Turkish Navy news and updates. [Archive]

[TR]AHMET

August 22nd, 2004, 10:52 AM

NAVAL FORCES COMMAND

Total Personnel (Including Coast Guard): 55.000
Reserves: 55.000

Structure:
Naval Forces Command HQs and 4 sub commands: Turkish Fleet Command, Northern Sea Area Command (Black Sea and Sea of Marmara), Southern Sea Area Command (Aegean and Mediterranean), Naval Training Command.

FRIGATES , FAST ATTACK MISSILE CRAFTS AND SUBMARINES

FRIGATES

TYPE-NUMBER-REMARKS

Gabya (G) Class (Oliver Hazard Perry) - 8 - 136 Meter/4.100 Ton, Harpoon SSM, Standard Missile 1 (SM-1) SAM

Tepe Class (Knox) - 4 - 134 Meter/4.260 Ton, Harpoon SSM, Sea Sparrow SAM, ASROC

Barbaros Class (MEKO200-IIA) - 2 - 118 Meter/3.380 Ton, Harpoon SSM, Sea Sparrow SAM

Salihreis Class (MEKO200-IIB) - 2 - 118 Meter/3.380 Ton, Harpoon SSM, Sea Sparrow SAM

Yavuz Class (MEKO200-I) - 4 - 116 Meter/2.919 Ton, Harpoon SSM, Sea Sparrow SAM

TOTAL: 20

Note: Phalanx or Sea Zenith air defence systems are available in all frigates.

CORVETTES

Aviso A69 (D'Estienne D'Orves) or B Class - 6 - 80 Meter/1.250 Ton, Exocet SSM. Anti-Submarine Corvettes.

TOTAL: 6

FAST ATTACK MISSILE CRAFTS

TYPE-NUMBER-REMARKS

KILIC Class Type TPB57 052B - 3 - Harpoon SSM

YILDIZ Class Type FPB 57 - 2 - Harpoon SSM

DOGAN Class Type FPB 57 - 8 - Harpoon SSM. Fire control, command control, communications and power systems upgraded

KARTAL Class Type S141 - 8 - Penguin Mk2 SSM

KILIC II Class - 0 - 1 under delivery, 2 under construction, 1 ordered

TOTAL: 21

SUBMARINES

TYPE-NUMBER-REMARKS

GUR Class Type 209T2/1400 - 1 - 1 under construction + 2 more ordered. All being built in Turkey. Harpoon SSM.

PREVEZE Class Type 209T1/1400 - 4 - Built in Turkey. Harpoon SSM.

ATILAY Class Type 209/1200 - 6 - 3 of them built in Turkey. Possible upgrade for the 4 most recently built subs.

TANG Class - 1 - To be retired

TOTAL: 12

AMPHIBIOUS FORCES

TYPE-NUMBER-REMARKS

Ertugrul Class LST - 2 - 400 Personnel/18 Tanks

Osman Gazi Class LST - 1 - 980 Personnel/17 Tanks

Bayraktark Class LST - 2 - 200 Personnel/16 Tanks

Sarucabey Class LST - 2 - 600 Personnel/11 Tanks

Cakabey Class LST - 1 - 400 Personnel/9 Tanks

EDIC Class LCT - 27 - 140 Personnel/6 Tanks

C 302 Class LCM - 19 - 100 Personnel/5 Tanks

Patrol Crafts

TYPE-NUMBER-REMARKS

AB Class Patrol Vessel - 10 - Produced in Turkey, armed with Bofors and Oerlikon guns

SG80 Class Patrol Vessel - 12 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

KW15 Class Coastal Patrol Vessel - 8 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

SG1 Class Coastal Patrol Vessel - 1 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

SG Class Coastal Patrol Vessel - 12 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

MRTP15 Class Interceptor Craft - 17 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

Kaan29 Class Large Patrol Craft - 5 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

SAR33 Class Patrol Vessel - 10 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

SAR35 Class Patrol Vessel - 4 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

SG21 Class Large Patrol Vessel - 14 - Produced in Turkey, in service with the Coast Guard

TOTAL: 93

Mine Warfare Ships

TYPE-NUMBER-REMARKS

Edincik Class - 5 - Transfered from French Navy after a complete overhaul and modernization
S Class - 9 - Old vessels from 60s and 70s
F Class - 4 - Old vessels from 60s
K Class - 3 - Old vessels from 60s and 70s
MHV-45-014 Class - 0 - 1 under delivery, 5 more ordered. Germany was awarded with the contract worth 630 million USD, of building 6 new MCMV ships. First ship will be built in Germany, the rest in Turkey. The contract was signed on 30 July 1999. The project is to be completed by 2007.

TOTAL: 21

NAVAL AVIATION AND MISSILES

Maritime Patrol Aircraft / Anti-Submarine Warfare / Search and Rescue Helicopters (Including the Coast Guard)

TYPE-NUMBER-REMARKS

CN-235-100M - 9 - 6 MPA+3MSA Coast Guard. Project Meltem I
Socata TB20 - 7
C-295 - 0 - Candidate for the 10 aircrafts to be selected for Project Meltem III
S-70B-28D Seahawk - 7 - 8 more ordered + 1 optional
AB-212E - 2 - Electronic Warfare
AB-212N1 - 3
AB-212N3 - 7
AB-206B - 3
AB-204N - 1
AB-412EP - 9 - All Coast Guard SAR
A109K-II - 1 - Coast Guard SAR
CH-60S Knight Hawk - 0 - 6 ordered

TOTAL: 16 Coast Guard Planes + 21 Naval Warfare Copters + 2 Electronic Warfare Copters + 10 Coast Guard SAR Copters

On-board Missile Systems

TYPE-NUMBER-REMARKS

RGM84 Harpoon Block 1C SSM - ? - 130 km

UGM84 Harpoon Block 1G (Sub-launched version) - ? - 130 km

Popeye III Turbo Sub-launched Land Attack CASOM - 0 - 350+ km. Secret agreement with Israel. First party of missiles are expected to be delivered in 2008.

Exocet MM38 SSM - ? - 65 km

Penguin Mk2 Mod1 SSM - ? - 27 km

Penguin 2 Mod 7 AGM - 26 - 32km

HellFire II-M3 AGM - 84 - 8 km. To be used with the Sea Hawk helicopters

Sea Skua AGM - ? - 15 km

RIM7 Sea Sparrow SAM - ? - 15 km

SM 1MR Standard Missile SAM - ? - 46 km

BORA D SAM (1X4 FIM-92B/C Stinger) - 1 - pre-production model. Under development. Stinger mounted on naval platforms. Planned for fast attack missile crafts.

[TR]AHMET

September 5th, 2004, 08:06 AM

NAVAL FORCES COMMAND

PROJECT MELTEM: Meltem 2: integration of hi-tech avionics and reconnaissance/surveillance equipment to 9 CN-235 aircraft which were locally produced under Meltem 1 project plus 10 additional aircraft which will be locally produced under Meltem 3 project. Status: Contract signed in 2003 with the French company, Thales. On track.

Meltem 3: Production of additional aircraft (most probably C-295) for naval reconnaissance/surveillance roles. Status: Replies to the request for proposals received from two companies, the aircraft type will be selected in early-2004.

PROJECT LONG HORIZON: Establishment of a large-scale sea-air-land radar, radar-ESM and communications network for the purpose of detecting and identifying the surface vessels on the Aegean Sea by providing a real-time coverage. Status: Contract signed with delay on 30 July 2003. Expected completion date for the project is late-2006.
PROJECT MILGEM: Acquisition of 8 (+4 optional) anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and patrol corvettes. Status: Suspended.

PROJECT TF-2000: Local production of 6 TF-2000 anti-air warfare (AAW) and command and control frigates. Status: Suspended due to financial problems.

4 KILIC II Class Fast Attack Missile Crafts: Status: On track.

8 or 9 S-70B Sea Hawk helicopters: Status: On track.

Popeye III Turbo Sub-launched Land Attack CASOM: Status: First party of missiles are expected to be delivered in 2008.

BORA D SAM (1X8 FIM-92B/C Stinger): Stinger mounted on naval platforms. Planned for Fast Attack Missile Crafts. Status: Under development.

[TR]AHMET

September 16th, 2004, 01:45 PM

PICTURES of the sinking of D-358 TCG BERK by torpedo.

http://www.turkishnavy.net/thum/berk.gif Gif animation

Very Nice :eek

yasin_khan

September 16th, 2004, 02:01 PM

nice pic. :)

Skywalker

May 15th, 2005, 06:13 AM

Turkish Navy presented a Test Video of planned MILGEM Corvettes.

http://www.dzkk.tsk.mil.tr/turkce/Modernizasyon/Milgem_Video.wmv

and a picture ...
http://www.dzkk.tsk.mil.tr/turkce/Modernizasyon/MILGEM.GIF

More Informations about MILGEM

The name of the Turkish Navyâ€™s latest shipbuilding program is â€œMİLGEMâ€ which foresees building of 12 Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPV). The project name â€œMİLGEMâ€ (Milli Gemi - National Ship), summarizing the main goal of the project, means that this shipbuilding project will be realized through the maximum use of national means. .

Local production of shipsâ€™ systems, with technology and know-how transfer for maximum national contribution, is ultimate aim of the project. The total national contribution to MİLGEM Programme is expected to be around 80 percent.

MİLGEM program rose from the need to replace the existing patrol ships that are getting close to the end of their economical operation lives. The program was commenced officially in January 1996. Ships to be constructed within the scope of this program will be designed to meet the requirements of a complex combat system that integrates all weapon and sensor systems within a centralized command and control system. The ships will operate either as a single unit or in coordinated operations with other naval forces and will be capable of,

Patrol in littoral waters
Search and rescue
Anti submarine warfare patrol
Pursuit and prevention of the terrorist activities in the sea
Protection of the coastal transportation.
The design of the ships will be developed from a proven hull form and will have notable sea keeping performance characteristics. Reduced detectability and enhanced survivability of the ships are the key operational requirements. The ships will have notable stealth characteristics with low radar cross-section, acoustic signature and underwater noise.

Evaluating the experience gained through shipbuilding projects, it has been concluded that if the Navyâ€™s current expertise in military shipbuilding is combined with existing capabilities of the private shipyards together with the universities and related supporting industries, a shipbuilding project of the size and complexity of an OPV can be accomplished. The design and the construction of the first ship will be completed at İstanbul Naval Shipyard. Construction of the following ships will be continued at local private shipyards.

The design of the first MİLGEM ship was commenced in 2004. It is planned to have her in service in 2010.

http://www.dzkk.tsk.mil.tr/English/Modernizasyon.asp

Skywalker

June 23rd, 2005, 03:50 PM

Turkey To Buy Up to 17 Helicopters from Sikorsky
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, ANKARA

Turkey has decided to buy up to 17 Seahawk helicopters for its navy from U.S. manufacturer Sikorsky Aircraft, Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul said.

The deal involves the initial purchase of 12 Seahawks with an option for five more, Gonul told journalists late June 22, Anatolia news agency reported.

He did not disclose the financial terms of the deal.

The Turkish armed forces already have eight S-70B Seahawk helicopters.

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_002590.shtml

Bordo-Bereli

June 24th, 2005, 05:07 AM

Mod edit: Path: Irrelavant one liner deleted.

radiosilence

January 3rd, 2007, 11:37 AM

The Request for Proposal for acquisition of six new type submarines.....
defencetalk (http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/navy/Turkey_Issues_RFP_for_Acquisition_of_New_Type_Subm arine12009729.php)

I would think HDW type 214 is the favorite for the Turkish Navy new SSK since they already operate type 209. Any chance of the Collins-class being selected?

contedicavour

January 3rd, 2007, 11:51 AM

defencetalk (http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/navy/Turkey_Issues_RFP_for_Acquisition_of_New_Type_Subm arine12009729.php)

I would think HDW type 214 is the favorite for the Turkish Navy new SSK since they already operate type 209. Any chance of the Collins-class being selected?

The Collins is a big oceangoing sub which is oversized and too expensive for brown water operations in the Aegean or in the Black Sea.
There are only 2 potential candidates with one outsider : DCN's Scorpene or Marlin, HDW U214 and the outsider Lada/Amur. Since local production is requested, and since so far only German subs have been built, I'd bet 10:1 that HDW will win the deal. However there will be tight clauses against delays or technical problems...

cheers

radiosilence

January 3rd, 2007, 02:41 PM

The Collins is a big oceangoing sub which is oversized and too expensive for brown water operations in the Aegean or in the Black Sea.
There are only 2 potential candidates with one outsider : DCN's Scorpene or Marlin, HDW U214 and the outsider Lada/Amur. Since local production is requested, and since so far only German subs have been built, I'd bet 10:1 that HDW will win the deal. However there will be tight clauses against delays or technical problems...

cheers

I don't think DCN has a shot due politcal reasons.

j4ck4l11

January 3rd, 2007, 03:03 PM

thanks ahmet all of ur nice working abaut navy and it s equipmants i would help u abaut navy but i counldnt ve time for internet with hope u ll show our real face on the military

Gerasimos

January 4th, 2007, 04:51 AM

Nice work happening in your navy.I believe the only disadvantage is the frigates .All of Knox class were launched in 1971,1972 so there are ships 35 years old(with steam engines!).If they are retired the actual number of frigates is reduced to 16.Also the A69 corvettes were launched between 1973 and 1977,so approximately 30 years old ships(They don't even have modern SAM system,correct me if I make a mistake).So my point is that the Turkish navy has actually 16 frigates and 2 "seas" to divide this number.It is dificult because Turkish navy must have 14 frigates in Aegean because we (Greece)have 14 frigates.So only 2 frigates remain to guard the Black sea.And if some frigates are decided to guard the southern sea of Turkey I mean between Cyprus,Syria etc the actual number of frigates in Aegean is further reduced.

contedicavour

January 4th, 2007, 01:02 PM

BilalK

January 4th, 2007, 01:37 PM

Gerasimos

January 4th, 2007, 02:26 PM

Excellent stuff Ahmet!

I admire the MILGEM corvette project because it is an excellent symbol for Turkey's strong defence industry. IMO it will be on par with most W.European corvettes in the 2000 ton range.

I think 2007 will be a lucrative year for HDW, their U-214 looks like a good export product. On top of Turkey's tender for six SSKs, Pakistan has a requirement for three.

MILGEM seems to be a good project although I believe that if the first ship is going to be commisioned in 2010 the RAM it carries(7.5km range) will be out of date.Also their cost is 200 million $ each,the MEKO 200 frigates shouldn't cost more than 300-400 million $,so why not MEKO and even more if these corvettes will have a coastal defense role why not a FACM our Roussen class for example cost 92 million each and were built here in Greece.So with 1.6 billion $(cost of 8 Milgem) you could buy 4-5 MEKO or 16 FACMs

BilalK

January 4th, 2007, 05:04 PM

orko_8

January 4th, 2007, 06:37 PM

I agree, but does the MIGLEM really cost $200 per ship? I thought most corvettes in the 1500 to 2000 ton range cost $100-150mn per ship?

200 million $ is expected to be the cost of the first ship TCG Heybeliada. She is the first of the class and hence a prototype platform, to undergo extensive testing process for about 3 years. Unit price is expected to decrease substantially in the forthcoming ships, especially when +4 option ships are realized.

Gerasimos

January 5th, 2007, 02:14 AM

200 million $ is expected to be the cost of the first ship TCG Heybeliada. She is the first of the class and hence a prototype platform, to undergo extensive testing process for about 3 years. Unit price is expected to decrease substantially in the forthcoming ships, especially when +4 option ships are realized.

I heard that the total cost of the program is 1.6 billion $,so if you divide it with 8,you'll get 200 million $ per ship.Also it's not sure that the option ships will be MILGMEM,there is the possibility to be MEKO-100 ship.My question was why spending so much for corvettes and not buying figates that are needed more?,or much more FACMs?

orko_8

January 5th, 2007, 03:56 AM

I heard that the total cost of the program is 1.6 billion $,so if you divide it with 8,you'll get 200 million $ per ship.Also it's not sure that the option ships will be MILGMEM,there is the possibility to be MEKO-100 ship.My question was why spending so much for corvettes and not buying figates that are needed more?,or much more FACMs?

MEKO A-100 is absolutely out of question for economic, technical and bureucratic reasons. B&V pressed hard for A-100 during late 1990's but its offers were repeatedly refused.

+4 option will most possibly realized but configuration changes are being thought, such as installation of Mk56 or Mk48 VLS launchers.

The era of FACM's are about to end. Current design trends and requirements dictate bigger platforms between the scala of frigate and FACM, with enough habitability for her personnel to operate longer, further, and with adequate armament for ASW/ASuW.

The cost of the MilGem project was not stated officially but it is estimated between 1.2 and 1.4 billion dollars, most of which o to R&D projects such as hull mounted sonar, ship combat control system, radar, EO system, 76mm gun fire control system etc. Even unit price is 200 mil. dollars, compare it with other corvette projects, or just with cancelled corvette project of Hellenic Navy (approx. 400 million $ was planned for the first ship)

Gerasimos

January 5th, 2007, 04:18 AM

MEKO A-100 is absolutely out of question for economic, technical and bureucratic reasons. B&V pressed hard for A-100 during late 1990's but its offers were repeatedly refused.

+4 option will most possibly realized but configuration changes are being thought, such as installation of Mk56 or Mk48 VLS launchers.

The era of FACM's are about to end. Current design trends and requirements dictate bigger platforms between the scala of frigate and FACM, with enough habitability for her personnel to operate longer, further, and with adequate armament for ASW/ASuW.

The cost of the MilGem project was not stated officially but it is estimated between 1.2 and 1.4 billion dollars, most of which o to R&D projects such as hull mounted sonar, ship combat control system, radar, EO system, 76mm gun fire control system etc. Even unit price is 200 mil. dollars, compare it with other corvette projects, or just with cancelled corvette project of Hellenic Navy (if I'm not mistaken, unit price was estimated around 300 million dollars without armament at the time of cancellation)

For the MILGEM cost,I searched through Google and found that it's 1.6 billion for the 8 ships.As far as the FACMs are concerned, in Greece with biggest coastline in Europe they are need for coastal defence.The Visby corvette costs between 100-184 millions,there are other examples too.You should also check "The Global corvette"(US).I think that it might cost less than 200millions,a total new program.

beleg

January 5th, 2007, 04:24 AM

MILGEM seems to be a good project although I believe that if the first ship is going to be commisioned in 2010 the RAM it carries(7.5km range) will be out of date.Also their cost is 200 million $ each,the MEKO 200 frigates shouldn't cost more than 300-400 million $,so why not MEKO and even more if these corvettes will have a coastal defense role why not a FACM our Roussen class for example cost 92 million each and were built here in Greece.So with 1.6 billion $(cost of 8 Milgem) you could buy 4-5 MEKO or 16 FACMs

First of all , the CIWS for MilGEM is not selected as of yet. It might be RAM it might be SeaRAM or another . Its very easy to replace this kind of systems in a ship. comparing with Greek S-Class frigates which dont have even the most primitive Phalanx on them, MilGEM will be able to defend itself..

Why not MEKO? The answer is simple. Once you can build something like Milgem , you wont ever need to buy stuff like MEKO anymore. These ships are scalable and modular , the next step after a corvette is logically a frigate. I am quite confident that once the trials of MilGEM comes to a certain stage we will hear more about a Turkish concept for a multi purpose frigate.

orko_8

January 5th, 2007, 04:32 AM

For the MILGEM cost,I searched through Google and found that it's 1.6 billion for the 8 ships.As far as the FACMs are concerned, in Greece with biggest coastline in Europe they are need for coastal defence.The Visby corvette costs between 100-184 millions,there are other examples too.You should also check "The Global corvette"(US).I think that it might cost less than 200millions,a total new program.

Ah I see, you are referring to GlobalSecurity site which has not been updated for a very long time. No official figures declared yet, but as I said, most defense sources claim 1.x billion dollar cost.

I remember reading Turkish Navy commanders' speeches mentioning "production of 12 indigenous corvettes" which may be a clue about the realization of +4 options.

beleg

January 5th, 2007, 04:32 AM

For the MILGEM cost,I searched through Google and found that it's 1.6 billion for the 8 ships.As far as the FACMs are concerned, in Greece with biggest coastline in Europe they are need for coastal defence.The Visby corvette costs between 100-184 millions,there are other examples too.You should also check "The Global corvette"(US).I think that it might cost less than 200millions,a total new program.

How much does F-35 cost?

1,6 billion for 8 ships is only an estimated cost including R&D. Its an ongoing project which still spends money for R&D. The unit costs can not be safely guessed at the moment.

Isn't Global Corvette for Royal Navy? The corvette program for USNavy is LCS. Their prices are in the same range with estimations for MilGEM (+-50Mio US$) and probably total cost of ownership for MilGEM will be much lower since MilGEM uses more traditional systems.

Gerasimos

January 5th, 2007, 04:48 AM

First of all , the CIWS for MilGEM is not selected as of yet. It might be RAM it might be SeaRAM or another . Its very easy to replace this kind of systems in a ship. comparing with Greek S-Class frigates which dont have even the most primitive Phalanx on them, MilGEM will be able to defend itself..

Why not MEKO? The answer is simple. Once you can build something like Milgem , you wont ever need to buy stuff like MEKO anymore. These ships are scalable and modular , the next step after a corvette is logically a frigate. I am quite confident that once the trials of MilGEM comes to a certain stage we will hear more about a Turkish concept for a multi purpose frigate.

In this site it's says just RAM http://www.turkishnavy.net/milgem.htm in wikipedia it says RAM and that there is the possibility of putting MK.41 but at start they will use RAM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgem.
Also you should check your sources about our frigates:Elli,Limnos have 2 Phalanx and Sea Sparrow,Adrias,Aegeon,Navarino,Kountouriotis,Boubo ulina,Kanaris,Themistocles,Fokas have 1 Phalanx and Sea Sparrow.that means that all our S-Class frigates have Phalanx and Sea Sparrow:D.please tell me the AAW capability of your Knox class(none),and of the Perry class(ancient SM-1).....
I also said that it looks good(MILGEM) but I'm waiting to see the results and problems that may come up during trials....When it will be brought into service then I will say my opinion...
Thank you orko for the information.I saw it in the site of "navy matters".

orko_8

January 5th, 2007, 05:12 AM

Just a note: The last four Elli class frigates do not have Phalanx (F463 - F466)

Gerasimos

January 5th, 2007, 08:05 AM

Just a note: The last four Elli class frigates do not have Phalanx (F463 - F466)

orko_8 if you check the greek version of the official site of hellenic navy,you'll see that only F465-F466 don't have Phalanx(you are right to that thank you for mentioning it).F463-F464 have Phalanx.:)

orko_8

January 5th, 2007, 09:15 AM

orko_8 if you check the greek version of the official site of hellenic navy,you'll see that only F465-F466 don't have Phalanx(you are right to that thank you for mentioning it).F463-F464 have Phalanx.:)

Are you sure?

http://www.worldwarships.com/S_Borg/Bouboulina_sjb.jpg
http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07015/2093875238443857.jpg
http://bendijkstra.nl/F-464%20ex%20F825.jpg

In addition, according to PN official site (which is direct copy-paste from Jane's Fighting Ships)

"1 or 2 (450, 451) GE/GD Vulcan Phalanx 20 mm Mk 15 6-barrelled; 3,000 rds/min combined to 1.5 km. One mounting only on hangar roof in F 459-462."
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/frigates_s_en.asp

It simply says that F450 and F451 have two, F459, F460, F461 and F462 have one Phalanx.

Gladius

January 5th, 2007, 09:34 AM

Gerasimos, in late 2005 the F-464 Kanaris came to Spain as part of SNMG-2 Task Group and the past year 2006 she visit Barcelona and both times without phalanx installed.

As proof:

Palma Oct.15th - 2005.
http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/7230/ftk73ud.jpg
http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/6451/sdf6gj.jpg

Barcelona 2006.
http://aycu19.webshots.com/image/5258/2004976948812931559_rs.jpg

PS: Pics the Siroc & Nacho.

Gerasimos

January 5th, 2007, 03:36 PM

Are you sure?

http://www.worldwarships.com/S_Borg/Bouboulina_sjb.jpg
http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07015/2093875238443857.jpg
http://bendijkstra.nl/F-464%20ex%20F825.jpg

In addition, according to PN official site (which is direct copy-paste from Jane's Fighting Ships)

"1 or 2 (450, 451) GE/GD Vulcan Phalanx 20 mm Mk 15 6-barrelled; 3,000 rds/min combined to 1.5 km. One mounting only on hangar roof in F 459-462."
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/frigates_s_en.asp

It simply says that F450 and F451 have two, F459, F460, F461 and F462 have one Phalanx.

Guys I just said what you can read in the greek hellenic navy site,check
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/kanaris_f464.asp#a1
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/mpoumpoulina_f463.asp
I know it's Greek but you'll see that it says Phalanx,I read it from there.For me it doesn't matter so much if 4 of our frigates don't have Phalanx.I wanted to answer to Beleg who said that they don't have AAW capabilities.And I proved they have.They all have Sea sparrow,in contrary to the Turkish frigates I mentioned.

beleg

January 8th, 2007, 05:06 AM

I think you have a reading and/or understanding problem. I didnt say they dont have AAW capability. It is you who keeps talking about AAW capability which you base on SSM/NSSM (which also is ancient and is being replaced by ESSM) which imo is not a very good missile to depend on.. In fact i believe its worse than SM-1.

What i want to say, but because of hurrying too much said in an in complete way, is "some" Greek frigates lack a CIWS not AAW. Period.

Ships operate in task forces, they never sail alone during wartime , Milgem will be operating with frigates, which will have ESSM and perhaps SM-2 by then to provide protection form aerial threats.

Besides, the ship alredy does have sensors and the space to install VLS systems which can house ESSM or another missile if needed.

Anyway the topic is Turkish Navy, if you have valuable input please post it. But dont turn the topic in to another Turkish vs Greek comparison thread. It gets boring after a while.

tatra

January 17th, 2007, 06:36 PM

comparing with Greek S-Class frigates which dont have even the most primitive Phalanx on them, MilGEM will be able to defend itself..

It may be the case some ex-Dutch, now Greek S-frigates (S=Standaard which, incidentally, is a type and not a class indication) do not carry Phalanx. However, severel of their sisterships in Greek service do and they have carried Goalkeeper as well as 40mm and 76mm guns atop the hangar in other navies. There should be no trouble whatsoever fitting Phalanx, SeaRam, or RAM (see also German F122 Bremen class, a S-frigate derivatie), a twin Fast Forty, a Sea Guard firing unit or some other CIWS.

To the extent there is a problem (with fitting a CIWS), it is one of funding and not one of ship design or technology.

Below a S-frigate variant proposed for Iran (then still under the rile of the Shah), to accompany the 4 US designed destroyers which later became the Kidd class. Yes, that's a Standard missile launcher as found on the O.H. Perry class frigates, and 2 Phalanx.

tatra

January 17th, 2007, 06:47 PM

contedicavour

January 20th, 2007, 05:10 AM

Below a S-frigate variant proposed for Iran (then still under the rile of the Shah), to accompany the 4 US designed destroyers which later became the Kidd class. Yes, that's a Standard missile launcher as found on the O.H. Perry class frigates, and 2 Phalanx.

Interesting thumbnail. The Dutch did build a modified Kortenaer FFG with SM1MR, the Van Heemsmerk AAW FFGs now sold to Chile. Though they preferred to install the SM1 aft (replacing the hangar for the helo) in order to preserve the Sea Sparrow launcher.
I do confirm the ex Dutch Kortenaer used to carry Phalanx and/or Goalkeeper CIWS in Dutch service, so no issue whatsoever to put those systems back on.

cheers

contedicavour

January 20th, 2007, 05:16 AM

Why would the Turks need to keep any ships in the Black Sea? All they need to do is block the passage to the Med. That's where the important sea lanes of communication are. And you may not even need ships to accomplish that.

Giventhe very long Turkish coastline on the Black Sea, I would still make sure a strong coast guard or a significant force of Navy corvettes are there for fishery patrol, anti-smuggling, protection of trade routes, etc
Russian Black Sea, Ukrainian, Georgian, Bulgarian navies are in a bad condition and probably aren't able to perform those tasks in the rest of the Black Sea, so Turkey should at least help its own national interests there.
Worth noticing I didn't mention Romania above, since its navy is apparently in better conditions (especially since the ex RN Broadsword Batch 2 acquisition)

cheers

Rich

January 20th, 2007, 08:42 AM

tatra

January 20th, 2007, 02:33 PM

I didn't say the Black Sea was unimportant to Turkey, just that they would not necessarily need a bunch of frigates there.

tatra

January 20th, 2007, 02:38 PM

Interesting thumbnail. The Dutch did build a modified Kortenaer FFG with SM1MR, the Van Heemsmerk AAW FFGs now sold to Chile. Though they preferred to install the SM1 aft (replacing the hangar for the helo) in order to preserve the Sea Sparrow launcher.
I do confirm the ex Dutch Kortenaer used to carry Phalanx and/or Goalkeeper CIWS in Dutch service, so no issue whatsoever to put those systems back on.

cheers
Yes, but the Heemskerk was designed more as a pure AAW ship, complement to the old Tromp a.k. Kojak class, which explains the sacrifice of the hangar area in the rear rather than the Sparrow launcher forward of the bridge.

Did you notice the incredible similarity of that version for Iran with Germany's F122 Bremen class?

swerve

January 20th, 2007, 05:22 PM

I agree with my Italian friends description of the importance the Black Sea coastline has to Turkey. I will add to that the Black Sea is a vital tourism, commercial, and fisheries hub that is essential to the Turkish economy. If youve never been to the Black Sea Turkish coastline you should really plan a trip there, most of all for you Europeans. Because it is stunning! It was one of the great vacation secrets of Europe back when I was over there. Yugoslavia was another one.

As has already been mentioned its also a stretch of coast where smuggling and other criminal activity has always been prevalent.

But any region of such vital economic importance is going to have a military presence. Even during the "bad old days" in Turkey, back when I was there, there was very little trouble around the Tourist areas. Turkey is a wonderful place to tour.

I haven't been there for all of three years. :) First trip since my days of bumming around on the cheap in the 1980s, when I went to the north-east. Very pleasant - the forests in the coastal ranges are beautiful in spring & early summer, full of flowers. There was a daily F-16 patrol along the coast in 2003, but down below, I didn't see a policeman for a week, hanging around in little beach resorts full of Turks, with very very few foreigners. Lovely.

atilla

January 20th, 2007, 07:31 PM

did they patrol after 12 o clock or Before 12 o clock :DD joke about black sea black sea coast ıs lovely about all type of green u can see

U should try the fısh named HAMSİ in pot along whith corn bread

balamir

January 21st, 2007, 03:13 AM

So Turks need to leave some ships in the Black Sea whereas Greece doesn't need to leave some on Ionian Sea? Splendid. I'm sure our subs would like to have free for all shooting there :)

contedicavour

January 21st, 2007, 12:55 PM

Yes, but the Heemskerk was designed more as a pure AAW ship, complement to the old Tromp a.k. Kojak class, which explains the sacrifice of the hangar area in the rear rather than the Sparrow launcher forward of the bridge.

Did you notice the incredible similarity of that version for Iran with Germany's F122 Bremen class?

Yes indeed. Dutch and German ships are very similar, such as the latest AAW FFGs (F124 and De Zeven Provincen). If there still was a big enough market for AAW FFG/DDGs around I would expect something similar to F124/DZP to be on offer as a potential competitor to FREMM and Aegis-equipped ships.

cheers

Waylander

January 21st, 2007, 05:31 PM

The F122 is a modified Korteaner class. This explains the similarity. :)

contedicavour

January 23rd, 2007, 07:26 AM

The F122 is a modified Korteaner class. This explains the similarity. :)

Yep I remember that, though I don't know if the original design was Dutch or German ? Was there some sort of licence acquisition or was it more of a joint project with shared R&D ?

cheers

Waylander

January 23rd, 2007, 11:41 AM

As long as I know the main part is dutch with some german input.

tatra

January 23rd, 2007, 04:49 PM

The F122 is a modified Korteaner class. This explains the similarity. :)
As if I didn't know. What I meant was that the proposal for Iran is more different from Kortenaer but more similar to Bremen. This is especially evident if you consider the hangar area.

The Standard Frigate of the Kortenaer class has been a successful design. Conceived as a general purpose frigate for operations in the Eastern Atlantic area, it is equipped with an AAW suite for point air defence and an MC gun and ASM Harpoon for ASW. With good seakeeping behaviour, low underwater noise, low self-noise and two-helicopter capacity the platform provides a powerful ASW capability. The design has attracted keen international interest. The Federal German Republic acquired the design for the F122, the Bremen class. Bremen is similar to the Kortenaer but uses a different rear superstructure hull and different propulsion system (apart from electronics fit).

FOr F124 and LCF, commonality extends only to systems, not platform.

Waylander

January 23rd, 2007, 06:29 PM

Sorry, I missunderstood this. :)

contedicavour

January 25th, 2007, 07:50 AM

The Standard Frigate of the Kortenaer class has been a successful design. Conceived as a general purpose frigate for operations in the Eastern Atlantic area, it is equipped with an AAW suite for point air defence and an MC gun and ASM Harpoon for ASW. With good seakeeping behaviour, low underwater noise, low self-noise and two-helicopter capacity the platform provides a powerful ASW capability. The design has attracted keen international interest. The Federal German Republic acquired the design for the F122, the Bremen class. Bremen is similar to the Kortenaer but uses a different rear superstructure hull and different propulsion system (apart from electronics fit).

... though at the end the Kortenaers ended up without VDS or towed array as multi-purpose FFGs in the Greek and UAE navies... given their ASW potential in the Atlantic they would have been potentially better used by the Brazilian or Portuguese or Chilean navies (yes I know Chile is on the Pacific, but you get my point ;) )

cheers

sanalbey

April 8th, 2007, 06:36 PM

contedicavour

April 9th, 2007, 04:57 AM

why Turkish Navy must divide its frigates? The most important advantage of warships are thier mobility. It is not a soccer match. You can shift your ships anytime you want? Do you mean Greece keeping 14 frigates 7/24 at Aegean Sea? I don't think so. Also for the Aegean sea you should consider the missile boats and submarines as well. After the MILGEM project TuNavy will have even more assets to use.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Almost all Greek naval assets are in the Aegean sea. There are only a few minor assets in the lower Adriatic Sea, all the rest is facing east. Turkey, on the other hand, has other areas to patrol, from the very long Black Sea coastline to the southern waters facing Cyprus.

cheers

sanalbey

April 17th, 2007, 11:39 AM

I'm not sure I understand your point. Almost all Greek naval assets are in the Aegean sea. There are only a few minor assets in the lower Adriatic Sea, all the rest is facing east. Turkey, on the other hand, has other areas to patrol, from the very long Black Sea coastline to the southern waters facing Cyprus.

cheers
my point is during a crise or war you can shift your ships (which are mobile) and focus your efforts at one point/area you need. You can send all your available frigates to one area/sea. And during a conflict (with Greece for instance), I don´t think that Turkish frigates need to patrol Blacksea. There are other minor assets that can perform police duties at Blacksea. And no big naval threat.
Regarding to Cypruss issue; I don´t think that Turkey will reserve it´s frigates to patrol around Cyprus unless Greece intended to send there some ships. Which means that Greece dividing it´s forces as well.
Also what I think missile boats, corvettes and submarines are very useful tools to use at Agean sea. You should also count those ships and add to your equation. And they are also mobile and can be gethered in an area and at any time you need.
You should not measure the coastal line of a country and then divide it with the number of ships to assess it´s naval power.
But if you are talking about peace time patrols it is an other story. I don´t think that both navies using all their frigates/ships to sail and patrol around Agean sea. Just couple of them might be on duty.

Best wishes

beleg

April 18th, 2007, 04:17 AM

contedicavour

April 18th, 2007, 08:45 AM

But if you are talking about peace time patrols it is an other story. I don´t think that both navies using all their frigates/ships to sail and patrol around Agean sea. Just couple of them might be on duty.

Best wishes

Indeed, I had peace time patrols in mind. I cannot think of a determined will to start conflict on either side of the Aegean. However accidents can happen and tempers fire up very fast. That's when you can only rely on what you have at a given moment in the area. By the time more assets arrive, hopefully enough good sense will have stopped the escalation and it will up to journalists to count the points.
Anyway, Greece is ruining what I see as its geographical advantage by not replacing fast enough the deleted ships (CF Adams and Knox classes) and relying only on 10 rather old Kortenaer and 4 more recent Meko 200/Hydra. By the time the 4-6 unconfirmed FREMMs will join the fleet (1st in 2013 earliest), most of the Kortenaers will be too old to be useful.

cheers

sanalbey

April 18th, 2007, 07:25 PM

Indeed, I had peace time patrols in mind. I cannot think of a determined will to start conflict on either side of the Aegean. However accidents can happen and tempers fire up very fast. That's when you can only rely on what you have at a given moment in the area. By the time more assets arrive, hopefully enough good sense will have stopped the escalation and it will up to journalists to count the points.
Anyway, Greece is ruining what I see as its geographical advantage by not replacing fast enough the deleted ships (CF Adams and Knox classes) and relying only on 10 rather old Kortenaer and 4 more recent Meko 200/Hydra. By the time the 4-6 unconfirmed FREMMs will join the fleet (1st in 2013 earliest), most of the Kortenaers will be too old to be useful.

cheers

I believe the art at war. Geography could be seemed as an advantage but it could be a problem for Greece as well. The one who could merge the operational planing with the art of war can use the geography in his own side´s favor. Of course these are just my opinions and valid for the both sides.
I think Kortenaers are quite good ships and I have watched a program at a Greek TV (actually you can find it at Youtube) that their CICs are quite improved/changed. But my concern is Hellenic Navy has lack of area air defence systems. Their (self) air defence radious is 8 nm which gives opponent airforce quite enough area to maneouver and attack.
I don´t know about FREMMs. Could you give me some onformation about that project? Which country/company building them?

best wishes

Rich

April 19th, 2007, 06:48 PM

I'm not sure I understand your point. Almost all Greek naval assets are in the Aegean sea. There are only a few minor assets in the lower Adriatic Sea, all the rest is facing east. Turkey, on the other hand, has other areas to patrol, from the very long Black Sea coastline to the southern waters facing Cyprus.

cheers

To get a true picture of Turkish interest in the Aegean take a look at their TUAF order of battle. http://www.scramble.nl/tr.htm Dont forget to look at where the TUAF CN235M's are based as well. These maritime aircraft would figure heavily in any Aegean conflict as they are both systems, and weapons, heavies. The Turkish navy and air force is pretty Penguin/Harpoon heavy as well, the Turks themselves having a respectable Amphibious force no doubt constructed with the Aegean in mind. Their amphibious marine brigade, and commando brigades, are thought highly of.

Their navy is also mine warfare orientated, which in the Aegean and the straights would be crucial. Last time I checked they had about 50 landing ships of various types.

The Aegean was a potential flash point even before oil was found. Now its doubly so, and the Turks haven't forgotten about it. Really when you look at their force structure, systems types, and order of battle, you see the big word AEGEAN picture clear.

z1pp0

April 24th, 2007, 12:29 AM

To get a true picture of Turkish interest in the Aegean take a look at their TUAF order of battle. Dont forget to look at where the TUAF CN235M's are based as well. These maritime aircraft would figure heavily in any Aegean conflict as they are both systems, and weapons, heavies. The Turkish navy and air force is pretty Penguin/Harpoon heavy as well, the Turks themselves having a respectable Amphibious force no doubt constructed with the Aegean in mind. Their amphibious marine brigade, and commando brigades, are thought highly of.

Their navy is also mine warfare orientated, which in the Aegean and the straights would be crucial. Last time I checked they had about 50 landing ships of various types.
.....
Really when you look at their force structure, systems types, and order of battle, you see the big word AEGEAN picture clear.

What are you talking about? :S CN235MP dont have anti ship weapon capability. They are hardly "system and weapon heavies" as you claim. More like a survailance platform than combat aircraft. Also they are based at Topel wich is east of Marmara.

The only AShM capabel platform that I know of is the F-16 Block 50. Something like 50 of them. And its only now that the Turks are buying a handfull air launched Harpoons for testing in conjunction with Peace Onyx IV. In other words not even delivered yet. Half of them based in Merzifon (Blacksea) and the rest in Balikesir. Penguin is used only by a handfull of the old Kartal class fast attack craft's, which are beeing replaced by newer fast attack craft like the Kilic class. All Harpoon assets are mounted on Turkish navy Frigates and Fast attack crafts today.

Air base's close to the Aegean are the ones surounding Izmir. Wich are either trainer or transport bases. The closest "combat active" bases are Balikesir a hundred Km inland and Bandirma by the Marmara sea which is primarily tasked with defence of the straits. Kesan and Aydin are Army and Jandarma helo bases respectively. The bases around Istanbul are for gliders and air force academy flights. Antalya is mainly used by NATO allies flying tanker missions (Northen Watch, OIF) in the middle east. Konya is almost closer to Syria than the aegean. Eskisehir is the main air force base with 3 squadrons, 1 is legacy F-4E's the 2nd are F-4E 2020 and the 3rd is a Recce sq. But beeing halfway between Istanbul and Ankara it is hardly an efficient QRA base.

The fleet of 50 or so ladingships are mostly old and rusty buckets of LCM's and LCT's. Only good for coastal trips. Sure usfull in getting to the islands from the mainland, but hey i could do that in a row boat. :)

So that leaves 2 squadrons of F-16 from Balikesir close to the aegean, +2 more if necesary from Bandirma. I would be very supprised if the greecs consider Trainers and cargo aircrafts (T-38, T-37, CN235M) a threat. So no I dont agree with your assesment on the Turkish Forces giving an all importance to the aegean. I would say that to the defence of the straits in the north west. Naturally they would always move squadrons to forward bases in time of war.

/Dan

contedicavour

April 26th, 2007, 11:34 AM

I don´t know about FREMMs. Could you give me some onformation about that project? Which country/company building them?

best wishes

Well, FREMMs are probably in both Greece's and Turkey's future at some point in the next 10 years, unless both navies opt for ESSMs to modernize Sea Sparrow and to equip new build ships (such as the Turkish Milgems).
At close to 6,500 tonnes and 140 meters long they carry up to 48 VLS for Aster 15/30 and SCALP Naval land-attack cruise missile. Aster-15 already delivers twice the range of old Sea Sparrows and Aster-30 is 2nd only to SM-2 III in range (at 120km vs 167km). The only thing the FREMMs lack for AAW is space for a long range AAW radar, but EMPAR or the French' Herakles are an acceptable backup.
Anyway, political issues between France and Turkey probably handicap FREMM's chances for Turkey unless Turkey selected the Italian version of FREMM. Besides, priority is on Milgems.
Regarding Greece, the next procurement has to be on new FFGs preferably with strong AAW. I'd bet on an order of 4 + option on 2 more before the end of 2007, with 1 built in Lorient and the others in Greek yards. Shame that it would mean selecting Herakles with its poorer performance vs EMPAR...

cheers

Rich

April 26th, 2007, 06:40 PM

Again I dont want to turn the thread into an Aegean thing but I cant overemphasize enough the importance of this body of water to Turkey. First off the Turks are at a disadvantage in the Aegean because it is Greece who holds much of the Islands and controls much of the waterway. This right of possession has been upheld in INTL courts and the Greeks aren't to anxious to cede any of it away to their historic enemy. But there is also more.

Much of Turkish industry is near the Aegean as are most of the Ports its industry depends on. Ive already mentioned the oil in the Aegean, most of which is still in the sea bed. But also remember in coming years the Caspian/Straights gateway is going to become one of the most important waterways for oil and natural gas in the world.

So the Aegean is extremely important to Turkey, and, to Greece. Important enough to design and build indigenously a corvette class, very similar to our LCS littoral combat ship, and to outfit it for the Aegean. Important enough to spend a ton of $$ modernizing your submarine force. Important enough to spend over 1/2 a billion$$ on S-70B helicopters. Important enough to Greece to risk a shooting war over deployment of S-300 SAMs to Cyprus and then to Crete.

Both countries are in the process of huge military upgrade programs and while Cyprus has historically been the focus of world attention on the two that is going to change.

The Aegean is the real hotspot and isnt going to be the driving force behind the naval modernizations of both countries. In order to survive and win this War Turkey has to be able to control both ends of the Aegean.

KGB

May 6th, 2007, 03:52 AM

T

Their navy is also mine warfare orientated, which in the Aegean and the straights would be crucial. Last time I checked they had about 50 landing ships of various types.

Possibly also related to events in WW1, a couple of losses to mines stopped the British navy from threatening Constantinople; the result was the Gallipoli campaign which ended favorably for Turkey.

ahussains

May 10th, 2007, 02:28 PM

How many ships Turkish Navy have ? and how old ?

Rich

May 10th, 2007, 07:14 PM

How many ships Turkish Navy have ? and how old ?

Hussain wouldn't this be a fine opportunity for you to research the subject and, instead of asking with a one liner, instead list the numbers and types of ship in the TN? Especially since its in your neck of the woods to begin with.

Then you can go further and explain the strategy behind the Turkish naval procurments. Or explain the importance of Cyprus to Greek overall strategy, "Cyprus is a 2'nd front that ties up a significant Turkish military presence".

In other words try your hand at typing more then one line, and, make a contribution.

Yasin20

June 10th, 2007, 10:15 AM

cant turkiye at least offered to by aircraft carriers at least the ones that carrie Harrier turkish navy can use it to carry it with there F35 jets that turkiye is getting

Todjaeger

June 10th, 2007, 11:35 AM

cant turkiye at least offered to by aircraft carriers at least the ones that carrie Harrier turkish navy can use it to carry it with there F35 jets that turkiye is getting

At present, it's an open question if the handful of Harrier-capable CVL will be able to operate the F-35B (STOVL version) Lightning II. Also, AFAIK Turkey isn't currently expected to order the F-35B, instead, like most participants in the JSF, Turkey is expected to order the F-35A CTOL-variant. While I expect Turkey could spend the additional money for the more expensive -B variant, I have to ask, why?

The role of an aircraft carrier has been to allow flight operations in areas where it wasn't feasible to conduct land-based flight operations. Unless Turkey becomes involved in operations requiring it to send task forces away from the Eastern Med or Black Sea areas, I don't see an aircraft carrier being worthwhile. After all, if one were added to the fleet, in order for it to operate away from Turkey (the whole point behind getting one) the surface and undersea vessels would need to be increased enough to escort the carrier in addition to their other duties.

-Cheers

Yasin20

June 10th, 2007, 11:50 AM

oh ok i whont ask that question again now that i know why

CCC

June 19th, 2007, 12:59 AM

Seems the MILGEM project is a ground breaking long term venture whos initial inefficiencies and cost structures will move quickley down the learning curve. This will allow for more timely production scheadules while making the upgrading of any inadiquacies of previous vessles rapidly simple. The long-term dividends are significant.

Quite frankly I find some of these military accessments of Turkey vs. Greece unfounded and very detrimental however consistent with current DOD error in foreign military evaluation and determinations hence the situation in Iraq. To the uninformed reader of such posts one would think Greece is militarily far beyond Turkey and capable of a swift and easy occupation of the western Turkey. This is almost humorous.

Please take into account even the most recent eye to eye face offs of these nations naval, special forces, political and intelligence tactics and strategies and their actual success of execution in recent real life conflicts as old as Cyprus, as recent as the Kardak iltel crisis (1995, declared a major failure by Greek Pres. Simitis himself) and most recently the search and rescue mission of fallen F16 pilots over the Aegean in May of 2006. All were direct conflicts that did and could have brought the two nations to the brink of war. In all instances the results were inline with the history of conflicts between these nations ending with the highest level of Turkish military success unfortunately at the grave expense of our Greek friends. Please take into mind that these events occurred while Turkey is fighting a antiterror war with the PKK within its own borders. Turkey is one of the few nations who army, special forces and air forces have been in real life combat situations on a regular basis..other than the occational confrontation with some of our Greek neighbors special forces units in Kosovo assisting with the Serbs and in N.Iraq working with PKK elements in the no-fly zone before the U.S. invasion. I dont have to tell you how that ended....

A touch of reality. If the Turkish Republic had the luxury of Greece's ability to only focus one nation as a military threat full Turkish occupation of Greece has been assessed by CIA data as in 10-15 days. Unfortunately Turkey bordering Russia, Iran, Iraq and Syria especially with the current state of the region as a result of unexplainable decision making by U.S. Military accumen does not have this luxury. Other than meaningless arial dogfights over the Aegean much due to the airspace issues leaves Greece as a tertiary threat at best. A Greek attack on Turkey or its escalation of any conflict to compromise Turkish borders or sovereignty will solve many ioutstanding issues that have irritated Turkey in the Med. for sometime.

"Peace at home, Peace abroad"....M.Kemal

Izzy1

June 19th, 2007, 03:09 AM

...real life combat situations on a regular basis..other than the occational confrontation with some of our Greek neighbors special forces units in Kosovo assisting with the Serbs and in N.Iraq working with PKK elements in the no-fly zone before the U.S. invasion.

Could you please provide any evidence to backup these remarks?

Rich

June 19th, 2007, 07:01 AM

Unfortunately Turkey bordering Russia, Iran, Iraq and Syria especially with the current state of the region as a result of unexplainable decision making by U.S. Military accumen does not have this luxury. Other than meaningless arial dogfights over the Aegean much due to the airspace issues leaves Greece as a tertiary threat at best. A Greek attack on Turkey or its escalation of any conflict to compromise Turkish borders or sovereignty will solve many ioutstanding issues that have irritated Turkey in the Med. for sometime.

What "accumen" is that? You mean the Kurds? The Kurds are far less of a problem for Turkey now that they have a stable Northern Iraq to live in. You should have seen life in eastern Turkey back in the '70s and early '80s if you think American acumen has caused you problems now. I forget the number of times I had rifles and Tommy guns stuck in my face during my times in Martial law Turkey.

America did not cause Iran. Iran caused Iran, along with a lot of help from the Soviets, I mean our friends the Russians.:rolleyes: Wait till Iran goes nuclear and you'll be thankful for those American high security bunkers at Incirlik.

Back to naval. You may think Greece is a tertiary threat but the Turkish military doesn't. I can remember the entire order of battle facing west in my time there. Its true the navy has a huge coastline to protect but remember that Turkey lives and dies on the Straits, Aegean and Marmara sea's. Your most important ports and industries are there, within striking distance of the Greek air force and navy.http://www.cerrahogullari.com.tr/ports.htm#aegean

The Greeks also have the geographical advantage in the Aegean. In order to win the Turkish Navy has to win both ends of the sea, including having to deal with Crete.

Recently, and in addition to becoming a vastly important energy waterway, large reserves of oil have been found in the Aegean seabed. In contested waters. Which is a big reason the Greeks have embarked on a huge military modernization spending spree.

So trust me. The Aegean is very much on the mind of your Generals. And American acumen has nothing to do with it.

CCC

June 20th, 2007, 12:25 AM

Izzy1, is that particular statement so hard to believe? Rogue nations like the Milosevic regime of Serbia during its quick attempts of genocide in Bosnia and Kosovo allowed for any and all assistance from legitimate or illegitimate elements. A nation that will hate Turks forever will want some real combat exposure for some of their elite forces. Greece after all jumped at the opportunity to harbor PKK leader A. Ocalan? A nation that openly performed in joint amphibious landing exercises with Syrian forces on Syrian beaches, quiet interesting that Ocalan was in Damascus at the time. The only evidence I can provide is hearsay of members of Turkish units that I have spoken with as well as read in limited reports in Turkish publications. Just as Hizbullah in Lebanon are actually active members of the Iranian Republican Guard. Im constantly surprised that the American mind finds actions and events like this so extraordinary and unbelievable. But I do understand, the wonderful luxury of safety in living in a brand new nation that lies in a completely peaceful region with two massive oceans on either side makes the world that other try to survive in day in day out almost a fictional CNN excerpt.

To Rich:

With all due respect Sir, I have the utmost respect for the United States of America, its Armed Forces and it courageous soldiers. When abroad I refuse to allow anyone to talk trash about the Stars and Stripes. But this administration that I have voted for TWICE has made and continues to make major errors in decisions in the region. The "Acumen" (I apologize for the typo "accumen") im referring to is the turmoil of the current region and specifically the invasion of Iraq and the instability it has caused while almost completely resurrecting the PKK Terrorist movement whose members are constantly attacking and bombing civilians, police stations, and military outpost in Turkey. Now they are nicely equipped with unintentionally supplied U.S. night vision, weapons and other munitions likely indented for Peshmerge, Kurdish Proper security forces and or Iraqi forces. All of Turkey is on its feet ready to move into Iraq but the government must respect its ally. This is a war of terrorism that Turkey has fought for 30yrs, at the cost of 30K lives highlighted in Gulf 1 which Turkey was effectively on the verge of putting a final end to during the 10yr No-Fly Zone with many incursions into Iraq up to 12 and 15 miles establishing a buffer zone without hurting a single Kurdish civilian or putting out a single Kurdish light bulb. Now when the Turkish military attempts to protect its people from terror attacks its not the same kind of terrorism as those of Al-Quaida or threat to American lives. Or its thought that Turkey wants to kill all Kurds or is animately against a Kurdish state. A major Turkish trading partner is eliminated (billions in gdp); a major oil pipeline running through Turkey (more billions in gdp), a rise in PKK terror with the U.S. invasion of Iraq and now the House is about to accept Accusations of Armenian Genocide? This is the acumen I referring to. How can a world power side with those that terrorize its ally in any campaign? The U.S. has terrorists in Iraq and so does its ally Turkey, both shouldve have gone into Iraq and cleaned house! No however, one must wait while the other sides with guess whom? The Kurds, very difficult for Turkey to accept much less present it to its public to push for 85k U.S. Troops for a requested northern front. Regardless Turkeys Erdogan administration still tried to circumvent the public vote and did so for the most part, only failing by a very thin margin. Turkey had been going in and out of Iraq and never touched the wrong Kurd. Israel has one soldier kidnapped in routine border skirmishes and levels Lebanon? Northern Iraq would have still been stable and the U.S. would have had a more legitimate coalition than the massive British military contribution. Turkish troops wouldve have been the source of a far more powerful and positive opinion sentiment in having a major Muslim member in the coalition...bad decisions. Yeah some of our generals are thinking about Greece who loves this scenario.
During your stint in Turkey in the 70s-80s in the period of military marital law don worry, you werent the only one who had machine gun barrels pointed in your face, so did my older cousins, and uncles and our friends even my father and I dressed like westerners while walking the streets.so it wasnt anything special, this was an honor for them and us. My uncles in front of me commended these soldiers for their efforts in pointing that weapon in his face, an honor that the military which each of my cousins and uncles served in was securing its nation from rotten forces in the country whose objectives it was to topple the nation with the threat of communist ideology and now Islamic fundamentalism. Yes, a threat that is difficult to believe and comprehend as an American with nice warm and cozy borders, no real threats on those borders much less within them. Given all of this immediate pressure of constant threat that Turkey exists under every weapons deal we have with the U.S. has a Greek parity who has the option to receive a scaled quantity without even asking for it because Turkey is such a threat to Greece? Because Turkey is soooooo interested in attacking Greece, when’s the last time Turkey attack Greece unprovoked or literally force to? So Greece gets to approach being a threat to Turkey because of this interesting parity agreement not to mention the all-powerful Greek American lobby on the Hill and here we are in a flawed and useless comparison. Those Aegean Sea borders are defined and these Greeks continue to weasel their way into the issue just as they do with airspace issues and as they do to everything related to Turkey or the world for that matter taking, taking never giving, whets their major export, sun and fun? Funneling funds from the EU off cooked balance sheets. Oh thats right they are Cradle of Civilization and gave the world Democracy,,funny how they decided against it for so long. Sometimes I wish they would make a dumb move to settle things once and for all but then 20yrs later there would a ridiculous thread like this one comparing Turkey to Greece its almost insulting that we have to deal with this and truly annoying. Where were the great Greek forces in Cyprus? If it weren’t for the U.S. and world embargoes that Cyprus issue would not be an issue. Look N. Cyprus is all Turkish and in total isolation? While the South never approaches negotiations properly makes it into the EU where it can nice serve as the EU veto goat while Greece and the rest of Europe proclaims to support Turkish entry other thank the Germans who fear more Turks and the well the French that quite frankly are,,,,well.... French annoying every being on earth...

The true and proven fact Captain is that Turkey is a strong U.S. ally an ally that has fought side by side, shoulder to shoulder with American soldiers spilling blood in the same trenches, sharing last words without thinking twice. Turkey will always be an ally but does have the hopes that its ally maintains some honor for this valued relationship. I am encouraged by the recent U.S. head turning and "peaking with one eye" at recent Turkish cross border operations in N.Iraq going after PKK terrorists. This is critical, I will be meeting with major congressmen and their foreign service advisors soon on the Armenian Allegations resolutions that if passed could have incredible repercussions in heavily straining these relations. I shutter to consider such an outcome of ridiculous assertions that will have NO benefit to the American people and United State but a devastating negative impact if passed. We are partners in a very ambiguous world where nothing is what is seems. Turks come from a culture that values a friendship with undying loyalty which Im sure you have experienced to some degree in your tenure in Turkey. Turks are very sensitive in their relationships, maybe too much to easily brush off even the slightest of dings in such a friendship. We must work together, forges stronger ties because terror is real, its hidden and its far reaching enough to directly corrupt governments and alliances. We cannot let this happen full communication, total dialog and proper alliances with mutual respect and cooperation’s are vital. Thank you.

Rich

June 20th, 2007, 09:07 AM

Yeah, look, CCC before I decide I want to spend 3 mins of my day reading your post regarding Turkey I first want to know if you are Turkish, or have ever been stationed there?

I have a rule. I never read long-winded posts of anyone with less then 50 posts here unless they can provide some expertise in the area they are argueing. If you think eastern Turkey is worse today then it was during the days of rage, back when I was there, you are wrong.

Izzy1

June 21st, 2007, 04:08 AM

The only evidence I can provide is hearsay of members of Turkish units that I have spoken with as well as read in limited reports in Turkish publications.

So your saying there is no hard evidence to your claim?

Scourge

August 10th, 2007, 05:14 AM

SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF NAVAL VESSELS TO CERTAIN FOREIGN RECIPIENTS.

(a) Transfers by Grant- The President is authorized to transfer vessels to foreign recipients on a grant basis under section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j), as follows:

(1) TURKEY- To the Government of Turkey--

(A) the OLIVER HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigates GEORGE PHILIP (FFG-12) and SIDES (FFG-14); and

(B) the OSPREY class minehunter coastal ship BLACKHAWK (MHC-58).
...

(b) Transfers by Sale- The President is authorized to transfer vessels to foreign recipients on a sale basis under section 21 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2761), as follows:

...

(2) TURKEY- To the Government of Turkey, the OSPREY class minehunter coastal ship SHRIKE (MHC-62).

http://www.fas.org/asmp/resources/110th/S1565is.htm

So, the Turkish navy will probably get two OSPREY class minehunters and two OLIVER HAZARD PERRY class frigates more...

Are the OHP frigates going to be put into service or used as a source for spare parts? And if they are put into service, will the Knox class be retired?

orko_8

August 10th, 2007, 04:03 PM

Turkish Navy currently has 2 FF-1052 Tepe class frigates out of 8 total active (plus 4 for spare parts). The remaining two will be retired soon.

Turkish Navy will most probably refuse the transfer of 2 Osprey's, since 6 new A class (MHV-054) and 6 transferred + modernized Circe class minehunters is enough for the operational requirement. There was some rumors about a possible follow-on order for 6 more A class minehunters, but take that with a grain of salt, since it is not confirmed information.

The two FFG-7's will be active ships, not spare parts. As known Turkish Navy was interested in the two Australian FFG-7's slated for retirement (around 2000 - 2002?) but it couldn't happen. The plan was always to get a total of 10 FFG-7's.

It is expected that these two ships wil be converted to long-hull version, undergo GENESIS modernization, and maybe some additional implementations + improvements.

contedicavour

August 13th, 2007, 04:50 AM

beleg

August 13th, 2007, 04:59 AM

I don't think Navy would want the ships without MK-13 but these ships do have the launchers.

AegisFC

August 13th, 2007, 07:34 AM

Is Turkey interested in OHPs even if they no longer carry the Mk13 launcher for SM1/Harpoon ?

The OHP's in storage and for sale from the US still have the Mk-13 launcher. Besides it looks like they just removed the arm and bolted over the openings in the launcher, all the equipment should still be their (too expensive and pointless to remove) so a minor refit will restore the launcher.

contedicavour

August 13th, 2007, 08:13 AM

The OHP's in storage and for sale from the US still have the Mk-13 launcher. Besides it looks like they just removed the arm and bolted over the openings in the launcher, all the equipment should still be their (too expensive and pointless to remove) so a minor refit will restore the launcher.

Ah ok thanks that's clear.
Are there still a few OHPs in storage in the US with Mk13s ? I guess at least the 2 initially planned for Portugal (unless that's where the 2 going to Turkey come from).

cheers

Todjaeger

August 13th, 2007, 12:29 PM

So if I understand it correctly the remaining Know will be deleted ?
Is Turkey interested in OHPs even if they no longer carry the Mk13 launcher for SM1/Harpoon ?
If Turkey doesn't take the Ospreys I'd expect Egypt to do it.

cheers

Egypt was transferred two Osprey-class MHC, the former USS Cardinal and USS Raven, in January of this year. The USS Heron and USS Pelican Osprey-class MHC were transfered to Greece in March of this year. Does anyone know which Osprey's were under consideration for Turkey? The same bill allowing the sale of surplus vessels mentioned Spruance-class DDG for Turkey, but I haven't seen reference to Osprey-class MHC.

-Cheers

beleg

August 14th, 2007, 04:57 AM

Turkey is not interested in Ospreys. I remember we have refused the offer previously and probably will do again. We have recently bought 6 A-class mine hunters from Germany built by Abeking&Rasmussen and Lürssen Werft so the fleet is in quite good condition.

contedicavour yes these are the ships offered to Portuguese before. We do need them so probably they will be transferred and go under GENESIS mod like the rest of the Turkish Perrys.

orko_8

April 10th, 2008, 01:16 AM

orko_8

April 11th, 2008, 07:39 AM

According to confirmed insider sources as well as an interview article with ASELSAN, Turkish Navy has been working on a multimission frigate project code named "TF-100".

TF-100 is reported to be basically a lengthened and Mk-41 + ESSM installed version of MilGem.

Also reported is the possible procurement numbers of MilGem and TF-100: 1+1+6 for MilGem and 4 TF-100.

TF-2020 AAW frigate project will follow up TF-100.

contedicavour

April 19th, 2008, 02:56 PM

Turkish Navy is going to procure Mk41 Tactical VLS launching systems for:

2 x Barbaros (Track IIA) Class (modernization kits)
2 x Salihreis (Track IIB) Class (new installation)
4 x Gabya (FFG-7) Class (new installation)

http://www.dsca.osd.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2008/Turkey_08-40.pdf

Wow this is news - we're talking ESSM here though, right ? No SM2 procurement to preserve area defence AAW after the inevitable (sooner or later) discarding of the SM1 ?

cheers

ASFC

April 19th, 2008, 04:51 PM

I read ESSM too. Apparently they saw what the Australians did with their OHP re: ESSM and have decided to copy (although without the expensive upgrade program :wink: ). Although I can only quote Wiki for this, it sounds right given the need to keep the Mk13 because they cannot buy SM-2.

Lostfleet

April 23rd, 2008, 06:03 AM

I have one question to ask,

According to Jane's Handbook Turkish Navy Meko Frigates and Fast Attack Crafts has 8 canisters of Harpoon Missiles. However in reality frigates has 2x2 canisters ( total 4 Harpoons) and fast attack craft has 2 single canisters ( total 2 Harpoons)

So the question is, where are there rest of the canisters? Either the specs are saying the potential max number of canisters installed on the platforms or the Navy has places the rest of the canisters as reserve on the land.

If the Fast Attack Craft indeed had 8 canisters each, a flotilla of 4 craft would be a formidable strike force.

beleg

April 24th, 2008, 04:00 AM

Lostfleet

April 24th, 2008, 05:00 AM

Afaik they are in reserve , to be installed when needed. Some navy personnel i chatted had said the installation process takes a short time so no need to wear them out by keeping them installed out in sea conditions.

Thanks a lot, I always wondered that,

however does the sea condition effect the missile inside the canister in long term?

contedicavour

April 24th, 2008, 06:26 AM

It is quite common for navies to send ships out with only part of the SSMs. The Italian Lupo and Artigliere FFG for instance can carry 16 Teseo Mk2 SSMs, a feat only former Soviet ships matched. Except that on average the Artigliere carry 4 SSMs only (and the Lupo are now flying the Peruvian flag)

cheers

AegisFC

April 24th, 2008, 09:37 AM

Atilla [TR]

April 26th, 2008, 01:02 AM

I have so many Q's about the Navy and the Turkish Navy? First of all can somebody tell me the use of Destroyers today, and does Turkey posses any? Second can somebody tell me the deference between and Corvette and Frigate please? I am aware that Turkey is building a domestically made and designed Corvette anything with Frigates? Sorry I have no clue about Navy, everything else good, just navy..

AegisFC

April 26th, 2008, 01:19 AM

;140587']I have so many Q's about the Navy and the Turkish Navy? First of all can somebody tell me the use of Destroyers today,

Here is a good place to start.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroyer
But in general Destroyers are usually multi-mission ships that can either escort larger ships or operate on their own. They can specialize (usually in Anti-Air Warfare or Anti-Sub Warfare) but still can do other missions as well.

and does Turkey posses any?

No they do not.

Second can somebody tell me the deference between and Corvette and Frigate please?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corvette

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frigate

As with a lot of things naval classes can be a little fuzzy so one countries Frigate is another countries Destroyer (F-100 is a Frigate to Spain but in Australian service it will be a Destroyer, which is probably a more accurate classification for it anyway).

I am aware that Turkey is building a domestically made and designed Corvette anything with Frigates? Sorry I have no clue about Navy, everything else good, just navy..

I know they are planning on upgrading your Perry class FFG's along the lines of what Australia has done but I don't know anything about designing your own.

beleg

April 28th, 2008, 06:50 AM

atilla

there are a few projects going on or about to start in Turkey regarding the Navy's main battle force.

First is a OPV Corvette named Milgem. It will be able to do ASW and ASuW operations. 8 of these are going to be produced. First ship is already being built.

Second is a light frigate which will be an extended version of Milgem corvette and have MK41VLS cannister & ESSM missile added to the original design.

Last is the good old TF-2000 project which will probably start in near future to have a full AAW and Command ship which will be in the class of Spanish de Bazaan class. Till then anti-air missions will be taken on by 4 Perry, which are going under a modernization program to add ESSM and modernize fire control radars and ships battle management system with an indigenous one, and 4 Meko Track II ships which will be equipped with ESSM this year.

eliaslar

April 28th, 2008, 07:25 AM

Are there any more details on the light frigate?

beleg

April 28th, 2008, 09:52 AM

Well currently only rumors. But it really is planned to be an extended version of Milgem corvette which has ESSM capability and will probably replace the Meko TrackI's duties. They are proposed in stead of 4 options of the planned 8+4 Milgems.

jedigman

April 28th, 2008, 10:24 AM

Heres a picture of the Yonca Onuk MRTP70.

Looks like the Visby class corvette, which shouldn't be a shock since yonca onuk helped in making the Visby class corvette.

orko_8

July 22nd, 2008, 05:17 AM

Type 214 has been selected as Turkey's new AIP submarine. The project covers joint produciton of 6 AIP submarines in Golcuk Naval Shipyard, with 80% local industrial involvement including indigenous C4I systems.

subcommander

July 27th, 2008, 07:34 AM

no body in the forum mentioned about the importance of the subs in a possible aegean conflict. i believe subs will play important role in determining the fate of war.

jedigman

August 28th, 2008, 12:20 PM

26 days from now the MILGEM will be set afloat.

27th September 2008

divedeep

August 30th, 2008, 06:40 AM

no body in the forum mentioned about the importance of the subs in a possible aegean conflict. i believe subs will play important role in determining the fate of war.

SSKs in particular are effective area denial assets when equipped with a well trained crew particularly in regards to disrupting SLOCs as in WWII.

Since the Hellenic Navy and Turk Navy will operate the same hulls-Type 209 Mods, the only difference between the appears to be the fact that the HN boats are baseline Type 214 while the TN boats will be fitted apparently with a GENESIS CMS and other indigenous systems according to some Turk posters. But too early to tell which has a technological advantage in terms of systems fit.

Will GF and other naval defence professionals give us their opinions?

My regards

kato

August 30th, 2008, 05:04 PM

Are there any lists available showing which units of the Turkish Navy are homeported where, or which fleet they belong to (ie eg Northern Sea Area Command)?

Ths

August 31st, 2008, 08:04 PM

I would like the rough disposition of the Turkish Navy as well.

First of all I should consider war between Greece and Turkey as out of the question - just to get that straight.

Second I would suppose a steady increase in importance of the Black Sea.
In fact I find it difficult to see any alternative to Turkish dominance of the Black Sea: Off course Turkey could always put a cork in around Istanbul; but in the event of war that important city might get more than dented, so rather fight closer to enemy shores - if not on them. This means Krim - and Savastopol.
Now the Mediterainean can - with the help of som patrollers - more or less take care of themselves.

The big question is now - in a Nato context - have the roles been divided so, that the Turks take charge in the Black Sea and Greece in the Aegean?

The recent Russian hostile movements in the Black Sea must be something Turkey does not want to see repeated - and they seem to have the means to do it. Their naval forces hardly need a carrier - in the Black Sea the major points of interest (Krim excepted) seem to bewithin fighter/bomber coverage. Especially if Romania get some decent fighters/bombers.

It seems to me that the Russian Black Sea is in a predicament not easily solved:
Having Your main naval base in another country - that hate your guts - is rarely helpfull. Furthermore having a museum of antiques as your main military force does nothing for morale.
If you then are up against a reasonably modern and fair sized navy - life starts getting bitter.

Question: How well are the Frigattes suited for the Black Sea?
Are the new light Frigattes build primarely for the Black Sea?

kato

August 31st, 2008, 10:27 PM

First off, zero chance of Turkey letting Greece take over the Aegaeis.

Also, the Turkish Navy is rather busy in the Mediterranean, and the Eastern Mediterranean is one of the focus point of naval power today. There are good reasons for NATO to have SNMG1, SNMG2 and SNMCMG2, the UN having MTF448, and various navies having further forces permanently in the area.

I was actually wondering with my question whether Fleet Command has any units (in particular submarines) permanently stationed in the Black Sea, or whether it's only the support and patrol units of the Northern Sea Area Command, and of course the FAC squadron stationed in Istanbul, primarily responsible for Marmama but probably also with a control zone further north.
The Surface Action Group is also headquartered in Kocaeli on Marmara though.

I know most of the Navy is homeported at Aksaz.

divedeep

September 1st, 2008, 03:35 AM

I would like the rough disposition of the Turkish Navy as well.

Wiki offers a pretty good outline of unit strength and locations. Probably try the TuN website?

First of all I should consider war between Greece and Turkey as out of the question - just to get that straight.

The same thing was said in 1913 in regards to Europe by a certain noted economist and philosopher on the basis that economic interdependence had rendered armed conflict moot. In 1997 the Turkish Armed Forces went on a "DEFCON 2" Equivalent over the Cypriot S-300 contract and the Greeks correspondingly (but not to the Turkish level) increased readiness. This had to potential to erupt into a 'substantial' level of hostilities short of war between two NATO allies so technically you are right as the word has gone out of fashion these days- re: Operation IF 2003. Still, human nature certainly hasn't changed much so to discount war (even if by another name or definition) is mistaken.

Second I would suppose a steady increase in importance of the Black Sea.
In fact I find it difficult to see any alternative to Turkish dominance of the Black Sea: Off course Turkey could always put a cork in around Istanbul; but in the event of war that important city might get more than dented, so rather fight closer to enemy shores - if not on them. This means Krim - and Savastopol.
Now the Mediterainean can - with the help of som patrollers - more or less take care of themselves.

Totally agree with this one. Arguably the Russians bottled up in the Back Sea have an even harder time transiting the Straits than the Allies did in 1915 from the other end. Systems wise the Russians lack the capability to break a concerted TuN blockade of the Bosphorus and/or the Dardenelles.

The big question is now - in a Nato context - have the roles been divided so, that the Turks take charge in the Black Sea and Greece in the Aegean?

I assume a naval OPLAN has been worked out with both navies in order to maintain the strategic balance in the Eastern Med and keep an eye on the with the assistance of a non NATO partner in maintaining ISR coverage around Cyprus and the Suez.