Good News for Pakistan? Turkey’s New Tank Is Ready for Mass Production

[waz]

I've always been fond of Altay. I do hope we see it in Pakistan. The could act as potent force multipliers.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

India can use its numerical advantage

Right. So to counter that "numerical advantage"

Pakistan likely believes in numbers as a means to prevent India

Is it just me that sees contradiction here between first quote and second? To reduce it your saying enemy has numbers advantage so we shall throw even bigger numbers at him?

Western tank theory and design were formed during the Cold War. The Soviet Union had vast tank armies and enjoyed huge numerical advantage. In this scenario NATO countries went for quality against quantity as they knew they could never match the Russians in numbers.

Before that the Germans had faced impossible odds. They knew there was no way they were going win against the Allies as they had the shear numbers on their side. The only option the German's had was to go for quality. Thus few Tigers, Panthers faced swarms of Shermans and T-34s.

In the context of Pak/India I am expected to believe that India has the numbers advantage but we are going to do them in with numbers? Surely that cannot make sense.

Pak/India wars are always sharp, short affairs. Ever seen a fight between two fat guy's? They don't last long as within minutes both will be on the ropes puffing and panting. That's India/Pak wars for you. Now in this context I would prefer to have smaller but more lethal tank force. I am no Basil Liddel-Hart but I do know that a Tank is primarily a offensive weapon.

Thus I would have Pak Army to be cultivated with the dictum "the best defence is offence" - that is the culture of the army should be aggressive and slanted toward taking the war to the enemy with mobile warfare being the ideal to be followed. In this offensive mobile warfare, spead is essential and tanks are the choice platform. The German's practiced this with Blitzkrieg and we know what the results were.

In this scenario Pakistan would punch a hole through the border at a given point with a strike force made up of MBTs like Altay with infantry, artillery in tandem via APCs and self propelled artillery and capture a salient and create a bulge into Indian lines. By this stage either a ceasefire would be declared or things would go serious and turn nuclear in which case it would matter nought which tanks either side has. Assuming it is ceasefire that captured bulge would be used to trade for any gains made by India along the frontline.

Now I am not going to be sparse with truth or so as I see it. Pak Army is no German Army. PMA Kakul does not produce Guderians, Rommels, Runsedt or SS-Standartenführer Joachim Peiper. Instead Pak Army has turned armour warfare into defensive doctrine and spread it's assets along the entire border. This create a force that developes a defensive traits and digs rather than charges. To be fair Pak is saved because this battle timidity is also prevalent in the Indian military.

Therefore Pak/India wars are best described as local engagements at brigade level along the 1,000 mile front and without huge armies being flung across the frontlines as we often saw in WW2 and US Army in Iraq that hit like huge hammer and then drove breakneck speed behind the enemy lines. This sort of war requires coomand level staff to have balls of steel and divisions on the ground needs commanders willing to charge ahead while taking huge causalties but keep rolling forward all the while improvising.

SS-Standartenführer Joachim Peiper's attack in Battle of Bulge with his Kampfgruppe Peiper is study in how armoured attack is led against larger and overwhelming enemy in the most difficult circumstances imaginable. What Kampfgruppe Peiper demonstrated was even in adverse circumstances bold leaders with well trained men armed with good weapons can wreal havoc on the enemy. PMA Kakul needs to nurture this spirit rather than launching coups with 111 Brigade.

Battle of Bulge

Unfortunately Pak Army has demonstrated lack of strategic acumen or battlefied flexibility. This was show by 1965 cock up and even the Kargil debacle.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

What is the news regarding Engine for the Altay... Is it available for export?
@Sinan,

 

[risingsinga]

I have a general analysis (can be wrong), I don't see much scope of tanks in future warfare. Tanks, even the quickest, is slower than other options and easy target for most anti-tank systems. Invest in better, more accurate and potent anti-tank missiles, helicopters and ground attack aircrafts. Just have few tank-divisions/artillery to defend and keep your presence in the field for a battle but focus on other options more.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

Right. So to counter that "numerical advantage"

Is it just me that sees contradiction here between first quote and second? To reduce it your saying enemy has numbers advantage so we shall through numbers at him?

Western tank theory and design were formed during the Cold War. The Soviet Union had vast tank armies and enjoyed huge numerical advantage. In this scenario NATO countries went for quality against quantity as they knew they could never match the Russians in numbers.

Before that the Germans had faced impossible odds. They knew there was no way they were going win against the Allies as they had the shear numbers on their side. The only option the German's had was to go for quality. Thus few Tigers, Pathers faced swarms of Shermans and T-34s.

In the context of Pak/India I am expected to believe that India has the numbers advantage but we are going to do them in with numbers? Surely that cannot make sense.

Pak/India wars are always sharp, short affairs. Ever seen a fight between two fat guy's? They don't last long as within minutes both will be on the ropes puffing and panting. That's India/Pak wars for you. Now in this context I would prefer to have smaller but more lethal tank force. I am no Basil Liddel-Hart but I do know that a Tank is primarily a offensive weapon.

Thus I would have Pak Army to be cultivated with the dictum "the best defence is offence" - that is the culture of the army should be aggressive and slanted toward taking the war to the enemy with mobile warfare being the ideal to be followed. In this offensive mobile warfare, spead is essential and tanks are the choice platform. The German's practiced this with Blitzkrieg and we know what the results were.

In this scenario Pakistan would punch a hole through the border at a given point with a strike force made up of MBTs like Altay with infantry, artillery in tandem via APCs and self propelled artillery and capture a salient and create a bulge into Indian lines. By this stage either a ceasefire would be declared or things would go serious and turn nuclear in which case it would matter nought which tanks either side has. Assuming it is ceasefire that captured bulge would be used to trade for any gains made by India along the frontline.

Now I am not going to be sparse with truth or so as I see it. Pak Army is no German Army. PMA Kakul does not produce Guderians, Rommels, Runsedt or SS-Standartenführer Joachim Peiper. Instead Pak Army has turned armour warfare into defensive doctrine and spread it's assets along the entire border. This create a force that developes a defensive traits and digs rather than charges. To be fair Pak is saved because this battle timidity is also prevalent in the Indian military.

Therefore Pak/India wars are best described as local engagements at brigade level along the 1,000 mile front and without huge armies being flung across the frontlines as we often saw in WW2 and US Army in Iraq that hit like huge hammer and then drove breakneck speed behind the enemy lines. This sort of war requires coomand level staff to have balls of steel and divisions on the ground needs commanders willing to charge ahead while taking huge causalties but keep rolling forward all the while improvising.

SS-Standartenführer Joachim Peiper's attack in Battle of Bulge with his Kampfgruppe Peiper is study in how armoured attack is led against larger and overwhelming enemy in the most difficult circumstances imaginable. What Kampfgruppe Peiper demonstrated was even in adverse circumstances bold leaders with well trained men armed with good weapons can wreal havoc on the enemy. PMA Kakul needs to nurture this spirit rather than launching coups with 111 Brigade.

Battle of Bulge

Unfortunately Pak Army has demonstrated lack of strategic acumen or battlefied flexibility. This was show by 1965 cock up and even the Kargil debacle.

Don't you think time has changed for 1-1 tank battle. Today most of the infantry would carry anti tank weapons. This is what has been seen in Arab - Israel Wars and also against Hesbullah.

The doctrine of Tank war fare that was used in WW2 is obsolete, how ever if the capabilities of the tanks are very advance as that seen during the Gulf War 2 along with decent air support things can be very different.

 

[Spectre]

,

Right. So to counter that "numerical advantage"

Is it just me that sees contradiction here between first quote and second? To reduce it your saying enemy has numbers advantage so we shall through numbers at him?

Western tank theory and design were formed during the Cold War. The Soviet Union had vast tank armies and enjoyed huge numerical advantage. In this scenario NATO countries went for quality against quantity as they knew they could never match the Russians in numbers.

Before that the Germans had faced impossible odds. They knew there was no way they were going win against the Allies as they had the shear numbers on their side. The only option the German's had was to go for quality. Thus few Tigers, Pathers faced swarms of Shermans and T-34s.

In the context of Pak/India I am expected to believe that India has the numbers advantage but we are going to do them in with numbers? Surely that cannot make sense.

Pak/India wars are always sharp, short affairs. Ever seen a fight between two fat guy's? They don't last long as within minutes both will be on the ropes puffing and panting. That's India/Pak wars for you. Now in this context I would prefer to have smaller but more lethal tank force. I am no Basil Liddel-Hart but I do know that a Tank is primarily a offensive weapon.

Thus I would have Pak Army to be cultivated with the dictum "the best defence is offence" - that is the culture of the army should be aggressive and slanted toward taking the war to the enemy with mobile warfare being the ideal to be followed. In this offensive mobile warfare, spead is essential and tanks are the choice platform. The German's practiced this with Blitzkrieg and we know what the results were.

In this scenario Pakistan would punch a hole through the border at a given point with a strike force made up of MBTs like Altay with infantry, artillery in tandem via APCs and self propelled artillery and capture a salient and create a bulge into Indian lines. By this stage either a ceasefire would be declared or things would go serious and turn nuclear in which case it would matter nought which tanks either side has. Assuming it is ceasefire that captured bulge would be used to trade for any gains made by India along the frontline.

Now I am not going to be sparse with truth or so as I see it. Pak Army is no German Army. PMA Kakul does not produce Guderians, Rommels, Runsedt or SS-Standartenführer Joachim Peiper. Instead Pak Army has turned armour warfare into defensive doctrine and spread it's assets along the entire border. This create a force that developes a defensive traits and digs rather than charges. To be fair Pak is saved because this battle timidity is also prevalent in the Indian military.

Therefore Pak/India wars are best described as local engagements at brigade level along the 1,000 mile front and without huge armies being flung across the frontlines as we often saw in WW2 and US Army in Iraq that hit like huge hammer and then drove breakneck speed behind the enemy lines. This sort of war requires coomand level staff to have balls of steel and divisions on the ground needs commanders willing to charge ahead while taking huge causalties but keep rolling forward all the while improvising.

SS-Standartenführer Joachim Peiper's attack in Battle of Bulge with his Kampfgruppe Peiper is study in how armoured attack is led against larger and overwhelming enemy in the most difficult circumstances imaginable. What Kampfgruppe Peiper demonstrated was even in adverse circumstances bold leaders with well trained men armed with good weapons can wreal havoc on the enemy. PMA Kakul needs to nurture this spirit rather than launching coups with 111 Brigade.

Battle of Bulge

Unfortunately Pak Army has demonstrated lack of strategic acumen or battlefied flexibility. This was show by 1965 cock up and even the Kargil debacle.

Have you gone native! mate? I know you are no Indian lover

Your analysis would have been perfecto in a different time but as the prior armored conflicts in subcontinent region show, defence holds an enormous advantage due to terrain. Both India and Pakistan have tried offensive thrusts of the kind you have described and suffered greatly for it with premier formations lying decimated in longewala, assal uttar and lahore area couple that with none of the gains to speak of while defensive formations have performed admirably in all three cases albeit due to different local variables.

You are correct when you say future wars would be fought under the nuclear umbrella and thus are likely to be akin to fencing match full of quick and shallow slices and thrusts. In such a case, it would make more sense for PA to present multiple holding brigades spread over a large area with ad hoc defences rather than concentrate forces which would leave wide swaths of territory indefensible. @Quwa is right in this. If the defences hold soon international pressure would force a ceasefire.

 

[XILLAX]

min 1.16 4th prototype version, if i am not wrong.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Does not meet our requirements; too heavy.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Have you gone native

If you tell me what you mean by "native" that might help me to give you a answer, mate!

no Indian lover

I reserve "love" for women only and of any nationality. Sorry I don't discriminate

suffered greatly for it with premier formations lying decimated in longewala, assal uttar and lahore area couple that with none of the gains t

Precisely. Poor planning, terrible leadership at strategic level, battlefield commanders showing too much timidity or total lack of judgement and failure to improvise. All lending reinforcing what I said about Pak/Indian Armies not being anything like the German Army.

defensive formations have performed admirably

Well they would would'nt they. All cozy and sat in their trenches. Lobbing a few grenades, few burst of heavy MG, barrage or two of artillery and roaring of tank engines. Both sides staying safely in their comfort zone. Hey why bother having a war in the first place or maybe Pak/India Armies are smart. All get to go home and get their medals to draw pensions for rest of their lives. I call that battlefield timidity.

@ACE OF THE AIR The tank is not redundant despite that having been declared in 1980s,19990s, 2000s and today. The Isreali experiance against Hezbollah revealed nothing new. You never send tanks into built up areas. You never send tanks without good infantry support. Tanks are good for mobile warfare in open country ideally used in flanking manouvres.

If tanks are used wrongly (urban environment) or on soft ground (failure of recon units) or lack of infantry support (Pakistan learnt this in 1965) or lack of air support (go ask the widows of Iraqi tank troops) the tank will fail but that has been known all along. American's learn't what lack of heavy armour can do. ask them what happened in Somalia in Mogadishu. They made a movie. Black Hawk down. It was dated Pakistani tanks and Malaysian APCs that saved them or the Rangers would have been toasted by the "Skinees".

 

[django]

Looks bad@ss man. State of the bad@ss art.

Now thats what you call a good looking machine, props to our Turkish brothers.

Right. So to counter that "numerical advantage"

Is it just me that sees contradiction here between first quote and second? To reduce it your saying enemy has numbers advantage so we shall throw even bigger numbers at him?

Western tank theory and design were formed during the Cold War. The Soviet Union had vast tank armies and enjoyed huge numerical advantage. In this scenario NATO countries went for quality against quantity as they knew they could never match the Russians in numbers.

Before that the Germans had faced impossible odds. They knew there was no way they were going win against the Allies as they had the shear numbers on their side. The only option the German's had was to go for quality. Thus few Tigers, Panthers faced swarms of Shermans and T-34s.

In the context of Pak/India I am expected to believe that India has the numbers advantage but we are going to do them in with numbers? Surely that cannot make sense.

Pak/India wars are always sharp, short affairs. Ever seen a fight between two fat guy's? They don't last long as within minutes both will be on the ropes puffing and panting. That's India/Pak wars for you. Now in this context I would prefer to have smaller but more lethal tank force. I am no Basil Liddel-Hart but I do know that a Tank is primarily a offensive weapon.

Thus I would have Pak Army to be cultivated with the dictum "the best defence is offence" - that is the culture of the army should be aggressive and slanted toward taking the war to the enemy with mobile warfare being the ideal to be followed. In this offensive mobile warfare, spead is essential and tanks are the choice platform. The German's practiced this with Blitzkrieg and we know what the results were.

In this scenario Pakistan would punch a hole through the border at a given point with a strike force made up of MBTs like Altay with infantry, artillery in tandem via APCs and self propelled artillery and capture a salient and create a bulge into Indian lines. By this stage either a ceasefire would be declared or things would go serious and turn nuclear in which case it would matter nought which tanks either side has. Assuming it is ceasefire that captured bulge would be used to trade for any gains made by India along the frontline.

Now I am not going to be sparse with truth or so as I see it. Pak Army is no German Army. PMA Kakul does not produce Guderians, Rommels, Runsedt or SS-Standartenführer Joachim Peiper. Instead Pak Army has turned armour warfare into defensive doctrine and spread it's assets along the entire border. This create a force that developes a defensive traits and digs rather than charges. To be fair Pak is saved because this battle timidity is also prevalent in the Indian military.

Therefore Pak/India wars are best described as local engagements at brigade level along the 1,000 mile front and without huge armies being flung across the frontlines as we often saw in WW2 and US Army in Iraq that hit like huge hammer and then drove breakneck speed behind the enemy lines. This sort of war requires coomand level staff to have balls of steel and divisions on the ground needs commanders willing to charge ahead while taking huge causalties but keep rolling forward all the while improvising.

SS-Standartenführer Joachim Peiper's attack in Battle of Bulge with his Kampfgruppe Peiper is study in how armoured attack is led against larger and overwhelming enemy in the most difficult circumstances imaginable. What Kampfgruppe Peiper demonstrated was even in adverse circumstances bold leaders with well trained men armed with good weapons can wreal havoc on the enemy. PMA Kakul needs to nurture this spirit rather than launching coups with 111 Brigade.

Battle of Bulge

Unfortunately Pak Army has demonstrated lack of strategic acumen or battlefied flexibility. This was show by 1965 cock up and even the Kargil debacle.

Peiper indeed was a genius commander as was Guderian whose capture of Kiev is a thing of legend. The only problem with more sophisticated and complexly engineered machines is that they are more prone to breakdowns, as was in the case of the battle of Kursk where Tiger and Panthers regularly broke down unlike the far simpler T-34. In the end the battle , the USSR fought the mighty Wehrmacht to a standstill during the peak of summer, it was the beginning of the end for Nazi Germany.kudos

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Bro

Thank you for the kind words. Much appreciated.

You need to post more

I do try but I support an entire tribe. So work demands can cut into my slack time.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Thank you for the kind words. Much appreciated.


I do try but I support an entire tribe. So work demands can cut into my slack time.

Lol....I hear you bro. The tribe comes first. I've got my mini clan aswell. Whatever posts you can do are really appreciated and valued. More than anyone else on PDF.

 

[Immortan.Joe]

This does not make sense. If the enemy has numerical superiority how can you offset it with mass numbers? If they have numbers the only way you can hope to balance that is with quality.

Altay looks like hell of a tank. It sort of resembles the M1-Abrams. Pakistan should have entered in join production instead of pissing around with Khalids, Zararas, Haiders and in between collecting junk from Ukraine. The Pak armour forces must look like hotch potch collection.

Pak will never have long protracted war with India. Any such war will be sharp and short before it either ceasfire is agreed or worse nuclear weapons are used. Therefore there is no need in having huge armoured formations. What Pak needs is small but potent armoured force to handle short wars lasting few days to weeks. Altay is perfect.

But does Pak have the money?

There is a very basic flaw in this thinking. Quality trumps Quantity and vice versa only if difference between the two is not marginal.

If following your advice, Pakistan adopts policy of few high quality tanks compared to large number of cheap tanks in false belief that quality would trump quantity and thus further stacking up odds in Indian favour (quantity wise), it would end up in a situation where India would not have to even fight those tanks.

See being few in number, those tanks could not be everywhere, or say in less places than Pakistan's current Chinese copy tanks could be, thus leaving gaps in line. What India need to do is push its tanks in those sectors where Pakistani tanks are not present while saturating area where those tanks are present with anti-tank weapons. Even if India goes toe to toes with these tanks, it could easily use its superior number to outflank and capture supply line/rear areas of these tanks and surround them, turning them into sitting ducks and start rolling them back from edges and hitting in center using attack choppers.

A small qualitative armour force would have much disastrous results for PA than large number of chinese copy as it would shorten the line and make outflanking that more easy for India.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Nice Machine , the targeting device looks amazing but we have the Al Khalid platform, servicing needs for now, I am sure Turkey is also fulfilling their own needs first

But would like to see the automated - anti Air platform inducted in Pakistan Military

Baktar Shikan on mobile platform would look nice with 4 missile lunacher

 

[BDforever]

Good News for Pakistan? Turkey’s New Tank Is Ready for Mass Production
Islamabad has been eying the new main battle tank as a replacement for the Pakistan Army’s legacy armor.

Turkey’s first indigenously-designed, third generation+ main battle tank (MBT), designated Altay, is ready for serial production, the Hurriyet Daily reports. Hurriyet citesTurkish military vehicles manufacturer Otokar, a branch of the Koç Group, the country’s top industrial conglomerate.

The chairman of the board at Otokar, Ali Koç, told reporters in April that his company is “ready to fulfill all the obligations with the highest sensitivity and ambition in the Altay tank project, which is Turkey’s biggest land systems project.”

“We are ready for the job, with our human resource, from the subcontractor to our workers, experience, abilities and our passion to serve the best for our country,” added Koç.

As of now, no date has been officially set for the serial production of the tank to begin. There are still two other defense contractors competing for the contract to produce up to 1,000 tanks for the Turkish Army.

“We believe that the interest that the countries who are friends and allies have taken in the Altay tank will present a positive effect on defense industry exports in the long term,” Koç also said.

The head of Turkey’s defense procurement agency, the Undersecretariat for Defense Industries, Ismail Demir announced in January that Pakistan’s military is interested in procuring the Altay MBT, although there is no official confirmation from the Pakistani side that this is the case.

Reports that Pakistan is interested in the Altay have to take into account that Turkey’s new MBT will be an expensive acquisition for the Pakistan Army since the Altay is based on Western tank designs and will be a NATO-standard MBT.

Pakistan has traditionally relied on cheaper models such as the al-Khalid and al-Zarrar MBTs (both derivatives of Chinese-made MBTs) given that the Pakistan Army’s armor doctrine favors mass over class in order to partially offset the Indian Army’s numerical superiority.

It is thus unlikely that the Altay will become the new mainstay of Pakistan’s armor force. If acquired, it will likely be only to supplement a cheaper armored vehicle procured under the so-called “Haider” program.

The Altay is a formidable weapons platform as I explained in January (See: “Will Pakistan Buy Turkey’s New Advanced Main Battle Tank?”):

Otokar entered into a system development deal with South Korean tank maker, Hyundai Rotem, whose K2 Black Panther tank project serves as the basis for the development of the Altay. Both tanks share the same base design including the chassis, although the Altay is purportedly slightly longer, equipped with heavier armor, and, in comparison to the K2 MBT also sports a modified turret with composite armor.

Both tanks are also armed with a 120-millimeter smoothbore gun, although the K2 Black Panther MBT is equipped with an automatic loader, whereas the gun on the Altay has to be loaded manually. Furthermore, theAltay MBT has a laser guided missile firing capability and is additionally armed with 7.62 millimeter coaxial machine gun and a pintle-mounted 12.7 millimeter machine gun up top.

The Altay can accommodate a crew of four and with its German-made 1,500 horsepower engine can reach a maximum speed of up to 70 kilometers per hour (43 mph). In October 2015, Turkish engine maker TUMOSAN signed an agreement with the Austrian firm, AVL List, for technical support in designing an indigenous engine for for future batches of the Altay MBT.

Interestingly, Pakistan’s defense industry is also considering procuring theAltay’s third generation thermal imagining sight for the al-Khalid tank.

I wish BD could buy this, but high price and tank weight is too much for BD soil, are two big problems.