Anyways do people have short memories here?

We already had news that turkey was looking at long range IADS including S-400, Chinese SAMs, quite an exotic list for a NATO country.
I would say unless a political shift occurs first they have about as much chance now as then.

Your memory doesn’t serve you well this time, I think..

Turkey always wanted to get S-400, but Russia offered only S-300 derivatives. On many different levels (both military and political) message to Russia was “enter the bid with S-400, and the deal will be yours” but Russia didn’t want to sell S-400..

That deal did go to Chinese HQ-9, so its quite retarded for some commenters to say “Turkey won’t buy non-NATO equipment”. That deal was broken because of delays, and Chinese didn’t provide the technology transfer that was agreed upon in time… Turkey even waited for an additional year to Chinese side to honor their part of the agreement before cancelling it. That had nothing at all to do with NATO, nothing. If anyone thinks otherwise; keep dreaming, you are wrong.

There are already Turkish-built medium range SAM prototypes live shooting at the targets today… Given a decade, that technology and knowhow can easily extend missile range to some 100km range and produce a functional domestic Long-range SAM system… If Chinese are reluctant to share technology, and share it right now, then there is simply no need for such an agreement..

Same applies to other participants; There is no point in buying a PAC-3 from US, for example. It won’t enter into active service in 4-5 years even if deal is made today, and T-LORAMIDS project will fruit at least something comperable in 10.

The situation is entirely different with S-400. Firstly, Russia is now willing to sell it for a change… Secondly, Turkey certainly doesn’t have the know-how to produce something comperable to it in foreseeable future. So if S-400 enters into service in 5 years, it won’t be rendered obsolete or unnecessary in another 5 years into service…

Set a two-stage agreement; Turkey buys 12 (as originally intended) S-400 systems without technology transfer. Then Turkey gets Russian assistance for producing something comperable to 9M96 missile for free and produce it as part of a domestic system… Maybe even full tech tranfer for legacy missiles like 5V55U or 9M82 for Roketsan to play with… Its a quite win-win for both sides…

I wonder if the SAA advance is in some way coordinated with the Turkish side or there is a sort of the race before the lines are established.

Turkey is scared Al Bab would be an hard nut to crack for the militia the support without a strong involvement of their own units, so stopped any further advance.

Roughly two months ago, a news report quoting an “unnamed source in TSK” (as usual), claimed there was an agreement of cooperation between Turkish Army and Russia, for them to coordinate the actions of FSA and SAA againist ISIS..

That source claimed plan is for SAA to take Tadif, and FSA will be allowed to take Al-Bab, and the highway will make the new border between FSA and SAA…

I did take this as half-BS, half “falsified journalism” back then and I still take it with a grain of salt, but this could explain a few things today.

1-Assad regime initially feared sharing a border with Turkish-backed FSA forces, used YPG forces as a buffer… Actually even TSK didn’t support the FSA’s offensive towards YPG, but now both sides have deliberately moved into each other, effectively cuting-off YPG’s advancement and there is already a 6 km border between these forces today.

2-Both Assad regime and FSA made a pincer movement in perfect coordination at the east of Al-Bab. This would also explain why there was literally no attempt for advancement for 2 weeks on FSA side, and it all started concurrently with SAA acts.

3-Russian-Turkish coordinated airstrikes now assist both FSA factions and SAA. This wouldn’t be possible as Russian aircraft still use Syrian Regime airbases, why help the enemy anyway? Same goes to Turkish airforce..

These all point at a truly coordinated act, and benefits both sides; For Syrian side, FSA is not really a threat so long as Turkish side puts a leash on them, and dealing with Turkish side ensures FSA/TSK will not advance any further than they promised… For Turkish side, it guarantees air supremacy without any political entanglements and makes SAA do some of the difficult tasks otherwise would have been difficult with these rag-tag groups doing all the fighting… win-win.

those are some big planes

Latest insider info said nothing was certain. Those were 3 images given to press among hundreds of preliminary design studies.. Aircraft can be twin engined or a single engined. It can use an EJ-200 derivative, or an F-110 derivative using EJ-200’s technological base. It can be as large as F-15 (twin F-110) or it can be as small as Grippen (single EJ-200). Its “likely” to be twin engined EJ-200, similar in size to Typhoon, MiG-29 or F-35, but it was not certain. To my knowledge, nothing has changed beyond that… TAI will (probably) give some alternative designs to military with some risk analysis, and let the military chose one of these..

no, absolutely not as a part trainer/fighter at these sizes,

If true, then it’s going to have to be a single engined plane, considering EJ200 being picked as the basis of new engine.

Some F-16 squadrons (primarily A-G oriented ones) are promoted from F-4E squadrons. Indirectly those F-16 squadrons use F-4Es as their trainers, even if its costs more than twice to operate… Simply because they are twin seat, can carry all the munitions F-16s can, and wear&tear, damage&malfunctions and training losses to F-4Es are preferred over the loss of an F-16..

Same analogy could be said for F-35 and TFX. It will be able to carry all the munitions F-35 can use, and if Turkey can more easily replace a domestic component on TFX or even build new airframe. IF there could be a twin seater version, it will certainly be the preferred trainer for TuAF..

Replacing T-38s directly is obviously nonsense, but it is possible TFX can be used for training flights after spending minimal time in T-38. In essence, replacing it in some roles.

If true, it would still mean a planned increase of combat coded squadrons by roughly 50%. And as F-5 squadrons would be replaced by true combat planes, their training role would then have to be performed by additional new trainer planes, no? Aren’t most of those 50+ F5 really retired? And remaining two dozen are purely for training (as addition to T-38) and/or airshow performance?

They are retired in reality, not because they have no flight hours remaining, but simply because they have no role for them…. They can’t do CAP, they can’t do A-G missions, there is really no need for additional trainers (TuAF has ~192 single seat F-16s, but has 42 twin seat F-16Ds, ~49 twin seat F-4Es, some ~50 twin seat (operational) F-5 and T-38s) so remaining twin seaters just wait at the hangars in Çiğli AFB, and single seaters at Eskişehir AFB, parked next to some unupgraded F-4Es and few F-104s, waiting to be scrapped eventually…

The thing is, it was never intended to “actually” phase out F-5s and half of F-4Es and reduce the numbers… F-35 simply delayed too much. At one point, Turkey considered F-15 procurement to at the very least replace F-4Es, but decision makers was like “hey F-35s will arrive in few years, lets build some additional F-16s as a stopgap measure and wait for it”. A few years later, Typhoon procurement was also considered but didn’t happen for the same reason. F-35 was hoped to be in TuAF ranks 7-8 years from now.

I am not saying numbers will not reduce, they may or they may not, but F-35 will not replace F-16s. First 14 F-35s will be stationed 7th Main Jet base (F-4E and former F-5 base), then Eskişehir (F-4E base), supplementing first, then replacing the F-4E 2020s. By that logic, if F-16s were to be replaced, its not THAT impossible some equivalent number of aircraft will take their place.

Yep, that is the list I am using in combination with some insider sources + twitter accounts.

You are referring to this video I assume?

https://jkikki.de/2016/12/16/%D8%A5%D8%B9%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D8%AF%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%A8%D8%A9-%D9%88%D8%AA%D8%AF%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%B9%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%B4-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%B1%D9%83%D9%8A/

They were Turkish soldiers. 1 dead (in hospital 2 days later), 1 injured.

In PKK operations, tank + cobra + 2 echalons of heavy infantry was the organic combined force. As heavy infantry is non existant in Syria, ISIS simply waited for Cobra vehicle to move away (due to unfounded overconfidence) then shot the tank. Tank crew got out as standard procedure, then cobra doubled back. They were talking to tank crew as the second ATGM hit, probably they were clueless about what happened.

As a side info, same Cobra and M-60T are hit again by ATGMs in 21th and 22th december respectively. This time, Cobra #259447 is -finally- written-off, M-60T is still alive and kicking. Makes me smile about the survivability of these vehicles, makes me mad about the incompetence that allows same vehicles to hit twice in a single week..

ISIL destroy Turkish Leopard-2 tank and capture 2 Leopard-2 tanks near AL-Bab town in northern Syria.

That destroyed tank is #528, (one of the two tanks captured by ISIS) destroyed by Turkish air force. Picture is taken and published by some unofficial Turkish special forces account. Though there is no source claiming second tank is also destroyed. Maybe left alone to be re-captured later.

It looks like Leopard 2 tanks didn’t do any better than older Sabra tanks

So far, it actually did worse. Both M-60Ts and Leopard 2A4s are proved equally vulnerable to ATGMs from sides (which is expected), M-60T is also proven to be quite survivable to impacts to its front armor (no ATGM penatrations after ~20 attempts), Leopard 2 isn’t tested on that area yet (no hits to front armor as of now).

Statistically speaking however, 2 M-60Ts got their armor penatrated in 5 months, this number is 3 for Leopards in just 3 weeks. Maybe just bad luck, but Leopard 2’s way longer turret is exposing more of its weak side armor than M-60T.

Post-impact survivability is also on par, both has proven to have reliable automatic fire extinguishers. Both M-60T and Leo2 has proven functional blow-off panels saving crew, both proven hits to hull results in ammo cook-off.

As far as reliability concerned, Leo2 is proving to be less reliable however. Even on this latest occassion, both Leo2s had to be abandoned due mechanical breakdowns, not due to enemy fire. Both were already at the western edge of hospital when abandoned.

and it looks like Turk army is not that well prepared for their operation against ISIL although they have a lot of experiences in war against Kurds in SE Turkey.

Mistakes do happen. Some tactical planning gone bad apperantly; 22 armored vehicles (according to ISIS), got themselves surrounded inside hospital and akil mountain (according to drone footage posted by pro-ISIS sources), fought to break through. Two immobilized Leo2s and (unfortunately) a fully functional ACV-15 IFV is left behind and not claimed to be destroyed as of yet. Its not the first time our military gets a little too overconfident and careless and pays the price, but this mistake resulted in 16 deaths, roughly doubled the Turkish losses since the start of the operation.

This is a fact. You are saying Turkey would be fine with a Kurdish federation in Syria or Iraq with different leaders on Kurdish side.

An independent federation? No. You said it the only reason yourself:

Reason is simple: Turkey has the largest Kurdish population and it is afraid these federations will be an example for the Kurds in Turkey. No more, no less.

This is correct. As for autonomy of Kurds inside Syria or Iraq, but with a “preferred” leader on top, this is actually the exact outcome Turkey desires.

Your “because it was forced to do” explaination is just wrong, again, Turkey supported Mustafa Barzani since 1961, long before PKK/PYD existed and during times no one in Russia, US or Europe even knew about the existance of Kurds. That man was the head of armed forces of Mahabad Republic, only independent Kurdish state ever existed. How does that fit in “Turkey just hates all kurds” theory?

blatantly insincere.

Well if you like to hear the sincere version… I think many people are racist in their hearts and within that narrow vision and understanding, they try to explain every complicated matter they withness with simplified racism. So yeah, “Turks hates kurds they want to massacre them all”. How many times did you ever *personally* spoke to a Kurd to draw such conclusion? Not a pretender, or a Terrorist supporter, or someone BSing from a website but Personally? I even had a Kurdish GF some years ago, a character actually quite adamant about some rights Kurds were supposed to have here, yet I don’t recall someone like her complaining once about facing a racism you are describing here.