyed reading it bro, thanks for informing us.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

It would a mistake for PN to ignore having a mini carrier force AND also to completely ignore having a capable marine expeditionary force to capture territory and then blackmail India later on, if not for a grander strategy.

I also proposed the same mini carrier idea couple years back. Most pdfers outright rejected it with usual excuses. @Bilal Khan (Quwa) was of the opinion STOBAR and VSTOL were more pertinent solutions. Not an expert. But not having a light or small carrier that can operate in Arabian Sea close to home and in Indian Ocean to harass India might cost us.

Let's assume we get past our mental fog and economic constraints, I imagine the biggest obstacle to aircraft carriers is political. I don't think we'll have willing states supply aircraft carriers or their technologies due to the strategic value. You have to think about it: if Pakistan and/or Turkey are seeking that kind of power projection and has the money for it, why would anyone want to feed it? We'd be a regional threat.

If Turkey and Pakistan want carriers, they'll have to develop it themselves, I think (or try VTOL jets -- either way, it's a tough road).

 

[Neptune]

Let's assume we get past our mental fog and economic constraints, I imagine the biggest obstacle to aircraft carriers is political. I don't think we'll have willing states supply aircraft carriers or their technologies due to the strategic value. You have to think about it: if Pakistan and/or Turkey are seeking that kind of power projection and has the money for it, why would anyone want to feed it? We'd be a regional threat.

If Turkey and Pakistan want carriers, they'll have to develop it themselves, I think (or try VTOL jets -- either way, it's a tough road).

It would a mistake for PN to ignore having a mini carrier force AND also to completely ignore having a capable marine expeditionary force to capture territory and then blackmail India later on, if not for a grander strategy.

I also proposed the same mini carrier idea couple years back. Most pdfers outright rejected it with usual excuses. @Bilal Khan (Quwa) was of the opinion STOBAR and VSTOL were more pertinent solutions. Not an expert. But not having a light or small carrier that can operate in Arabian Sea close to home and in Indian Ocean to harass India might cost us.

I think it would not be a good idea to compare the naval postures of Turkey and Pakistan in the sense of their requirements for an amphibious assault ships and related capabilities. Both navies have different capabilities, doctrines, training and adversaries suited for their own unique operating environments and standing in national defence policy.

 

[Glass]

We should forget every single aircraft in question. Its either the F-35B or UAVs. Harrier's a last resort in case program gets delayed and only if Spain, Italy or UK is willing to lease some of theirs.

And UAVs by a long shot are not 100% feasible for carrier based flight operations. Maybe it can provide fire support to naval infantry but they also need to provide CAP and SEAD if necessary. Long story short, if there was a feasible use of them in the absence of manned aircraft, US Navy would have opted for them long ago. Its logical to operate UAVs on Anadolu but only for auxiliary and ISR purposes.

At the end of the day, it comes to F-35B unless someone makes, yet another very "clever" decision.

By the time TURMARFOR* gets fully operational, we would probably be readmitted into the JSF program anyways so F-35B it is. The quesion should be whether TCG Trakya is completely cancelled or delayed, thus will it effect the number of planned F-35B acquisitions.

* The future Turkish high readiness maritime task force we declared to NATO which will be led by Anadolu, meaning that all other escort assets should be ready and in service too, 2025 minimum. This might raise a window of opportunity here too. If I remember correctly the sanctions imposed to us by the American Congress have an exception clause if the acquisitions are made for the use in NATO related tasks. Now, I am not sure if the F-35 ban act passed by American Congress also has such an exception but this could mean it would be (not 100% certain) easier for us to procure TCG Anadolu specific platforms should the Naval Forces wishes to such as LCAC landing vehicles, V-22 Ospreys, CH-53E/K and more Seahawks (including the maritime utility/transportation variants).



Enjoyed reading it bro, thanks for informing us.

I think its very wrong to have a nato pov when it comes to such acquisitions, nato itself has proved itself to be useless and judging by the latest developments that alliance will cease to exist in the future. I think one of the primary reasons why we are even aquiring such offensive vessels is to create bigger deterrent in the post-nato period.

 

[Saithan]

I think its very wrong to have a nato pov when it comes to such acquisitions, nato itself has proved itself to be useless and judging by the latest developments that alliance will cease to exist in the future. I think one of the primary reasons why we are even aquiring such offensive vessels is to create bigger deterrent in the post-nato period.

You're forgetting that those loopholes exist for a reason, it's called politics. US won't go back on their word, but loopholes can be used to achive same result e.g. US presence in Syria even though Trump said withdraw.

 

[ANMDT]

I think this will be very difficult. Perhaps the options could be:
1. M-346 (with afterburning engines and made carrier capable)
2. Yak-130 (same as above)
3. Super Tucano (same as above)

The Anadolu was originally designed without fixed wing in mind. Adding fixed wing was an afterthought mid-way due to the availability of the F-35. Perhaps its just best to operate it as an LHD and with UCAVs (TB-2 / etc).

TCG Anadolu is modified Juan Carlos LHD of Spain, which was designed for carrying fixed wings as well. Like RAN, TN has also considered removing the ski-jump but has opted for it, since there was a willing to operate fixed wing.
Same as other LHDs, Anadolu is only capable of operating some STOVL aircraft. Otherwise, standard landing would be an issue, even take off might be resolved by choosing proper aircraft.
Although there is a rumor implying that there could be a bigger variant of Anadolu in the future, as a pure light aircraft carrier with more capacity for STOVL aircraft instead of multi-role amphibious assault, without F-35B it is not possible.

 

[Armchair]

I think it is possible if you put prop planes and UAVs. See WWII carriers, smaller than the Anadolu yet carried a lot of prop planes. And prop planes of that era did not even have the thrust to weight of modern prop planes. Plus they had to be weighed down by armour.

Another advantage of prop planes is they have much longer loiter times than their jet / turbo fan compatriots. This means the deck is far less stressed with launch and recovery operations.

 

[Test7]

TCG Ufuk and TCG Istanbul

 

[BordoEnes]

TCG Anadolu is modified Juan Carlos LHD of Spain, which was designed for carrying fixed wings as well. Like RAN, TN has also considered removing the ski-jump but has opted for it, since there was a willing to operate fixed wing.
Same as other LHDs, Anadolu is only capable of operating some STOVL aircraft. Otherwise, standard landing would be an issue, even take off might be resolved by choosing proper aircraft.
Although there is a rumor implying that there could be a bigger variant of Anadolu in the future, as a pure light aircraft carrier with more capacity for STOVL aircraft instead of multi-role amphibious assault, without F-35B it is not possible.

I dont think the Turkish navy would acquire the LHD's solely based on the assumpion of US goodwill providing us with F-35's. The relationship between Turkey and the US were already strained when we decided to get Anadolu. It kinda makes me think there are definitly alternatives that the Turkish navy has in mind, most probably in the form of locally produced drones. Would absolutely LOVE to see us getting Sea Gripens but dont think we can operate it from TCG Anadolu :/