This is a discussion on Turkey's "empty" spot within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; If you look at Turkey's air force and what is in it and everything you will notice they have a ...
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.
Last edited by Atilla [TR]; May 20th, 2008 at 12:46 AM.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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
Last edited by ASFC; May 21st, 2008 at 07:13 PM.
Reason: Add reference.
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?
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
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.
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.
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.
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?
Last edited by Atilla [TR]; May 22nd, 2008 at 11:46 AM.
![Atilla [TR]'s Avatar](http://cdnpullz.defencetalk.com/forums/customavatars/avatar17795_2.gif){kind=avatar}
![Atilla [TR] is offline](http://cdnpullz.defencetalk.com/forums/imagize/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
