IDEF’07

8th International Defence Industry Exhibition

22 – 25 May, 2007

Survey Results

Ankara Hippodrome / Eryaman - Ankara

CONTENTS PAGE

1. INTRODUCTION 3
1.1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF SURVEY 3
1.2. METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLING 3
2. GENERAL INFORMATION 4 -9
2.1. OPENING AND ACTIVITIES 4-5
2.2. PARTICIPANT-REPRESENTATIVE INFORMATION 6
2.3. VISITOR INFORMATION 6
2.3.1. DISTRIBUTION OF VISITORS 6
2.3.2. FOREIGN VISITOR INFORMATION 7
2.3.3. DOMESTIC VISITOR INFORMATION 8
2.3.4. TABLES 9
3. PARTICIPANT SURVEY RESULTS 10 - 16
4. VISITOR SURVEY RESULTS 17 - 23

2
1. INTRODUCTION

This report contains survey results and detailed statistical information regarding the IDEF ’07 8th
International Defence Industry Exhibition held with the support and supervision of the Ministry
of Defence and the direction and responsibility of the Turkish Army Association between 22 and 25
May, 2007, at the Ankara 75th Anniversary Memorial Hippodrome in Eryaman, Ankara by TÜYAP
Tüm Fuarcılık Yapım A.Ş.

1.1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF SURVEY

This survey comprises the surveys conducted with visitors and participants during the IDEF ’07 8th
International Defence Industry Exhibition, and the visitor information forms collected at the
entrance, and aims to inform participants of the press and television coverage of the event, the
visitor profile, and overall assessment of the visitors, serving a wider purpose of benefiting from
this database of information.

1.2. METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLING

One-on-one surveys were conducted with 228 visitors and 59 participants, selected randomly and
distributed equally between days and hours, and information forms collected at the entrance were
used to extract information. The selected sampling bears an error margin of ± 0.5% among
participants and ±2% among visitors.

3
2. GENERAL INFORMATION

2.1. OPENING AND ACTIVITIES

The opening of the IDEF ‘07 8th International Defence Industry Exhibition was attended by
Prime Minister Recep Tayip ERDOĞAN, Secretary of Defence Vecdi Gönül, and Chief of General
Staff Gen. Yaşar BÜYÜKANIT. Also attending were 264 delegates, 12 secretaries and 5 chiefs of
general staff from 47 countries. The opening programme is below:

10:00-10:30 Acceptance of Guests to Ceremonial Grounds

10:30-10:32 Reading the Ceremony Programme
10:32-10:35 National Anthem
10:35-10:45 Flag Parade of Participant Countries
10:45-11:00 Mehter Squad Performance
11:00-11:05 Speech of the Turkish Army Association (TAA) General Director
11:05-11:15 Speech of the Secretary of Defence
11:15-11:30 Speech of the Prime Minister
11:30-11:40 Cutting the Ribbon
11:40-12:00 Transfer from the Ceremonial Grounds to VIP Viewing Terrace
Performance of the Turkish Stars Aerobatics Team
12:00-13:30 Lunch
13:30-16:30 Exhibition Tour

On and prior to the opening day, the Secretary of Defence Vecdi GÖNÜL and the General Director
of TAA M. Aydın ŞEN have held receptions for participants, delegations, foreign missions and
other high-level military and civilian dignitaries.

As an exhibition that gathers not only the wealth of product diversity developing parallel to
technology improvements in the defence industry, but also other sectors that have connections to
the defence industry, the IDEF ‘07 8th International Defence Industry Exhibition was host to the
following seminars, meetings and events:

¾ Seminars and Meetings at the Exhibition

EVENT ORGANISER
JSF INDUSTRY SESSION SSM
INTRODUCTION TO THE ATAK PROJECT AGUSTA WESTLAND
THE HÜRKUŞ PROJECT TAI
INTRODUCTION TO THE T-38 MODERNISATION TAI
AGS INDUSTRY SESSION SSM, AGSI ,TAI
INTRODUCTION TO MİMTÜ OTOKAR
INTRODUCTION TO MİLGEM COMMANDERSHIP OF THE NAVY
INTRODUCTION TO THE HEWS PROJECTS ASELSAN
INFANTRY FORCE PROTECTION SIBAT

4
 ¾ Signing Ceremonies
PROJECT PROJECT OWNER
EHTES MOU Signing Ceremony SSM-DAPA(KOREA)
ZMA and M113 MOD. MUT. Agreement FNSS-KADDB(JORDA)
JSF Signing Ceremony ALP AVIATION
F 16 BLOCK 50 (PO IV SPEWS II) Signing Ceremony SSM-TAI
HUNTER COMMAND SYS. Signing Ceremony SSM-ASELSAN
TAI -PAKISTAN AIR FORCE COMM. TAI-
İHA PROJECTS Signing Ceremonies
ASELSAN TAI-SAVRONİK
NEW PATROL BOAT Signing Ceremony SSM-DEARSAN
COMM. NAV.-SSM- STM- MTU, ASELSAN-
MİLGEM WAR SYS. Signing Ceremony
TÜBİTAK
SSM-İLETİŞİM VE UZAY TEK. SAN. VE TİC. A.Ş.,
SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS MOU Signing Ceremony
ASTRIUM LTD.
TÜKA PROJECTS Signing Ceremony SSM-TÜBİTAK
NBC-PROTECTIVE CLOTHING PROJECT Signing Ceremony SSM-ÇAN JOINT VENTURE
VERTICAL WIND TUNNEL AGREEMENT Signing Ceremony SSM-STM
MODSİM KAMMOS ÖDY PROJECT Signing Ceremony SSM-METEKSAN

Private offices have been maintained on the premises throughout the exhibition to allow meetings
among the purchasing decision makers of the Ministry of Defence and the Turkish Armed Forces
and participating companies, foreign delegations, and high-level military and civilian authorities.
The following persons were available for meetings at these offices.

TITLE RANK NAME

SECRETARY OF DEFENCE M.VECDİ GÖNÜL
UNDERSECRETARY OF DEFENCE LT. GENERAL YALÇIN ATAMAN
UNDERSECRETARY OF DEFENCE INDUSTRY MURAD BAYAR
GENERAL STAFF LOGISTICS DIRECTOR LT. GENERAL RASİM ARSLAN
ARMY LOGISTICS COMMANDER LT. GENERAL HÜSEYİN NUSRET TAŞDELER
ARMY LOGISTICS DIRECTOR MAJ. GEN. ABDULLAH DALAY
NAVY LOGISTICS DIRECTOR/NAVY TECHNICAL VICE ADM. İZZET ARTUNÇ
DIRECTOR REAR ADM. NACİ TAYFUN TANSAN
AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMANDER LT. GENERAL SÜLEYMAN ŞEVKET DİNGİLOĞLU
AIR FORCE LOGISTICS DIRECTOR MAJ. GEN. RIDVAN ULUGÜLER
GENDARMERIE LOGISTICS COMMANDER BRIG. GEN. MUSTAFA KEMAL ALATAŞ
GENDARMERIE LOGISTICS DIRECTOR BRIG. GEN. MUSTAFA İHSAN BATI
COAST GUARD LOGISTICS DIRECTOR COLONEL FAZLI ORTAYOL
UNDERSECRETARIAT OF DEFENCE PROVISION
MAJ. GEN. RAİF AKBAŞ
AND CONSTRUCTION OFFICER
UNDERSECRETARIAT OF DEFENCE TECHNOLOGY
MAJ. GEN. ORHAN UĞURLUOĞLU
AND COORDINATION OFFICER
MoD FOREIGN PURCHASING OFFICE DIRECTOR BRIG. GEN. YILMAZ UYAR
MoD DOMESTIC PURCHASING OFFICE DIRECTOR BRIG. GEN. SELAHATTİN KISACIK
MoD TECHNICAL SERVICES OFFICE DIRECTOR COLONEL NEVZAT KILINÇ
MoD R&d AND TECHNOLOGY OFFICE DIRECTOR BRIG. GEN. İSMAİL TANER AKAY
TRNC SECURITY FORCE COMM. REPRESENTATIVE COLONEL ENGİN NAŞİT
DIRECTOR OF
GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF SECURITY KADİR YILMAZ
SECURITY
PRESIDIUM OF THE UNION OF CHAMBERS AND
HÜSEYİN ÜZÜLMEZ
COMMERCIAL EXCHANGES OF TURKEY

5
2.2. PARTICIPANT-REPRESENTATIVE INFORMATION

500 companies from 48 countries have attended the IDEF ‘07 8th International Defence
Industry Exhibition. These countries are as follows:

USA South Africa Lithuania

Germany India Luxemburg
Australia Holland Malaysia
Austria Iraq Moldova
Azerbaijan UK Norway
UAE Ireland Pakistan
Belarus Spain Poland
Belgium Israel Romania
Bosnia Herzegovina Sweden Russia
Brazil Switzerland Slovakia
Bulgaria Italy Chile
Czech Republic Japan Thailand
China Canada Taiwan
Denmark Kazakhstan Turkey
Finland TRNC Ukraine
France Korea Jordan

2.3. VISITOR INFORMATION

2.3.1. OVERALL DISTRIBUTION

A total of 40,979 visitors have attended the IDEF ‘07 8th International Defence Industry
Exhibition held at the Ankara 75th Anniversary Memorial Hippodrome. The distribution of these
visitors is given below:

Number of %
Visitors
Turkey 39,716 96.9
Foreign 1263 3.1
TOTAL 40,979 100.0

6
2.3.2. INFORMATION ON FOREIGN VISITORS

According to the accommodated delegations and information forms collected at the entrance to the
venue, visitors from 46 foreign countries have attended the IDEF ‘07 8th International Defence
Industry Exhibition. The number and percentages of these countries are given below:

NO. OF NO. OF
COUNTRY VISITORS % COUNTRY VISITORS %
1 Germany 284 22.4 25 Austria 10 0.8
2 France 125 9.9 26 Chile 9 0.7
3 USA 102 8.1 27 Indonesia 9 0.7
4 UK 93 7.4 28 Serbia 8 0.6
5 Korea 63 5.0 29 Sweden 8 0.6
6 China 55 4.4 30 UAE 8 0.6
7 Israel 52 4.1 31 Belarus 7 0.6
8 Pakistan 50 4.0 32 Lithuania 6 0.5
9 Moldova 48 3.8 33 Egypt 5 0.4
10 Denmark 35 2.8 34 Bulgaria 5 0.4
11 Italy 27 2.1 35 Finland 5 0.4
12 South Africa 25 2.0 36 Iraq 4 0.3
13 Belgium 23 1.8 37 Jordan 4 0.3
14 Switzerland 20 1.6 38 Kazakhstan 4 0.3
15 Azerbaijan 19 1.5 39 Libya 3 0.2
16 Canada 18 1.4 40 Romania 3 0.2
17 Iran 18 1.4 41 Morocco 3 0.2
18 Malaysia 17 1.3 42 Slovakia 2 0.2
19 Spain 16 1.3 43 Slovenia 2 0.2
20 Greece 15 1.2 44 Swaziland 1 0.1
21 India 14 1.1 45 Tunisia 1 0.1
22 Norway 14 1.1 46 Ukraine 1 0.1
23 Russia 12 1.0 Total 1263 100.0
24 Australia 10 0.8

7
2.3.3. INFORMATION ON DOMESTIC VISITORS

Among the domestic visitors of the IDEF ‘07 8th International Defence Industry Exhibition,
89.5% came from Ankara, and the remaining 10.5% from other cities. The distribution among
cities is given below:

CITIES %
1 Ankara 89.5
2 Istanbul 1.7
3 Kocaeli 1.5
4 Eskişehir 1.2
5 Sakarya 0.8
6 Konya 0.7
7 Kırıkkale 0.6
8 Bursa 0.6
9 İzmir 0.4
10 Antalya 0.3
11 Manisa 0.3
12 Düzce 0.3
13 Kayseri 0.3
14 Adana 0.2
15 Çankırı 0.2
16 Balıkesir 0.1
17 Gaziantep 0.1
18 İçel 0.1
19 Sivas 0.1
20 Trabzon 0.1
21 Aksaray 0.1
22 Denizli 0.1
23 Hatay 0.1
24 Karabük 0.1
25 Malatya 0.1
26 Samsun 0.1
27 Şırnak 0.1
28 Tekirdağ 0.1
29 Tunceli 0.1
Total 100.0

8
2.3.4. TABLES

TABLE 1

COMPANY PARTICIPATION

500 431 500

400
296
300 256
Country
200 Company

100 30 50 48
31
0
IDEF 2001 IDEF 2003 IDEF 2005 IDEF 2007

TABLE 2

DELEGATION PARTICIPATION
300 282 264
250
183
200 148
150
Participating Country
100 45 50 48
35 Participating Delegation
50
0
IDEF IDEF IDEF IDEF
2001 2003 2005 2007

9
3. IDEF ‘07 PARTICIPANT SURVEY RESULTS

10
Q1. How were you notified of the IDEF ‘07 Exhibition?

N %
Promotional brochure 6 10.2
Press advertisements 3 5.1
Internet 8 13.5
Company connections 12 20.3
We are regular participants 18 30.5
TAA 8 13.5
MoD 2 3.4
Tüyap 3 5.1
Total 64 101.6

Q2. Do you think the promotion of IDEF ‘07 was adequate?

N %
Adequate 44 74.6
Inadequate 15 25.4
Total 59 100

If inadequate, any recommendations?

Press and the television can have more coverage
Promotion on international scale is required

Q3. Have you participated in an IDEF before?

N %
Yes 40 67.8
No 19 32.2
Total 59 100.0

Years:
1995 1 participant
1997 1 participant
1999 2 participants
2001 4 participants
2003 9 participants
2005 16 participants
All IDEF Events 5 participants

11
Q4. What is your purpose for participating in the IDEF ’07?

N %
Following developments 24 40.7
Professional improvement 17 28.8
Purchasing 3 5.0
Business connections 36 61.0
Product comparison 12 20.4
Prestige 32 54.2
Company promotion 47 79.7
Competition 9 15.2
Networking with potential buyers 6 10.1
Total 188 315.1

Q5. In comparison to IDEF ’05, how would you rate IDEF ‘07?

N %
More successful 23 65.4
Equally successful 27 28.6
Less successful 9 6.0
Total 59 100.0

Q6. What did you like the most in IDEF ’07?

Organisation 5
Participation 4
Event promotion 2
Air shows 2
Further interest of Turkish companies 2
Increase in number of participants 2
Turkish Stars show 2
Exhibits 1
Stand layouts 1
Presentation to a wide audience 1
Availability of many companies 1
Participation of military personnel 1
Foreign visitors 1
Gifts 1
New products 1
High-quality participants and visitors 1
Food 1
Housekeeping 1

12
Q7. What improvements can be made to IDEF ’07?

Air conditioning 12
Food queues, quality, selection, prices 12
Internet connection 4
Toilets 4
Inadequate air conditioning in tents 4
Should not take place at a hippodrome 4
Security 2
More appropriate layout 2
Coordination and organisation 2
Easier access at the gates, stricter security 2
Generators 2
Transportation 2
Promotion of IDEF 1
Further activities and visual events 1
A proper exhibition layout map 1
Allowing children on fairgrounds (on Saturday or Sunday) 1
Inadequate transportation from main gate to fairgrounds 1
Tents should not be used 1
Lack of comfort in the large tent 1
Roads to the fairgrounds 1
Car park 1
Better promotion 1
More participation and more resting areas in shade 1

Q8. Were you able to reach your audience in IDEF ’07?

N %
Yes 38 64.4
No 4 6.8
Partially 17 28.8
Total 47 100.0

Q9. Do you plan to participate in IDEF ‘09?

N %
Yes 52 88.1
No 3 5.1
No response 4 6.8
Total 59 100.0

Purposes of participants responding “Yes”:

Networking with potential buyers 24
Sales connections 21
Monitoring Turkish Army projects 17
Knowing competitors more closely 7
Holding distributor/retailer meetings 2

13
 Q10. Have you attended seminars and meetings?

N %
Yes 19 27.2
No 38 64.4
No response 2 3.4
Total 59 100.0

ASSESSMENT OF TECHNICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

Q11. How satisfied are you of exhibition services?

5 4 3 2 1 No Idea or
Extremely Satisfied Neither Dissatisfied Extremely Have Not
Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Used
nor
Dissatisfied
N % N % N % N % N % N %
Visitor and protocol entrance services 9 15.2 18 30.6 11 18.7 11 18.7 10 16.9 -
Participant car park 7 11.9 28 47.5 5 8.5 7 11.9 12 20.2 -
Information desks 9 15.2 26 44.1 10 16.9 4 6.8 4 6.8 6 10.2
Direction posts 7 11.9 24 40.7 9 15.2 8 13.5 6 10.2 5 8.5
Stand layout 5 8.5 28 47.5 12 20.2 9 15.3 5 8.5 -
Technical services 8 13.5 9 15.2 15 25.4 18 30.6 8 13.5 1 1.8
Electricity services 4 6.8 8 13.5 18 30.6 15 25.4 6 10.2 8 13.5
Housekeeping 9 15.3 11 18.7 21 35.6 8 13.5 8 13.5 2 3.4
Refreshments - 9 15.2 13 22.0 13 22.0 17 28.9 7 11.9
Transportation and customs services 5 8.5 11 18.7 14 23.6 6 10.2 4 6.8 19 32.2
Host-hostess-guide services 7 11.8 18 30.5 9 15.3 6 10.2 4 6.8 15 25.4
Attendance of Turkish Army personnel 16 27.1 24 40.7 9 15.3 5 8.5 2 3.4 3 5.0
Stand visit schedules of foreign delegations 6 10.2 19 32.2 16 27.1 6 10.2 5 8.5 7 11.8
Acquiring invitation sets 9 15.3 23 38.9 10 16.9 2 3.4 6 10.2 9 15.3
Shuttles between fairgrounds and the city 5 8.5 7 11.8 9 15.2 3 5.0 2 3.4 33 56.1
Security services 10 16.9 24 40.7 13 22.0 5 8.5 3 5.0 4 6.7
Secretarial services 5 8.5 26 44.2 9 15.3 2 3.4 3 5.0 14 23.6
Communications 5 8.5 14 23.6 12 20.2 6 10.2 15 25.6 7 11.9

14
Q12. What were specific shortcomings of IDEF ’07?

Air conditioning was inadequate. 16

Tent air conditioning was inadequate. 9
Internet connection was inadequate. 5
Food monopoly is wrong; selection is small, food is low-quality and expensive, queues are too long. 12
Security 4
The venue is not suitable. 3
Transportation 3
Exhibitors should be placed according to sectors. 1
Power problems were encountered. 2
Stands should be covered. 1
Partial coordination and security shortcomings are evident. 1
The organisation needs to be cleaner, of a higher quality, and more professional. 2
It is difficult to obtain water at the fairgrounds; it should have been given free of charge. 1
Lavatories are filthy. 1
There was no water; all services were extremely late. 1
No toilets in tents. 1
Hygiene should be observed. 1
Stands are not clean. 1
Toilet doors not closing, cubicles dark. 1
Foreign visitors had to queue behind people washing their feet in washbasins for ablution. It is
extremely inconsiderate not to provide a specific place for this ritual in a Muslim country. We believe 1
we have not gotten our money’s worth here.
Many visitors tripped over dislodged floor fittings. 1
Double-layer tents should be erected. There is need for insulation. 1
Stand carpet was stained. 1
The floor of the large tent trembled constantly. 1
Direction posts were inadequate. 1
Event hours are too short. 1
Extensive queues formed at participant entrances in the morning. 1
Military personnel should not be allowed prompt entry while participants queue at the gates. 1
Personnel provide incomplete information. 2
Some exhibitors violated stand height limits; this should be enforced. 1
Car park card was meaningless. 1
Stand utilities were provided too late (carpet, power). 1

15
Q13. How do you rate the unit price of a stand at the event?

N %
Too expensive 4 6.8
Expensive 12 20.4
Normal 10 17.0
No idea 2 3.4
No response 31 52.4
Total 59 100.0

Q14. What improvements would you like to see at IDEF ’09?

If tents are to be used, they should be of higher quality (like DSA 2006 Malaysia). 3
Tents are not appropriate for this. 2
Better air conditioning. 6
Companies should be grouped in accordance with their fields of operation. 3
Food services must improve. 2
Coordination and harmony across the event. 2
A more comfortable and centrally-located venue is needed. 4
Transportation 1
Faster internet 4
Adequate technical services 1
Visiting hours should not end at 4.30 pm. 1
Better entrances and car parks 1
Minors should be allowed in the event one day on the weekend 1
The event can be open to public one day on the weekend 1
Previously it was in autumn and cooler; this year it was too hot. 1
More foreign companies should visit. 1
Official delegations should have better visit schedules. None of them followed the schedule.
Better promotion may widen the audience. 1
The car park should be worked on; entry and exit must be faster and easier. 1
Well-known companies should not be assigned to tents. 1
Toilet cleanliness and directions should be improved. 2

16
4. IDEF ‘07 VISITOR SURVEY RESULTS

17
Q1. How did you find out about IDEF ‘07?

N %
Promotional brochure 29 12.7
Print advertising - media 35 15.3
Internet 36 15.8
Company connections 113 49.6
I am a regular attendee 12 5.2
Other 6 2.6
Total 231 101.2

Q2. How do you rate the promotion of IDEF ’07?

N %
Adequate 154 67.6
Inadequate 73 32.0
No response - I don’t know 1 0.4
Total 228 100.0

Recommendations if inadequate:
Inadequate promotion 6
More advertisements 2
More commercials 2
Billboards can be used 2
TV commercials may be run 2
I did not see any promotion 2
More press coverage 1
More international and local press coverage 1
No coverage in the press or on the internet 1
Billboards and posters in crowded places 1
Not of sufficient quality; resources are too few 1
A longer promotion period should be used 1
Less than last year 1
No comment 1

Q3. What is your purpose in visiting IDEF ’07?

N %
Following developments 152 66.7
Professional development 78 34.2
Purchasing 3 1.3
Business connections 25 11.0
Product comparison 28 12.3
Other 11 4.8
Total 297 130.3

18
 Q4. Did you benefit from IDEF ’07?

N %
Yes 179 78.5
No 22 9.6
Undecided 25 11.0
No response 2 0.9
Total 228 100.0

Q5. Do you plan to visit IDEF ’09?

N %
Yes 211 92.6
No 7 3.0
Undecided 10 4.4
Total 228 100.0

What improvements would you like to see?

More simulators 19 Land weapons 1
Better promotion 11 Weapon systems 1
Better selection of venue 12 Aviation technologies 1
I am satisfied 11 We want to see where we stand in the world 1
More Turkish companies 9 End the food problem 1
New technologies and diversity 7 People should not attend in uniform 1
Types of aircraft 5 Slides 1
Fairground directions 3 Meetings 1
Better organisation 2 Wider participation 1
Adequate brochures 2 Air defence 1
I would like to see a Russian stand 2 Participation of more companies 1
Better organised stands 2 Not just products but their design and production should be 1
exhibited
Participation of security companies 2 A closer experience of the tanks 1
Communication 2 Satellite systems 1
Inspection 2 More activities 1
More weapons 2 Weapons 1
Signs too small 1 Missiles 1
Too many and unnecessary signs 1 Satellite equipment 1
Entrances not clearly marked 1 Ramps 1
Toilet cleanliness should be better 1 Ordnance that will make Turkey look powerful 1
Lack of resting areas 1 More advanced laser weapons 1
Music can play 1 Company information should be more understandable 1
More cafeterias 1 Interesting events should be held; does not attract public 1
We want different companies 1 A seminar hall 1
Transportation is difficult 1 First aid 1
Low representation of electronics and software 1 Combat rations 1
People could be kinder; especially Ukraine 1 Aircraft 1
Radar systems 1 More air forces 1
Rockets 1 More electronic equipment 1
Turkish firearms, diversity 1 Parachuting shows 1
Space technology 1 Diving equipment 1
Lack of armaments components and accessories 1 High-tech weapons 1

19
Q6. What products and services are you interested in?

Armaments 46 Submarines 1
Air defence 17 Machine, chemicals and weapons industry 1
All in general 16 Artillery ordnance 1
Defence systems 14 Products of Turkish companies 1
Aircraft 11 Electronic systems 1
Aselsan 10 The Israel group 1
Helicopters 5 Heavy machinery 1
Havelsan 5 Electronic products, software 1
Rockets 4 Off-road vehicles 1
Electrics, electronics 4 Aviation 1
Communication systems 4 The Spanish stand 1
Computer software 4 Information 1
Anything about aviation 4 Turkish Armed Forces tents 1
All weapon systems 4 Information 1
Telecommunications 3 Communication 1
Missiles 3 Models 1
Armoured vehicles 2 Protective materials 1
Long-range weapons 2 Pipe tracking with helicopters 1
Simulations 2 Light weapons 1
Radar 2 Aircraft industry 1
Thermal cameras 2 Technological advances 1
Anti-aircraft guns 2 Tactical vehicles 1
Equipment 2 Mechanical designs 1
Electronic support systems 2 Military construction equipment 1
Sarsılmaz 2 Fuel explosion preventive systems 1
Bombs 2 Roketsan solutions 1
Air Forces 2 Personal defence 1
Firearms 2 TAİ 1
Foreign companies 2 Missile warheads 1
Clothing 2 Military equipment sale, contact with firms 1
Machine equipment 1 Machinery 1
Wireless communication products 1 Electronics 1
Information systems 1 Heating systems 1
Cryptology 1 Electro-optical systems 1
Parachutes 1 Marine products 1
Laser 1 Air systems 1
Automotive components 1 Armed vehicles 1
By-products in manufacturing 1 Guided equipment 1
Military materials 1 Health products 1
Wheeled armoured vehicles 1 Artillery 1
Transmission products 1 Warplanes 1
Ordnance 1 Rocket systems 1
Maps 1

20
TECHNICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES

Q7. How would you rate the shuttle service?

N %
Shuttles and stops adequate 88 38.6
Shuttles and stops inadequate 41 18.0
I could find out arrival and departure schedule 65 28.5
I could not find out arrival and departure schedule 34 14.9
Total 228 100.0

Q8. How would you rate driving directions from the city to the fairgrounds?

N %
Adequate 158 69.2
Inadequate 50 22.0
No response 20 8.8
Total 228 100.0

Q9. How would you rate the visitor car park?

N %
Adequate and organised 166 72.8
Inadequate and unorganised 52 22.8
No response 10 4.4
Total 228 100.0

Q10. How would you rate the invitation and security checks at entrance?

N %
Adequate and organised 194 85.1
Inadequate and unorganised 27 11.8
No response 7 3.1
Total 500 100.0

Q11. How would you rate the layout and directions within the fairgrounds?

N %
Adequate 165 72.4
Inadequate 59 25.8
No response 4 1.8
Total 228 100.0

21
Q12. Were you able to receive sufficient information and documents from info desks?

N %
Yes 170 74.6
No 47 20.6
No response 11 4.8
Total 228 100.0

Q13. did you have difficulties while visiting stands?

N %
Yes 43 18.8
No 180 79.0
Cevap Yok 5 2.2
Total 228 100.0

Q14. Were you satisfied with food and beverage services?

N %
Yes 98 43.0
No 104 45.6
No response 26 11.4
Total 228 100.0

Q15. Were you satisfied with the maintenance and cleanliness of toilets?

N %
Yes 135 59.2
No 61 26.7
No response 32 14.1
Total 228 100.0

Q16. How would you rate visitor quality?

N %
Very good 60 26.3
Good 147 64.5
Mediocre 13 5.7
No response 8 3.5
Total 228 100.0

22
Q17. Girişte görevli personelin yaklaşımı ve tavrı ile ilgili düşünceniz nedir?

N %
İyi 203 89.0
Çok iyi 21 9.3
Güvenlik yeterli değil 3 1.3
Hiç iyi değil 1 0.4
Total 228 100.0

Q18. Bir önceki fuarla karşılaştırıldığında;

N %
Çok Başarılı 15 6.6
Başarılı 108 47.4
Orta 52 22.8
Yetersiz 5 2.2
Cevap Yok 48 21.0
Total 228 100.0

23