Advancements and Deployment of Turkish UAVs: A Strategic Overview

MALE/HALE UAVs have their place, that is in fact my argument and I never disputed it. But define "in conflicts": a conflict against a military with the capabilities that Russia has, and which (unlike Russia) actually brings them to bear, is not normally that place. Nothing more, nothing less. Is there any assertion in my post that you substantively disagree with?
 
Last edited:
Trident said:
Well, making the right prediction for all the wrong reasons is indicative of luck, not wisdom.

2) You operate on the implicit assumption that Russia is in fact a conventional foe. On paper that is certainly true and everybody expected it to operate like one, but the key surprise is that it is actually repeating many of the same mistakes made by forces that previously fared poorly against TB2s. Experts have been shocked by the low level of EW activity and Russia has still not established air superiority (US officials noted only yesterday that the VKS remains averse to operating over Ukraine proper). Coordination among ground forces has been disastrously bad, they regularly outran supply lines early on, nevermind SAM cover.

To conclude from the conflict to date that TB2s (or similar UAVs) can make a significant difference against a conventional foe is to disregard the elementary problem that Russia is not acting like such an adversary at all. Failing to account for the flawed premise is liable to lead one into drawing the wrong conclusions.
Click to expand...
Ukraine itself does not have the right force structure to make most use of out MALE drones.
1. Insufficient air superiority platform to contest the air against opponent
2. No SEAD capability or doctrine, Poor anti-radiation capability and no decoys.
3. No Aerial Ewar support outside standoff ELINT
4. No modern long range networked precision fires to take advantage of ISR
And of course it is the not developmental end point for the technology: attritable VLO with networked autonomous combat AI

The multiple time demonstrated failures of "conventional militaries", with regard to "military competence" suggests to me that the expected level of combined arms mutually supporting operations should be lower than what people expect (in that is both harder than what people expect, and organizations are more dysfunctional than people expect). Personally, I expect most militaries to be no more efficient, function or competent than standard inefficient government bureaucracy.

The idea that every army can conduct complex join operations is not unlikely the idea that infantry squares never break and would fight to the last man, that everyone can execute Sturmtruppen tactics or be a highly capable horse archer. It is just too easy to buy a bunch of fancy parade pieces and have very poor combat power by forgetting the human factor.

It would not surprise that "low skill warfare", where everyone and every side operates far below the threshold established by theory is the norm. The question of how war actually works under "incompetent warfare" should be in itself a interesting question and a study in military friction and organizational limitations.
 
I would tentatively concur with the other points, but...

shin_getter said:
Ukraine itself does not have the right force structure to make most use of out MALE drones.
1. Insufficient air superiority platform to contest the air against opponent
Click to expand...

... considering that Russia has been unable to establish air superiority and suppress GBAD on a sustained basis, I would disagree here - Ukraine is most definitely contesting the air!

What standard are you judging it against? Admittedly it's easy to be misled by media portrayals, but by my reckoning Ukraine has, relatively speaking, by far and away the best air defences of any country facing large scale air attack since 1973. Compared with Desert Storm, it has twice the number of 4th generation fighters as, and its SAMs are a full generation ahead of those used by, Iraq.

Meanwhile, the Russian fighter fleet (not nearly all of which is committed!) is only marginally larger than the number of 4th generation fighters the Coalition deployed in 1991. At most half of it is at best half a generation newer than what Ukraine uses, so both quantitatively and qualitatively Russia has a much tougher challenge on its hands. For reference, its currently confirmed fixed wing toll stands at 15, while the Coalition eventually lost 2.5 times more - which was universally hailed as extraordinarily light.

The preposterous amount of hyperbole surrounding Iraqi air defences in Desert Storm* not withstanding, on this basis the difficulties encountered by the VKS no longer seem so surprising. Especially since you have to assume that the Ukrainians are operating in a similarly canny manner as Yugoslavia did in 1999, as opposed to Iraqi performance in 1991, and have NATO information support. Add a training deficit relative to US and NATO crews hot off the closing days of the Cold War era...

* "Sixth largest air force in the world" [of 95% obsolete junk] and Bagdad "one of the most heavily defended cities" [with largely AA guns]...
 
stealthflanker said:
So i made myself bit of approximation on RCS of the MIUS UCAV. Some limitations however is that it's still PEC, and the dimension is speculative as what is currently available now is a mockup without canard and wing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1506377456931917824
Click to expand...

It's not a mock-up, what you see that's been released by Baykar is the first flight capable prototype. The composite skin is baked/bonded onto the frame, steps to cut out access panels and slots for the wings comes after. Hence why BaykarTech UAVs have very little screws and panels. You can observe this from TB2 to Akinci UCAVs.

Here you can see the TB2 structure before composite skin is bonded to it
1648026701132.png
1648026743713.png
 
Combat-Master said:
Combat-Master said:
According to the information obtained by the AA correspondent, ASELSAN and SEFİNE Shipyard have joined forces to develop trimaran-style unmanned surface vehicles.


View attachment 660302
View attachment 660303

www.aa.com.tr

Mavi Vatan'a 2 yeni insansız muhafız geliyor

Türk savunma sanayisinin ortaya koyduğu insansız deniz aracı çözümlerine 2 yeni araç eklenecek. - Anadolu Ajansı
www.aa.com.tr www.aa.com.tr

Image from the steel cutting ceremony' 7th June
View attachment 660304
Click to expand...
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etwrKn2Vm2c&t=1s

View attachment 660429View attachment 660430

View attachment 660431View attachment 660432
Click to expand...
USV in development by Aselsan and Sefine shipyard
1648114731047.png
1648114712739.png
 
shin_getter said:
Trident said:
Well, making the right prediction for all the wrong reasons is indicative of luck, not wisdom.

2) You operate on the implicit assumption that Russia is in fact a conventional foe. On paper that is certainly true and everybody expected it to operate like one, but the key surprise is that it is actually repeating many of the same mistakes made by forces that previously fared poorly against TB2s. Experts have been shocked by the low level of EW activity and Russia has still not established air superiority (US officials noted only yesterday that the VKS remains averse to operating over Ukraine proper). Coordination among ground forces has been disastrously bad, they regularly outran supply lines early on, nevermind SAM cover.

To conclude from the conflict to date that TB2s (or similar UAVs) can make a significant difference against a conventional foe is to disregard the elementary problem that Russia is not acting like such an adversary at all. Failing to account for the flawed premise is liable to lead one into drawing the wrong conclusions.
Click to expand...
Ukraine itself does not have the right force structure to make most use of out MALE drones.
1. Insufficient air superiority platform to contest the air against opponent
2. No SEAD capability or doctrine, Poor anti-radiation capability and no decoys.
3. No Aerial Ewar support outside standoff ELINT
4. No modern long range networked precision fires to take advantage of ISR
And of course it is the not developmental end point for the technology: attritable VLO with networked autonomous combat AI

The multiple time demonstrated failures of "conventional militaries", with regard to "military competence" suggests to me that the expected level of combined arms mutually supporting operations should be lower than what people expect (in that is both harder than what people expect, and organizations are more dysfunctional than people expect). Personally, I expect most militaries to be no more efficient, function or competent than standard inefficient government bureaucracy.

The idea that every army can conduct complex join operations is not unlikely the idea that infantry squares never break and would fight to the last man, that everyone can execute Sturmtruppen tactics or be a highly capable horse archer. It is just too easy to buy a bunch of fancy parade pieces and have very poor combat power by forgetting the human factor.

It would not surprise that "low skill warfare", where everyone and every side operates far below the threshold established by theory is the norm. The question of how war actually works under "incompetent warfare" should be in itself a interesting question and a study in military friction and organizational limitations.
Click to expand...
Considering Ukraine has been receiving training from UK forces since 2014 and appears to be following current UK military doctrines for you to claim that they are following low skill warfare is pretty strange statement unless you’re suggesting that current UK military doctrines are also low skill orientated.
 
