Talk:Bayraktar TB2

Range listed is wrong. Whoever listed a range of 150km with fuel capacity of 300l needs to find another hobby

The drone can stay 27h in the air, with a travel speed of 70kt (130km/h). This means that the range is around 3500km, not 150km. The figure of 150km probably refers to the communications range, and even this doesn't seem to be correct, as the producer's page (https://www.baykartech.com/en/uav/bayraktar-tb2/) states that the communication range is <300km.

178.235.179.67 (talk) 02:39, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

There seems to be confusion as to operational range due to communications and range (aeronautics) which is the total ground covered. In a 27 hour endurance test flight in Kuwait, a range of 4000km was achieved. source. 4000km/27 hrs=148km/hr=80knt average. so it’s reasonable. Also keep in mind that indicated air speed is less than true airspeed, 70knt IAS at 17,000ft is ~92knt TAS [1]. Technophant (talk) 00:43, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2022

The claim that 47 TB2s were downed by LNA has no real evidence. It's nothing but a hearsay, and if you actually follow the sources it leads to a fake US official named Jeff Jaworski. It was a PR stunt for Pantsir S1 by Kremlin shills, i'm very surprised to encounter those dubious articles as sources here after all this time. 159.146.75.173 (talk) 17:10, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mr.User200:I can find notting about this "Jeff Jaworski", can you look on this? Shadow4dark (talk) 17:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – robertsky (talk) 17:52, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

The IP is questioning whether the source already in the article, a Vietnamese language article citing a US journalist named Jeff Jaworski, is a reliable source. I can find no mention of this journalist anywhere else - I suggest the IP is right. What reliable sources supports the "47 kills" claim? Is this Vietnamese source reliable? -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 17:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

The IP have just errased a section of the article of the Wing Loong I Drone here. According to him since the Wing Loong Drone did not have radar or air to air missiles, those Bayraktar drones could not be destroyed. However the content of the article says this Bayraktar drones were destroyed in airstrikes on the ground. It seems another IP, likely from Gala19000 or User1234 is trying to push for a POV here. Regarding the article of the 47 TB2 drone destroyed is another source of the many numbers of downed drones that exist, some sources claim 16, 23 or more drones destroyed. Since GNA and Turkey until now have not published the number of lost TB2 drones, we consider all information available.Mr.User200 (talk) 23:18, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Finlay McWalter, @Mr.User200: I just did a more extensive search and realised that the IP may be right as well. Avia.pro is a Russian outfit and may be biased. If he is a US military correspondent, we would expect to see the news coming in from at least a more US focused military website. And the trail runs cold at Russian sites, and the odd Vietnamese ones. "Jeff Jaworski" here may be referring to a now deactivated Quora user https://www.quora.com/profile/Jeff-Jaworski-1, as dug out by some readers at https://en.topcor.ru/18972-amerikanskij-voenkor-nazval-chislo-bajraktarov-unichtozhennyh-rossijskim-pancirem-v-livii.html. There's no way to verify the content in Quora at the moment as it seems that the user had either deleted their content before deactivating, or as part of the deactivation process, the content were hidden or removed. There seems to be no archives on archive.org and archive.is as well. But I would err on the side of caution and consider this as unreliable sourcing and thus the content should be removed. Thoughts? – robertsky (talk) 00:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Neither source seems like a reliable source, and someone with a Quora account fails WP:USERGENERATED. The relevant claims should be removed, until they can be affirmatively supported with real WP:RS. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 08:16, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Don't bother. I said those things multiple times, everytime user Mr.User200 deleted my edits on the Edit page. Yes, actual source was a Quora user called "Jeff Jaworski" and he wasn't a journalist, in his profile he said he was a "defense enthusiast", even he didn't claim he was a journalist. Also his source was Avia.pro (pro Kremlin source) and Avia.pro was sourcing Al-Masdar news which is pro Assad/Russia. "mediabiasfactcheck" considers that source a "questionable one". These are all facts but some people have an agenda here so they won't even let people to say these on the Edit page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.196.94.19 (talk) 21:05, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

I believe that this was removed by Mr.User200 after our conversation here. – robertsky (talk) 02:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Libya section needs neutral language

Let alone most of them being dubious sources, there's no such lists for any other equipment where the product in question was supposedly "destroyed" however many times. It's trying to canvas an idea that "They completely failed in Libya" Without talking about the strikes the drone did which reversed the tide of the war.

