What's new

Altay & Turkish Main Battle Tank Programs

The tank is looking good. I wouldn't worry too much about the "sharpness" of the turret. It's not a good way to judge armour effectiveness in modern tanks. Even if you look at the Merkava (which is a very overrated tank by the way), the turret isn't actually sharp like it appears from the outside:
CQpa4aY.jpg

It's just a thin sheet of armour on top - underneath it's perpendicular angles, like stairs.

The composition of the armour is much more important, and that's something we can't determine by looking at pictures.
 
.
The tank is looking good. I wouldn't worry too much about the "sharpness" of the turret. It's not a good way to judge armour effectiveness in modern tanks. Even if you look at the Merkava (which is a very overrated tank by the way), the turret isn't actually sharp like it appears from the outside:
CQpa4aY.jpg

It's just a thin sheet of armour on top - underneath it's perpendicular angles, like stairs.

The composition of the armour is much more important, and that's something we can't determine by looking at pictures.
I'd still prefer such-shaped turret.
 
.
It finally looks more modern and technological.

But those side-mirrors... They just do not fit in...

Why do they exist anyway? Do they no use cameras for views?

And another question, I've heard that 'automatic reload system' will not be added to Altay, any news on that? Will Altay also get that tech like its brother in South Korea?

These mirrors don't looks like good but it has to be there. How can the driver see back side while his head is out of the tank? They will not use the cameras everytime.

And, ALTAY will not use auto-reloder never. Because of this reason ALTAY weighs almost 10 tons more than K2.
 
. .
And, ALTAY will not use auto-reloder never. Because of this reason ALTAY weighs almost 10 tons more than K2.

But that doesn't make any sense, what is the point of making the tank heavier as it was already 55 tonnes? Auto-loader provides consistent and reliable loading capability, faster than humans can perform, in a constant perfect harmony.

And it would also make the tank lighter as well..

It would also provide the tank the capability to stock more ammo while risking less amount of lives inside..

Its acceleration would improve, it would turn faster and easier, consume less fuel, less likely to stuck in a mud-hole, run faster.

They really should add an auto-reloader...
 
. . . . .
But that doesn't make any sense, what is the point of making the tank heavier as it was already 55 tonnes? Auto-loader provides consistent and reliable loading capability, faster than humans can perform, in a constant perfect harmony.

And it would also make the tank lighter as well..

It would also provide the tank the capability to stock more ammo while risking less amount of lives inside..

Its acceleration would improve, it would turn faster and easier, consume less fuel, less likely to stuck in a mud-hole, run faster.

They really should add an auto-reloader...

-Auto-loader mechanism jam too frequently.
-If one of the three personel(Gunner , Driver , Commander) pass out during fight Loader himself take his position.
-The lighter the tank is less armor it will have.
 
.
-Auto-loader mechanism jam too frequently.
-If one of the three personel(Gunner , Driver , Commander) pass out during fight Loader himself take his position.
-The lighter the tank is less armor it will have.
1-It depends on the used technology. All the latest tanks are using this system now.
2-Then train them so that they would not pass out.
3-It works the other way around. If your tank weights less, then you would have a weight cap you can use to add more armor to your tank.
 
.
1-It depends on the used technology. All the latest tanks are using this system now.
2-Then train them so that they would not pass out.
3-It works the other way around. If your tank weights less, then you would have a weight cap you can use to add more armor to your tank.

1-By latest tanks you mean world famous Abraham , Leopard and Merkava? None of them using auto-loader.
2-Train them?!? How the... anyone can train himself to prevent pass out?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
But that doesn't make any sense, what is the point of making the tank heavier as it was already 55 tonnes? Auto-loader provides consistent and reliable loading capability, faster than humans can perform, in a constant perfect harmony.

And it would also make the tank lighter as well..

It would also provide the tank the capability to stock more ammo while risking less amount of lives inside..

Its acceleration would improve, it would turn faster and easier, consume less fuel, less likely to stuck in a mud-hole, run faster.

They really should add an auto-reloader...

The Challenger 2, Leopard 2 and the Abrams all use a manual loader, and they are the best tanks in the world. If the choice of autoloader was so simple, every tank since about 1975 would have an autoloader. They don't, and there's a good reason they don't.

Each tank is designed to operate in a certain environment and against certain threats. Some prioritise mobility over other factors. Others prioritise other factors, like the following: autoloaders are less reliable and slower than a manual loader. Also, the 4th crew member is very valuable to reduce stress on the crew due to all the maintenance that has to be done on a tank in the field. Lastly, as someone else already mentioned - if one of the crew becomes a casualty, the loader can take their place. Your suggestion that they just "train them so that they would not pass out" is one of the silliest things I've ever read. Why even have a tank? Just train the crew not to die when bullets, explosives and shrapnel hit them, yeah?
 
Last edited:
.
We had a discussion in one of the Turkish forums about what it could be, they came to a conclusion of it being IFF device and pointed at K2 MBT as their basis for the argument.
View attachment 191780
They laughed at me when I suggested MWS :(


Bro, IFF on a tank is possible but not common. Transmitters, receivers and electronic units will occupy serious space on turret so I don't suppose that SSM requests IFF on Altay. MWR is much possible for me as well. :)
 
.
The Challenger 2, Leopard 2 and the Abrams all use a manual loader, and they are the best tanks in the world. If the choice of autoloader was so simple, every tank since about 1975 would have an autoloader. They don't, and there's a good reason they don't.
They are from middle age. The tech has improved so much since then.

Each tank is designed to operate in a certain environment and against certain threats. Some prioritise mobility over other factors. Others prioritise other factors, like the following: autoloaders are less reliable and slower than a manual loader. Also, the 4th crew member is very valuable to reduce stress on the crew due to all the maintenance that has to be done on a tank in the field. Lastly, as someone else already mentioned - if one of the crew becomes a casualty, the loader can take their place. Your suggestion that they just "train them so that they would not pass out" is one of the silliest things I've ever read. Why even have a tank? Just train the crew not to die when bullets, explosives and shrapnel hit them, yeah?

If there is a way to teach people not to die, that would indeed be a great way around, but I highly doubt that it would actually work the way you think it'd.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom