Turkish Unmanned Vehicle Programs

[LegionnairE]

Yes, but this is also legit for T-129. Your lose will always be cheaper on cheap unmanned helicopters; you will only risk unmanned helicopter's itself which is not as much expensive as T-129, and no pilot's life will be risked.

So you are in profit anyway.

no, T129's M197 20mm gun can engage you from outside your rifle's range. You're suggesting that a 7.62 machinegun would be enough. No. It wouldn't be.

Having stuffed handgranedes into glass jar, our soldiers used to drop jars from helicopters onto terrorists.
Comparing those old days with todays laser guided smart bombs we should just chill out.

Threats have changed though. Helicopters are much less survivable these days.

I think the proper way to go forward is to make Atak-2 with ejection seats.
We should all push for that.

 

[UkroTurk]

no, T129's M197 20mm gun can engage you from outside your rifle's range. You're suggesting that a 7.62 machinegun would be enough. No. It wouldn't be.


Threats have changed though. Helicopters are much less survivable these days.

I think the proper way to go forward is to make Atak-2 with ejection seats.
We should all push for that.

Okay, helis are less survivable but what about stuffed jars with hand grenades??) Are they still useful?

 

[OguzSenturk]

no, T129's M197 20mm gun can engage you from outside your rifle's range.

In theory, yes. In Afrin, no. I am giving this solution for T-129 usages in Afrin and not risking them, their pilots. I am not gonna share videos again since they are PKK videos, but you can see them in previous pages of Operation Olive Branch thread; T-129s fly in those altitutes, even lower.

 

[mete]

You are right, i am aware of this. But i never wanted to put 20mm/30mm on 300kg unmanned helicopter, that would be unnecesserily over powered. Even 12mm is not necessery. 7,62 Sarp-Light loaded unmanned helicopter, would have less inertia than 20mm loaded T-129, or 30mm loaded AH-64. 7,62 may push your shoulder back little bit if you don't position yourself, but it wouldn't even move 300kg mass in the air that cutting air with it's blades a centimeter.

Imagine that these kind of unmanned helicopters, fly above 150m-200m on surface and hit terrorists one by one, without risking any pilot's life, and even if terrorist scum somehow succeed to shot it down your cost would be much more lower than T-129.

I said 150-200m altitude because T-129s even fly lower than this as they can be seen in videos in Afrin.

I totally agree, it is a nice idea and in my opinion it must be done.

That thing wouln't be shooting a target which is 300-400 meters away. I think it would be lot more. This is not such bad because when shooting a below target optimum range increases. But accuracy becomes more problematic. This is the point that I am concerned. Firing wouldn't effect flight stability but it might affect firing characteristics.

When you shoot from a helicopter you apply a rotational force. If you are not firing at the axis of center of mass. ın this situation force from helicopters rotors for lift applies as a driving force and helicopter starts to swing at burst fires. This does not affect general flight capabilities but it really affects accuracy. That was the thing I was talking about.

As you said sarp is a good solution for this but depending on its current engineering purposes it might need some changes. Both mechanics for gun stability and material properties for less weight might need change. Lightweight is really important here.

Those are really are not problems for our defence industry, as I said earlier our industry is capable of doing much much more. I am trying to tell that; it might take some time. But if I know our defence industry it is a matter of a couple of months. We already have unmanned helicopters, stabilised gun and capability of controlling helicopter gun.

 

[OguzSenturk]

If you are not firing at the axis of center of mass. ın this situation force from helicopters rotors for lift applies as a driving force and helicopter starts to swing at burst fires.

Yes that is really a bad thing, but would be just taken care by putting RCWS in the axis of center of mass If burst fire mode would be a problem in accuracy of weapon, it could fire at one-fire mode. There are even old footages from 2015-2016 where RCWSs hit terrorists perfectly in burst fire modes

 

[mete]

Yes that is really a bad thing, but would be just taken care by putting RCWS in the axis of center of mass If burst fire mode would be a problem in accuracy of weapon, it could fire at one-fire mode. There are even old footages from 2015-2016 where RCWSs hit terrorists perfectly in burst fire modes

That might be done but there is problem.
Take center of mass as a point. Take the gun chamber as the second point. Draw a line and if you only fire that line follows yes, it is done. But if you do that you need to move heli to fire and accuracy of stabilised gun is gone. When you turn the gun like on t129 then you lose the axis and rotational tork applied. So; firing at that line and only that line is not feasable.

