There is zero official documentation stating this. HİSAR-RF and SİPER Block 0/1 is indeed physically similar and Block 0/1 is more than likely derived of HİSAR-RF but there is no documentation to support it.
Yeah sure it is. There is no data other than ROKETSAN and considering Block 0/1 is product of ROKETSAN I would rather believe that source. Unless you have means to access the missiles and measure diameters, there is no point arguing it further.
That’s exactly what I’ve said though? Only uncertain aspect of my comment is that if SİPER Block 0 had booster or not; then again there is little to no information regarding Block 0 excluding its range which is 70km.
There was even claims about SİPER Block 0 being just HİSAR-O⁺ booster; I have yet to find anything official about Block 0 except for the range. With the current available information we can derive one thing, and it is that SİPER Block 0 & Block 1 is derived from HİSAR-RF and has a booster. No other information has official source including claims about using same booster as ATMACA.
Again you are missing the point. You are deriving this information from an edited footage of the missile, Block 0/1 could be just HİSAR-RF with booster but it is not explicitly stated in any official document. Even reliable secondary sources, such as Defence Turkey, only mentions SİPER Block 0/1 is derived from HİSAR-RF not a single source states it is outright HİSAR-RF with booster.
I’m still waiting a proper source for that. As I’ve said above, both official and secondary never states SİPER Block 0/1 is HİSAR-RF with booster. All of them specifically says Block 0/1 is derived from HİSAR-RF.
I do have all those images, again those are from edited videos which give us nothing about actually dimension of missiles. Just because one missile physically similar (or derived from other) does not mean they are same missiles.
That is not accurate way to compare you know right? Even the original source of the images states perspectives of original images are not same. Camera angle and distance should be accounted.
“SİPER Ürün-1 is developed based on the HISAR O+ RF missile.”
“SİPER Ürün-1, with the booster of the ATMACA anti-ship missile or another variant, has a range of 100 km with a dual pulse rocket motor.”
SİPER Product-1 was developed based on the HİSAR O+ RF missile. The missile, which has a booster of the ATMACA anti-ship missile or another variant, has a range of 100 km with its dual pulse rocket engine.
I can’t say this officially, but here’s the logical way you might do the math:
BMC has showcased a hybrid tank design using the Altay turret mounted on a Leopard 2 hull, along with the original Leopard gun. The other modernization model simply retains the full Leopard hull and turret, and upgrades them with additional armor, new optics, fire control systems, etc. (You can revisit my photo for reference.)
The BMC modernization offers extra protection on top of the turret because it uses the Altay turret. In contrast, the other modernization package uses a modular armor kit, which is significantly cheaper and provides protection close to the level of the Altay turret—especially in terms of chemical protection, which is a priority for the Turkish Armed Forces.
So, adding APS (Active Protection Systems) and ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) kits results in less weight, lower cost, and a faster upgrade process compared to using the full Altay turret.
This information hasn’t been officially disclosed because it’s not yet ready for public release, but this is likely the reason behind CEO’s approach.( If BMC wins this project, they will have to divide their Altay serial production capacity to support both the standard Altay and the Leo-Altay upgrade. However, our command likely prioritizes getting the Altay into service over a hybrid Leo-Altay solution.)
We’ll find out publicly in due time, and this isn’t the end of the competition until an official decision is announced. You should understand that what I’m sharing is logical speculation under simple question and its response—not officially confirmed information.
Logical approach to our procurement process fall flat mostly mate.
ROKETSAN’s and ASELESAN’s involvement is already official and we do know ROKETSAN & ASELSAN were awarded with 2A4 modernisation. BMC also signed contract way earlier than ROKETSAN this puzzled me but it seems BMC’s contract is no longer in effect.