Last edited:
Russian embassy in Turkey trying to create a lie that Ukraninian engine manufacturer requested Baykar to develop a drone with aerosol spraying systems. Document contains the company's answers to the questions sent to Ukraine's Export Control Agency, which BaykarTech states that their drone does not have aerosol spraying mechanism.

1648796417505.png
Ukraine abides to European Union's drone export control legislation.
1648796470187.png

-------------
Russian Ministry of Defense: Motor Sich firm's request to the manufacturer of Bayraktar UAVs draws attention. The document includes whether it is possible to equip these UAVs with aerosol spraying systems and mechanisms with a capacity of at least 20 liters.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1509559707668779016
View: https://twitter.com/RusEmbTurkey/status/1509559707668779016?s=20&t=yq30DENT1-RvVZ7CG__C4Q

-------------

Russian Embassy trying to create a pretext for chemical warfare, yet they aren't able to read the document correctly in their pace to spread a lie.
 
Combat-Master said:
3D render of MIUS, I believe this is an official render because of how accurate the model is.
Was included in show casing Turkey's new multi-purpose missile 'Mini Cruise Missile'
View attachment 676220
View attachment 676219
View attachment 676218

https://twitter.com/x/status/1509430713824722945
View: https://twitter.com/SavunmaSanayii/status/1509430713824722945?s=20&t=oIXF0eJwuF2niqemXv8WFQ
Click to expand...

Mini Cruise Missile - CAKIR - to be launched from AKINCI UCAV by the end of this year.
1648798691024.png
Yeni Milli Seyir Füzemiz geliyor- #ÇAKIR!.mp4_snapshot_01.38.130.jpg
1648798908924.png
 
Apparently, Ukrainians used a TB2 to distract Russian's flagship guided missile cruiser Moskva to conduct a missile strike and sink it. Lot's of grains of salt on this one, like salt bae amounts of salt. But, just posting it here in-case the audacious attack is true -
www.thedrive.com

Russia's Black Sea Flagship Moskva Has Exploded Off Ukraine (Updated)

Russia acknowledged an explosion aboard the cruiser Moskva hours after Ukraine claimed to have struck it.
www.thedrive.com www.thedrive.com
https://twitter.com/x/status/1514499341087608840
View: https://twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1514499341087608840?s=20&t=KNihHa_4KBK-UcSoRpWmfg
 
It seems plausible that a TB2 took part in the operation, Russian sources claimed one was engaged by a frigate at around the same time. Whether its presence made an actual difference to the outcome is unknowable at this point, however. The AD systems should have been multi-target capable, and given their layered nature the UAV cannot possibly have distracted all of them at the same time (e. g. S-300F & AK-630M). So there's a good chance that whatever the Ukrainians did may well have succeeded regardless of the TB2 being there or not.
 
Updated version of TB2 features TUALCOM ANTY GPS-GNSS Anti-Jammer (seen top section front of the air-inlet) , which utilises beamforming techniques and CRPA technologies resilience against jammers.
1650107950361.png
www.tualcom.com.tr

Tualcom - GPS ANTI-JAMMER

ANTY GPS-GNSS Anti-Jammer is a small, lightweight, low power and affordable solution for robust GNSS operation under interference.
www.tualcom.com.tr www.tualcom.com.tr
1650108115732.png

GPS L1, Galileo, Beidou Operation​

ANTY has dedicated anti jamming channels to support all available GNSS constellations simultaneously. Wide bandwidth of each channel enables the M codes and SBAS signals to be used with the embedded GNSS receiver.

40 dB Jamming and Spoofing Suppression​

Powerful digital beamforming techniques enable ANTY GPS Anti-Jammer to perform 40 dB widedband jamming and spoofing suppression at any direction. In addition, Anty Anti-Jammer can perform additional digital anti-jamming techniques such as adaptive notch filtering, pulse blanking etc. to improve jamming suppression performance.
 
Trident said:
It seems plausible that a TB2 took part in the operation, Russian sources claimed one was engaged by a frigate at around the same time. Whether its presence made an actual difference to the outcome is unknowable at this point, however. The AD systems should have been multi-target capable, and given their layered nature the UAV cannot possibly have distracted all of them at the same time (e. g. S-300F & AK-630M). So there's a good chance that whatever the Ukrainians did may well have succeeded regardless of the TB2 being there or not.
Click to expand...

The one thing that strikes me is that the S-300F on the Atlant (Slava) class is that the 3R41 Volna (NATO: Top Dome) can engage targets within about a 60-degree arc. If they were trying to engage a TB-2 in that arc, and the Neptunes arrived from the opposite side (intentionally or coincidentally), that might have neutralized the long-range SAM. But it still leaves the question of what the Osa-M (SA-N-4) and AK-630 were doing.
 
TomS said:
Trident said:
It seems plausible that a TB2 took part in the operation, Russian sources claimed one was engaged by a frigate at around the same time. Whether its presence made an actual difference to the outcome is unknowable at this point, however. The AD systems should have been multi-target capable, and given their layered nature the UAV cannot possibly have distracted all of them at the same time (e. g. S-300F & AK-630M). So there's a good chance that whatever the Ukrainians did may well have succeeded regardless of the TB2 being there or not.
Click to expand...

The one thing that strikes me is that the S-300F on the Atlant (Slava) class is that the 3R41 Volna (NATO: Top Dome) can engage targets within about a 60-degree arc. If they were trying to engage a TB-2 in that arc, and the Neptunes arrived from the opposite side (intentionally or coincidentally), that might have neutralized the long-range SAM. But it still leaves the question of what the Osa-M (SA-N-4) and AK-630 were doing.
Click to expand...
How much would the sea state brought on by the storm interfere with the operations of the weapon systems on the ship?
 
France wants to develop a drone similar to TB2 that costs 5 million euros a piece.

www.archyde.com

How the Turkish TB2 drone inspires the French army - Archyde

© N. Liashonok/Ukrinform/Sipa TB2 Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones have established themselves as one of the most valuable assets of the Ukrainian army once morest the Russian invader. They are only twenty at most. However, the Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones have established themselves as one of the...
www.archyde.com www.archyde.com

“Hole in the racket of the French forces”​

Fifteen countries have already bought it, including Qatar, Poland, Morocco, Libya and Pakistan. Something to give ideas in France. “These reliable and cheap, consumable drones are a hole in the racket of the French forces that must be filled urgently, believes Cédric Perrin, LR vice-president of the Senate Defense Committee and author of several reports on drones. Faced with the scenario of high-intensity conflicts, we cannot be satisfied with ultra-high-end equipment, in small numbers.” LREM deputy Fabien Gouttefarde and Thierry Berthier, researcher at the Saint-Cyr cyberdefense chair, even called on March 28 in Atlantico to develop in less than two years a French TB2 at 5 million euros per unit. Against 118 million for the future European Euro-drone.
 
Thermal signature of TB2 from it's rear tail boom IR and CCD camera. - Would it be possible to use it as an budget IRST ?
1650615069249.png
 
Turkey certainly has a success story with their UAV program. Having witnessed their aircraft programs first hand, this is not a surprise to me. I have to wonder though, is there a "tipping point" regarding the size of the platform, where their ability to operate in a robust air defense zone becomes less tenable? Recall Iran took down a large US UAS over the Persian Gulf. I assume smaller MQ-1 and 9 are still out there. Certainly there have been losses of TB2, but we may never know how many sortie they have flown. If you are loosing one UAS per one hundred sortie, that may not be bad. Loosing one per ten sortie is not so good.
That said I am sure a Teber-82 will work well in areas with limited air defense capability.
 
yasotay said:
If you are loosing one UAS per one hundred sortie, that may not be bad. Loosing one per ten sortie is not so good.
Click to expand...
Their sorties are really long, so math can be even more complicated.

p.s. question to Turkish members: TAI drones seem to really lack publicity, compared to Bayraktar ones. The reason is a relative lack of foreign push?
 
With the agreement between Turkish Fly BVLOS Technology, a subsidiary of Coşkunöz Holding, and British Flyby Technology, the Turkish unmanned aerial vehicle named JACKAL was sold to the UK.

Cargo UAV. cargo capacity up to 18kg to 180km distance
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZVVsDkjPpw&t=8s
www.technoscience.fikrikadim.com

Turkey’s drone ‘Jackal’ to be used in UK

The unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) “Jackal” with a minimum carrying capacity of 15 kilograms and a range of 130
www.technoscience.fikrikadim.com www.technoscience.fikrikadim.com
 
Maybe sold in the UK is more accurate. To a UAV training services provider.
 
In a TV interview general manager of TEI (aerospace engine manufacturer) explains why UAV's require piston engines that can perform well at high altitudes. One of the examples he gives is that in an country which he does not state, a Bayraktar drone outmanoeuvred an adversary drone and managed to down it because the engine was superior in performance at altitude. He doesn't state how.

If true, it's first account of Turkish drone downing another drone.
View: https://youtu.be/AeaeELG93QA?t=843

These turbo diesel aviation engines have been developed specifically for Turkey's UAVs
TEI - Turbodiesel Aviation Engines'TEI-PD170
1581686781_pd170web.png 		TEI-PD180ST
1628604790_tei-pd180st.png 		TEI-PD222ST
1628662744_tei-pd222st.png
Engine ConfigurationStraight 4 CylinderStraight 4 CylinderStraight 4 Cylinder
Displacement2,1 Liters2,1 Liters2,1 Liters
Fuel Consumption207 g/kWh220 g/kWh220 g/kWh
Air SupplyTwo-Stage Serial TurbochargerSingle-Stage TurbochargerSingle-Stage Turbocharger
Take-off Power (5 minutes)172 HP180 HP222 HP
Continuous Power172 HP170 HP200 HP
High-Altitude Power
(@20.000 ft.)		170 HP170 HP180 HP
High-Altitude Power
(@30.000 ft.)		130 HP115 HP115 HP
FuelJP-8 or Jet-A1JP-8 or Jet-A1JP-8 or Jet-A1
Electrical Power Generation2 x 4,5 kW2 x 4,5 kW2 x 4,5 kW
Dry Weight162 kg158 kg163 kg
 
Last edited:
We need more on this. If true that would be written down in History.

tumblr_pi0xy3lsFu1u5z9tdo1_1280.jpg

(picture should display a Taube)
 
Last edited:
An interesting Akinci UCAV with two different engines/engine housings - not sure what's going on here. I'm sure we'll hear about this at some point.
1651433072797.png
 
Combat-Master said:
An interesting Akinci UCAV with two different engines/engine housings - not sure what's going on here. I'm sure we'll hear about this at some point.
View attachment 677535
Click to expand...

It seems that several different engines are available, between 450hp and 850hp. Presumably this airframe has mismatched engines for a fit test or some such.
 
TomS said:
Combat-Master said:
An interesting Akinci UCAV with two different engines/engine housings - not sure what's going on here. I'm sure we'll hear about this at some point.
View attachment 677535
Click to expand...

It seems that several different engines are available, between 450hp and 850hp. Presumably this airframe has mismatched engines for a fit test or some such.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, it's clever decision? Different thrust of engines could allow this UAV to fly by big circles, thus lowering fuel consumption and increase flight endurance. :cool:
 
Been a while, let's get up-to-date with Ukraine-Russia situation concerning Ukraine's use of Bayraktar TB2

Su-27 striking Russian facilities on the Snake Island in the Black Sea, captured by a TB-2 drone.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1523027490230444035
View: https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1523027490230444035?s=20&t=IzSlPU98lxZoQbl5cCJPbw


TB2 targeting Russian landing craft which was carrying Russian TOR-M2 air defence system
https://twitter.com/x/status/1522897994701549573
View: https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1522897994701549573?s=20&t=IzSlPU98lxZoQbl5cCJPbw
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom