Turkey's "empty" spot

[Atilla [TR]]

If you look at Turkey's air force and what is in it and everything you will notice they have a lot of F-16's, for A2A role and A2G role, these airplanes should be replaced by the F-35. Turkey also has a lot of upgraded F-4 that are on there last upgrade or else it is pointless and useless to use, these should be replaced with the near future equivalent, but they are being replaced by F-35. So to basically sum up what I am saying is Turkey needs a big Dual engined interceptor, and strike aircraft yet they are not even considering one. And really I do not want Turkey to get the F-22, as it is to expensive and a Russian equivalent is better at a cheaper cost. What I would like Turkey to get is a Su-35 with Turkish or Israeli Avionics, and Russian missiles, with a system like JHMCS and , TVC. Now some of you would say that Turkey would never buy a Russian system and Russia would never let Turkey buy there system but this is not the Truth as Turkey is thinking about maybe getting the S-300 with the possibility of S-400 in the future. Only obstacle I would see is that Turkey would want to build the fighter in Turkey by TAI, but Russia has let India build the SU-30MKI in India. EF-2000 with the latest block could be another option, (I see this option have more plausibility, then the former). JAs Gripen is another option which probably suits Turkey the best, yet it's BVR range capability I have no clue about (then again upgrades are always around).


F-16>>>>Gets replaced by F-35

F-4>>>>>Gets Replaced by F-15>>>>Then the F-22 (which is unneeded with better options out there.

 

[Scourge]

I think TuAF is perfectly happy with F-35. And they will not buy only 100 aircraft in the long term. It seems they think that they can achieve air superiority with large numbers of F-35. Buying 40-60 Eurofighters for political reasons is also a possibility.

 

[swerve]

So to basically sum up what I am saying is Turkey needs a big Dual engined interceptor, and strike aircraft yet they are not even considering one. ....

Why does Turkey need such an aircraft? What would it do (for Turkey) that other TuAF aircraft can't do? Possession of large twin-engined aircraft by India, for example, is no justification: India is much larger, & has island territories scattered across an ocean. India needs the range. France, the UK, Germany, Italy, Spain - none of these feels the need for a large interceptor. They're all buying aircraft which are lighter (despite being twin-engined) than F-35.

First define the role, then see what capabilities are needed to fill it, then find what has those capabilities. You're doing it the wrong way round.

 

[Feanor]

Well if it helps Turkey bought BTR-80's so it's not out of bounds, but like other members here have said, what's the point?

 

[Atilla [TR]]

Turkey is not a small country (well it is but it is stretched very long distance), also Turkey has a huge shoreline. Also lately Turkey has been doing cross border raids but these are nothing that F-16's cant do let alone F-35, the main thing is that Greece might get a beast of plane ( I assume either EF 2000, or Rafale, Jas Gripen) and Turkey has to and will counter act that. It was the norm for Turkey to have dual engined fighters till they bought F-16 and the F-35. Also what is the possibility that Turkey might get a Russian airplane?

 

[swerve]

Turkey is very much smaller than India (ca. 25% of the land area), that land is far more compact, & Turkey lacks the external operating space that India has. Look at a map. The operating area of the Turkish air force is probably less than 10% of the operating area of the Indian air force.

It has never been "the norm" for Turkey to operate twin-engined fighters. How many of these are twin-engined?

F-84
F-86
F-100
F-102
F-104
F-4
F-5

You seem to think that twin-engined aircraft are larger than single-engined, but this is not necessarily so. The F-5A was a small twin-engined aircraft, & the F-35 is heavier than either Rafale or typhoon.

 

[Atilla [TR]]

Turkey is very much smaller than India (ca. 25% of the land area), that land is far more compact, & Turkey lacks the external operating space that India has. Look at a map. The operating area of the Turkish air force is probably less than 10% of the operating area of the Indian air force.

It has never been "the norm" for Turkey to operate twin-engined fighters. How many of these are twin-engined?

F-84
F-86
F-100
F-102
F-104
F-4
F-5

You seem to think that twin-engined aircraft are larger than single-engined, but this is not necessarily so. The F-5A was a small twin-engined aircraft, & the F-35 is heavier than either Rafale or typhoon.

While Turkey might be small there operating area is large, and since when did i say anything about India I just said that they have the SU-30MKI, look at other countries that operate the SU-27, most are small. What I am saying is that most twin engine airplanes have more capabilities then single engined airplanes. To add to the fact Turkey uses F-16 for intercepting, good against Greece which operates the same thing, not Iran who operates the mighty F-14 (they do work)! And Syria which I do not have a clue what they operate EDIT they use MIG 31 from what i read.

 

[ASFC]

So you are saying that the F-35 and the upgraded F-16's cannot fight a Handful of F-14s (A models are they not)(and thats if they work) and Syrias legacy Soviet Fighters, as well as not being able to handle the strike role?

As far as I can see, there is no problem, the F-35/F-16 combo that you will have should be able to deal with anything that can be thrown at the TuAF, provided they buy enough of course.

Edit: Syria are supposed to be buying MiG 31's, but I don't think they have them yet, and the numbers they are purchasing are supposed to be small:
5 according to DID Here

and 8 if you look on wiki

 

[BilalK]

Even if Turkey requires an advanced twin engine fighter, I think the Eurofighter Typhoon would be the likelier system than Su-35BM. For one the Eurofighter Consortium has already offered the fighter with local production and even Middle East-Asia marketing rights. Secondly, wouldn't it be a smoother fit to Turkey's NATO oriented system than Sukhoi?

 

[Atilla [TR]]

Even if Turkey requires an advanced twin engine fighter, I think the Eurofighter Typhoon would be the likelier system than Su-35BM. For one the Eurofighter Consortium has already offered the fighter with local production and even Middle East-Asia marketing rights. Secondly, wouldn't it be a smoother fit to Turkey's NATO oriented system than Sukhoi?

I agree, another thing is I had no clue that Turkey could sell them to Central Asian countries. The F-35 deal does not let them do this. And is there still a possibility for Turkey to get the EF-2000?


Also can mods join this thread into the newly unlocked thread? THXS

 

[swerve]

While Turkey might be small there operating area is large, and since when did i say anything about India I just said that they have the SU-30MKI, look at other countries that operate the SU-27, most are small. What I am saying is that most twin engine airplanes have more capabilities then single engined airplanes. To add to the fact Turkey uses F-16 for intercepting, good against Greece which operates the same thing, not Iran who operates the mighty F-14 (they do work)! And Syria which I do not have a clue what they operate EDIT they use MIG 31 from what i read.

I only mentioned India because you raised it.

Turkeys operating area is not large compared to, for example, the UK, or Spain (again, look at a map - and where their islands are) - neither of which sees the need for an aircraft larger than F-35.

If you think that the number of engines on the fighters of Yemen or Ethiopia or Vietnam - or even Syria - should determine what Turkey buys, then the people of Turkey should be glad that you are not in charge of air force procurement. There's nothing magical about two engines. IT DOESN'T MATTER! What matters is whether the aircraft can do what you want it to do. One reliable engine is better than two unreliable ones.

Turkeys F-16s could eat Irans F-14s for breakfast, BTW. And the Gripen, which you mentioned as an aircraft other countries might get, is single-engined.

 

[Feanor]

EDIT they use MIG 31 from what i read.

Rumors and speculation. I wouldn't believe it. The Foxhound is a highly specialized plane for which the Syrians have neither the money nor the need.

 

[Atilla [TR]]

I only mentioned India because you raised it.

Turkeys operating area is not large compared to, for example, the UK, or Spain (again, look at a map - and where their islands are) - neither of which sees the need for an aircraft larger than F-35.

If you think that the number of engines on the fighters of Yemen or Ethiopia or Vietnam - or even Syria - should determine what Turkey buys, then the people of Turkey should be glad that you are not in charge of air force procurement. There's nothing magical about two engines. IT DOESN'T MATTER! What matters is whether the aircraft can do what you want it to do. One reliable engine is better than two unreliable ones.

Turkeys F-16s could eat Irans F-14s for breakfast, BTW. And the Gripen, which you mentioned as an aircraft other countries might get, is single-engined.

The main thing I am saying is that twin engined airplanes have more outside capability then just reliability of having 2 engines. There speed and bvr capabilities excel that of single engined counter parts. Plus the F-35 does not have supercruise, which does not matter if it had 2 engines or not.


FYI Su-35 BM is reported to have super cruise.

 

[swerve]

The main thing I am saying is that twin engined airplanes have more outside capability then just reliability of having 2 engines. There speed and bvr capabilities excel that of single engined counter parts. ....

I'm afraid none of this is true. These qualities are a result of other factors, not the number of engines. Go and look up the F-5 again, & compare it with some of its single engined contemporaries, such as the Mirage III & Draken. Or compare the F-5E with Mirage F1 & Viggen. And so on, and so on.

The number of engines is unimportant. What matters for aircraft performance is thrust, weight (& their ratio), drag, lift, etc. For BVR performance, what matters is the quality & power of sensors, the weapons, & the interface between sensors & crew. None of these is directly related to the number of engines.

 

[Atilla [TR]]

While yes the engine should have no bearing on how well an airplane performs in BVR and what not, but generally it is the case Airplanes that have 2 engines do better in BVR then single engined airplanes, it has nothing to do with the fact that 1 engined airplanes cannot do this. Also while on topic does anyone know how the F-35 does in BVR? How is the Aim 120 against it's russian counterparts? DOes the F-35 have the capability of carrying the AIm 120D?

 

[BilalK]

I agree, another thing is I had no clue that Turkey could sell them to Central Asian countries. The F-35 deal does not let them do this. And is there still a possibility for Turkey to get the EF-2000?


Also can mods join this thread into the newly unlocked thread? THXS

Well Turkey will need to release an RFP and I'm certain the Eurofighter Consortium will responsd. The EC sent an offer to Turkey to locally produce EF as well as offer the fighter to countries like UAE and Pakistan.

 

[z1pp0]

...
First define the role, then see what capabilities are needed to fill it, then find what has those capabilities. You're doing it the wrong way round.

What Turkey realy needs is a high altitude air supremacy fighter. Today elderly F-4's provide support and high altitude cover for F-16's doing the VID/intercepts. Even though I am a phantom phan it's easy to realise that the effectivness of the F-4's are diminishing. The upgraded F-4E 2020 are optimised for A2G. And officialy the only BVR missile is the Sparrow (AIM-7M I belive). THK have setteled for some 50 2020's and are only considering a handfull of RF-4E's for upgrade.

JAS-39 Gripen: Even in it's Gripen demo variant, it is to small. That is it doesn't have the necesary high altitude performance. Eventhough the political climate have changed for the better the last years there are still a few obstacels for a major purchase like this to go through.

Flanker variants: Even though the price and politics are good enough there is no nato weapon system availabel without major electronics development/upgrade which speak a lot against it. Not to mention all the new Russian technology that Turkey have little experience with.

F-22: USA won't sell their precioussssss LO Air Supreamcy fighter anytime soon, and it is to expencive. I would like to see a export derivative of it though. An F-22 with F-35 technology.

F-35XL: Remember the F-16XL? Ad a large delta wing to the F-35 that don't give the CG problems the F-16XL had, and tweak the engine for high altitude. It would probably be more economical than an export F-22 and comonality with the 'normal' F-35 is a big plus. But this would still be a long shot. Oh and I want to see a two seater aswell :

F-15K: Good relations with Korea, (almost) the same engine as THK Falcons and a bunch of (nato) weapons already integrated gives it a good position. USA/Boeing might interfere by demanding St.Louis Manufacturing.

Eurofighter Typhoon: The performance is what THK needs. Weapons integrated that THK already have in inventory. METEOR on the way. Politicalwise Turkey might want to 'improve' european relations by buying some European aircrafts for a change. I doubt that the offer to market/sell the Typhoon in central asia is a big enough carrot though.

Rafalle: It's a nice A2G optimised fighter so doesn't quite realy fit the bill. It would require AMRAAM integration or buying MICA's which wouldn't be desierabel. Besides political relations speak against it.

IMHO the best candidates for a high altitude air supreamacy fighter are the Typhoon and F-15K, with F-35XL and Flanker derivative as longshoots. But since Turkey have cronical financial funding problems I wouldn't be suppriced if THK have to settle for a F-16 & F-35 mix up until 2020.

\\Dan

 

[Feanor]

What about a MiG-35 option? MiG has experience with fitting NATO standard avionics (it was done for iirc Czech Republic recently), it has the option of AESA, TVC, unconfirmed claims of LO technologies worked into it, and is fairly inexpensive.

 

[beleg]

Yesterday there was a meeting in the parliament for whether to join or not to the next phase of JSF project. During his speech the MoD clearly stated some facts.

- Turkey will buy 116 F35s (100+16).
- Orders will be placed in 2010
- The cost planned and funded for the project is ~11billion US$
- Flyaway cost for planes are expected to be around 70-75m$ per plane
- Talks are ongoing for integrated locally developed weapons
- Turkey is trying to archive at least some control on mission computer/EW systems.
- The local work share secured so far is 5.5 billion US$ and we are trying to get more contracts.
- Turkey will not buy a Eurofighter or Eurohelicopter until Turkey is allowed to join EDA. Which means Eurofighter or EH-101 has no place in Turkish Armed Forces in near future as one particular member of EDA insists on keeping us out.

 

[swerve]

While yes the engine should have no bearing on how well an airplane performs in BVR and what not, but generally it is the case Airplanes that have 2 engines do better in BVR then single engined airplanes, it has nothing to do with the fact that 1 engined airplanes cannot do this. ...

Absolutely correct. Therefore, what you should be arguing for is a high-performance aircraft with excellent BVR capabilities, regardless of the number of engines.