Turkey's aircraft carrier

>>33316706
On a personal note I don't think its a useful investment, Turkey has no real need for power projection currently (might change in the future) and resources could be probably be better spent on the land forces.

Why?

>>33316706
>A FUCKING RAMP

>>33316853
This tbqh senpai, they should spend the money on something militarily useful.

>>33317743
Eh, it's better for the west if they build one shitty boat rather than something useful. Way easier of a target for the upcoming war.

>>33316706
Good. They should buy another one, like Australia.

t. Spaniard

>>33316706
Can roaches survive at the bottom of the sea?

>>33316706
Mfw the only people theyre fighting right now are right across their border and those on a image board

>>33317889
Agreed. If it's operational by the time any shit breaks out between them and NATO or Russia, it'll be that much easier for their opponent to win. It seems like, Post-ww2, it's pretty unacceptable to lose a carrier.

>>33316706
taking current situation in account, it will not carry F-35s...

>>33318897
>it'll be that much easier for their opponent to win.

Wouldn't the ability to project force beyond their territory be an advantage?

>>33318944
What do you mean? They haven't cancelled their order, in fact they've increased it.

>>33319010
So far it seems Erdogan wants to build Iran 2.0 so US might lose interest in giving the planes. Similar way France didnt deliver Mistrals.

>>33319010
>Wouldn't the ability to project force beyond their territory be an advantage?

It would be, if your means for force projection wasn't a sitting duck for any of the AShMs that are almost guaranteed to be fired by any likely opponent Turkey would face. As mentioned above, the only people Turkey could fight who aren't capable of sinking such a vessel are sitting on, or inside of their own borders.

I'd think their interests would be more in securing their own nation before building means to project force that they don't really have.

>Turkey
>F-35s
huh? what? When the fuck did we agree to give them to t*rkroaches?

>>33319079
12th of July 2002
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_procurement#Turkey

>>33319010
Their order is for F-35A, not the B model.

>>33319077

It will be operating in the Mediterranean. Surrounded by western aligned nations or NATO members. There is sufficient air cover.

Unless you wish to tell all the other flattop operators in the Med their ships are worthless, because you have a better grasp of the situation there than they do.

>>33319132

They intend to add the Bees onto their order.

>>33316706
Why are we supplying these Islamic roaches and not killing them with the Kurds/Russia?

File: 1462757090155.jpg (129KB, 780x520px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 780x520px

>>33316706
>What are your thoughts on it?
It should make a pretty explosion.

File: 1267479824268.png (99KB, 208x201px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 208x201px

>>33319123

>selling advanced military hardware to the enemy

File: 1489296973539.png (1MB, 1061x763px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1061x763px

>>33320985
>t. failed empire
>yfw it will never happen

>>33319058
>>33319010


Erdogan is committing international political suicide for ridiculously transparent reasons (his upcoming referendum for UNLIMITED POWAH).

If he doesnt stop sperging out at the EU and Netherlands, he may well not get F-35s, which may make him reach his final sperg form.

>>33321042
(((they are our allies tho bro)))

File: 1487386803584.jpg (8KB, 250x248px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 250x248px

>>33316706

>a light aircraft carrier

>thoughts?

I can't fucking wait for it to get vaporized

>>33316706

Isn't it strange that the Turkish navy so closely resembles the RAN?

>Meko 200s
>OHPs
>Juan Carlos

>>33316706

Fuck Turkey, they are the enemy.

>>33319010
They aren't buying the F-35B you retard

>>33319317
>They intend to add the Bees onto their order.
[Citations needed]

>>33321810
This. The current shitshow thats going on is really entertaining to follow. Erdogan must have the smallest penis ever to get this mad over pretty much everything atm

>>33316706
>It's set to carry the F-35B and attack helicopters.

>*look at current political climate in Turkey*
Ahah nope.

F-35 will either be the new iranian Tomcat or Turkey won't have any.

>>33316867
>A FUCKING RAMP
seconded

>>33321810
>If he doesnt stop sperging out at the EU and Netherlands, he may well not get F-35s, which may make him reach his final sperg form.
>which may make him reach his final sperg form.
Like what ?
Zerg-dogan ? Super-dogan ? Hitler-dogan ? sphincter-dogan ?

>>33319010
>Wouldn't the ability to project force beyond their territory be an advantage?

It's more about the method of spending funds. If they lose the carrier and all the billion dollar planes on it, they budget cutter their entire army for no reason and now have shitty equipment for the rest of their branches

>>33324048

Literally look at the wikipage for the carrier. It is crammed with sources this.

>>33324125
*with sources for this

The muslim conquest of France & Germany will be happening soon

The number of able bodied men who will fight for their country is negligible in the west

>>33324049
Or he is just fallowing the trend. I mean have you heard about Trump. Also this latest EU-Turkey spat is for benefit of both sides. The Dutch PM was about to lose election to a far right party and than suddenly he found a reason to go all nationalistic, same shit with Erdogan, all this shit is for domestic consumption. He knows that few thousand votes of Dutch Turks aren't going to change shit but nationalist votes in Turkey can. Also the EU did fuck him over on refuge deal.

>>33323976
But can the turks handle the bantz?

>>33324133
The German turks left to escape that shit.

Turkey was basically pro-Europe for ages but now, all the pro-Euro turks who are mostly atheists anyway, are leaving Turkey as quick as they can. Instead of making Turkey part of EU, they just joined the EU individually.

It's the turks back in Turkey that are the muslim snackbars,

>>33316706
This is huge, million of weaponized roaches could take off from that thing.

How do we respond to this?

>>33324209
lol meanwhile in reality 80% of turks in Germany are on welfare, and are more islamist than back in the middle east.

File: Roach Remover.jpg (96KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1000x1000px

>>33324215

Bug spray.

File: turk soldier.png (775KB, 1397x1649px) Image search: [Google]

775KB, 1397x1649px

>>33316736
During the coup attempt recently, didn't most of the navy just sail away?

>>33316736
>Turkey has no real need for power projection currently (might change in the future)
ya, it'll change when they get this ship you fucking autist.

>>33317743
>This tbqh senpai, they should spend the money on something militarily useful.
they already have fuckhuge army and homegrown MBT program, what else do you want? idiot

File: raid-insect-spray-the-game-600-35543.jpg (27KB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 854x480px

>>33324274

File: 1460445532245.jpg (794KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

794KB, 1600x1066px

>>33324153

Erdogan is a prime example that they can't handle the bantz

well cockroaches can fly but they have limited range from turkey

so i guess they made that roach carrier to deliver them to yurop

love how they post toms benchmark..

a site that used autocad 2D rengering(on 2016 edition as they say) while autocad has stopped rendering anything on 2d since 2012....

really makes you think..

or guru3d when they benched 1060 on aos claiming everything on high while the aos bench site showed that their settings was on mid/high

>>33324274
even with a light carrier, power projection will be somewhat negligible, especially since they pissed off the Russians (black sea fleet) and are pissing off the EU by bitching about nazis (various Med fleets). Realistically, Turkey needs to protect the Straight, anything in the Med would be NATO territory, and a Russian-Turk shootout would be pretty one sided with not much of a naval aspect.

Many of Turkeys ME rivals are either largely landlocked or are failed states like Syria that are literally across the boarder. It'd be like the US buying an air craft carrier to strike Quebec, rather than just flying up there.

>>33316706
>filename.

That is the Spanish L61 you fuckwit.

Its a LHP with a ramp for Harriers. It has a very LOW launchcycle and its mostly a troops-material-hospital ship.

Turkey is building a LHD? Ok.

>>33325060

It's based of the same design that's why it's pic related. (not OP btw)

>>33324219
This.
Also they scaped from nothing since most of them go back every fuggin single holidays.

Spen in Germany

Turkey has no use for a carrier but they'll have some fun building it and it's a nice advert for their war industry.

>>33324946
>even with a light carrier, power projection will be somewhat negligible,
This statement, does not follow this statement:
>especially since they pissed off the Russians (black sea fleet) and are pissing off the EU by bitching about nazis (various Med fleets).

Just nonsensical, unrelated talk.

>Realistically, Turkey needs to protect the Straight, anything in the Med would be NATO territory, and a Russian-Turk shootout would be pretty one sided with not much of a naval aspect.

Which Turkey wouldn't be fighting on its own. This carrier is to project power around the Med.

>Many of Turkeys ME rivals are either largely landlocked or are failed states like Syria that are literally across the boarder. It'd be like the US buying an air craft carrier to strike Quebec, rather than just flying up there.

Extremely poor analogy and a lack of appreciation for operational flexability.

>>33325118

And from what basis do you assert that from? Given the numbers of other LPH/Light carriers around the Med, it was a good choice.

>>33325120
OK, instead of generalities, how about dreaming up some useful real world missions for the ship?

War with Greece comes to mind. They really should go at it until one side is destroyed. They are natural enemies and not important to civilization.

>>33325134

Missions? ASW, local CAP / strike, amphibious assault (by air and/or sea).

All of that would be useful in a scenario like you describe. People really do underrate the usefulness of a light aircraft carriers simply because they aren't a Nimitz packing 90 airframes.

>>33316706

Eh, great for them I guess? I don't see why they need a carrier when most of their efforts are focused on the Mediterranean Sea where they can just launch from an airbase.

>>33321810
So long Erdogan and Trump getting orders from the same guy. There is nothing to fear.

File: turkey iran blockade.png (206KB, 370x503px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 370x503px

>>33325714
I think it would be used to counter Iran (have the carrier parked in the middle of the Arabian Sea and then just fly f35s to bomb the Persian Gulf and destroy Iran's economy that way) as well as being able to launch ships into Somalia (Turkey has a military base there now) and Bosnia (if the Serbs there start a rebellion).


Over all it seems like this would give Turkey the capabilities to fuck over their only regional adversary as well as maintaining control over Somalia/Bosnia.


I've made a map that shows the pressure points Turkey have on Iran's oil exports (marked in red) a couple of airstrikes would fuck up their trade, purple is where the Turkish carrier could be placed.

>>33318897
>Post-ww2, it's pretty unacceptable to lose a carrier

You don't know that. No one has lost a carrier since WWII.

>>33326452
>launch ships into Somalia

I meant: launch aircrafts into Somalia.

Sounds like a nice ship. Would be a shame if something bad would happen to it on a dark moonless night.

t. The Dutch

>>33316706
I hate turkey so fucking much. I would like to turn them to glass before Israel or Palestine. I'd even settle for getting to beat Erdogan to death.

>>33326788
Netherlands strong. Remove Kebab. USS Cole 2: Turkish Aircraft Carrier Boogaloo.

File: l04he.jpg (27KB, 399x385px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 399x385px

>>33326788
>>33326907
> the Dutch
> militarily relevant

>>33321810
I seriously hope we drop these faggots from NATO. They do nothing besides cause problems. I wish us burgers and Russia would team up to remove Erdogan.

It will work for the intended purpose. Scaring off kebab and feta. But if it ever sees real combat it will probably look like the Chinese New Year before long.

>>33326976
>the Turks
>humans

Pick one and only one faggot.

>>33326976
The Sea is the one place where I'd be confident we could give the roaches a run for their money.

>>33327000 (checked)

I'm not Turkish, your military is just shit.

>>33327066
I'm not Dutch. I just hate the Turks.

>>33324946
This makes it seem like the Turks are just trying to look big.

"look at me I haz carrier I am invincibru"

>>33327066
Our military is underfunded but it isn't bad.

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

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

Sure they have more stuff but most of that is pre 1990's rejects from other countries. They hardly have the equipment to keep their new toy safe if one would want to harm it.

>>33327245
The only problem I have with the Dutch military is how you are so cucked by mama Merkel and the EU that you have handed over control of some of your infantry units to Germany.

>>33327412
German marines are integrated within the command structure of the Dutch marines whom are part of the British Royal Marines.

And then the EU politicians are still pretending the EU army doesn't exist yet :^)

>>33321042
>literally the greatest deterrent to soviet naval gains during the entire cold war
>allowed us to put missile batteries on their land
Yeah those fuckin turkroaches lol

>>33327584
>shoots down Russian jet in Syria and almost causes international crisis
>blocked off and threatened Inkirk airbase during the "coup"

Their usefulness has expired. Erdogan needs to die before they are a respectable nation again.

>>33316867

This.

>>33325757

Fake news or implying God speaks to Erdrogan?

>>33316867
>>33327837
What's bad about ramps?

>>33329404

Nothing.

Some people on /k/ struggle with the concept that everything has advantages and disadvantages which are weighed up against the operational profile / doctrine of the user. It is a balancing act. Would you have 500 figher jets only or would you rather have 250 fighter jets with force multipliers like AEW, AAR and C3ISTAR?

The ramps themselves do not have any negative impact on aircraft performance, they only provide a (very helpful) boost STVOL/VOL/STOBAR aircraft.

File: F35B Lighting II front.jpg (102KB, 1200x914px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1200x914px

>>33326452
It could also be used to open a second front against Russia in the Black Sea if NATO is attacked in Eastern Europe.

>>33326452
Had Erdogan had the ship two years ago he could have intervened in Libya and helped his guys against Haftar. Countries like Tunis and Libya are interesting to Turkey

>>33316706
Spain should just steal it back just before construction's finished HMS Agincourt style

>>33329962
It's being built in turkey.

>>33329563
>The ramps themselves do not have any negative impact on aircraft performance
No shit, ramps are garbage because they limit take off weight.

>>33330358

Kill yourself you massive fucking nigger.

How does the ramp limit the take off weight when it is DEMOSTRAIGHTED that it does the opposite compared to pure VTOL?

>>33330394
>compared to pure vtol
We're comparing it to proper CATOBAR carriers that the US and France have had for over 50 fucking years. Get your shit together, third world scum.

>>33330421
>We're comparing it to proper CATOBAR carriers

No, we're really not. Follow the actual line of discussion.

>Get your shit together, third world scum.

Are you suggesting the US is third world then? Since, you know. They use VTOL carriers.

You offer very little in the way for comparison since you mention nothing is relation to logistics, maintenance, manpower. Thankfully, I have a good source of information that you may read:

>Studies compared the effectiveness of conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) and V/STOL aircraft at sea. One study, conducted by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) in 1980, concluded that V/STOL aircraft provide better mission performance at sea with fewer aircraft. This stems from the V/STOL's ability to generate a greater number of sorties for a given time period, primarily because it is unconstrained by the normal deck cycles of CTOL aircraft. The AIAA study points out that "the air platform from which V/STOL operates can be smaller than today's large deck carrier. The support costs, including logistics, maintenance, manpower, et al. are reduced for both the aircraft and the ship." This concept sets the stage for reducing the large overhead normally associated with sea-based tactical aviation to the point where it can be considered viable on many more seagoing platforms.

1/3

>>33330541
>>33330541
>The STOVL JSF greatly reduces the training and currency requirement for fixed-wing operations afloat. This increases commensurately its ability to be adopted and employed jointly as the Air Force is no longer excluded from non-land-based operations. With the large power margins, enhanced stability control, and pilot augmentation systems the STOVL JSF will incorporate, safe and efficient landings at sea will become easy and straightforward. This should lead to streamlined training and extended currency limits—so much so that non-naval-trained pilots could become ship-qualified in just a few days. Consider the flexibility of being able to jointly sea base all of the services' primary tactical air assets, not only in the context of the tenets mentioned earlier, but also in the form of indefinite sustainment for the force structure. The STOVL JSF squadrons from any service, with minimal effort, could provide forces for surged or sustained sea-based maritime operations—a force planner's dream.

>Fewer aircraft require less hangar space, fewer maintenance and support personnel, and for STOVLs, fewer ship systems to support them and a much smaller air department. STOVLs require 30% less deck space for operations, which leads to increased operating efficiencies. Those efficiencies allow generation of more sorties given equal mission performance. For example, STOVL aircraft can generate 30% more sorties than CTOL aircraft for targets out to 400 nautical miles, and 15% more for ranges to 700 nautical miles. The affordable combination of multiple missions within one hull design can become a reality based on our emerging technology.

>>33330421
So as I mention in my original post >>33329563

Shit is more complex than you childishly pretend it to be. Raw range and take off-weight don't mean shit if you don't have the means to support it because you've chosen the "better" option and thus had to sacrifice force enablers and other things for it. Like escorts in and/or qualitative and quantitative terms.

We need to ban Erdogan's Turkey from NATO immediately and stop supplying it with high grade weapons and weapon technology

>>33330676
This

>>33326475
That's just proof that post-WWII navies consider the loss of a carrier unacceptable.

>>33330676
You'll come to accept reality in time.
Or you won't. It doesn't matter to Turkey.

>>33316706
>Ramp

>>33326890
>I hate turkey so fucking much.
Why?

>>33330676
>stop supplying it with high grade weapons and weapon technology


The funny thing is that this is exactly what the Turks have been working to counter, they're importing very little equipment out of the box these days and pretty much every weapon sale has to be at least partially built in Turkey along with technology

>>33334684
>along with technology

I meant to say

>along with technology transfers

Wrote too fast.

File: hmas canberra .jpg (135KB, 1000x599px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1000x599px

>>33316706
looks like the Canberra Class carriers Australia has

>>33334703
They're both from the same company, they're Spanish ships.

>>33334707
oh yeah

>>33327812
Russian jet was over Turkish air space.

File: 1489646251673.jpg (115KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 640x640px

>>33334703
>Canberra Class carriers
>carriers
This what cucks actually believe.

>>33335080

Not him, but they're still reconfigurable into the light carrier role. Just would be expensive refitting the missing support equipment / structure that was removed from the design to save money.

>>33334707
>>33335101
> we might get Spain, Turkey and Australia all sail the same ship during an exercise in the future.

Gonna look sweet.

>>33316706
Why does anyone help Turkey with anything?

>>33329563
No, it's more like this.
>beautiful American carrier/LHD
>delicious flat top
>ugly British, Turkshit, etc. carrier
>a fucking pig disgusting ramp

>>33337475
We are muslims.

File: TR patrol.jpg (69KB, 960x539px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 960x539px

>>33329563
it wears aircraft faster

>>33337475

Four main reasons

>NATO
>They control the Bosphorus
>They were the most Europeanizing muslims under Ataturk, but that's going away under Sultan Erdogan
>During the Cold War they were anti-communist, and that was good enough for the West to befriend them

File: Tu-22M.jpg (332KB, 1280x865px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 1280x865px

>>33335011
didn't they were like, seconds on it? Was it warranted to be shot down?

>>33316853

So they can Launch planes full of Rapefugees into europe.

File: 7918a853e2d2f200d91f549a43f0823b.jpg (435KB, 2580x1485px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 2580x1485px

>>33327479
whats their focus of this supposed army? to battle who?

>>33337677

Incorrect.

>Why does Turkey want a light carrier

Probably to make sure they can resupply Northern Cyprus in the event of a conflict with Greece. The carrier can make airlift/sealift to Cyprus a lot easier and carry ASW helis to keep Greek U-boats away from supply convoys.

>>33335011
Who gives a shit? Russian shit flies over US airspace all the time, and US over Russian, and we just deal with it.

Russia baited the turks, and they took it hook line and sinker.

>>33337894
I guess it would be used to battle Russia.