Drone carrier: aircraft carrier laughter and tears in Turkish
Turkey has begun testing its latest Anadolu UDC. They waited for the ship, the test was postponed due to the fire of 2019, but now everything is over and Anadolu is going to the test.
So Turkey can be congratulated on joining the club of countries that have non-aircraft carriers in service. You can consider the differences between the UDC and the so-called "light aircraft carrier" for a very long time, but in fact there are aircraft carriers, and there are aircraft-carrying attack ships. Helicopter carriers, landing ships and the like.
The essence of aircraft carriers is simple, like a lifeline: they carry planes on board, with the help of which they project power to any region of the world. Naturally, surrounded by a whole crowd of escorts.
UDC (let's call them all that way) play a little differently. In fact, these are landing ships capable of delivering to a certain area up to a battalion (in the US Marine Corps in a battalion up to 2 people, if anything) personnel with weapons and armored vehicles. Land this personnel in accordance with plans, and then provide fire cover using attack helicopters or vertical take-off aircraft.
Such ships exist in many fleets world and, in principle, they differ from each other only in size and, accordingly, in the number of personnel and equipment taken on board.
Almost all of these ships can move an infantry battalion along with an infantry fighting vehicle / armored personnel carrier to a fairly decent distance, tanks reinforcements, artillery, ATGMs, air defense systems and other things useful in battle.
Typically, such ships are characterized by the presence of a dock chamber in the stern, from where, in fact, the landing takes place on special landing craft capable of operating in shallow water.
And all such ships have a large hull with a decent flat deck, on which it is so convenient to place helicopters.
A helicopter is generally a very useful thing on a ship. A PLO helicopter is capable of, if not destroying, then at least scaring off an enemy submarine, transport helicopters can land the first wave of troops, which will gain a foothold on the coast and make it possible for the main forces to approach, and attack helicopters will quite normally provide fire support to the landing troops and, first of all, arrange anti-tank a headache to the enemy’s equipment, which will have the intention to destroy the landing force.
And who is richer - those countries can afford to consider the issue of placing on these luxurious decks and VTOL aircraft - aircraft with vertical takeoff and landing.
Yes, this option is not for everyone who is not friends with NATO, there are practically no chances, except for the frankly outdated Harriers. But even NATO members may not receive the new F-35Bs. As it happened with Turkey.
In general, UDC is a compromise. Aviation technology is a very complex economy that requires a lot of premises and areas, warehouses, technical personnel, since maintenance and especially repair of both aircraft and helicopters is a very difficult task.
In addition, it is necessary to store on the ship, in addition to spare parts and tools, aviation fuel, oils and ammunition. Everything is so non-combustible and not dangerous in terms of explosion.
By the way, on the same UDC of the WASP type, the Americans carry ammunition and fuel for the landing force for 4-5 days of hostilities. But "WASP" is a vessel with almost 30 thousand tons of displacement. For comparison, TAKR "Peter the Great" - 25 thousand tons. That is, we feel the difference in what someone carries.
Plus, any UDC is a potential command post for a landing operation and a hospital. It is very convenient to deliver the wounded by helicopters.
In general, UDC is really universal and has many positive qualities. Indeed, a helicopter regiment on deck, a motorized rifle regiment of incomplete equipment below deck (modern UDCs can accommodate from 1000 to 2000 fighters), a hospital, communications - in principle, everything that is needed for a landing operation.
Of course, you have to pay for everything.
Therefore, the tonnage of the UDC is quite decent, moreover, in terms of size, all these Mistrals are rather rather big ships that require special infrastructure. UDCs have very wide hulls (and where you place everything you need in narrow ones), that is, you should not expect the speed of a destroyer from them.
Armament is also modest. It will, of course, allow you to shoot at targets on the shore, to brush off annoying aircraft (doubtful) and helicopters (more likely) of the enemy, but in fact, the UDC implies an ORDER. Not as cool as an aircraft carrier, but nonetheless. Air defense / anti-aircraft defense ships are simply required to be present in this order, since helicopters are good, but not for combat operations against enemy submarines. Detect - yes, sink - is unlikely to succeed.
And the presence of aircraft such as "Harrier" or "Lightning-2" is not a panacea for problems from the air. It is clear that the duty link should carry out patrol service even if something happens ... But it is in which case it immediately becomes clear that 6-12 aircraft on the UDC is not 80-100 on a serious American aircraft carrier. And given that it will be necessary to act against enemy aircraft near its territory, on which airfields will definitely be present, then it will turn out to be a very definite situation in which the Moskva cruiser found itself.
There were no planes on the Moskva, but they would hardly have been able to change anything. Considering how much and what weapons were on the cruiser, any UDC would have strangled with envy. And yet, here's how it all turned out.
Why UDC is needed at all has been said more than once. The first wave of landings on the territory of the enemy, which, so to speak, does not have impressive means of defense. A group of ships, which includes UDC, approaches the shore, scatters the enemy forces on the shore and begins landing. Cover ships, attack helicopters and aircraft assist in the landings. Everything is simple.
landing operations in stories there were many human wars, the difference is only in the scale of operations. Of course, landings on the scale of Normandy or Okinawa are rare today, but about 1991 ships and almost 170 aircraft, including B-2000 strategic bombers, were involved in Operation Desert Storm in 52.
But such landings are still rare, but the visit of an order from 1-2 UDC and several frigates and escort minesweepers near Odessa in our time would look more than justified. Plus, of course, cover planes from the Crimean airfields.
Here we would have an operation in which the UDC would have been revealed in full, because these ships are capable of landing a decent mass of troops and equipment in the indicated area in a short period of time.
Now it’s worth asking the question: why does Turkey need UDC? Yes, not one, but two, because Trakia is being built on stocks.
The ambitions of the Turkish ruler Erdogan have been known for a very long time. Pan-Turkic peace and projecting the influence of Turkey's power somewhere else.
In general, today Turkey has a quite good fleet by half, however, from ships inherited from NATO allies, but in general, it is quite enough to protect and defend its maritime borders.
So why does Turkey need two hefty UDCs (by the way, these will be the largest ships in the Turkish fleet), apparently, one in the Black Sea, one in the Mediterranean?
ambition. In dollar terms, they are expressed quite normally. It is prestigious in our time to have an aircraft carrier. Better yet, not alone. Of course, the question arises why some countries need it, but this is a question for another article, and we will think of a similar question on UDC for the Turks.
UDC is an offensive tool. With this, everything is clear, they do not defend themselves with amphibious assault forces. In any case, this is a tool for moving military forces to another area and conducting military operations there.
We look at the Black Sea, where the first Turkish squadron is based. Where can you land troops?
Bulgaria and Romania are NATO allies. Absurd.
Ukraine? So we still need to ask.
Russia? Yes, it's funny.
Abkhazia? See point 2.
Georgia? It also seems to be nothing.
In general, the region is such that there is nothing to solve for oneself by landing.
Mediterranean Sea.
The thought immediately arises of the Greek islands, where the two countries always have something going on. But Greece is also a member of NATO. And how much conflict can occur between them ... In general, it can.
Italy, France, Spain - all their own.
Africa ... Yes, Turkey had interests there, but not of such a plan to fight for them, and even so.
Syria? Well, there are enough borders through which you can work (which is happening now), it's cheaper than driving ships. We know that we suffered with the Syrian Express.
Perhaps we simply do not know something, but not a single country within the range of Turkish ships comes to mind where a coup could be staged with the help of two regiments.
So let's leave that aside for now and move on to the ship itself.
Briefly: "Anadolu" is the Spanish "Juan Carlos the first."
A ship considered a classic of the UDC, since it has a very strong side: an excellent balance between the number of troops and the amount of aircraft. This is a really chic ship that can be retrained from a landing ship into a helicopter carrier or a light aircraft carrier no worse than the Mistral.
It is clear that the aircraft carrier will be very light, equipped with vertical take-off and landing aircraft, but the Spaniards solved the problem of a short take-off by creating a 12-degree springboard in the nose, which would allow any VTOL aircraft to take off "humanly", that is, with a normal supply of fuel and weapons .
The springboard isn't such a bad thing after all. It cannot break, it does not take time to recharge the steam system or electromagnetic storage devices, in general, it is scrap and in Africa it is scrap. And most importantly, he is able to throw into the air that "Harrier", that F-35B with a normal combat load.
In general, having successfully repurposed the Juan Carlos for themselves, the Turks got what they wanted: a flat deck with a springboard, four landing craft (LCM) or two landing hovercraft (LCAC) or two landing barges (LCVP), which is more, than the Spaniard, respectively, the landing can be thrown out faster. Huge compartments that can accommodate 29 tanks and up to 40 other vehicles. 12 helicopters in the hold and 6 on the flight deck. Well, the cherry on the Anadolu cake is 12 F-35В.
In general, when the Juan Carlos was created, when the Anadolu was designed, everything was relatively calm and an amphibious helicopter carrier was drawn, that is, a classic UDC. And then the F-35B appeared, and then it started ...
In 2014, when it became clear that the Spaniards would build the ship, even then the Turks were itching to make a UDC with an aircraft carrier option. And then such a gift of fate ...
How Anadolu was built can be read separately, it was built quickly. Which ruined the ship. If the Spaniards were busy like the French, then the alignment could be completely different.
And it turned out that in 2018 the ship was laid down, and in 2019 it was already launched. But by that time, Erdogan had openly played political-military-economic games, including with Russia, and for some unknown reason (we still don’t know much about Turkey) decided to buy S-400 air defense systems in Russia. And our guardians, for no less strange reasons, decided to sell the latest anti-aircraft missile systems to a NATO country.
In general, the situation is more than strange, but the most piquant thing is that the United States did not appreciate Erdogan's ability to be friends with everyone at once, and therefore immediately threw him out of the F-35 supply program. To avoid.
And it happened in the same year 2019. That is, a tragicomic situation has developed: an aircraft carrier is being completed, almost an aircraft carrier, with a springboard for taking off planes, God bless him, with this springboard!
What is most valuable today? That's right, toppings! So questions arose regarding the need for a paid-for and possibly even a complex flight support complex already being installed. That is, surveillance, driving radars, computing power and just jobs suddenly became unnecessary. Yes, all this can be used to work with helicopters, but ...
It’s not that Turkey really needed this non-aircraft carrier in practice, of course, these are just show-offs. The usual eastern arrogance of the ruler of a country claiming regional leadership. The Turks have long established the production of many things, including weaponswhich can and should be taken into account. But Erdogan wanted power. Turkish light aircraft carriers, as leaders of two operational groups of ships, North and South - yes, it would look.
Here the F-35 would look simply gorgeous. I don’t know who these task forces would scare, but 12 F-35s on ships is a good strike power. They would have come to court even with a likely showdown with Russia. As practice has shown, one ancient Su-24 can do things, but here is still a dozen of the latest stealth attack aircraft ...
In general, there was something to regret.
The Turks came up with an elegant move. Yes, Bayraktars. We don’t have our own aircraft (and they don’t, under license the Turks produce only F-16s) - we will equip them with our own drones!
A lot has been written about Bayraktar after the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, no less has been written and said after the Ukrainian events. And, let's just say, the promoted UAV was debunked a little. He was too unable to escape from the defeat of not the most, we note, the new anti-aircraft systems of Russia. On the contrary, that neither is a classic: "Torami" collided just "once".
But it's an option.
Of course, even a few dozen Bayraktars cannot replace 12 F-35s. This is clear and understandable, you don’t even need to count here especially.
No matter how bad the F-35B is, it carries a four-barreled 25-mm cannon in a container and 220 rounds, as well as up to 6800 kg of combat load on hardpoints.
Bayraktar is known to be able to carry about 100 kg in the form of bombs and missiles. The combat load is indicated at 150 kg, but 50 of them are a weapons control module.
Moreover, the fact that the drone can hang in the air for a very decent amount of time at a cruising speed of 130 km / h does not give anything at all. The radius of control of "Bayraktar" from a ground station is about 150 km, from a ship it can be a little more. But "Anadolu" will have to come somewhere exactly at this distance.
It is not in vain that I often remember Moscow today. The cruiser also came a little closer than it could. And here the hint is not only transparent, it’s immediately clear what’s the point of having clouds on board drones there is none.
For a final comparison, the F-35 has a range of 800 km. A little compared to ground models, but sorry, beyond the scope of many anti-ship missiles. And the plane flies a little faster than the UAV.
We are already silent about the number of weapons, because 1 to 68 - everything is clear. Operators will just wipe their hands trying to drag so many bombs and missiles with drones.
But what can I say, the F-35s of Turkey are not allowed, which means that we will have to get out of the situation as it will. We decided to go out at the expense of "Bayraktars", but everything looks very funny, to say the least - miserable.
As a result, a springboard that gobbled up a certain amount of displacement is completely unnecessary. Unless a miracle happens and the United States does not forgive Erdogan, who has lost his shores, and does not supply him with the F-35В.
In general, it turned out to be some kind of strange toy, such as the royal yacht of the monarchs of Thailand. It's a joke, of course, but that's what the Thai aircraft carrier is called. "Chakri Narubet" goes to sea so rarely that the royal family, for whom apartments have been created on the aircraft carrier, goes out to air on it.
But "Chakri Narubet" (also, by the way, of Spanish construction), although it has a displacement of only 11 thousand tons, can carry 6 "Harriers" and 6 helicopters. No worse than Anadolu.
You can also recall colleagues "Anadolu", the Australian "Adelaide" and "Sydney".
In fact, this is still the same Spanish Juan Carlos, but slightly rebuilt to the requirements of the Australians, who had a lot of work for the UDC in East Timor. These UDCs were originally with a springboard, but were not calculated for the use of aircraft.
Therefore, when the F-35B appeared, the Australians salivated. The American partners said - no question, we will! But then it turned out that the installation of the same equipment for providing flights costs so much that in Australia they shuddered and decided to fly only by helicopters until the end of the ships' service life.
Here in Turkey it turned out that not everything you need is there. And therefore, in order to give at least some meaning to these drone carriers, UAV carriers will be made of them. A typical win with complete zrada. Apparently, they were communicating with our neighbors.
And in the end, there are more questions than answers. But in the end, the Turks drove themselves into this trap, so we can’t cry for them. And we can see what they end up with. And we will even see the birth of a new class of ships - the carrier of naval UAVs!
Although, indeed, they would have built an ordinary UDC, and the head would not have hurt. But Trakia is also being built there ...
To us, in the end, this is just a great example. In Russia, too, from time to time, searchlights of some aircraft carriers pop up for completely incomprehensible and frankly stupid purposes such as “flag demonstration”.
As practice has shown, ships of the UDC type can be very useful to us. In general, any new ships are useful to us;
This, of course, does not mean that we should immediately rush to create VTOL aircraft for these ships. We have excellent helicopters that can solve almost all the tasks of our time. We have, it turns out, where to use such a ship as the UDC. This, unlike Turkey, is already a reason for their creation.
If you carefully look at and analyze not only your own, but also other people's mistakes, if you clearly understand what role each warship can play, then the revival of the Russian fleet may not turn out to be such a dull affair.
The main thing is not to repeat the mistakes, neither your own nor others. The Turks, in fact, helped us get rid of part of the illusions. You have to rely only on yourself. Russian ship, with Russian machines and devices, with Russian weapons. This will be the key to future success.
Information