Turkish Aircraft Carrier concept

Hrm. Between the two designs shown, my recommendation for the Turks would be the one with the angled deck. So that if/when you put a catapult or three onto the thing, you have less rework to do.

SK2 said:
Not really, there are quite a few of new technology they are planning to use on the 003, and it will serve as both a technology demonstrator and operational CV. If you are familiar with PLAN developments you should know that they are famous for play safe in new design.
Click to expand...
We'd also see a brand new nuke plant get built, with all the technicians strangely marching around...


SK2 said:
Referring to big production halls, every major shipyards are building them as it will be weather-proof, thus reducing the delays in production due to weather, and with proper lighting and ventilation workers can operate 24/7 inside (Unions: what?)
Click to expand...
Unions: That will cost you extra.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Hrm. Between the two designs shown, my recommendation for the Turks would be the one with the angled deck. So that if/when you put a catapult or three onto the thing, you have less rework to do.
Click to expand...
I think the modular design and the space for the possible catapult adition are for in case they decide to go for a Naval Kaan. Otherwise both designs seemingly have two different conops altogether. They'd probably go for the revision during the MLU around 2050+, which makes a lot of sense.

By the time the construction begins, it'll be 2030s already and 2050+ by the time of the MLU, so you gotta expect the unexpected and prepare for it.

But in the meawhile I'm satisfied with Naval Hürjet, Kizielma and Anka-3. You'd have a deep strike capability with Anka-3 and a LW with Kizilelma already, so you don't need a stealth fighter on top of this if you're not trying to take on China.

Also, acc. to a Naval Architect in an another forum; the design without the angled deck is probably the old design, not a competing design.
 
An interesting question is: what for? What for this massive Turkish military effort? Where are the threats?
We Westerners (North Americans and Europeans) watched passively the hughe Russian military built-up since around 2005, without asking -or daring to ask- ourselves why it was taking place, what was the objective, even after Putin's 2007 Munich CSP speech, even after the annexation of Crimea he himself later described as the first true Russian response to the (alledgely Western-manipulated) collapse of the USSR. Since February 2022 we know that this massive rearmament aims at reinstating a Russian empire (ie domination over non-Russian nations and territories). Perhaps it would be a good idea to start asking the same question about Turkey, especially in NATO (is Turkey still an ally?) and the EU, where fortunately Turkey has remained a candidate-country since 1964.
 
BROF said:
An interesting question is: what for? What for this massive Turkish military effort? Where are the threats?
We Westerners (North Americans and Europeans) watched passively the hughe Russian military built-up since around 2005, without asking -or daring to ask- ourselves why it was taking place, what was the objective, even after Putin's 2007 Munich CSP speech, even after the annexation of Crimea he himself later described as the first true Russian response to the (alledgely Western-manipulated) collapse of the USSR. Since February 2022 we know that this massive rearmament aims at reinstating a Russian empire (ie domination over non-Russian nations and territories). Perhaps it would be a good idea to start asking the same question about Turkey, especially in NATO (is Turkey still an ally?) and the EU, where fortunately Turkey has remained a candidate-country since 1964.
Click to expand...
You've answered your own question. The Russian Empire and the Turks have fought a lot.
 
Archibald said:
rearm like crazy
Click to expand...
actually the military budget is significantly below the 2% NATO target, and for a large country that needs a lot of equipment and coverage, Turkey is actually not arming at all. Compared to 20 years ago, most of the inventory is quite ancient now; most of the budget goes to R&D instead.

Maybe that is because most of the equipment of significance became online only recently, but by the time the AC starts contruction, expect an increase in the budget. When the procurements are made, even the Navy alone will jump at least 300% in capability.
 
tahsin said:
The usual. Tries the usual work on voters. Claims the Arab streets like the brilliant leadership of the country and the jealous Arab monarchies and dictators reject the wisdom. If you want to, really say that you will declare a Caliphate and all those weapons are to be used in furthering of that goal. Instead of the momentum has reached a high point and the country will still have a high potential for war when the current political landscape changes. All those non-Turks will not be voting afterall.
Click to expand...
This is what the Navy demands, not what Erdogan demands although I'm sure he doesn't mind it that much. The Navy has been planning this surface fleet ever since the fall of the USSR, dude. Had the !999 Earthquake not happened, they'd have gone for it probably much sooner.

It is not about the usual "Caliphate" propaganda of anti-Turkish folk. It is about the fact that we're living in a multipolar World now and everyone who wants a slice of the pie needs to show the flag every once in a while.
 
Combat-Master said:
MUGEM aircraft carrier
https://twitter.com/x/status/1827690726358127069
View: https://x.com/T_Nblty/status/1827690726358127069

Source - https://www.trthaber.com/haber/bilim-teknoloji/mavi-vatana-milli-ucak-gemisi-geliyor-874479.html

View attachment 738140

View attachment 738141

View attachment 738142
MUGEM (National Aircraft Carrier)

Aircraft​

Minimum 50 manned and unmanned aircraft
  • Baykar, TB-3
  • TUSAŞ, ANKA-3
  • TUSAŞ, HÜRJET
  • Baykar, KIZILELMA

Personnel​

  • 400-500 personnel
  • Role-2 Level Medical Facilities

Other Capabilities​

  • 10,000 nautical miles range at 14 knots (6104 km)
  • Maneuvering ability in sea state 6 and higher
  • Logistic support capability with two helicopters

Main Propulsion System (ATS)​

The main propulsion system has high reliability, performance enhancement, and cost-effective COGAG configuration.
  • COGAG Configuration
  • Bow Thruster: Easier docking
  • 4 Gas Turbines: High maneuverability
  • 2 Variable Pitch Propellers (CPP): Efficient maneuverability
General Specs
  • Full length: 285 meters
  • Maximum width: 72 meters
  • Draft: 10.1 meters
  • Displacement: 60,000 tons
  • Maximum speed: 25 knots
  • Aircraft Landing/Take-off System: STOBAR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Looks like it will have 4x MIDLAS VLS total 32x cells and 4x GOKDENIZ CIWS for self defence
View attachment 738143
Click to expand...
Kinda strange to think that a carrier the size of a Midway needs a ski jump for modern aircraft...

I suspect that the Turks will discover that they need a higher efficient-cruise speed for their carrier, so it can do flight ops at cruise speed instead of at a sprint. More like 21-24 knots, not 14.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Kinda strange to think that a carrier the size of a Midway needs a ski jump for modern aircraft...

I suspect that the Turks will discover that they need a higher efficient-cruise speed for their carrier, so it can do flight ops at cruise speed instead of at a sprint. More like 21-24 knots, not 14.
Click to expand...

Well, without catapults, you need some take off assistance. British and Russian carriers of similar displacement have a ski jump. The lighter Italian and Spanish ones as well.
They are advertising the possibility of switching "easily" to a flat deck + catapults in the future.

I guess the area of operation for this carrier will be 95% of the time restricted to the Mediterranean Sea, so the transit speed is not that important.
 
Which leads to the question of the Dardanelles and the strait of Bosporus!
Does the Turkish Navy's own carrier allowed to transit there?
Does the 1936 Montreux Convention which is still in place has an article regarding any Turkish aircraft carriers?
 
Tzoli said:
Which leads to the question of the Dardanelles and the strait of Bosporus!
Does the Turkish Navy's own carrier allowed to transit there?
Does the 1936 Montreux Convention which is still in place has an article regarding any Turkish aircraft carriers?
Click to expand...
Both this ship and the LHD(s) of the Turkish Navy are going to be based in Aksaz, which means that they are procured for operations that are out of Turkey's strike range. So imagine Eastern Central Atlantic and (primarily) the Indian Ocean.

If these ships were procured for operations within Turkey's means of force projection and reach, i.e. East Med and the Black Sea, they would've been based in Istanbul instead.

GVwn3iJWYAErrF6.jpg
 
Tzoli said:
Which leads to the question of the Dardanelles and the strait of Bosporus!
Does the Turkish Navy's own carrier allowed to transit there?
Does the 1936 Montreux Convention which is still in place has an article regarding any Turkish aircraft carriers?
Click to expand...

Reading the text, it's not 100% clear but the purpose of the Convention was to largely return sovereignty over the Strait to Turkey, so I suspect Turkish vessels can pass unencumbered by the convention.
 
Where it based what it's planned operational zone is two different things. They can easily relocated or redirected for a black sea mission.
 
Yavuz was always heavier than 15000 tons, nobody has ever said Ex-Goeben could not sail into the Blacksea after 1936.

Much impressed by the planned operational area of Atlantic. Of course they will silently snicker it is all about impressing the Moroccans for some reason but l guess the secret open reason is shadowing the likes of Iranian Makran after the pivot to the Pacific...
 
okakac said:
Yavuz was always heavier than 15000 tons, nobody has ever said Ex-Goeben could not sail into the Blacksea after 1936.
Click to expand...

There's a clause allowing single ships larger than 15,000 tons to transit one at a time anyway, with two destroyers as escort. (Article 11)
 
okakac said:
Yavuz was always heavier than 15000 tons, nobody has ever said Ex-Goeben could not sail into the Blacksea after 1936.

Much impressed by the planned operational area of Atlantic. Of course they will silently snicker it is all about impressing the Moroccans for some reason but l guess the secret open reason is shadowing the likes of Iranian Makran after the pivot to the Pacific...
Click to expand...
Battleships and Battlecruisers were allowed passage, Carriers were forbidden (Hence the Moskvas, Kievs and Kuznetsovs was designated aviation cruisers.
 
Actually looked it up and found one source in full legal terms 1936 style. 11 basically stops any moves to legally interdict Soviet Blacksea shipyards in production of capital ships. While 17 allows USN of 1945 to visit Istanbul with 2000 ships, 100 of them carriers. Or a fantasy Russian fleet of dozens of aviation cruisers visiting Istanbul as long as they return in the way they came.

Basically nothing stops us Turks. Trust me on this.
 
Manuducati said:
Well, without catapults, you need some take off assistance. British and Russian carriers of similar displacement have a ski jump. The lighter Italian and Spanish ones as well.
They are advertising the possibility of switching "easily" to a flat deck + catapults in the future.

I guess the area of operation for this carrier will be 95% of the time restricted to the Mediterranean Sea, so the transit speed is not that important.
Click to expand...
It's not transit speed so much as wind speed over deck.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom