International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20784
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Prem » 28 Apr 2018 06:16

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20 ... ns-actions

Senate Bill To Ban F-35 Sales To Turkey An Unprecedented Attempt To Check Erdogan's Actions

bipartisan bill introduced by Senators Lankford (R-OK), Tillis (R-NC), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) would prevent the transfer of F-35s to Turkey and keep the country from establishing a maintenance depot for the stealth fighters. Turkey has been one of six prime F-35 partner nations since 2002 and one of its biggest customers, with 116 of the stealth fighters on order. Under this legislation, the White House would to certify that Ankara isn't working to degrade NATO interoperability, exposing NATO assets to hostile actors, degrading the security of NATO member countries, seeking to import weapons from a foreign country under sanction by the U.S., and wrongfully or unlawfully detaining any American citizens.Though not specifically stated, the first four points deal almost entirely with Turkey's planned purchase of S-400 surface-to-air missile systems. Since 2015, the Turkish military has been looking to purchase a new, long-range SAM to replace a number of aging Cold War-era systems it still has in service. That year, a previous plan to buy Chinese FD-2000s collapsed amid pressure from the United States and other NATO members for many of the reasons Lankford and Shaheen cite in their proposed legislation. But in 2017, Turkey announced it had signed a contract with Russia to buy the S-400s, with an eye toward some level of domestic industrial cooperation or co-production, which had always been a major secondary goal for the deal. As they had when Turkish authorities said they were going to buy the Chinese weapons, the United States and other NATO members expressed their dismay over the plan, saying that the Russian systems wouldn't work with the alliances networks and other constructs and that they could risk exposing sensitive information to the Kremlin. Concerns about the potential of Moscow gaining information about the F-35 and how the S-400 performs against it have only grown since then, especially after Turkey stated that it would seek to fully integrate the F-35 with the rest of its own military networks.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35640
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 05 May 2018 10:35

Here’s The F-22 Production Restart Study The USAF Has Kept Secret For Over A Year.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20 ... ver-a-year

I'm gonna x-post in thr AMCA dhaaga as well.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1312
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 08 May 2018 11:25

Interesting interview with a former German fighter pilot Robert Hierl about his experiences with the MiG-29

It's an hour long but fascinating for history buffs like me

The Mig 29 part begins somewhere around the 9 minute mark


Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3861
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Kartik » 10 May 2018 23:43

First F-16 to receive life extension modification rolled out

An Air Force Thunderbird jet was the first Lockheed Martin F-16 to have a service life extension – modifications that will add more than 4,000 flight hours to the aircraft’s lifetime.

The aircraft is one of about 300 refurbished C and D models of the F-16s that will roll off the shop floor of the 573rd Aircraft Maintenance Squadron at Hill AFB, Utah after receiving structure-strengthening modifications, the USAF announced on May 3.

The F-16 service life extension programme is aimed at keeping the fighters flying until close to 2050. The jets became operational in 1979 and were originally deemed air worthy for up to 8,000 flight hours, but will have their life extended up to 12,000 flight hours as part of the programme. The jets will receive a dozen structural modifications, including changes to their bulkheads, wings and canopy.

“The Thunderbird jet presented some challenges. This is the largest structural upgrade we’ve ever done,” said Joe Gardenhour, civilian leader in the 573rd AMXS. “This programme moves beyond the usual modifications into a standard package of repairs, and it is going to bring stable workload into the depot for years to come.”

The Thunderbird jet was the first of four F-16s that will be used as validation and verification aircraft. Maintainers will use lessons learned from these first aircraft to better establish the cost, workflow and timeline for the modification of future aircraft.

Once the final processes and workforce are in place, the USAF’s goal is to complete each fighter in 9 months at a cost of $2.4 million.


Expect the Pukes to put some of their older F-16s through similar life extension upgrades to keep them going for another 15-20 years at least.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3861
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Kartik » 10 May 2018 23:45

Bangladesh picks Marshall support for used C-130Js

Bangladesh has selected the UK's Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group to modify a pair of ex-Royal Air Force-operated Lockheed Martin C-130Js and provide long-term support for the tactical transports.

Announced by Marshall on 10 May, the deal will include work in designing, developing and installing a new medical evacuation fit for Dhaka's Hercules. This will "enable the Bangladesh air force to carry out important tasks within the country and overseas delivering support to UN missions," the Cambridge-based company says.

Marshall says it will provide a "total support solution" to the Asia-Pacific nation, including aircraft maintenance, engineering and logistics services and spare parts. This will "ensure the effective operation of the fleet", it adds.

The Bangladesh air force says the ex-RAF transports will provide "a key enhancement to our current airlift capability… as we prepare to take the step from the B- to J-model." Flight Fleets Analyzer records the service as currently using four C-130B/Es, aged between 56 and 58 years. The UK's surplus "Super Hercules" are on average 19 years old, it shows.

The RAF has already retired its five short-fuselage C-130Js, having focused its operations on the stretched -30 model, 19 of which remain in use. One of its surplus airlifters has already been bought by the US Navy and will be employed in support of its Blue Angels aerobatic display team, where it will replace an aged T-model transport.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3861
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Kartik » 17 May 2018 02:46

Israel to link F-15I fleet upgrade with follow on F-15I buy

Israel has proposed a deal to purchase additional Boeing F-15s, in a package that would also include upgrading the Israeli air force's existing I-model examples of the strike aircraft.

Worth almost $4 billion, the potential purchase would include 25 twin-engined F-15Is in an advanced configuration. The new version's airframe would have an extended lifespan and enhanced features including a large-area cockpit display.

The purchase of additional F-15s has recently gained priority for the Israeli air force's high command over ordering aircraft for a third squadron of Lockheed Martin F-35Is. The rationale for this decision is that while the F-35's stealth features are essential at the start of a conflict, the type will need be flown during later combat sorties in conjunction with assets capable of carrying a heavier weapons load.

Flight Fleets Analyzer records the Israeli air force as currently operating 25 F-15Is, aged between 18 and 20 years. These aircraft would be modified to the same enhanced standard as the proposed additional batch, if the deal goes ahead.

Sources indicate that a purchase is likely to advance around the mid-way point of a 10-year military spending package recently approved by the USA.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 23 May 2018 12:42

Detailed Official Report On Harrowing Encounter Between F/A-18s and UFO Surfaces
the only conclusion the report comes to, there are six in all:

The 'Anomalous Aerial Vehicle' was of unknown origin and represented technology not currently in the possession of the U.S. or any other nation.

It featured broadband RF stealth making the use of radar against it largely ineffective.

The craft manifested extreme performance but did not have lifting structures or control surfaces required for traditional flight.

It showed that it has some kind of advanced propulsion capability making it able to go instantly from hovering to very high speed and to make very abrupt course changes.

It was able to 'cloak' itself, becoming invisible visually to the naked eye.
Possibly capable of operating undersea without being detected by the most advanced sub-surface sensors

Image

.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 23 May 2018 13:18

IF our MOD every befriends them then I am sure they will ask for Full TOT of the AAV and local lic production at HAL factory ....They first 40 types will be direct purchase and next 40 will be in CKD/SKD kit followed by lic prod of AAV from locally sourced raw materials :wink:

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7761
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Pratyush » 23 May 2018 13:20

Are these reports discribing Klingon bird of prey. As no other craft I know meets the criteria the AAC was operating on.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2361
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 23 May 2018 13:35

Austin wrote:Detailed Official Report On Harrowing Encounter Between F/A-18s and UFO Surfaces
the only conclusion the report comes to, there are six in all:

The 'Anomalous Aerial Vehicle' was of unknown origin and represented technology not currently in the possession of the U.S. or any other nation.

It featured broadband RF stealth making the use of radar against it largely ineffective.

The craft manifested extreme performance but did not have lifting structures or control surfaces required for traditional flight.

It showed that it has some kind of advanced propulsion capability making it able to go instantly from hovering to very high speed and to make very abrupt course changes.

It was able to 'cloak' itself, becoming invisible visually to the naked eye.
Possibly capable of operating undersea without being detected by the most advanced sub-surface sensors

Image

.



If you really thought about this, it’s scary as hell.

This is no nutcase out there with a tinfoil on his head. This is the goddam US Navy encountering these things.

Whomever (or whatever) is flying these things would have made mincemeat out of these F-18s and the carrier battle group they were from. Judging by the unearthly abilities and performance of those things, they weren’t piloted by humans.

Think about that.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 23 May 2018 13:59

Think about what ? Such incidents has been document since decades and centuries but today due to availability of Camera , FLIR and declassfication from offical sources these stories are more believable.

This thing can travel in Air and Under water by extension it must have travelled in space to reach here , has no known aerodynamic shape and has broad band stealth and can morph .......All in All if they wanted to attack F-18 or USN Fleet they would have done that then.

They just same to say a Nice Hello to us :)

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2361
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 23 May 2018 14:13

Austin wrote:Think about what ? Such incidents has been document since decades and centuries but today due to availability of Camera , FLIR and declassfication from offical sources these stories are more believable.

This thing can travel in Air and Under water by extension it must have travelled in space to reach here , has no known aerodynamic shape and has broad band stealth and can morph .......All in All if they wanted to attack F-18 or USN Fleet they would have done that then.

They just same to say a Nice Hello to us :)


Could be the scout or recon squad before the main fleet arrives from Alpha Centauri or somewhere.

Humans think in human lifespans. Who knows with these things? They might live for millenia so preparing a few centuries for an invasion might be no big deal.

Just scary that there are things out there with such power. But now I’m somewhat prepared for the first open encounter.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1312
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 23 May 2018 15:12

Sigh, even the aliens are racist... always seem to keep themselves in and around North America.. maybe it's the brown smog produced by us SDREs which is to blame :((

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35640
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 23 May 2018 16:27

Israel Launched World's First Air Strike Using F-35 Stealth Fighters, Air Force Chief Says

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-new ... -1.6110706

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2361
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 23 May 2018 19:28

Manish_P wrote:Sigh, even the aliens are racist... always seem to keep themselves in and around North America.. maybe it's the brown smog produced by us SDREs which is to blame :((


We have our sightings too. As dharmics, we’re just more non-chalant about them.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4362
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Neshant » 23 May 2018 19:34

chola wrote:
Manish_P wrote:Sigh, even the aliens are racist... always seem to keep themselves in and around North America.. maybe it's the brown smog produced by us SDREs which is to blame :((


We have our sightings too. As dharmics, we’re just more non-chalant about them.


What's the estimated speed on that thing.

Seems to have no visible source of propulsion - a fan or jet

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 23 May 2018 20:20

Another documented incident of IrAF F-14 and F-4 confronting and trying to dog fight it

AFM: Iran UFO reports revealed

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 23 May 2018 20:21

chola wrote:
Manish_P wrote:Sigh, even the aliens are racist... always seem to keep themselves in and around North America.. maybe it's the brown smog produced by us SDREs which is to blame :((


We have our sightings too. As dharmics, we’re just more non-chalant about them.


More like a Quadcopter/ Aviation Hobby thing

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2361
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 24 May 2018 04:57

^^^ I don’t see any of the typical hobby quadcopter props, tho.

It does sound like a lawnmower if the sound was matching the UFO.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 738
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby kvraghav » 24 May 2018 08:45

^^
Looks like there are some small set of jet firing causing the rotation and switching off and another set of jets taking over or we are being stupid.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 24 May 2018 08:51

The youtube is full of such videos and its hard to distinguish between real and fake ones , This certainly looks fake to me ...some one flying some 3000 Rs Chinese UAV with likely tin foil wrapped over it to look like UFO..

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 24 May 2018 22:45

http://militarywatchmagazine.com/read.php?my_data=70632

American Raptors based in the United Arab Emirates have flown a number of sorties into Syrian airspace, both as a show of force in response to the Russian military presence in the country and to strike targets of Islamist insurgent groups. Prominent figures in the U.S. Air Force leadership have noted that deploying the F-22 for combat operations to the country, where Russia has deployed extensive surveillance equipment including some of its most advanced air defence radar systems capable, has seriously undermined the platform’s viability by providing Moscow with valuable intelligence on the aircraft. U.S. Air Force Lt. General VeraLinn Jamieson stated to this effect: "The skies over Iraq and specifically Syria have really just been a treasure trove for them to see how we operate. Our adversaries are watching us, they're learning from us... Russia has gained invaluable insights and information with operating in a contested airspace alongside of us in Syria." The secrecy of the elite fifth generation fighter’s manoeuvres, radar evading systems and weapons deployment were lost - a major blow to the effectiveness of the air superiority fighter. Russia was able to test the limits of the Raptor’s stealth, learn how the platform was designed to operate and better develop countermeasures against the F-22. It could potentially even use this information to incorporate successful aspects of the design onto its own next generation fighter.

Considering the magnitude of the loss which resulted from deploying the F-22 for combat operations to Syria, and the ‘treasure trove of information’ provided to America’s adversaries, deployment of the F-35 for combat operations to the very same warzone just months later remains highly unlikely. Radar systems from Russian S-300V and S-400 air defence systems are able to cover all of Israeli and Lebanese airspace and the vast majority of Syria itself. Flying the F-35 on combat missions over this area would inevitably provide Russia with valuable information regarding the fighter’s capabilities. Iranian air defence systems are also reportedly active in the region, and the chance to test anti stealth measures against the F-35 could well prove a major asset for Tehran - arguably outweighing the losses incurred from Israeli airstrikes.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35640
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 24 May 2018 22:46


SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35640
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 24 May 2018 22:52

chola wrote:^^^ I don’t see any of the typical hobby quadcopter props, tho.

It does sound like a lawnmower if the sound was matching the UFO.

It is.. the truboprop is mounted in the center with blades covered by the circular airframe. What is UFO about it!?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2361
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 24 May 2018 23:31

SaiK wrote:
chola wrote:^^^ I don’t see any of the typical hobby quadcopter props, tho.

It does sound like a lawnmower if the sound was matching the UFO.

It is.. the truboprop is mounted in the center with blades covered by the circular airframe. What is UFO about it!?



Nope, I don’t believe there is such a center-mounted “turboprop” hobby drone. How would such an arrangement maneuver? Or go horizontally? Wouldn’t it just go up?

Closest thing I found but the props are still pretty obvious:
Image

Overwhelming majority of hobby drones are quads like this:
Image

Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 140
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Chinmay » 25 May 2018 09:45

OT but has brar_w left the forum? His posts were very informative

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 25 May 2018 10:31

SaiK wrote:Yet another insider dent on F35

https://amp.businessinsider.com/strange ... ael-2018-5


Luneburg lens ,The chinese J-20 has been flying with one of these

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35640
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 28 May 2018 19:55

High gain radio use?

_____

Florida Air Base Hangar Turns Into A Raptor's Nest As F-22s Take Refuge From Alberto

http://amp.timeinc.net/thedrive/the-war ... source=dam

_____
NOTE to IDRW.org associates: Article* cannot be reproduced without written permission of https://www.bharat-rakshak.com in any form
:rotfl: *any BRF linked articles.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 268
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Haridas » 28 May 2018 23:41

Long wave IRST Could Soon Shoot Down Stealth F-22s and F-35s

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... 2s-f-25996

Statistical physics is the key and artificial neural network the base.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 31 May 2018 09:50

Egyptian Mig-29M2

Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Austin » 02 Jun 2018 11:57

How the Mig-31 repelled the SR-71 Blackbird from Soviet skies

This statement was dramatically confirmed in Paul Crickmore’s book Lockheed Blackbird: Beyond The Secret Missions.

In this book one of the first Foxhound pilots, Captain Mikhail Myagkiy, who had been scrambled with its MiG-31 several times to intercept the US super-fast spy plane, explains how he was able to lock on a Blackbird on Jan. 31, 1986:

“The scheme for intercepting the SR-71 was computed down to the last second, and the MiGs had to launch exactly 16 minutes after the initial alert. (…) They alerted us for an intercept at 11.00. They sounded the alarm with a shrill bell and then confirmed it with a loudspeaker. The appearance of an SR-71 was always accompanied by nervousness. Everyone began to talk in frenzied voices, to scurry about, and react to the situation with excessive emotion.”

Myagkiy and its Weapons System Officer (WSO) were able to achieve a SR-71 lock on at 52,000 feet and at a distance of 120 Km from the target.

The Foxhound climbed at 65,676 feet where the crew had the Blackbird in sight and according to Myagkiy:

“Had the spy plane violated Soviet airspace, a live missile launch would have been carried out. There was no practically chance the aircraft could avoid an R-33 missile.”

After this interception Blackbirds reportedly began to fly their reconnaissance missions from outside the borders of the Soviet Union.

But the MiG-31s intercepted the SR-71 at least another time.

On Sept. 3, 2012 an article written by Rakesh Krishman Simha for Indrus.in explains how the Foxhound was able to stop Blackbirds spy missions over Soviet Union on Jun. 3, 1986.

That day, no less than six MiG-31s “intercepted” an SR-71 over the Barents Sea by performing a coordinated interception that subjected the Blackbird to a possible all angle air-to-air missiles attack.

Apparently, after this interception, no SR-71 flew a reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union and few years later the Blackbird was retired to be replaced with the satellites.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1442
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Zynda » 02 Jun 2018 20:09

It seems like Turkey has been able to leap & close key technology gaps in 15 years time. Any guesses on how this happened? Is Turkish investment in Def R&D is so high & that too in many areas simultaneously to close gaps or is it all blowing a bunch of hot air? Its GDP is around 1T$ as on 2018.

I know Turkey has probably made quite amount of progress in Defense production (I believe it is capable of producing & supporting key F-16 parts) but did it anytime receive tech transfer from NATO which enabled Turkey to make significant progress?

This is what one poster at KeyDef states on Turkey thread:

Turkey went from OEM production of parts for foreign companies, then licence production of platforms, then co-development/co-production of platforms to focusing on indigenous design and development of both sub-systems and entire platforms.

Turkey could not set out to re-invent the wheel. It could only purchase near obsolete wheel technology and develop it to a modern and new generation wheel. This is how Turkey has closed its technology gaps.

You gave the example of the MILGEM warships. Yes, when the program commenced all that Turkey did was integrate foreign sub-systems into an indigenously designed warship. However, one must look at where Turkey is now. Turkey went from 40% foreign content to near 95% indigenous production.

Turkey today has been able to design, develop and produce the following critical subsystems:

Active, Non-Rotating IFF Antenna Subsystem
• STANAG 4193 compliant Mode 1/2/3/C/S/5 interrogation • 450 km range

Active Phased Array Multifunction Radar
• X-Band
• Volume and horizon search,
• Air/surface target detection, tracking and classi cation, • Sea-skimming fast-small target detection and tracking, • Multiple target precise tracking,
• 150 km range
• Track capacity >1000

Active Phased Array Illumination Radar
• X-Band
• Semi-active missile guidance • 150 km range

Active Phased Array Long Range Search Radar
• S-Band
• Long Range volume search,
• Air/surface target detection, tracking and classi cation, • 450 km range
• Track capacity >2000

Even the GaN based T/R units are designed and produced in Turkey.

See http://www.aselsan.com.tr/en-us/pres...CAFRAD_ENG.pdf

Its warships now use indigenous Anti-ship missiles (Roketsan ATMACA), Torpedo's (AKYA), Land-attack cruise missiles (GEZGIN) and Rail-guns.

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/209...i_Ship_Missile
http://www.telegiz.com/articles/2167...-idef-2017.htm
https://www.dailysabah.com/defense/2...c-railgun-deal

No one has given Turkey the Active Phased Array Multifunction Radar or the Rail-gun technology.

TCG Istanbul, the i-class Frigate currently being built will use a Turkish Rail-Gun as its main gun. How many countries have commercially available rail-guns ready to go on a military platform?


Except the T-129 is no longer comparable to the AW-129 Mongoose in terms of capabilities. The Mongoose did not have a helmet mounted cuing system, full-glass cockpit, MMW FCR, LHTEC engines originally designed for the Boeing–Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche and modern weapons systems. It is probably the best light attack helicopter in its class currently for hot and high roles.

Furthermore, it is bringing Turkey $1.5 billion in export income.

The T-129 program has also enabled Turkey to develop the T-130 heavy attack helicopter. Not bad for a country that didnt have any capability to produce rotary aircraft 10 years ago!

Today Turkey is able to produce indigenous turbo-shaft engines! {produce as in licence manufacturing?}

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Bart S » 02 Jun 2018 22:01

Zynda wrote:It seems like Turkey has been able to leap & close key technology gaps in 15 years time. Any guesses on how this happened? Is Turkish investment in Def R&D is so high & that too in many areas simultaneously to close gaps or is it all blowing a bunch of hot air? Its GDP is around 1T$ as on 2018.

I know Turkey has probably made quite amount of progress in Defense production (I believe it is capable of producing & supporting key F-16 parts) but did it anytime receive tech transfer from NATO which enabled Turkey to make significant progress?

This is what one poster at KeyDef states on Turkey thread:


That guy is probably hyping and embellishing it a lot, just like the Chinese 50 centers do. However, given that Turkey didn't suffer from colonial loot, had a 100% literate population for a long time, was secular and not Islamist for most of the last 100 years, was ruled by the military (thereby cutting out bureaucratic hurdles) for a very long time, had access to Western tech being a NATO member, and has a per capita USD 11,000 economy and benefitted from NATO aid, it should be straightforward for them to have built several weapons systems like they did. Pakis they are not, though under Erdogan (du) they seem to be heading in that direction.

Oh, and they don't suffer from the Indian MOD running R&D and production, like we do . :evil:

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1215
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Thakur_B » 03 Jun 2018 09:59

Turks are heavily dependant on european and korean vendors, but they can make decent ground warfare weapons.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15292
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Karan M » 04 Jun 2018 03:09

Zynda, the guy has written a bunch of hokey, heaped up with a dose of jingoism.

As of only a couple of years back, the Turks were struggling to operationalize their first short range radar. They have yet to scale to the wide number of applications or waveforms or form factors, a country like India for instance has already operationalized. Primarily because all this requires heavy involvement of R&D and time & effort. Take for instance their pride and joy:http://www.aselsan.com.tr/en-us/capabilities/radar-systems/air-defense-radars/kalkan-air-defence-radar

Does this look anywhere near a MPR in complexity, or an AEW&C system or the ones we are making for the BM network.
Tell me, if they are so far ahead in terms of mastering radar tech; why is the Smart L licensed?

This is their "concept" http://www.aselsan.com.tr/en-us/capabil ... ems/hsar-o
Consider, if the building blocks were actually available, would they be importing S-400s or any fancy Euro gear?

We have the following 3D radars having cleared trials and in production - MPR, Rohini & derivatives, Aslesha, Rajendra and derivatives, LLTR and MPR and derivatives.. yet it takes us at least 2-3 years to develop a new system and operationalize it, such as the QRSAM radar or the Atulya or the 3D TCR and similar new gen AESA units. And as a result, our radar imports have dipped substantially.

Now consider the Turks, they have thrown money every which where and while it has allowed ASELSAN for instance to cobble together kits of "state of the art" weapons systems made from imported subassemblies, they are yet to actually reach real own capability.

For instance, just look at the hodge podge that is their SAM procurement. They are looking to US, Russia, everyone and everywhere and yet this guy claims that all the building blocks are already achieved. Does that even make sense?

Second, the Turks routinely used to get fawning coverage in western trade mags. The reality is when their Israeli supported locally developed drone took to the air, its payloads were too heavy. Now draw your own conclusion about Aselpod vs Litening or Sniper.[ Thing is Indian military's foreign preference (quick capability to win wars at short notice), has led to a situation wherein even command guided Akash can give many ostensibly more advanced SAM systems a run for their money in terms of actual sophistication. The same IMHO can't be said for the Turks, whose erstwhile professional military is getting more and more hollow. Erdogan for instance gutted the AF of its fighter pilots because of coup fears.

Now for my rant, excuse me if I am preaching to the choir.

I see this sort of delusional talk such as that forum guy did amongst a lot of folks who have not been associated with any sort of tech development (unlike you) - they just think snapping fingers, hiring people with fancy degrees, and putting some money into the task means magic advancement. There is no allowance made for actual learning or the program management complexity and snafus common with large procurement let alone development programs.

You see the same kind of attitude on BRF amongst a few chaps with similar mindset challenges, going the other way, wondering why things in a relatively transparent system don't happen overnight. LCA took 30 years. GTRE has done nothing. The DPSUs are useless we import blah blah..

Some civil engineer or architect thinking that making a LCA is just like making sure mason gets x bags of cement and y amount of gravel, and "what, its not done yet". Or the other side, common to many over jingoistic types. XX got sanctioned, so guys we are the best.

No allowance made for first effort and hence mistakes, overprovisioning or underprovisioning which are all too common.

In all these threads there is a common mindset issue. They simply ignore the amount of time it takes to build a proper engineering and R&D set up which actually learns by doing and then innovates. We all know what happens when you change specifications slightly on some complex product and how the suppliers and vendors react, even when the so-called raw materials and processes are relatively established.

But these guys think you just snap your fingers, put money and the decade long cycle of developing world class products like radars which require multi-disciplinary investments in everything from electronics, to metal forming (e.g. the antenna processes), mechanical/hydraulics (e.g. the masts) let alone the complex advances in specific non COTS items like semiconductors and the all-important algorithms and the software to pull it off, just happen overnight.

India started its EW journey in the 70s and it has taken two decades of consistent work from the 1990's to know develop and deliver some proper EW systems to Navy, AF etc. Its the same journey Thales, IAI all made.

But somehow Turks are super special as are the Chinese and can magically move through space, and time to develop world-leading capabilities overnight.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2361
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 04 Jun 2018 08:16

Bart S wrote:
Zynda wrote:It seems like Turkey has been able to leap & close key technology gaps in 15 years time. Any guesses on how this happened? Is Turkish investment in Def R&D is so high & that too in many areas simultaneously to close gaps or is it all blowing a bunch of hot air? Its GDP is around 1T$ as on 2018.

I know Turkey has probably made quite amount of progress in Defense production (I believe it is capable of producing & supporting key F-16 parts) but did it anytime receive tech transfer from NATO which enabled Turkey to make significant progress?

This is what one poster at KeyDef states on Turkey thread:


That guy is probably hyping and embellishing it a lot, just like the Chinese 50 centers do. However, given that Turkey didn't suffer from colonial loot, had a 100% literate population for a long time, was secular and not Islamist for most of the last 100 years, was ruled by the military (thereby cutting out bureaucratic hurdles) for a very long time, had access to Western tech being a NATO member, and has a per capita USD 11,000 economy and benefitted from NATO aid, it should be straightforward for them to have built several weapons systems like they did. Pakis they are not, though under Erdogan (du) they seem to be heading in that direction.

Oh, and they don't suffer from the Indian MOD running R&D and production, like we do . :evil:


The truth is if the Turks are anything like the 50 centers then Zynda will be seeing many things in the future.

I began debating the 50-centers before I knew any better more than a decade ago. Back when the LCA was in a true horse race with the J-10. We promptly lost that race a few years later. Then it was race with the FC-1 to induction. Well, there are over 100 Blunders in the Terrorist Air Force so we know what happened there as well.

During that decade the 50-centers also surprised us (and themselves I think) with the J-20 and the J-31 which came out of nowhere. Never mind the Y-20, the ARJ-21 and the C919. And oh let’s not mention the hunter-killer drones, AIP subs and warships.

If the Turks are anything close then they’ll do great things.

And I think they are more than just close with the Atak129 example. No matter how you slice it, the Turks beat an established attack helo in the Z-10 with over 100 in service and mostly likely offered cheaply on subsidized basis to the Tallest and Deepest.

I see them somewhat like the S. Koreans. Both Western-based MICs that really began screwdrivergiri’ing the F-Solah.

I would like to see how the 5th Gen contest ends up with the AMCA, TFX and KFX.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4362
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Neshant » 04 Jun 2018 13:22

chola wrote:If the Turks are anything close then they’ll do great things.

And I think they are more than just close with the Atak129 example. No matter how you slice it, the Turks beat an established attack helo in the Z-10 with over 100 in service and mostly likely offered cheaply on subsidized basis to the Tallest and Deepest.


Atak129 is basically a revised copy of the A129 Mangusta designed & built by the company Augusta Westland.
Needless to say, Augusta Westland is not a Turk company.

Essentially Turks are building it under license and acquired the rights to export it.

How much additional work Turks put into the chopper beyond a few cosmetic changes is questionable.

The 129 isn't any more Turkish than the Su-30MKI is Indian.

Likewise they have produced Reaper type drones supposedly on their own to blast the PKK since US stalled export of the armed drones to them. But how much of it is entirely indigenous and how much of it is dependent on US/EU supply chain is an unknown.

Thus your statement should read "No matter how you slice it, Augusta Westland beat Z-10.."

That being said, India's progress on the drone front has been rather poor by comparison to this much smaller country. We have no excuse for being behind.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2361
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 04 Jun 2018 13:58

Neshant wrote:
chola wrote:If the Turks are anything close then they’ll do great things.

And I think they are more than just close with the Atak129 example. No matter how you slice it, the Turks beat an established attack helo in the Z-10 with over 100 in service and mostly likely offered cheaply on subsidized basis to the Tallest and Deepest.


Atak129 is basically a revised copy of the A129 Mangusta designed & built by the company Augusta Westland.
Needless to say, Augusta Westland is not a Turk company.

Essentially Turks are building it under license and acquired the rights to export it.

How much additional work Turks put into the chopper beyond a few cosmetic changes is questionable.

The 129 isn't any more Turkish than the Su-30MKI is Indian.

Likewise they have produced Reaper type drones supposedly on their own to blast the PKK since US stalled export of the armed drones to them. But how much of it is entirely indigenous and how much of it is dependent on US/EU supply chain is an unknown.

Thus your statement should read "No matter how you slice it, Augusta Westland beat Z-10.."

That being said, India's progress on the drone front has been rather poor by comparison to this much smaller country. We have no excuse for being behind.


The two bolded statements are completely contradictory. If they can export the T129 regardless of the AW origin then it is theirs because they OWN the rights to it.

In contrast, we cannot export the MKI because we do NOT own the rights to the Su-30 we’re building.

The Turks can also make changes to the Atak129 as they see fit and they can build as many as they want and in as many variants as they want. They already have a B variant planned.

We cannot make one make more Su-30 than stipulated in the contract and that assembly line cannot make new variants once the contract ends.

Our technology acquisition strategy is what is really lacking. What we do is local subcontracting for our firangi vendors. What the Turks got is real ToT. They bought something where they control the rights.

And not just the Turks but the South Koreans too with the TA-50 from LM.

As I said before, the AMCA/TFX/KFX race will see how we stack up with one another.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4362
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Neshant » 05 Jun 2018 13:11

chola wrote:The two bolded statements are completely contradictory. If they can export the T129 regardless of the AW origin then it is theirs because they OWN the rights to it.


The supply chain for the chopper is mainly in western Europe.

In contrast, we cannot export the MKI because we do NOT own the rights to the Su-30 we’re building.


The supply chain for the aircraft is almost entirely in Russia.
Rights or no rights, we are for the most part merely assembling the aircraft.
Incompetent Indian negotiators did a very poor job of negotiating the Sukhoi deal.
Hundreds of aircraft paid for and hardly any gain for the domestic aerospace base.

The Turks can also make changes to the Atak129 as they see fit and they can build as many as they want and in as many variants as they want. They already have a B variant planned.


They can't do so without AW.
The deal to let them produce the chopper was to side step any European legislation of blocking exports to them due to the use of these choppers on Kurds. Their drone manufacturing base has an Israeli connection.

And not just the Turks but the South Koreans too with the TA-50 from LM.
As I said before, the AMCA/TFX/KFX race will see how we stack up with one another.


South Korea and Japan are in a different league altogether with their advanced R&D industries.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19306
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Philip » 07 Jun 2018 03:59

The US GAO has recommended " no more funding " for production of JSF F-35 stealth birds until the over "1000 " deficiencies are rectified.

Problems in brief.Ejector seat causes neck. injuries.Helmet not working properly.OBOGS problems.Refuelling probe breaks off easily. Over 111 " Cat 1" faults which directly impinge upon the aircraft's "safety and security".An annual full scale production worth over $10B from next year is planned for 10 years.The entire project lifetime cost is estimated at around $1.4 trillion, the most expensive in history.

Let's see how this unfolds as any halt or slowdown would be devastating for the programme.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], K_Rohit, navneeet and 31 guests