Chinese firm wins Turkey's missile defense system tender

Transfer-of-Technology and co-production ensures the missiles will not have kill switches built in them. Exported Patriot (and other Western SAMs) IFF are programmed to not to fired on F-15/F-16 (and other NATO aircrafts). Problem is that Israel (F-15/F-16) may engage in a possible war against Turkey in the future. Turkey wants SAMs that can shoot at any aircrafts regardless of type.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_flotilla_raid

bunch of random news coming out of Turkey again

http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/13351/global-insights-money-not-realignment-drives-china-turkey-missile-defense-deal
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/us-gets-turkeys-message-over-its-chinese-missile-choice.aspx?pageID=238&nID=57420&NewsCatID=429
http://news.yahoo.com/turkey-us-hold-talks-china-missile-deal-104508093.html
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-330690-us-rushes-to-sweeten-missile-deal-with-turkey-against-chinese-offer.html

basically says:
1. US not happy about deal with China, will try to re-negotiate. NATO also not happy
2. Turkey saying they choose China but will be willing to re-negotiate
3. Rankings show 1. Chinese system, 2. Eurosam, 3. Patriot, (Russia’s entry eliminated all together)
4. Turkey opted for the Chinese system due to price, tech transfer. its all business

will Turkey go Brasilian on us and go on eternal tender process?

Whether you consider the assumption logical and likely is up to your own discretion, and what little we may deduce from performance parameters of the respective missile systems, in the background of likely Turk requirements.

for all we know, the tender may have placed performance parameters quite low and a strong emphasis on tot and costs. see Brazil.

again your assumption, you assume that you know what the Turkish requirements are that led to them even considering the Chinese missile.

Whether you consider the assumption logical and likely is up to your own discretion, and what little we may deduce from performance parameters of the respective missile systems, in the background of likely Turk requirements.

But the fact that FD-2000 was even a competitor in this tender, never mind coming out on top, means it must have similar performance, and

again your assumption, you assume that you know what the Turkish requirements are that led to them even considering the Chinese missile.

We can quibble endlessly as to how big each factor played a role in the FD-2000 coming out on top, and I agree co production, tot, cost (and possibly geopolitical motive) probably propelled FD-2000 on top.

But the fact that FD-2000 was even a competitor in this tender, never mind coming out on top, means it must have similar performance, and yes in your previous example hen clearly the Swiss saw gripen as equal in their important parameters.
I suppose going by your logic, china could have offered HQ-12 with the same offers they had for FD-2000, and associated lower cost, and the Turks would have accepted it too, irregardless of the fact it only has a slant range if 50km or something.

You’re barking up the wrong tree now.

here’s what I said:
“That doesn’t say FD-2000 performed better than the other systems, but rather all four were in the same ballpark of performance, at least in the turk’s eyes.”

I think you’re interpreting the words “same ballpark” as meaning equal performance between each system in every metric, without recognizing the “at least in the turk’s eyes” part.

again its your assumption.

you need to stop assuming what the Turks think and actually quote what the Turks said
and their Defense Minister says: “transfer of technology, co-production, timely delivery, and costs”
nothing about performance.

http://en.trend.az/regions/met/turkey/2200951.html

I personally would have to agree with the DM. Given Turkeys desire to be a arms producer, the Chinese solution would give them a better chance at achieving part of that goal.

lets look at it this way..
the Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon all met (or met most of) the capability requirements of the Swiss AF.
Swiss chose Gripen. Does that mean the Gripen’s performance is the same as the Typhoon? No.
What it means is that the Gripen regardless of its difference in performance to the Typhoon, can still do the required job and it also met some other non performance parameters such as costs.

For the time being all we can say is that Turkey wanted ToT and the Chinese seem to be willing to give them that.

only you added further assumptions that the three or four missile systems are roughly similar in performance with out any proof.

You’re barking up the wrong tree now.

here’s what I said:
“That doesn’t say FD-2000 performed better than the other systems, but rather all four were in the same ballpark of performance, at least in the turk’s eyes.”

I think you’re interpreting the words “same ballpark” as meaning equal performance between each system in every metric, without recognizing the “at least in the turk’s eyes” part.

Lol unless I can run a sort of analysis of variance regarding all of their capabilities (and that goes for all weapons systems without a “generational” leap), I think that is probably the most prudent conclusion, no?

Putting it another way, is there a significant difference in performance between X, Y and Z based in their own merits (e.g.: accounting for engagement scenarios, human factor, off board capability such as AEWC).

That’s just paraphrasing what I said in the last post, that all the weapons were in the same ballpark for turkey’s performance parameters. I’m not making a statement regarding the absolute performance between each of them

lets look at it this way..
the Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon all met (or met most of) the capability requirements of the Swiss AF.
Swiss chose Gripen. Does that mean the Gripen’s performance is the same as the Typhoon? No.
What it means is that the Gripen regardless of its difference in performance to the Typhoon, can still do the required job and it also met some other non performance parameters such as costs.

For the time being all we can say is that Turkey wanted ToT and the Chinese seem to be willing to give them that.
only you added further assumptions that the three or four missile systems are roughly similar in performance with out any proof.

That’s just paraphrasing what I said in the last post, that all the weapons were in the same ballpark for turkey’s performance parameters. I’m not making a statement regarding the absolute performance between each of them

These missile system are never in same ballpark. Just look at there Helicopter competition and engine power behind each gunship. Are they in same ball park including the helicopter having name of Erdogan. It was very obvious why such decision was made to score a point.

http://www.advancingafreesociety.org/the-caravan/letter-from-istanbul-2/

no, you’re just trying to make them all equal as usual

Lol unless I can run a sort of analysis of variance regarding all of their capabilities (and that goes for all weapons systems without a “generational” leap), I think that is probably the most prudent conclusion, no?

Putting it another way, is there a significant difference in performance between X, Y and Z based in their own merits (e.g.: accounting for engagement scenarios, human factor, off board capability such as AEWC).

what it probably means that FD-2000 met at least the minimal level of performance demanded as with the others. the gap between fd-2000 and the other missiles, we don’t know how large or small it is.

That’s just paraphrasing what I said in the last post, that all the weapons were in the same ballpark for turkey’s performance parameters. I’m not making a statement regarding the absolute performance between each of them

Apparently CPIMIEC also let the turkish (turks?) choose their own test scenarios which the other vendors didn’t, and that worked to their favour.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/03/us-turkey-china-defence-idUSBRE99205L20131003

But let’s not kid ourselves here, even if FD-2000 was significantly cheaper, allowed for ToT, and yielded other sweeteners, it never would’ve been here top of the shortlist if its performance wasn’t competitive with the others. That doesn’t say FD-2000 performed better than the other systems, but rather all four were in the same ballpark of performance, at least in the turk’s eyes.

no, you’re just trying to make them all equal as usual
what it probably means that FD-2000 met at least the minimal level of performance demanded as with the others. the gap between fd-2000 and the other missiles, we don’t know how large or small it is.

Russia was out in this competition because of some reasons:
– S-300PMU versions are no more in production.
– S-400 will not be available for export for some time
– Russia is not willing to give technology transfer for S-300VM or S-400.

S-300VM is different than Greek S-300PMU-1 and more capable.

I’m really more surprised, that Turkey didn’t choose Patriot or SAMP/T.

have you looked at there previous gunship chopper competition where light and medium weight helicopters competing against each other. so even if some SAM system has 200km range and another has 100km. both will meet requirements as there is no such thing as requirements and every one knows decision is in hand of one person. just look at the name

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/turkey-reopens-talks-on-ka-50-2-170186/

Apparently CPIMIEC also let the turkish (turks?) choose their own test scenarios which the other vendors didn’t, and that worked to their favour.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/03/us-turkey-china-defence-idUSBRE99205L20131003

But let’s not kid ourselves here, even if FD-2000 was significantly cheaper, allowed for ToT, and yielded other sweeteners, it never would’ve been here top of the shortlist if its performance wasn’t competitive with the others. That doesn’t say FD-2000 performed better than the other systems, but rather all four were in the same ballpark of performance, at least in the turk’s eyes.

God forbid, Chinese win cannot have anything to do with specs…. :dev2:

Well, it didn’t.

http://lenta.ru/news/2013/10/04/choice/

Turkey says it was due to price, localization, and offsets.

Acutally Chinese system has very poor specifications. it is not long range system like S-300PMU2 or S-300V4.

Price was also reduced.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130926/DEFREG03/309260012/Chinese-Firm-Wins-Big-Turkish-Air-Defense-Deal
The decision to acquire the system, dubbed T-Loramids, from the Chinese contender was made at a Thursday meeting of the Defense Industry Executive Committee, which oversees major procurement decisions and is chaired by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The contract was initially expected to be worth $4 billion, but one procurement official said the Chinese manufacturer had reduced its proposal to around $3 billion.

but the biggest factor is decision by Erdogan. This guy has very poor insights

This same person who didnot chose Ka-52 Erdogan chopper on time and later asking US for quick delivery of gunships.

see his visit to Argentina for Olympic where he got half the votes what he was expecting or his decisions about Syria.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/how-turkey-blew-its-chance-to-lead-this-troubled-region-8846456.html

S-400 isn’t offered currently and for a long time for export to anyone.

Chinese won because they offered tech transfer and also were by far the cheapest.

God forbid, Chinese win cannot have anything to do with specs…. :dev2:

S-400 isn’t offered currently and for a long time for export to anyone.

Chinese won because they offered tech transfer and also were by far the cheapest.

Even if it was S-300VM that would still be far superior to the S-300PMU-1 Greece has. S-300VM lacks some features like the 400km 40N6 of the S-400 but is still a very potent systems – Link-1, Link-2.

S-400 itself still lacks 40N6.

Also the current S-300VM on offer have had an update. Though older version of the S-300VM at that time was offered to Turkey.

Even if it was S-300VM that would still be far superior to the S-300PMU-1 Greece has. S-300VM lacks some features like the 400km 40N6 of the S-400 but is still a very potent systems – Link-1, Link-2.