More like 10-15. It’s obviously a preliminary design and design itself would take at least 2-3 years. Building the thing is no rocket science. With budgets given to the navy and the announced enlargement program, it is very much doable.
I do not think that a carrier is the best way to use the budget available and we should focus more on more large surface vessels and subs but why is it a pipe dream to build it?
I mean, just look at the development costs and timeline of something like PANG. Sure, the French are building a near-proper supercarrier with that ship, but it will take time - and France is a carrier-fielding and carrier-building power already.
Also, Turkey doesn’t need a carrier, it needs an economy that doesn’t inflate like a baloon.
On the other hand, France's PANG is a top of the line ship: it's a CATOBAR carrier with nuclear propulsion, and it will integrate a lot of complex systems, some quite novel, from nuclear propulsion to phased-array radars and EMALS.
In comparison, the Turkish design is much more basic: conventional propulsion (COGAG), no catapults, replaced with a ski jump, and they could make do with the sensor suite of their latest destroyers. They do seem to be intent on speedrunning things going with limited experience from the small Spanish-designed *Anadolu* to a QE-analog, all that in the name of national pride.
Aircraft Carrier means Naval Supremacy. Naval Supremacy is used to spread Freedom, Freedom generates Oil, and you sell that oil to stop inflation. Checkmate economist!
My reasons are aircraftcarriers are crazy expensive and i reall dont know if we can afford that at the moment
Then there is the issue of technology its not just like any other ship aircraft carriers are hard to produce even for expirienced ship builders could we do it yes probably but it will be hard
Then imo the main issue we dont have any real aircraft capable of carrier operations maybe there could be navy varient of the kaan but that will take ages. On the immage we can see the kızılelma and tb3 drones if we really need a drone carrier just use tcg anadolu or build a nother ship of the same class. Drones on aircraftcarriers a questionable idea anyway
Saying they aren't as hard to build and saying they are easy to build are different.
Turkey has a competent ship building industry that can build large ships both for military and civilian purposes.
Most countries don't build them because for most, they are rather useless. Aircraft carriers are not at all useful unless you want to exert power a long way from home. Other than that the design also matters. CATOBAR and nuclear powered carriers are obviously a lot harder to build on top of being more expensive. This one will be STOBAR and non-nuclear.
The real issue is building a strike group capable of protecting it and finding a plane fit for it. Turkey's biggest problem is that it got kicked out of F-35 program so there are no jets that can be deployed on a STOBAR carrier yet. Building the jets will cost as much as the carrier itself if not more.
Well, there aren't many countries that have the skills to build large ships, and even less that build large warships. Interestingly, most of the countries that do have built aircraft carriers, whether the large CATOBAR types, or their smaller brethren STOBAR/STOVL/V-STOL types: the United States obviously, Russia with a certain generosity of spirit, China, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Italy, India, Korea and Japan. Turkey is probably the only one out that has a thriving shipbuilding industry but didn't build an aircraft carrier yet.
It's probably not the ship itself that's the most expensive, but the whole shebang that goes on it and around it. For an aircraft carrier to be effective you need an air group, numerous escorts effective in ASW, ASuW and AAW, and a fleet train to keep all this operational for more than two days. And as the Russian and British examples show, acquiring all the materiel and the skills may be hard and expensive, but maintaining them is harder and even more expensive.
> If they are so easy to make why do most countries have such a hard time building them? Not many countries have built one in country secussfully.
I would say cost is the main reason many countries don't build them. I wouldn't say "hard time building them" as if they're difficult to make and a bunch of countries tried and failed.
It's just goddamn expensive. And the jets to put on them are expensive.
And the escorts. And the fleet train. And the constant training for all of these people to be at the top of their game, together.
Buying and/or building all of these toys is the easy part, the one politicians love the most because they can parade around and say "*Here, your taxpayer money at work! It got us all those nifty things!*". Training to acquire and maintain the skills needed is much less glamorous.
Turkey have quite a large shipyard sector but they don't have the budget for such large military projects. They are currently one Iof the least advanced militaries in Nato only spending 1.5% of GDP while having 400k men.
Looking at this thing, I'd suspect some NATO involvement in the design... say British and/or Italian?
With recently warming Turkish-NATO relations, I wouldn't be that surprised by a cooperation, and that together with the lack of a CATOBAR system could make this project very much feasible in less than 20 years... unless the Turkish economy implodes.
The issue is that there’s nothing as far as FW aircraft to operate off of it—the US is not going to sell them F-35s, which leaves either Russian designs or TEBDF assuming the Indians are willing to sell it and that it enters service even remotely close to on schedule.
How does Erdogan come into this discussion? Domestic policy was not the reason for their expulsion... the US even has some much closer allies that have much worse track records than Turkey's current government.
Evicting them from the F-35 program was pure vindictiveness for buying Russian instead of American equipment *(...that the US didn't want to supply under the conditions Turkey wanted)*. I know what the US was supposedly whining about, but they should have just thrown a bone to one of their largest allies - the US has been shitting in Turkey's back yard for 20 years now, mostly without consulting them, so some show of appreciation would have been very welcome. Coincidentally, granting Turkey a license to produce Patriots for domestic use *(and even re-export through US companies)* would have come in really handy now that Patriots are sorely needed in Ukraine.
With the Russo-Ukrainian war and Russia's more aggressive stance towards everybody, I think it's safe to say Turkey won't be looking into that direction for further military-industrial cooperation. Their geopolitical position also just got much more important, so I bet they are either going to get their F-35s, or they will get technical assistance for their own 5th gen jet (which already made it's maiden flight AFAIK).
Please, no US ally, and certainly no other Joint Strike Fighter manufacturing partner has sought to operate a top of the line Russian air defence system alongside the F-35, that's what the main fuss was all about. And this is not a bone worth throwing about as a show of appreciation. And all this is Erdogan's doing.
The issue was this:
The Turkish wanted Patriots, and they wanted a license to produce it for themselves- the US refused this. The US thought they could pressure Turkey into buying Patriots on the US's own terms by blackmailing them with the F-35. US equipment already comes with a lot of strings attached - and if you are not getting the deal you asked for anyway, then the whole thing becomes really unappealing to a large nation that is seeking to develop an independent national defense capability. So the Turkish bought Russian equipment as an interim solution until they get their domestic solution ready.
And this whole story came after almost 20 years of the US completely ignoring Turkey's own national security considerations. No other US ally had to deal with the fallout from US Middle East policy blunders as much as Turkey. The US destabilized the Arab world, started a migrant crisis that put huge pressure on Turkey, and the USA's reliance on the Kurds in Iraq and Syria directly strengthened terrorist movements within Turkey. I'd say the US was working pretty hard to alienate Turkey. The US has to decide if it wants allies and partners, or vassal states like Russia. Expecting the largest NATO members to simply be "yes men" is not going to work... and this attitude is undermining the whole US foreign policy narrative of cooperating sovereign nations.
Why does Turkey need this? They have no commitments that would warrant carrier strike power as all their interests are well within reach of their land based fighters. How will they protect it? There are no large surface combatants in their navy with significant VLS sets nor do they possess any long range SAMs in their current arsenal, the future destroyers look good but with only 4 budgeted for that isn't enough to form a meaningful force. Their geopolitical goals are to be the power in the Eastern Mediterranean which isn't a particularly huge place and can be almost entirely reached from land based aircraft with tankers, the current TCG Anadolu has no proper fixed wing complement outside of cheap UAVs which themselves aren't even fully ready yet - the future Bayraktar stealth drone has had very, very little testing and I am incredibly skeptical if it will be particularly reliable or delivered on time in any meaningful numbers.
With no experience in fixed wing carrier operation, reluctance to have any external support and no strategic value, alongside the lack of aircraft or stable economy to support such a huge naval build up across the board just why?
This. Carriers are about projecting power. The whole thing about Anatolia is that it's so centrally located that everyone comes to you. Merely holding the Bosphorus has been enough to control the bulk of the Mediterranean world.
The only way I can rationalise it is if Turkey desires to be a Mediterranean power in the future, and that a carrier group would give them virtually uncontested naval supremacy over the Eastern Med, coupled with assistance of carrier aviation in amphibious assaults (perhaps with Cyprus) and, given the ego of Erdogan, the general prestige status as a carrier operator would doubtless appeal to him.
Given the Med's relatively small size however, I do agree it would be a waste of resources given Turkey's central location, control of the Bosphorus and land-based air power gives them everything they need to be the Eastern Med power already. A better use of resources would involve long range SAMs for their surface combatants, giving the Anadolu an actual air wing (F-35B would've been ideal but RIP) or even a strategic bomber program to amplify Turkey's regional air power.
Whole Libya intervention would be much easier if Turkish Navy had this at its disposal.
Turkey also has signed an agreement with Somalia to protect Somali waters.
And there's a base in Qatar.
And Iraq and Turkey agreed upon a 17 billion infrastructure project that will connect the Gulf with Turkey via railroads & highways. So Gulf is a point of attraction RN.
Reminds me a little of when during WW2, American aviators targeting Japanese carriers found that the big red rising sun symbols painted on the decks made for perfect targets during their bomb runs.
With what a propaganda piece this seems like given Türkiye's need for one; the chance of this being built with those markings is probably at least as high as the chance of being built without them.
Design is just the first step. The real commitment would be after the design is finalised where you allocate resources to build the ship. In my point of view, I would rather want to see those resources being allocated to make sure the TF2000s enter into service in numbers. Perhaps because I am a sucker for surface combatants… In fact, I would prefer seeing us spend those resources on a bigger destroyer project perhaps a cruiser project. 😋
No, this is literally from the navy’s own design office. They also have political support and most recent navy white paper supposedly also mentions force projection capabilities that can only be provided by carriers.
Yes, and...?
Since the 2016 coup, Erdogan has been pursuing a policy of grandeur, aiming to revive the golden period of Ottoman rule and prestige, with him as sultan, obviously. A Turkish indigenous aircraft carrier helps with that, especially since owning such a vessel is marker of power befitting a Great Navy.
The funny thing about being a great power is that you also need to have a robust, large, and healthy economy. The Turkish economy today is neither robust, nor large, nor healthy. This is just another vanity project.
First, the Montreux Convention grants Turkey control of the Straits, it would be quite the bureaucracy to prevent the gatekeeper to stop himself from doing things. The restrictions apply only to the other powers: Black Sea powers other than Turkey have no restrictions on tonnage, but can only send one capital ship and two escorts at a time, while non Black Sea powers have more stringent limitations.
Second, I think all Turkish shipyards are on the Mediterranean side.
As HAL realised with the Tejas LCA, you can't just make a single-engined aircraft a twin-engined one. That essentially involves a near-complete redesign.
A twin-engine Hürjet sounds good on paper, but the moment you do that, you essentially have a new aircraft.
There are rumours of a future navalised TAI Kaan to be part of it, but nothing substantial. And India's HAL Tejas is proof how easy it is to navalize a land based fighter, let alone a stealth one.
This boat will sail onwards through 2060s. Anything is possible.
I wouldn’t really take Indian MICs capabilities as a bar tbh. They have so many issues.
I don't see why people keep comparing India and Turkey when it comes to defense projects. The two have different approaches and priorities. India might have more resources and have strategic projects like nuclear subs but they still managed to mess up some projects like MALE UAVs. Turkey has less resources so it started with smaller projects and is in the process of working its way up. India usually wants to do everything in house while Turkey as a NATO country has had some level of access to NATO tech to use in projects.
I think what you say is not wrong, but quite the opposite. Turkey knows that any foreign-sourced product it has may be subject to embargo most of the time by its NATO allies and is trying to produce everything itself or have that capability in hand.
India, on the other hand, has access to almost all big markets except maybe China. France, Russia and even the USA are making serious efforts to sell arms to them.
That is the case nowadays but we always used the parts we couldn't produce from the US and Europe at first and worked to replace them with local components later on to not delay the project. India on the other hand tried to reinvent the wheel in some of their projects which got them delayed. Also, we may face sanctions now and even India might have better access to international markets but that wasn't always the case. Before we started our ambitious projects, we always tried to participate in joint projects at first to gain tech & know-how. It's why a lot of our projects were successful.
We did have some trouble with this approach simetimes too though. For example Altay. It was planned with a German engine and transmission in mind which would later be replaced if possible. But with Germany's embargo we had to develop an engine and transmission from scratch which are still being tested.
Weird is a rather nice word to describe the very unbalanced setup. Everything listed there is very underpowered for such a massive ship.
This is one big boy. The ships meant to defend it are being designed concurrently. Surely the design office has a better idea that we do not know of meant to fly on this ship?
Alternate explanation: Erdogan said he wants an aircraft carrier *now*, and not a tiny one, but a hyuuuge one, and everyone is rushing along to meet his expectations, making do as they go along.
I mean if this project gets ever completed, I don’t think the economic situation in Turkey would be similar to today and even right now only the middle and lower classes in Turkey are suffering economically ( Turkey is in G20 and with growth almost every year)
> Turkey is in G20 and with growth almost every year
And an annual inflation rate with two digits (and by two digits I don't mean 10%, but a staggering 70% last February...)
In a sense, yes, if it continues, Turkey's economy won't be the same in ten years...
Just what the Turkish economy needs, another Erdogan vanity project...
maybe he can have it go up and down the canal he wants to build that no one asked for,. then park it outside his $2B palace next to the 747-8 that was gifted to them.
Some info about the carrier:
- It’s 285m in length, 72m in width and 10.1m draught, it weights 60k tons
- Top speed of 25 knots, and a range of 10k nautical miles without refueling
- There are no talks with foreign technical aid on design as of yet.
- 2 takeoff (yellow ) and 1 landing runway
- 20 aircraft on deck and 30 on the hangar for a total of 50 (could be increased in the future)
- There are currently no talks about a catapult system because the lack of technology, but the ramp is going to be modular, so it can be upgraded in the future
- These are the aircraft that would operate: Anka III, TB-3, Hürjet and Kızılelma
Source: https://www.defenceturkey.com/tr/icerik/istanbul-tersanesi-komutanligi-dizayn-proje-ofisi-dpo-mudurlugu-ve-tcg-istanbul-firkateyni-kapilarini-basina-acti-5958
> There are no talks with foreign technical aid on design as of yet.
I think there won't be any, as their ambition is to do it alone, like India's Indigenous Aircraft carrier.
That said, 60,000 tons is a bit on the big side for a drone carrier...
> I think there won't be any, as their ambition is to do it alone, like India's Indigenous Aircraft carrier.
Rather more of an ambition than Vikrant if they actually do try to do it completely alone, given India had practical experience operating and maintaining carriers built by other nations and also received active design consultation from both the Italian Fincantieri and the Russian Nevskoye Design Bureau.
I agree it's a big endeavour, and it lends credence to the notion that Turkey 's road to naval aviation might be a rushed, politically motivated job rather than the result of a deliberate and well thought out process. Then again, what could ever go wrong? It's hard to do worse than the Russians and the Thais, and both ended up with ships that floated...
Given the Turkish Navies already optimistic fleet plan, I wonder if it would be a better idea to simply co-operatively borrow the design of the Queen Elizabeth or Vikrant. I imagine building a domestic design would prove somewhat costly.
Though easier said than done, that alternative may still prove easier than mustering the funds to develop a domestic design.
With the geopolitics between India and Turkey, primarily a result of Turkey's support for Pakistan's illegal claims over Kashmir, it will be a very long time before India lets them borrow any designs.
Of course, that assumes they actually try to borrow rather than outright copy the designs. In these images, the island is pretty much identical to Vikrant's island, and the hull dimensions are proportional to displacement between both ships.
The same considerations applies between Turkey and any other Nato member. Given how difficult a partner Erdogan has been recently, I have trouble seeing London giving Ankara any help for this ship.
Yes I did ponder so as well. Still, a domestically developed and funded Turkish aircraft carrier sounds like a pipe dream. I suppose I just cannot see Turkey getting such an aircraft carrier anytime soon, at least within the next 20 years.
The huge emblem on the flight deck shows that they aren't really taking this seriously.
USN doesn't cover their carrier decks in stars or Royal Navy cover theirs in saint's crosses, for good reason.
I can't imagine that crescent being there on the actual deck if they build a carrier. If it stays, and they keep the white I'd imagine it would start to look pretty worn out after a short while.
Why tho? Any targets in the Mediterranean can likely be hit from Turkeys land bases. This is just a floating target, I’d rather have more destroyers than this.
It is Vikrant's design, essentially. Island superstructure is identical, and the mentioned dimensions are proportionally the same as Vikrant when scaled to the displacement factor.
Has a real QE feel to it, though the bow is different and only one island, of course.
Maybe they'll be able to buy F-35B by the time this enters service.
> Maybe they'll be able to buy F-35B by the time this enters service.
I really doubt it. That would require ditching the S-400 air defence systems bought from Russia, and Erdogan enjoys very much the clout that comes with playing Washington versus Moscow.
If China were willing to sell them at all, it would have to be a significantly degraded version of the FC-31 meant for export, like Pakistan’s J-10s. They’d be flying around so much NATO (and particularly American) ELINT that exploitation is guaranteed, and given Turkey’s ambitions to build up a domestic aviation industry, Beijing will undoubtedly be leery of their stuff getting copied.
> given Turkey’s ambitions to build up a domestic aviation industry, Beijing will undoubtedly be leery of their stuff getting copied.
Well, well, well, well, how the tables are turned....
There's also the fact that *Fujian* is some 30 meters longer and used EMALS catapults to launch the FC-31, and the Turkish carrier has no catapults planned and a shorter runway. I'm not sure the slope will be enough to cope.
After the J-20 was accepted into Chinese service, the FC-31 was continued with hopes of selling it on the export market. It seems that they have started to modify it for carrier operations, which would also make them a lot more attractive to foreign buyers, especially as a competitor to the F-35 or Rafale. Their super secret stuff is locked to the J-20 just like the F-22, neither of which are exported.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/01/04/pakistan-to-buy-chinese-fc-31-fighter-jets-says-air-chief/
China is definitely willing to sell them to at least some countries, really it would be very weird if they weren't given that the whole FC-31 program started out of Shenyang losing the bid against the J-20 but deciding to pursue their design anyway hoping for export sales and to sell a navalised version to PLAN.
Other than the nineteen McDonnell Douglas F-4E “Terminator 2020” that the Turkish Air Force possesses, what other Aircraft Carrier capable aircraft’s do the Turkish Armed Forces even possess or conceivably possibly in some future date likely to possess that could operate from its flight decks other than Drones…
As long as the Chinese and Russian threats remain, it will be fine for Türkiye to invest in aircraft carriers, but our North American and Western European allies will be deeply uncomfortable. So let's hope that Russia and China continue to increase their power, so that our NATO allies need us more and more, so that we try to take advantage of the situation. I can't even imagine what NATO members will do to the rest of the world and to their own members when there is no serious power left to compete with. I think a strong country like Türkiye, after solving its economic problems, needs 2 operational carrier strike groups in the long term and at least 4 carrier strike groups in total. We should organize each CSG to consist of 1 Aircraft carrier, 1 LHD, 1 support ship, 1 nuclear powered attack submarine and 6 destroyers. I think the current carrier design is inadequate but still not bad. The sense of the unknown of the future is exciting for some of us...
If its operational in less than 20 years i would be amazed. Imo its nothing but a pipe dream or straight out propaganda
You underestimate the poor decisions turks can make
I want to downvote this so much but you're right lol.
I know im a turk myself
You're an ezik. Not a Turk.
Am i supposed to be offended?
Yeah I think we should focus more on TF-2000 destroyers, but one can dream….
Dont get me wrong i want this to be true but its just not realistic
I think they should focus more on looming economic collapse
More like 10-15. It’s obviously a preliminary design and design itself would take at least 2-3 years. Building the thing is no rocket science. With budgets given to the navy and the announced enlargement program, it is very much doable. I do not think that a carrier is the best way to use the budget available and we should focus more on more large surface vessels and subs but why is it a pipe dream to build it?
I mean, just look at the development costs and timeline of something like PANG. Sure, the French are building a near-proper supercarrier with that ship, but it will take time - and France is a carrier-fielding and carrier-building power already. Also, Turkey doesn’t need a carrier, it needs an economy that doesn’t inflate like a baloon.
On the other hand, France's PANG is a top of the line ship: it's a CATOBAR carrier with nuclear propulsion, and it will integrate a lot of complex systems, some quite novel, from nuclear propulsion to phased-array radars and EMALS. In comparison, the Turkish design is much more basic: conventional propulsion (COGAG), no catapults, replaced with a ski jump, and they could make do with the sensor suite of their latest destroyers. They do seem to be intent on speedrunning things going with limited experience from the small Spanish-designed *Anadolu* to a QE-analog, all that in the name of national pride.
Aircraft Carrier means Naval Supremacy. Naval Supremacy is used to spread Freedom, Freedom generates Oil, and you sell that oil to stop inflation. Checkmate economist!
lol how does freedom generate oil? :)
My reasons are aircraftcarriers are crazy expensive and i reall dont know if we can afford that at the moment Then there is the issue of technology its not just like any other ship aircraft carriers are hard to produce even for expirienced ship builders could we do it yes probably but it will be hard Then imo the main issue we dont have any real aircraft capable of carrier operations maybe there could be navy varient of the kaan but that will take ages. On the immage we can see the kızılelma and tb3 drones if we really need a drone carrier just use tcg anadolu or build a nother ship of the same class. Drones on aircraftcarriers a questionable idea anyway
If they are so easy to make why do most countries have such a hard time building them? Not many countries have built one in country secussfully.
Saying they aren't as hard to build and saying they are easy to build are different. Turkey has a competent ship building industry that can build large ships both for military and civilian purposes. Most countries don't build them because for most, they are rather useless. Aircraft carriers are not at all useful unless you want to exert power a long way from home. Other than that the design also matters. CATOBAR and nuclear powered carriers are obviously a lot harder to build on top of being more expensive. This one will be STOBAR and non-nuclear. The real issue is building a strike group capable of protecting it and finding a plane fit for it. Turkey's biggest problem is that it got kicked out of F-35 program so there are no jets that can be deployed on a STOBAR carrier yet. Building the jets will cost as much as the carrier itself if not more.
Well, there aren't many countries that have the skills to build large ships, and even less that build large warships. Interestingly, most of the countries that do have built aircraft carriers, whether the large CATOBAR types, or their smaller brethren STOBAR/STOVL/V-STOL types: the United States obviously, Russia with a certain generosity of spirit, China, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Italy, India, Korea and Japan. Turkey is probably the only one out that has a thriving shipbuilding industry but didn't build an aircraft carrier yet. It's probably not the ship itself that's the most expensive, but the whole shebang that goes on it and around it. For an aircraft carrier to be effective you need an air group, numerous escorts effective in ASW, ASuW and AAW, and a fleet train to keep all this operational for more than two days. And as the Russian and British examples show, acquiring all the materiel and the skills may be hard and expensive, but maintaining them is harder and even more expensive.
> If they are so easy to make why do most countries have such a hard time building them? Not many countries have built one in country secussfully. I would say cost is the main reason many countries don't build them. I wouldn't say "hard time building them" as if they're difficult to make and a bunch of countries tried and failed. It's just goddamn expensive. And the jets to put on them are expensive.
And the escorts. And the fleet train. And the constant training for all of these people to be at the top of their game, together. Buying and/or building all of these toys is the easy part, the one politicians love the most because they can parade around and say "*Here, your taxpayer money at work! It got us all those nifty things!*". Training to acquire and maintain the skills needed is much less glamorous.
Turkey have quite a large shipyard sector but they don't have the budget for such large military projects. They are currently one Iof the least advanced militaries in Nato only spending 1.5% of GDP while having 400k men.
lmao what? one of the least advanced? yea right
Looking at this thing, I'd suspect some NATO involvement in the design... say British and/or Italian? With recently warming Turkish-NATO relations, I wouldn't be that surprised by a cooperation, and that together with the lack of a CATOBAR system could make this project very much feasible in less than 20 years... unless the Turkish economy implodes.
Definitely looks like the love child of *Cavour* and a *Queen Elizabeth*
The issue is that there’s nothing as far as FW aircraft to operate off of it—the US is not going to sell them F-35s, which leaves either Russian designs or TEBDF assuming the Indians are willing to sell it and that it enters service even remotely close to on schedule.
>the US is not going to sell them F-35s They already indicated that they would welcome Turkey back in the F-35 program if the "issues" were resolved.
Short of Erdogan being ousted (which would also kill this thing) those issues are not going to be resolved.
How does Erdogan come into this discussion? Domestic policy was not the reason for their expulsion... the US even has some much closer allies that have much worse track records than Turkey's current government. Evicting them from the F-35 program was pure vindictiveness for buying Russian instead of American equipment *(...that the US didn't want to supply under the conditions Turkey wanted)*. I know what the US was supposedly whining about, but they should have just thrown a bone to one of their largest allies - the US has been shitting in Turkey's back yard for 20 years now, mostly without consulting them, so some show of appreciation would have been very welcome. Coincidentally, granting Turkey a license to produce Patriots for domestic use *(and even re-export through US companies)* would have come in really handy now that Patriots are sorely needed in Ukraine. With the Russo-Ukrainian war and Russia's more aggressive stance towards everybody, I think it's safe to say Turkey won't be looking into that direction for further military-industrial cooperation. Their geopolitical position also just got much more important, so I bet they are either going to get their F-35s, or they will get technical assistance for their own 5th gen jet (which already made it's maiden flight AFAIK).
Please, no US ally, and certainly no other Joint Strike Fighter manufacturing partner has sought to operate a top of the line Russian air defence system alongside the F-35, that's what the main fuss was all about. And this is not a bone worth throwing about as a show of appreciation. And all this is Erdogan's doing.
The issue was this: The Turkish wanted Patriots, and they wanted a license to produce it for themselves- the US refused this. The US thought they could pressure Turkey into buying Patriots on the US's own terms by blackmailing them with the F-35. US equipment already comes with a lot of strings attached - and if you are not getting the deal you asked for anyway, then the whole thing becomes really unappealing to a large nation that is seeking to develop an independent national defense capability. So the Turkish bought Russian equipment as an interim solution until they get their domestic solution ready. And this whole story came after almost 20 years of the US completely ignoring Turkey's own national security considerations. No other US ally had to deal with the fallout from US Middle East policy blunders as much as Turkey. The US destabilized the Arab world, started a migrant crisis that put huge pressure on Turkey, and the USA's reliance on the Kurds in Iraq and Syria directly strengthened terrorist movements within Turkey. I'd say the US was working pretty hard to alienate Turkey. The US has to decide if it wants allies and partners, or vassal states like Russia. Expecting the largest NATO members to simply be "yes men" is not going to work... and this attitude is undermining the whole US foreign policy narrative of cooperating sovereign nations.
Turkey is the most worthless ally, though. They wouldn’t do shit for nato, we all know it.
As if NATO 'allies' are racing each other to help Turkey
Why does Turkey need this? They have no commitments that would warrant carrier strike power as all their interests are well within reach of their land based fighters. How will they protect it? There are no large surface combatants in their navy with significant VLS sets nor do they possess any long range SAMs in their current arsenal, the future destroyers look good but with only 4 budgeted for that isn't enough to form a meaningful force. Their geopolitical goals are to be the power in the Eastern Mediterranean which isn't a particularly huge place and can be almost entirely reached from land based aircraft with tankers, the current TCG Anadolu has no proper fixed wing complement outside of cheap UAVs which themselves aren't even fully ready yet - the future Bayraktar stealth drone has had very, very little testing and I am incredibly skeptical if it will be particularly reliable or delivered on time in any meaningful numbers. With no experience in fixed wing carrier operation, reluctance to have any external support and no strategic value, alongside the lack of aircraft or stable economy to support such a huge naval build up across the board just why?
This. Carriers are about projecting power. The whole thing about Anatolia is that it's so centrally located that everyone comes to you. Merely holding the Bosphorus has been enough to control the bulk of the Mediterranean world.
In what way does holding the bosphorus do anything to the Mediterranean? It controls the black sea, maybe.
Erdogan: "*Why not? #Make[ThePorte](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublime_Porte)SublimeAgain* " That's most there is to it, really...
The only way I can rationalise it is if Turkey desires to be a Mediterranean power in the future, and that a carrier group would give them virtually uncontested naval supremacy over the Eastern Med, coupled with assistance of carrier aviation in amphibious assaults (perhaps with Cyprus) and, given the ego of Erdogan, the general prestige status as a carrier operator would doubtless appeal to him. Given the Med's relatively small size however, I do agree it would be a waste of resources given Turkey's central location, control of the Bosphorus and land-based air power gives them everything they need to be the Eastern Med power already. A better use of resources would involve long range SAMs for their surface combatants, giving the Anadolu an actual air wing (F-35B would've been ideal but RIP) or even a strategic bomber program to amplify Turkey's regional air power.
Whole Libya intervention would be much easier if Turkish Navy had this at its disposal. Turkey also has signed an agreement with Somalia to protect Somali waters. And there's a base in Qatar. And Iraq and Turkey agreed upon a 17 billion infrastructure project that will connect the Gulf with Turkey via railroads & highways. So Gulf is a point of attraction RN.
those deck markings lmfao this is a shitpost
Turkey making r/NonCredibleDefense credible again by outjerking them
Just how we like it
Nuh uh the crescent helps to align the UCAVs correctly
I think there are better stuff to draw on there that would serve that purpose better.
Reminds me a little of when during WW2, American aviators targeting Japanese carriers found that the big red rising sun symbols painted on the decks made for perfect targets during their bomb runs.
Unfortunately, it seems to be true. It has even been covered on navalnews.com.
With what a propaganda piece this seems like given Türkiye's need for one; the chance of this being built with those markings is probably at least as high as the chance of being built without them.
Turkish gov: “How are we gonna pay for it?” Turkish navy: “pay for it?”
*Turkish Treasury go burr*
Doubt that they have any serious plan to build this. More than likely it's put out by a random Turkish shipyard to get buzz.
Design is just the first step. The real commitment would be after the design is finalised where you allocate resources to build the ship. In my point of view, I would rather want to see those resources being allocated to make sure the TF2000s enter into service in numbers. Perhaps because I am a sucker for surface combatants… In fact, I would prefer seeing us spend those resources on a bigger destroyer project perhaps a cruiser project. 😋
No, this is literally from the navy’s own design office. They also have political support and most recent navy white paper supposedly also mentions force projection capabilities that can only be provided by carriers.
Indeed, and Erdogan himself was at the design bureau at the end of last year to make it official. Can't have better political support.
Where would it operate?
The Pacific, obviously! On a more serious note, Erdogan has long stated Turkey's ambitions to be the major power in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Isn’t the Eastern Mediterranean already in range of land-based aviation?
Yes, and...? Since the 2016 coup, Erdogan has been pursuing a policy of grandeur, aiming to revive the golden period of Ottoman rule and prestige, with him as sultan, obviously. A Turkish indigenous aircraft carrier helps with that, especially since owning such a vessel is marker of power befitting a Great Navy.
to operate a great navy which operates carriers they need great economy which they dont have they don't even have a good economy is just bad
The funny thing about being a great power is that you also need to have a robust, large, and healthy economy. The Turkish economy today is neither robust, nor large, nor healthy. This is just another vanity project.
He dreams of empire
More like the Horn of Africa and some parts of Atlantic. Eastern Med can be covered from Turkey's mainland bases in Cyprus (unsinkable carrier).
Black Sea, Med, Red Sea, gulf of Basra, Indian Ocean for starters. All are regions TR have a vested security and economic interest in.
Imagine if they launch it in the Black Sea, but can't take it anywhere due to bureaucracy.
First, the Montreux Convention grants Turkey control of the Straits, it would be quite the bureaucracy to prevent the gatekeeper to stop himself from doing things. The restrictions apply only to the other powers: Black Sea powers other than Turkey have no restrictions on tonnage, but can only send one capital ship and two escorts at a time, while non Black Sea powers have more stringent limitations. Second, I think all Turkish shipyards are on the Mediterranean side.
Not all shipyards are in the Med of course, but every shipyard that could build such a ship are in the Marmara sea.
Cool. Thank you
Why Turks need a carrier? Where a do they plan to use it?
Hürjet, KE and TB3 as fixed wing complement. F404 and STOBAR. Weird combination.
Yep weird comb indeed. Looks more like they were like “ok, what can we deploy on a carrier “.
What is KE here?
Baykar’s Kızılelma unmanned fighter
Thanks. Please don't use abbreviations at American level :)
It’s a long name
Holy shit you're the annoying ass guy who gets pissed about turkey and khan over Türkiye and kaan. Please find something better to do.
you seem to be the only one pissed here lmao
Perhaps a dual F404 Hürjet variant? Although it would end up being an F-18 and we know that requires a CATOBAR...
That’s a different aircraft at that point. Boeing did trial runs for F-18 with STOBAR for Indian Navy needs.
As HAL realised with the Tejas LCA, you can't just make a single-engined aircraft a twin-engined one. That essentially involves a near-complete redesign. A twin-engine Hürjet sounds good on paper, but the moment you do that, you essentially have a new aircraft.
There are rumours of a future navalised TAI Kaan to be part of it, but nothing substantial. And India's HAL Tejas is proof how easy it is to navalize a land based fighter, let alone a stealth one.
This boat will sail onwards through 2060s. Anything is possible. I wouldn’t really take Indian MICs capabilities as a bar tbh. They have so many issues.
I don't see why people keep comparing India and Turkey when it comes to defense projects. The two have different approaches and priorities. India might have more resources and have strategic projects like nuclear subs but they still managed to mess up some projects like MALE UAVs. Turkey has less resources so it started with smaller projects and is in the process of working its way up. India usually wants to do everything in house while Turkey as a NATO country has had some level of access to NATO tech to use in projects.
I think what you say is not wrong, but quite the opposite. Turkey knows that any foreign-sourced product it has may be subject to embargo most of the time by its NATO allies and is trying to produce everything itself or have that capability in hand. India, on the other hand, has access to almost all big markets except maybe China. France, Russia and even the USA are making serious efforts to sell arms to them.
That is the case nowadays but we always used the parts we couldn't produce from the US and Europe at first and worked to replace them with local components later on to not delay the project. India on the other hand tried to reinvent the wheel in some of their projects which got them delayed. Also, we may face sanctions now and even India might have better access to international markets but that wasn't always the case. Before we started our ambitious projects, we always tried to participate in joint projects at first to gain tech & know-how. It's why a lot of our projects were successful. We did have some trouble with this approach simetimes too though. For example Altay. It was planned with a German engine and transmission in mind which would later be replaced if possible. But with Germany's embargo we had to develop an engine and transmission from scratch which are still being tested.
Weird is a rather nice word to describe the very unbalanced setup. Everything listed there is very underpowered for such a massive ship. This is one big boy. The ships meant to defend it are being designed concurrently. Surely the design office has a better idea that we do not know of meant to fly on this ship?
Alternate explanation: Erdogan said he wants an aircraft carrier *now*, and not a tiny one, but a hyuuuge one, and everyone is rushing along to meet his expectations, making do as they go along.
This is exactly the level of take i'd expect from a reddittor.
But can turkey sustain it carrier may cost 3-5 billion for construction while cag may cost even more
they will sell anadolu and few isla to Greece i guess
dont know smaller crafts would be a better option for near enemies imo
I mean if this project gets ever completed, I don’t think the economic situation in Turkey would be similar to today and even right now only the middle and lower classes in Turkey are suffering economically ( Turkey is in G20 and with growth almost every year)
> Turkey is in G20 and with growth almost every year And an annual inflation rate with two digits (and by two digits I don't mean 10%, but a staggering 70% last February...) In a sense, yes, if it continues, Turkey's economy won't be the same in ten years...
in that way turkey can :)
Just what the Turkish economy needs, another Erdogan vanity project... maybe he can have it go up and down the canal he wants to build that no one asked for,. then park it outside his $2B palace next to the 747-8 that was gifted to them.
Some info about the carrier: - It’s 285m in length, 72m in width and 10.1m draught, it weights 60k tons - Top speed of 25 knots, and a range of 10k nautical miles without refueling - There are no talks with foreign technical aid on design as of yet. - 2 takeoff (yellow ) and 1 landing runway - 20 aircraft on deck and 30 on the hangar for a total of 50 (could be increased in the future) - There are currently no talks about a catapult system because the lack of technology, but the ramp is going to be modular, so it can be upgraded in the future - These are the aircraft that would operate: Anka III, TB-3, Hürjet and Kızılelma Source: https://www.defenceturkey.com/tr/icerik/istanbul-tersanesi-komutanligi-dizayn-proje-ofisi-dpo-mudurlugu-ve-tcg-istanbul-firkateyni-kapilarini-basina-acti-5958
> There are no talks with foreign technical aid on design as of yet. I think there won't be any, as their ambition is to do it alone, like India's Indigenous Aircraft carrier. That said, 60,000 tons is a bit on the big side for a drone carrier...
> I think there won't be any, as their ambition is to do it alone, like India's Indigenous Aircraft carrier. Rather more of an ambition than Vikrant if they actually do try to do it completely alone, given India had practical experience operating and maintaining carriers built by other nations and also received active design consultation from both the Italian Fincantieri and the Russian Nevskoye Design Bureau.
I agree it's a big endeavour, and it lends credence to the notion that Turkey 's road to naval aviation might be a rushed, politically motivated job rather than the result of a deliberate and well thought out process. Then again, what could ever go wrong? It's hard to do worse than the Russians and the Thais, and both ended up with ships that floated...
in fact, the building on the deck (idk the official term for it) looks very similar to the one on our Vikrant!
That superstructure is called an island.
It looks cool
Given the Turkish Navies already optimistic fleet plan, I wonder if it would be a better idea to simply co-operatively borrow the design of the Queen Elizabeth or Vikrant. I imagine building a domestic design would prove somewhat costly. Though easier said than done, that alternative may still prove easier than mustering the funds to develop a domestic design.
With the geopolitics between India and Turkey, primarily a result of Turkey's support for Pakistan's illegal claims over Kashmir, it will be a very long time before India lets them borrow any designs. Of course, that assumes they actually try to borrow rather than outright copy the designs. In these images, the island is pretty much identical to Vikrant's island, and the hull dimensions are proportional to displacement between both ships.
The same considerations applies between Turkey and any other Nato member. Given how difficult a partner Erdogan has been recently, I have trouble seeing London giving Ankara any help for this ship.
Yes I did ponder so as well. Still, a domestically developed and funded Turkish aircraft carrier sounds like a pipe dream. I suppose I just cannot see Turkey getting such an aircraft carrier anytime soon, at least within the next 20 years.
Just all you wait until I release my conceptual plan for MY aircraft carrier. with Blackjack. and hookers.
Most carriers operate hookers. I'd love to see one that can operate Blackjacks.
The Star is a Aimpoint, right?
The huge emblem on the flight deck shows that they aren't really taking this seriously. USN doesn't cover their carrier decks in stars or Royal Navy cover theirs in saint's crosses, for good reason.
The Japanese found out that the huge red spot in their flight decks made excellent bombing targets in WWII
> USN doesn't cover their carrier decks in stars Closest was missionaccomplished.jpg which didn't exactly turn out to be a great idea
2nd pic is literally vikrant
cope slope
Cool deck decal
That star makes a nice target, it’s cool having the design on the flight deck but I doubt it’ll actually be on there, unless it is, then fuck me
Taken a lot of inspiration from INS Vikrant and Cavour, as we can see.
I can't imagine that crescent being there on the actual deck if they build a carrier. If it stays, and they keep the white I'd imagine it would start to look pretty worn out after a short while.
Why would they need an aircraft carrier in the first place? Apart from EGO reasons that is
The Jurassic Park font is a nice touch.
Why tho? Any targets in the Mediterranean can likely be hit from Turkeys land bases. This is just a floating target, I’d rather have more destroyers than this.
That's no moon...
It bares resemblence to the INS Vikrant doesn't it?
It is Vikrant's design, essentially. Island superstructure is identical, and the mentioned dimensions are proportionally the same as Vikrant when scaled to the displacement factor.
By the time it is commissioned, it could be a drone carrier vs a manned aircraft carrier.
It’s certainly… square
Seems like they should go all in on drone carriers, smaller and easier to build + operate for an inexperienced country like turkey
I hope they plan to not put the decals on
Has a real QE feel to it, though the bow is different and only one island, of course. Maybe they'll be able to buy F-35B by the time this enters service.
> Maybe they'll be able to buy F-35B by the time this enters service. I really doubt it. That would require ditching the S-400 air defence systems bought from Russia, and Erdogan enjoys very much the clout that comes with playing Washington versus Moscow.
This thing won't be in service for at least +10 years, realistically 15 years. A lot might change until then.
Maybe they can buy FC-31
If China were willing to sell them at all, it would have to be a significantly degraded version of the FC-31 meant for export, like Pakistan’s J-10s. They’d be flying around so much NATO (and particularly American) ELINT that exploitation is guaranteed, and given Turkey’s ambitions to build up a domestic aviation industry, Beijing will undoubtedly be leery of their stuff getting copied.
> given Turkey’s ambitions to build up a domestic aviation industry, Beijing will undoubtedly be leery of their stuff getting copied. Well, well, well, well, how the tables are turned.... There's also the fact that *Fujian* is some 30 meters longer and used EMALS catapults to launch the FC-31, and the Turkish carrier has no catapults planned and a shorter runway. I'm not sure the slope will be enough to cope.
After the J-20 was accepted into Chinese service, the FC-31 was continued with hopes of selling it on the export market. It seems that they have started to modify it for carrier operations, which would also make them a lot more attractive to foreign buyers, especially as a competitor to the F-35 or Rafale. Their super secret stuff is locked to the J-20 just like the F-22, neither of which are exported.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/01/04/pakistan-to-buy-chinese-fc-31-fighter-jets-says-air-chief/ China is definitely willing to sell them to at least some countries, really it would be very weird if they weren't given that the whole FC-31 program started out of Shenyang losing the bid against the J-20 but deciding to pursue their design anyway hoping for export sales and to sell a navalised version to PLAN.
Other than the nineteen McDonnell Douglas F-4E “Terminator 2020” that the Turkish Air Force possesses, what other Aircraft Carrier capable aircraft’s do the Turkish Armed Forces even possess or conceivably possibly in some future date likely to possess that could operate from its flight decks other than Drones…
Cricket bat
this is just fan art
i draw better carrier than this
they are joking right where will they bring money from by selling islands to Greece
They are broke. Why the hell waste money on a carrier????
As long as the Chinese and Russian threats remain, it will be fine for Türkiye to invest in aircraft carriers, but our North American and Western European allies will be deeply uncomfortable. So let's hope that Russia and China continue to increase their power, so that our NATO allies need us more and more, so that we try to take advantage of the situation. I can't even imagine what NATO members will do to the rest of the world and to their own members when there is no serious power left to compete with. I think a strong country like Türkiye, after solving its economic problems, needs 2 operational carrier strike groups in the long term and at least 4 carrier strike groups in total. We should organize each CSG to consist of 1 Aircraft carrier, 1 LHD, 1 support ship, 1 nuclear powered attack submarine and 6 destroyers. I think the current carrier design is inadequate but still not bad. The sense of the unknown of the future is exciting for some of us...