Turkish Navy(TN) has initiated a project called GENESIS to upgrade combat management system of the Perry class frigates. The aim of project is to modernize CMS of 8 Perry Class(TN call them G-Glass) firgates in 7 years(contract signed in 2004 I believe). So far, first two ships have been delivered and accepted by TN. Third ship has entered sea trials and will be operational within a few weeks.
In a recent development, TN has also decided to introduce 8-cell MK-41VL and ESSM missile capability for the last 4 of the 8 Perry ships under the GENESIS project. FMS contract recently signed with Lockheed Martin to provide 4 sets of 8-cell MK-41 VL and upgrade of MK-92 mod-2 FCS to Mod12 version in order to increase anti-ship missiles and local area defence capabilities of the ships.
The new GENESIS-CMS will provide;
• Reduction of Anti-Ship Missile Defence reaction time
• High-degree combat system automation
• Centralized command and control
• Automated target(up to 1000) tracking via sensor fusion
• Situation awareness
• Decision support
• AAW, ASUW, ASW, EW support
• Better CIC organization
• Reduction of crew
• Increased durability and high availability
• Link-16
• Ease of HW & SW maintenance with domestic capabilities
Within the project all the existing Sensors and Weapons of the old platform will be integrated within the new nationally modernized Combat Management Center of the ship. In GENESIS, old Operator Consoles including the Weapon Control Consoles will be replaced by modern Tactical and Operator Consoles which are redesigned with latest technologies. All critical hardware components which are used for Sensor and Weapon integrations and operator functions, will be developed to meet related military national and NATO standarts and specifications.
The Turkish Pilot 1st LT (THK) Halil Ibrahim was sentenced into 4 years in prison today by a Greek court, as found guilty for the death of Flight Lieutenant (EPA) Konstantinos Iliakis
during an interception south-west of Isle of Karpathos on May 23, 2006.
The 37 years old pilot according to the charges, was harassed from the Turkish pilot who attempted a violent maneuver which lead to the mid air collision.
The incident happened during an interception of 2 Turkish F-16 that had invade the Hellenic air space, escorting a turkish F-4 recon. fighter, in their illegal root towards the isle of Crete.
It goes without saying that 1st LT Halil Ibrahim was convicted in absentia.
First, the incident happened in the international air space…Second, Turkish flight has been intercepted by HAF. Therefore, it was Greek pilot’s responsibility to apply safe interception rules which was clearly stated by ICAO.
There was no dogfight or harrasment from Turkish flight…It was an attempt by Greek flight to buzz the Turkish flight, but Greek pilot made a fatal mistake of judging his closure rate and hit the Turkish F-16 from behind…He should have been in a safe distance from Turkish flight instead of trying to harras them…If you ask me, Turkish goverment should sue Greek goverment to have their lost F-16 block-50 replaced…
A TuAF F-4E2020 Phantom before take off…
Turkish F-4E/2020 with 8×3 Mk-82 and ELTA SAR/GMTI radar in the nose :rolleyes:
So, what do you suggest Old Shape? Cancel A-400 and buy C-130J since it is cheaper to buy? Or do you suggest buying C-17 which is much more expensive to buy and operate?
all that argument you have presented that A-400M will be an expensive machine etc etc can be true I accept that but the needs of European countries point to something in between C-130 and C-17. Unfortunately, there is nothing available in that category. C-130 cheaper than A-400 but offers much less capability(almost every category: payload, range, speed, technology etc). Take the example of Germany, if they buy 120 C-130J instead of 60 A-400, their problem will not be solved. Their PUMA AFV weights 32 ton in basic configuration, will not fit in C-130. There was an exercise called ELITE-07 in Germany. One of the A-400 participant country, Turkey, participated that exercise with 4 F-16s and 4 F-4Es…and it took 2 C-130s(actually one C-130 and one C-160s) to carry all needed equipment, separe parts(including separe engines for each type) and ground crew and pilots…The same mission can be carried out with one A-400M instead of C-130 and C-160 combined…
Clearly most(if not all) A-400M participants can not buy C-17s in numbers. Buying combination of C-130/C-17 will not be cost effective either. Therefore, I dont see a solution to European needs other than making A400M available to them. I also agree that A400 decision is more than military, it was also economical/political decison that aim to support european aviation industry even if the cost of making A400 doubles or triples C-130, it will still make sense on the long run economically…
I also believe that ones A-400M starts production, it may sell more aircraft than anticipated. For example, Asian and Gulf States are prime candidates for A-400M. These states needs range and enough payload to reach Europe and USA to participate in military exercises or regular military visits.
But, the customer gets a bigger ship with 100 knots more speed. And a lot of jobs secured…..do not enderestimate this powerful factor.
And comes with almost double the payload, oversize cargo and range capability which are not even comparable to C-130…
I agree with Sens. Turkish needs were different than Greeks. During 1995s, Turkey was operating around 160 F-16s and has recently ordered 80 more f-16s…TuAF’s clearly needed surgical strike capability from stand-off ranges to support 240 so F-16s…This is one of reasons that Turkey did not want to create another multi-role, BVR ,aircraft out of F-4E upgrade…All attention and money are given to get new generation A/G capabilities integrated into good old F-4Es…
Turkish F-4E/2020s are upgraded with EL/M-2032 SAR/GMTI radar and other new generation avionics(HUD, INS/GPS Navigation, HOTAS, MFD, Have Quick Radios etc) to improve A/G performance… SAR capability is amazing…It provides all wheather strike capability day or night…Mk-82/84 series dumb bombs can be drop at night without visually seening the targets which are identified by SAR radar…Turkey bought around 100 Popeye-I missiles which was the part of F-4E upgrade project in addition to already used PGMs such as AGM-65G Mavericks, GBu-10/12…Combination of SAR/Popeye missile capability is truly new class in surgical strike missions…TuAF also bought EL/L-8222 ECM Pod to improve survability under new generation SAM threats…F-4E/2020s are not totaly naked in terms of A/A, they still use Aim-9L/M for self defense…
Overall, it was a good decision by TuAF to focus on A/G capabilities rather than create another fire and dodge AMRAAM capable aircraft. I look at this way, did F-4E/2020 Terminator project provide new capabilities to TuAF? Answer is yes…
I dont think you can compare the cost of C-17 and A-400M…it is not going to be fair to compare it in the first place…Why? Development of C-17 has been financed by US DOD long time ago(project started during 1980s) and C-17 is now in full production…According to available figures, initial cost of a single C-17 was 320 million USD for US DoD…This figure later went down to 250 million usd in the second batch…Of course, all other C-17 buyers(UK, Canada etc) paid much more than 250 million $ per aircraft due to training, logistical support…Boeing is now desperately looking for new customers to keep production going…Probabaly it is the time to buy C-17 if there are countries who wish to spend 1.5-2 billion $ for 4 C-17s…
On the other hand, A-400M is a new design and even required new turbo-prop engine(which will effect the developmet cost and time). For example, C-17 used commercial derivative of a turbofan jet engine and it has had positive effect on the development cost…Second, Airbus and buyers agreed to a fix price deal which also covers the development costs of A-400 project…McDD( original producer of C-17) was given a contrat to design and develop C-17 by US DoD…Still McDD lost money because they encountered unexpected delays in the production….Simialr to late Boeing deals, Airbus later signed a deal with south africa for 8 a/c with a price tag of 837million euro…it makes it little over 100 million euro per copy…With the current $/euro rate, it is about 142 million $…but this is very recent trend in the economic markets….and week dolar makes US products cheaper…The trend may change after US elections…I have seen a published cost/payload rate of transport aircrafts…I think it was mentioned that buyers usually pay 3million per ton capability….So, C-17’s 80 ton will cost about 240 million, A-400’s 37 ton, will cost about 111 milion $, C-130 with 20 ton, will cost about 60 milion, C-27 with 11 ton, will cost about 33 million….If you look at recent contracts, these figures are -/+ are similar….
Overall, comparing C-17 and A-400m in terms of technical and price, it kind of comparing apples and oranges…Both designed to serve different mission requirements of different countries…US needs(as a global super power) are different from German or French or Belguim or Turkish…These countries are much nearer to operational areas than USA. Therefore, A-400 with 37 tons load to 3300km ( or 30 tons to 4800kms range)can be found sufficient for most(or all) European countries. It has large cabin space that can fit 2(?) Tigers or a single Cougar. These loads are impossible for a C-130s…Only concern can be ,for example, if Germany will operate only A-400 in the transport duties, it may not be cost efficient for low valume loads or shorter distances…To solve this problem, for some countries, it may make sense to purchase couple of CN-235/295 type light transport airplanes to support A-400Ms…Which is what USAF/US army doing now even though there are many C-130s available to them…
In addition to what Orko said, NATO owns the system and leases it to the member countries for their EW training needs…
Simple. The Swedes may actually have placed small front and rear antenna on the actually rod beam.
I dont buy that argument. There is no array structure or antenna that can be seen or identifed on that Greek ERIEYE system that faces rear or front of the aircraft…I see couple of small ESM/RWR antennas..That’s all…You can not hide a large array antenna if there is one…Take a look at IAI’s G550 AEW proposal to S. Korea:
The rear array which contain T/W modules(big round radome) under the vetical tail can be seen from the picture…There is also a similar big nose that contain T/W modules in the front of the aircraft..And two huge side looking array structure…This system has “true” 360 capability…
Greek ERIEYE antenna looks same as Brasilian or Sweden ‘s ERIEYE…Can someone explain how come this side facing, flat looking antenna can provide 360 degree coverage? Unless the rule of physics change in a way that radar beams can be expanded or rotated in the space…IAI or Boeing or NG was so stupid that they could not discover what Ericson has discovered in ERIEYE….Look at IAI’s new proposal, to get 360 degree coverage requirement, they put arrays on every corner of the airplane…face, tail, sides….
Anyway, 300 or 360 degree it will not matter too much from the operational point of view…Nobody will take risk of attacking a well protected AEW aircraft from the blind spots…
I think you mean putting the aircraft in yaw motion every copule of minutes or some seconds….How often do you want to yaw the plane? Every 10 seconds or every 5 minutes or every 15 minutes? It seems it is not that practical method to cover blind spots…I dont want to be the pilot of this aircraft requires ruddering every minute…I think the argument should be do you really need 360-degree coverage?
On the current ERIEYE antenna, T/W arrays are facing sides..I dont see any array covers Front and AFT of the aircraft…I agree with Bharat, technicially, there is no 360 degree coverage provided by ERIEYE antenna…If you look at new Phalcon AEW proposed by IAI, you can clearly see that attention is given to cover 360 degrees by putting arrays front and back of the Gulfstream…Similarly, Boeing solved the problem by putting a “HAT” contains T/W arrays that face front and back on the B-737 MESA antenna…
I dont see Greek flag on the airpane…or it is covered..Why? Are they officially delivered and accepted by HAF?
Greeks do operate a squadron of RF-4Es for recce purposess..What for? As long as RF-4Es fly in the international air space, I dont see how you can prevent them flying recce missions….This is true for both sides…Greeks purchased 4-5 ELINT/SINGT pods from a French Company…These pods are used by Greek RF-4Es to collect intel from Turkey…