For example, on Pantsir page there's no seperate section counting how many of them got destroyed by TB2's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.230.174.178 (talk) 00:21, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Finding reliable sources for payload and armaments

The surveillance version in the catalog has a payload of less than 55 kg. I think that includes the weight of the sensor payload, about 51kg for the MX-15D turret and 4kg for the software defined radio SIGINT module. 300 Litres of Avgas weighs 216kg. I can’t find a good source for empty weight, 420kg on Google may be a guess. I did see a writer believe that the max payload without sacrificing fuel is 50kg and it seems like they added the 4x23kg hardpoint capacity plus 55kg sensor payload to equal almost 150kg.

The only loadout I’ve seen on video is two MAM-L and two MAM-C. It uses a single “100lbs hook type” bomb rack system. Meant to hold a 100lbs bomb using two hooks, or 50lbs/23kg on a single hook, which is the rated capacity of the Hornet release system. It’s also rated for 4g lateral loads, so it can be overloaded to some degree, however most of the weapons listed have no RS they have been tested on the TB2 including the Cirit and APKWS. My best guess is 45kgx2 payload is the max. Several armaments are too heavy and don’t mention TB2 so need to be removed.

The source for L-UMTAS test shows the missed drop without rocket ignition. The MAM-L is an adapted L-UMTAS without a rocket motor. So what the video shows is the drop of a MAM-L prototype, not a test-fire of the actual rocket. The KUZGUN is 100kg and there’s no mention of compatibility with TB2. The BOZOK is a feasible weight. A twin 70mm rocket launcher is feasible too but there’s no proof for it either. Technophant (talk) 00:24, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Technophant, see next Talk page section for a relevant source. N2e (talk) 16:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Source on recent Bayraktar successes in naval environments

There is an excellent article just published in Naval News on the Bayraktar TB-2, and its string of recent uses in the Russo-Ukraine war by Ukraine against Russian naval assets. Here's the link. Includes some details on versions, differences of the naval version from non-naval, weapons load, etc. N2e (talk) 16:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2022

Line: "Lithuanian citizens have fundraised $3.2 million, out of the $5.37 million, to buy a Bayraktar drone for Ukraine. [137]"

Change to: "Lithuanian citizens have fundraised more than $5 million, to buy a Bayraktar drone for Ukraine. [137]"

Change source link to: https://www.euronews.com/2022/05/28/lithuanians-organise-donation-drive-to-buy-bayraktar-drone-for-ukraine Vaicius (talk) 07:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

 Already done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Operators

Lithuania should be added to the operators section In the tb2 donation campaign to Ukraine held in Lithuania, 1 Bayraktar TB2 was delivered to Lithuania to be delivered to Ukraine. the unmanned aerial vehicle has the Lithuanian flag and coat of arms. in this case, it makes Lithuania a potential user.

References

Kosovo should be added to Operators There already arrived 5 bayraktar TB2

References

Name

Should not it be "Bayraktar TB2" instead of "Baykar Bayraktar TB2"? Renat 11:00, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

I've moved the page. HappyWith (talk) 04:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Ukraine batches & Price

Hello, I cleaned up the first paragraph of the section "Ukraine and 2022 Russian invasion" - there were 4 sources for the sentence "In January 2019, Baykar signed an agreement with Ukrspetsproject, part of Ukroboronprom, on the purchase of 12 TB2 and 3 ground control stations worth US$69 million for the Ukrainian army. Ukraine received the first batch of the UAVs in March 2019 at a cost of one to two million dollars". However, three of the sources said six TB2 were ordered, and only one said in the headline "12", quoting as source a tweet by Ukrainian president Proshenko, who did not give any number, and later speaking about 6 in the text. So with 3 sources against 1 rather dubious, I guess we should stick to 6. I eliminated also the part of "at a cost of one to two million dollars", because there is absolutely no mention of that in the source quoted (not even the specific Ukranian order is mentioned). I have removed that part and have transferred the source, which gives a price estimation of US$ 5 million per unit, to a new section called ''Price'' higher up. Corrections or additional sources welcome! Ilyacadiz (talk) 11:29, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Kazakhstan section in Operational History

There's a fresh video circulating on twitter showing a Kazakh TB-2 destroying Tajik military vehicles. i can't find any reliable source on Google but if someone has the time, kindly look into this. Pr0pulsion 123 (talk) 17:16, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Ukrainian official shared about Bayraktar drones in prank call

Sergey Pashinsky in a prank call shared that "there is more PR and corruption in Bayraktar than combat use ... first and foremost a PR project. ... I was personally against it, because they are extremely vulnerable to air defense systems ... they were all shot down within a week. ... not a self-sufficient weapon ... gets shot down by air defense systems in a flash and has no combat effectiveness at all. ... if not for the HIMARS and HARM systems, there would be no more Bayraktars in Ukraine." [2]https://www.rt.com/russia/564899-ukraine-bayraktar-vovan-lexus/ MouseInDust (talk) 12:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps if there's a "better" source than RT. I doubt anyone else is willing to share Vovan and Lexus videos though. 36.65.251.205 (talk) 23:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

There are numerous sources, unfortunately it is not in the interest of large west media to even mention this.

https://www.defensemirror.com/news/32917/Ukrainian_Official_Lambastes_Famed_Turkish_Bayraktar_UAV_in_a_Prank_Call_with_Russians

https://www.farsnews.ir/en/news/14010719000458/Crimean-Bridge-Aack-Senir-Official-Reveals-Ukraine’s-Sabage-Teams

https://cablefreetv.org/the-head-of-the-association-of-defense-enterprises-of-ukraine-confirmed-the-united-states-participation-in-all-operations-in-kiev/

https://www.thenewspaper.gr/2022/10/20/ουκρανός-αξιωματούχος-αχρηστα-τα-bayraktar-κ/ MouseInDust (talk) 08:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Wrong amount crowdfunded by Lithuanian people listed

Under the "Ukraine and 2022 Russian invasion" section, the wiki article says that 3.2 million USD out of 5.37 million was raised by Lithuanian people for the Bayraktar to Ukraine. This is inaccurate, all the required money was raised (5.9 mln. euro) in 3.5 days. Afterwards, the manufacturer (Baykar) decided to gift the Bayraktar for free, with the promise of the remaining funds being spent on Ukraine via differents means. Per the deal, the organizers spent 1.5 million euros of donated money on arming the drone, with the rest being spent on humanitarian aid.

Sources: https://www.euronews.com/2022/05/28/lithuanians-organise-donation-drive-to-buy-bayraktar-drone-for-ukraine

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/lithuania-transfer-crowdfunded-bayraktar-drone-ukraine-wednesday-2022-07-06/

https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/1736353/bayraktar-drone-crowdfunded-in-lithuanian-delivered-to-ukraine

https://mil.in.ua/en/news/lithuanian-bayraktar-tb2-destroys-russian-invaders-in-ukraine/ 46.251.48.134 (talk) 23:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2023

Kosovo should be added to the list of current operators, Kosovo Security Forces have recently received 5 Bayraktar TB2s:

http://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/kosovo-security-forces-receive-turkish-bayraktar-drones/

http://www.yenisafak.com/en/news/kosovo-security-forces-receive-turkish-bayraktar-drones-3664062

http://www.kosovo-online.com/en/news/politics/klan-kosova-ksf-received-five-bayraktar-drones-5-5-2023

http://euronews.al/en/bayraktar-drones-have-arrived-in-kosovo/ 78.182.150.236 (talk) 14:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

 Already done M.Bitton (talk) 22:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Bayraktar used against ISIS

Bayraktar TB2 was used against terrorists ISIS as well as PKK and YPG. https://www.dailysabah.com/war-on-terror/2016/09/07/turkish-drone-bayraktar-guides-warplanes-to-destroy-daesh-terrorist-targets-in-north-syria-operation/amp ~~Ozcalibur (talk) 19:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Poland in the Current operators

The page lists Poland as the first NATO customer, but that was Turkey. Poland is the first EU customer though. 2600:4040:2521:1A00:EC4A:2F62:FD40:FEF5 (talk) 15:08, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Flight time update

By December 2023, the TB2 drone had completed 750,000 flight hours globally.

• https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/gundem/milli-siha-bayraktar-tb2-750-bin-ucus-saatini-tamamladi/3079577#:~:text=%C4%B0stanbul,ilk%20milli%20hava%20arac%C4%B1%20oldu.

188.132.140.177 (talk) 19:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Maldives is a future operater

maldives I believe just bought 06 of them 27.114.165.93 (talk) 10:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Ethiopia

The notion of MAM munition killing 60 and wounding more by its own is ridiculous. It is literally a micro munition, spesifications are publically available. its impact is clear in many videos. In one of them, it directly hits a Russian artillery piece, and crew, who had no cover, was not immediately dead. This should be mentioned in actual article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.182.152.79 (talk) 11:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)