Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Turkey’s new carrier alters eastern Mediterranean energy and security calculus
The Jerusalem Post ^ | 02/04/2014 | MICHA’EL TANCHUM

Posted on 02/09/2014 6:35:33 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: AnAmericanAbroad

That looks Russian!

Never do a job with tweezers if a sledge hammer is available.


21 posted on 02/09/2014 9:01:44 AM PST by DariusBane (Liberty and Risk. Flip sides of the same coin. So how much risk will YOU accept?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase

given the possible turkish enemies in the med, land-based maritime patrol and attack aircraft, land-based SSMs, and submarines this is a target unless they also build an escort group which i am sure tirkey cannot afford.


22 posted on 02/09/2014 9:14:12 AM PST by bravo whiskey (We should not fear our government. Our government should fear us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

....... And, the Israelis will wait until the thousand troops are on board with the 150 vehicles and tanks before sinking her..........

To an absolute certainty, this ships life depends entirely upon some future Israeli prime minister not getting too upset at Turkey.


23 posted on 02/09/2014 9:14:28 AM PST by Cen-Tejas (it's the debt bomb stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DariusBane
It was Russian; and nowhere near as awesome as the photoshopped version once aviation geeks got done with it: Your move, B-29 Superfortress.
24 posted on 02/09/2014 9:22:03 AM PST by AnAmericanAbroad (It's all bread and circuses for the future prey of the Morlocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: skinkinthegrass

The Brits did ok with their “one shot” VSTOL carriers in the Falklands in the early 1980s.

As it is, this probably isn’t meant to function in it’s “carrier” role, but rather to put troops various places under the protective cover of the Turkish Air Force.

As to it being sub bait ... what’s the Israeli equivilant of the Navy Cross again?


25 posted on 02/09/2014 9:29:37 AM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase

It’s obvious that the days of big ships is over.

The money is better spent on counterintelligence, SF, and smart missiles.

WWII was a long time ago. Just ask my daddy (active USMC 1944-1974). He’s seen some changes.


26 posted on 02/09/2014 9:44:07 AM PST by warchild9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
So with the ski slope, are the Turks planning to purchase F-35Bs?

More likely a training platform for the 2018 winter olympics.......

27 posted on 02/09/2014 9:47:51 AM PST by Hot Tabasco (I think I've lost my mojo.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter

The British didn’t have to worry about proper fighter aircraft protecting the anti shipping strike planes. If the Argentines had the bases to run escort Mirages over their Etendards and Skyhawks the British would have been in serious trouble.
In the Eastern Med there are plenty of bases for dangerous aircraft.


28 posted on 02/09/2014 9:49:04 AM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

I’ve just received a book in the mail about Admiral Gorshkov and this very subject.

Hope to have it read soon.

Currently reading one on Wehrmacht reconnaissance units that I bought online. More my specialty.


29 posted on 02/09/2014 9:49:11 AM PST by warchild9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Regarding the ski jump, allegedly it is an integral part of the hull design engineering. At least that’s what the Aussies said in denying that they were going to buy F-35Bs to go along with their As and use it as a true light carrier.

But it will certainly allow the Turks and Aussies to operate F-35s, if they choose to do so at some point down the road.


30 posted on 02/09/2014 9:56:48 AM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: buwaya

I thought the Argies could run proper top cover ( they were using Mirages for shipping strikes in addition to their SuEs and A-4s), just chose for the small flight low level penetration mission to avoid the Shars and ship based AAW (Sea Dart).

As it is, this ship will probably not need to operate outside the protective CAP provided by the Turkish AF. So it’s a focus on the ships assault capabilities. Of course having some F-35s on board for nearby/quick turnaround CAS wouldn’t hurt, with land based fighters providing top cover.


31 posted on 02/09/2014 10:03:20 AM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter

IIRC the Mirages didn’t have the fuel to get into fights with the Harriers and so wouldnt. They could do shipping strike with the range,but unescorted.


32 posted on 02/09/2014 10:17:29 AM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter

Falklands you say?

How many of Turkey’s neighbors have an old Exocet collecting dust.
Just waiting for that special day?


33 posted on 02/09/2014 2:18:20 PM PST by DUMBGRUNT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

Thanks for the posting. Germans also developed four and six engine long range flying boats. Not many reports about their effectiveness. Or notice from anywhere else including US during WWII has been paid to them.

Re long and medium ranging anphibian supersonic aircraft fighters and bombers. Could be the solution for small nations which cannot afford or maintain expensive aircraft carriers including the complex defence of such. The last time we toyed with that concept was the “Skate”. These things wether used solitary or a group (wing) could be supplied by subs. Sooner rather than later FR’s will be seeing a posting on this concept.


34 posted on 02/09/2014 6:38:51 PM PST by mosesdapoet (Serious contribution pause.Please continue onto meaningless venting no one reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter
Regarding the ski jump, allegedly it is an integral part of the hull design engineering. At least that’s what the Aussies said in denying that they were going to buy F-35Bs to go along with their As and use it as a true light carrier.

It's more a matter that changing it is more trouble than it's worth - cost savings and performance improvement would be very marginal.

And it does keep options for the future - both in terms of operating our own STOVL aircraft in the future (which would, at present, of course, mean purchasing F-35Bs) or as additional decks for allied ships we're operating alongside.

35 posted on 02/10/2014 1:40:52 AM PST by naturalman1975 ("America was under attack. Australia was immediately there to help." - John Winston Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

Really? What’s the standoff range of an Exocet? I am thinking five Gripens could easily sent that thing into the drink. Do the Turks have any frigates or destroyers to escort her?


36 posted on 03/10/2014 8:30:32 PM PDT by MSF BU (n)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson