Altay & Turkish Main Battle Tank Programs

[SİLAHDAR]

I really don't like the idea of putting ammo in the hull for the sake of crew survivability after penetration and salvagebility of the tank. All fielded MBT's suffer from this except for the Abrams. An Abrams like ammo load-out and compartimentalization is the safest option out there but it looks like the European and eastern tank design are favored in the rest of the world, including Turkey. The Turks learned the hard way in Syria and most probably had to re-design the Altay completely. The first tranche will be conventional but later tranches will most probably be a different design all together, at least seperating the crew from the ammo completely a la T-14.

Altay t-3 will be like T-14.

What do you think about possible İtalian upgraded version of Fiat powered Altay T1 or T3 for behalf of ariete c2 ?

İtalia cannot be loose a huge money for using design a new tank ?

 

[UkroTurk]

There is no need peacocking t14 design which hasnt been proved. If the design were efficient , the creator of design ( US) would have put in serial production already instead of watching commies stealing idea.
Conventional tank design is superioty.

 

[SİLAHDAR]

There is no need peacocking t14 design which hasnt been proved. If the design were efficient , the creator of design ( US) would have put in serial production already instead of watching commies stealing idea.
Conventional tank design is superioty.

Franco-Germans already started work for him ;

 

[UkroTurk]

Franco-Germans already started work for him ;

 

[SİLAHDAR]

1- More longer front section due increased armor for againts new armata 152mm cannon . İt will cant penetratable by him. Also that is more important just because all of crew in the front.

2- New rheinmetall 130mm l-51 cannon. İt can be able penetration againts armata front hull armour. Just because 120 mm L-55 with dm-53 it cant penetrate the armata front hull armour.

3- New highly sharpened armour of hull due weight gain from lighter and new more power with mtu 1600 hp engine.

4- Low profiled turret , less armoured but its unmanned and very low profiled very hard to shot him with tank gun and also for againts anti tank missiles he have active and passive protection.

So

There is two news for europans ;

1- Russians again created a tank concept of future. They are's unique in this field.
2- Again Europans will create best tank of world. Just because russians make 152mm cannon for penetrate leopard 2a7 front armour but mgcs have more better protection and he will penetrate armata front armour with rheinmetall 130mm cannon. So Russians must increase armata armor protection. But that means more expensive and heavy tank than armata. But armata more expensive for russians already and also russians must add more powered engine for increased engine but they havent good engine in this level otherwise this tank will not suitable for Russian light, outnumbered and speed tank doctrine.

 

[Yatağanlı]

The question is how many decades before we see these vehicles in use in Europe?

Probably not any time soon.

 

[SİLAHDAR]

The question is how many decades before we see these vehicles in use in Europe?

Probably not any time soon.

2035

 

[UkroTurk]

1- More longer front section due increased armor for againts new armata 152mm cannon . İt will cant penetratable by him. Also that is more important just because all of crew in the front.

2- New rheinmetall 130mm l-51 cannon. İt can be able penetration againts armata front hull armour. Just because 120 mm L-55 with dm-53 it cant penetrate the armata front hull armour.

3- New highly sharpened armour of hull due weight gain from lighter and new more power with mtu 1600 hp engine.

4- Low profiled turret , less armoured but its unmanned and very low profiled very hard to shot him with tank gun and also for againts anti tank missiles he have active and passive protection.

So

There is two news for europans ;

1- Russians again created a tank concept of future. They are's unique in this field.
2- Again Europans will create best tank of world. Just because russians make 152mm cannon for penetrate leopard 2a7 front armour but mgcs have more better protection and he will penetrate armata front armour with rheinmetall 130mm cannon. So Russians must increase armata armor protection. But that means more expensive and heavy tank than armata. But armata more expensive for russians already and also russians must add more powered engine for increased engine but they havent good engine in this level otherwise this tank will not suitable for Russian light, outnumbered and speed tank doctrine.

Russians created the consept? Nope brother. It was drawn even first prototype made by US. The russians just stole.

 

[SİLAHDAR]

Russians created the consept? Nope brother. It was drawn even first prototype made by US. The russians just stole.

I dont know man. But my side prototype and serial product is diffrent things.

 

[Timur]

120 mm L-55 with dm-53 it cant penetrate the armata front hull armour.

and what backs your statement out? did ppl get see actual tests? did it happen in a war zone?

or is it like russian propaganda Pantsir here and there..

 

[SİLAHDAR]

and what backs your statement out? did ppl get see actual tests? did it happen in a war zone?

or is it like russian propaganda Pantsir here and there..

Armor professionals says. That is the KE resistance of front chassis.

As we know 120 mm L/55 can penetrate 800 mm with Dm53 apfsds

Source : http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php/Ammunition_Data

Actually Altay is 65 tonnes. When Germans put autoloader used leclerc turret in the e-mbt they gain 6 tonnes. İf we are put altay 120 mm L/55 unmanned turret with autoloader (already we have in fırtına 2) we can gain 10 tonnes total. Just because Unmanned turrets small and they need less armor for protection.
So if we decrease his lenght 54-55 tonnes he can work greatly with fiat-iveco 1300 hp engine. Any speed or protection loose. Just because ariete c1 is 54 tonnes and his speed 70 km/h who already speed of altay t1 with 1500 hp.

Altay designed for running 1500 hp and 65 tonnes they no need any improve to powertrains Just we must re organize inside of hull. Maybe it will take 2 or more years but in the and we will have altay with licenced engine.
Also tank concept's going unmanned turreted tanks. Soon or later we will design a tank like armata or mgcs.

Until this tank we will use leopard 2a4 chassis and engine for altay turrets. Or we can add 120 mm mkek L/55 gun to Leopard 2a4 upgrade package. Because L/55 gunned Modern tank important for us againts greek leo 2a7 hell.

 

[cabatli_53]

The ALTAY MBT T2 configuration will feature an increased armour system, increased protection with the isolation of ammunitions from the hull, laser guided tank ammo firing capability (for this Fire Control System should be upgraded), crew training mode and mobile camouflage net. The T2 variant is expected to begin deliveries shortly after the T1 configuration of ALTAY MBTs have been handed over. According to BMC officials, in order to compensate for the increase in weight, an indigenous diesel engine being developed by BMC Power for the ALTAY T2 MBT will be more powerful and will offer better performance than the existing 1,500hp EuroPowerpack.

Only one ALTAY MBT prototype will be produced in T3 configuration, which will feature an unmanned turret with a bustle-mounted autoloader. The ALTAY MBT T3 configuration is scheduled for qualification in 2024, and it is understood to be intended for use in further trials and technical evaluations rather than for service with the Turkish Land Forces. The ALTAY MBT Serial Production Phase contract also includes lifecycle logistics support service and the establishment and operation of a Tank Systems Technology Centre. There is also a plan for the procurement of 60 Armoured Recovery Vehicle (ARV) and 50 Mine Clearance variants of the ALTAY MBT, which will be based on the T1 configuration’s chassis.

BMC signed a contract on the ALTAY MBT Power Pack with the SSB on 13 June 2018. The name BATU was given to the ALTAY MBT Power Pack to incorporate a diesel engine and automatic transmission that will be developed by BMC Power. According to sources new engine with a power capacity of 1,600hp to be developed with Fiat’s technical support will be based on the Fiat/Iveco MTCA V12 diesel engine generating 1,270hp (950kW) and has 25.8lt volume utilized in the Ariete MBT. The engine that BMC will utilize in the ALTAY MBT will feature a turbocharger for the higher power requirement.

https://www.defenceturkey.com/en/co...es-new-mbt-programs-in-the-western-world-4063

 

[Bismarck]

Sounds interesting, but still no progress on IFV.

 

[Zarvan]

Why Altay is not entering production ??? What are the issues, I seriously hope Altay doesn't have same fate as India's Arjun had.

 

[Neptune]

Call me old fashioned or an equipment conservative as is the 95% of TSK but I still think that autoloader should not be favored and crew number shall remain at 4. But that's another topic.

Secondly, main battle tanks are no longer the cavalry of battlefield as they were in 20th century, today they are more of a fire support asset that is also used to provide frontline cover for pushing forces. Conventionally when facing the army of a sovereign state, it is suicide to maneuver tanks in the field without assault helicopter escort, as a matter of fact it became an unwritten doctrine for tanks not to charge without proper air support, note that I don't argue for fire support in a more generic sense. Unconventionally and in urban environments, we all know that it is even more fuvcked up to use tanks. There are many examples for it; our army in Syria, Russians in Chechnya or Saudis in Yemen.

The developments that took place over the last two decade in projectile technology, particularly ATGMs and armor pierxing sabots have proven that no armor is too tough. Unlike the WWII, over the last decade, vast majority of tank casualties are not caused by enemy tanks but are rather a result of ATGM fire, IED, mines, artillery or air strike. And although active protection systems (APS) may provide cover from dummy projectiles such as RPG-7 or obsolete older anti-tank missiles, newer weapon systems in my opinion makes APS useless to defend against as they come with a dual-shaped charge (tandem) or with a different guidance path by attacking at the top where the armor is thinnest and APS is weakest. On a second note, it is also worth mentioning that we glorify APSs for having proven hard kill systems in tests or streets but I doubt it is useful to have an APS against a Javelin missile or a modern IED where terrorist use enough explosives to blow up a whole neighborhood just to blow up a tank or a MRAP. And the radars of APS are prone to foeign interference. Tanks usually operate in groups of other vehicles and convoys where they are other radio chatters and geographic obstacles that can severely decrease APS detection performance, I am not sure they are tested in these environments.

Now, we should also note that unlike other weapon systems, man portable ATGMs are perhaps the most easy to get weapons for non-state actors after AK-47 and RPG-7. I mean look at the militias in Syria and Iraq, half of them already have Javelin and the other half fields Russian Kornet.

To conclude, tanks are no longer the cavalry of battlefield as they were. Nevertheless, their function as a fire support asset and a layer of armor to push the infantry forward remains irreplaceable. This means that survivability and functionality of a main battle tank is more important than its conventionally driven armor and firepower characteristics. So instead of designing a 65+ tonnes of tank that is practically too heavy to operate effectively in most of Anatolia; we should have rather focused on designing a lighter tank with a more survivable architecture as is the case in Israeli tanks with having the engine at the front to enable the crew to escape the tank in the event of destruction and other miscellaneous design characteristics for modern applications. I mean today, any slippers wearing militia dude with an iq above 90 who happens to have a Javelin or Kornet can easily take out a tank as modern as the Abrams or Leopard, not to mention a helicopter raining down a Hellfire missile, its done. Of course, we are not engineers nor army soldiers but that should have been our primary requirement in my humble opinion. A direct procurement or a slow paced R&D and production program for a heavier MBT could be planned in a later stage.

But where we are at now? Altay is taken away from Otokar just because Divan hotel accepted protestors during Gezi riots and we have to wait BMC for obvious reasons to cope up with problems it has created. Why don't we just open a separate department within defence industries authority called BMC Compatibility Department. I am surprised they didn't build a shipyard yet. I said this before when they purchased ABMK and I am saying this again, financial profitability is understandable, every government does it to companies closer to it. But none have done it at the expense of its soldiers deployed in combat let alone in defense sector. We will suffer from this in the future thus the life of our soldiers is my only concern and it should be of everyone else's.

Finding an engine for a tank we are not so sure of in general terms is the least of our problems. We shouldn't even be surprised if it faced delays or had engine problems. It was a trainwreck coming for years and nobody gave a shiit about it. Now with too much money spent already it became a clusterfuck like the F-35 and Pentagon. The only difference is for Pentagon it was just a financial clusterfuck, for us the finance is the least of our concern with Altay, even though we are moving towards a recession.