That video is the perfect example. One-fire looks like the most reasonable choice.

BTW I have remembered "napıyorsun lan" incident. I have remembered the terorist masturbating at the field. I can not stop laughing. If you didn't watch it I strongly recommend.

 

[LegionnairE]

In theory, yes. In Afrin, no. I am giving this solution for T-129 usages in Afrin and not risking them, their pilots. I am not gonna share videos again since they are PKK videos, but you can see them in previous pages of Operation Olive Branch thread; T-129s fly in those altitutes, even lower.

they fly low to empty their rocket pods I think. M197 is accurate enough you wouldn't need to dive.

 

[kartal1]

Having stuffed handgranedes into glass jar, our soldiers used to drop jars from helicopters onto terrorists.
Comparing those old days with todays laser guided smart bombs we should just chill out.

Well said!

 

[OguzSenturk]

they fly low to empty their rocket pods I think. M197 is accurate enough you wouldn't need to dive.

Well in video, they fly even lower than 100m altitude to use 20mm cannons, multiple times. It could be more safe to use unmanned helicopter in that situation.

 

[LegionnairE]

Well in video, they fly even lower than 100m altitude to use 20mm cannons, multiple times. It could be more safe to use unmanned helicopter in that situation.

I have no idea if we're talking about the same video, but all the ones I've seen so far were very short clips.

T129 pilot may have dived to use his rocket pods and was unable to ascend to a higher altitude due to the evasive actions he had to take. But I saw a FLIR video where the bullets were falling meters away from the target. So there might be a problem with the calibration / zeroing of our guns. I don't know to be quite honest, but with the 20mm gun T129 should at least be able to engage the enemy from 2 kilometers.

 

[UkroTurk]

Is there any unmanned Helicopters in Turkish Army or in TAI which you can stick on?
I doubt if there is operational unmanned heli with autocannon in the world.

 

[mete]

Is there any unmanned Helicopters in Turkish Army or in TAI which you can stick on?
I doubt if there is operational unmanned heli with autocannon in the world.

Operational? I do not know. But TAI started R-300 project at 2010 or 2011. 500 kg weight and 100 kg payload.

It can be done as we were arguing about.

 

[Saithan]

If we take an example, how much does R-300 cost, and what's the payload. what are the chance of R-300 taking out a terrorist who's well equipped with the right weaponry to take out UAV.

How many R-300 type would we need in average to take out a terrorist.

Then change the scenario to R-300 taking out a group of terrorists, what are the chances again / cost?

Compare that with a UAV using smartbombs. chances/cost ?

 

[-------]

R-300 is meant for naval use, so it's max service ceiling is not appropiate for SE. You can calculate the costs of the R-300 by factoring what airframe is based on 'Mosquito AIR', which costs around $20k.

 

[kartal1]

We have plenty of options to use in that kind of situation. For me the important part is also how fast the support comes. If I am in a such situation I would want portable kamikaze drones like Alpagu and Kargu. I cant wait long under 50cal fire for example. With its small silhouette and speeds close to 80kmph its difficult to shot it down and while I am thinking about the precision and also the intelligence gathering capability due to the bigger chance of the drone to not be seen also fast deployment I think in that kind of situation I would go for this. For the cost.... I am not sure if it would be more expensive than R300 platform with all the modifications in weapon and possible missile systems aboard. The possible bads of such system is the lack of possibility to take it with you and it must take off from already fortified position, the reaction time of the crew and also the higher silhouette of the drone comparable to the range that it would complete its mission. With 7.62 I am not sure about from how far it can act against the enemy precisely and cost friendly and also will it be able again precisely and cost friendly to fire while its moving and maneuvering. Also I am not sure how will be the maneuverability of the bird since its rotor based if it comes under enemy fire. Thats what it moves in my head.