TR Altay Main Battle Tank & Related Programs

Saithan

Experienced member
Denmark Correspondent
Messages
8,638
Reactions
37 19,746
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Turkey
I am pretty sure we had more than one 1000 HP powerpack program. what happened to the other candidates the 1000 HP would be enough for 155 Firtina-2 right ?
 

Merzifonlu

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
718
Reactions
25 2,155
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I am pretty sure we had more than one 1000 HP powerpack program. what happened to the other candidates the 1000 HP would be enough for 155 Firtina-2 right ?
We have only one 1000 HP military power pack program. That is UTKU.
 

Kartal1

Experienced member
Lead Moderator
Messages
5,231
Reactions
108 19,477
Nation of residence
Bulgaria
Nation of origin
Turkey
I am pretty sure we had more than one 1000 HP powerpack program. what happened to the other candidates the 1000 HP would be enough for 155 Firtina-2 right ?
We have only one 1000 HP military power pack program. That is UTKU.
Most probably talking about Tumosan's old program. As far as I know it didn't go as planned and is scrapped.
 

Strong AI

Contributor
Messages
1,044
Reactions
35 4,235
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Gunner Sabot, Tank Fire!

Deliveries have started within the scope of the TİYK-M60T Project. With the project, dependence on the Israeli-made fire control system was ended.

ASELSAN VOLKAN-M Fire Control System and Roketsan Additional Armor System were put into operation.

ASELSAN had integrated many domestic systems into the M-60T within the scope of the FIRAT-M60T Project.

 

Saithan

Experienced member
Denmark Correspondent
Messages
8,638
Reactions
37 19,746
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Turkey
Gunner Sabot, Tank Fire!

Deliveries have started within the scope of the TİYK-M60T Project. With the project, dependence on the Israeli-made fire control system was ended.

ASELSAN VOLKAN-M Fire Control System and Roketsan Additional Armor System were put into operation.

ASELSAN had integrated many domestic systems into the M-60T within the scope of the FIRAT-M60T Project.


it’s just sad that this upgrade is explained this simple…😞
 

lLiberté

Member
Messages
20
Reactions
2 43
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Roketsan Additional Armor System were put into operation.

Am I the only one who cannot spot any difference in armor scheme ? It is also mentioned that it received side skirt armor too but it looks identical to both M60T and M60TM.


For the reference M60T
M60T - 9.jpeg


And M60TM
M60TM - 2.jpeg


New designation M60T1 is also interesting, note that after Fırat Modernisation M60T were designated as M60TM.
Though it is similar to how M48 modernisations were designated (M48A5T1 & M48A5T2), but why M was dropped kinda puzzled me.
 
Last edited:

BalkanTurk90

Contributor
Messages
658
Reactions
5 1,028
Nation of residence
Albania
Nation of origin
Turkey
M60T modernization and Leo 2A4 looks good aslo have Aps and new engine (sabras) if i am right but they are just 166 , How about M60A3 which are some 700 with weak gun and engine ?
Turkiye needs at least 2000 Tanks . 1000 Altays and 1000 modernised 2A4 leo 340 , 160 Sabra and M60A3 500-700 to complete 2000 tanks .
Can Turkiye upgrade itself M60A3 to Sabra variant ?
 

Kartal1

Experienced member
Lead Moderator
Messages
5,231
Reactions
108 19,477
Nation of residence
Bulgaria
Nation of origin
Turkey
M60T modernization and Leo 2A4 looks good aslo have Aps and new engine (sabras) if i am right but they are just 166 , How about M60A3 which are some 700 with weak gun and engine ?
Turkiye needs at least 2000 Tanks . 1000 Altays and 1000 modernised 2A4 leo 340 , 160 Sabra and M60A3 500-700 to complete 2000 tanks .
Can Turkiye upgrade itself M60A3 to Sabra variant ?
Due to the relationship with Israel we can not and do not need the Sabra modernization package. More than that the current Sabras are being modernized further with Turkish solutions.

There is a developed upgrade package for M60A3 which includes a new low profile 105mm turret developed by Roketsan. When ready the modernized M60A3 is supposed to look like this with possibilities of integrating more equipment on request. The first modernized M60A3 prototype with the integrated new turret (MZKT) was delivered last year to TSK for tests.

1707608698883.png


There are two problems I see with this configuration. The first one is that 105mm is an outdated cannon for a MBT nowadays. This problem can easily be solved by integrating 120mm cannon in the newly designed turret as we are already making them for Altay. The second problem is that most probably the weight of the tank will increase and more powerful engine will be required. I think there are some options, but most probably the TSK would want a national solution for this and they are right.

What is the conclusion? We wait. 10, 20, 30 years as we wait with every big unit of equipment that is supposed to enter the Land Forces inventory.
 

Merzifonlu

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
718
Reactions
25 2,155
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
If the BATU (not UTKU, but BATU) power package fits into the M60s, I think we should first renew all M60s with the new power package and the subsystems that will transfer its power. Then we modernize the tank step by step, starting with the new turret.

If the BATU power package does not fit into the M60s, I think there is no need to spend more time with the M60. We must devote all our energy to Altay and gradually remove M60 tanks from our inventory.
 

Zafer

Experienced member
Messages
4,683
Reactions
7 7,389
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Hybrid or electric alone options for older stock tanks, why not?
 

boredaf

Contributor
Messages
1,414
Solutions
1
Reactions
16 3,935
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
The first one is that 105mm is an outdated cannon for a MBT nowadays.
I think 105mm could be serviceable, not for any future mbts but for our M60s, if we make a 105mm guided tank round, instead of ordinary munitions. There are few examples out there, most famous is probably Israeli Lahot, and a guided anti-tank missile was fired from Cockrel some time ago.

Roketsan already has Tanok, guided 120mm round with direct and top attack modes, if they can make a 105mm version of it, it would help not just our M60s but any possible IFV we might get with 105mm gun.

If the BATU power package does not fit into the M60s, I think there is no need to spend more time with the M60. We must devote all our energy to Altay and gradually remove M60 tanks from our inventory.
Unless we are going to completely scrap them, imo, it is still worth upgrading M60s that are going to stay in reserve. One of the biggest lessons of war in Ukraine is that even older systems have a place on the battlefield if the war turns into a bloody brawl on the ground. I'd rather have those M60s (and M133s if we ever retire those boxes) sit in reserves as modernised as possible instead of frantically trying to get them up to speed in case of a war, or let our soldiers use hopelessly outdated tanks.
 

lLiberté

Member
Messages
20
Reactions
2 43
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Can Turkiye upgrade itself M60A3 to Sabra variant ?

There was a similar attempt back then, it was not exactly "Sabra" but it was visually similar to it. Sabra proved itself on the field, I believe such modernisation would also fare well if it was not power pack screaming I'm dying.

Said Modernisation, M60A3T1
M60A3 Modernisation - 18.jpeg


There are two problems I see with this configuration. The first one is that 105mm is an outdated cannon for a MBT nowadays. This problem can easily be solved by integrating 120mm cannon in the newly designed turret as we are already making them for Altay. The second problem is that most probably the weight of the tank will increase and more powerful engine will be required. I think there are some options, but most probably the TSK would want a national solution for this and they are right.

We should not count our M60A3 (and their potential modernisations) as fully fledged main battle tanks. Our armed forces has been using M60A3s as heavy direct close fire support vehicles for quite sometime. Since this direct close fire support practice is embedded in army's doctrine, I don't think we can get rid of M60A3s or similar vehicles in any time soon.

That being said, M60A3 modernisation having 105mm cannon is absolutely fine as their main job would be destroying entrenched enemy positions more then engaging armor. Also as far as I'm concerned, MKE does not produce any kinetic rounds for 105mm at the moment, MKE had license produce FP105 in 1980s though it seems they did not come up with anything local. This would be kind of disheartening as having at least few sabot in the rack would be nice in case of anything more than a Toyota shows up.
 

Chocopie

Contributor
South Korea Correspondent
Messages
634
Reactions
35 2,277
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
South Korea
There are two problems I see with this configuration. The first one is that 105mm is an outdated cannon for a MBT nowadays. This problem can easily be solved by integrating 120mm cannon in the newly designed turret as we are already making them for Altay.
The 120 mm Altay gun by MKE is a L/55 caliber (variant of Korean K2 gun). It‘s too long and heavy with severe recoil for M60. A 120 mm gun outbalances the tank, changed turret and enhanced torsion bars needed, reduced ammo rounds.

120 mm cannon length:
L/55 = 6.6 m barrel (Rh Leo 2A6, MKE Altay)
L/44 = 5.3 m barrel (Rh Leo 2A4, Merkava) /
5.593 m overall (M256 M1A1 & K1A1)

105 mm gun length (M60A1/A3):
M68 = 5.55 m overall

120 mm Sabra Mk II (M60T):
MG253 = 5.3 m barrel

Israel‘s M60T Sabra Mk II upgrade uses the compact MG253 120 mm L/44 gun by IMI. Afaik MKE hasn‘t developed a L/44 version yet. It‘s not simple as shortening the length and be done with it. Koreans use licensed US M256 L/44 guns with a length of 5.593 m on K1A1/A2 tanks.

Modernized 105 mm MBTs are still useful assets. Since 2014 ROKA has improved over 1.000 K1 tanks (late 80/90s) to K1E1 standard (FCS, BMS, IFF, night sight thermals, front/rear cameras) and now upgrading to K1E2 with modern gunner sights, NBC positive pressure system, APU, air con etc.

105 mm K1E1 upgrade to K1E2:
 
Last edited:

BalkanTurk90

Contributor
Messages
658
Reactions
5 1,028
Nation of residence
Albania
Nation of origin
Turkey
There was a similar attempt back then, it was not exactly "Sabra" but it was visually similar to it. Sabra proved itself on the field, I believe such modernisation would also fare well if it was not power pack screaming I'm dying.

Said Modernisation, M60A3T1
View attachment 65520



We should not count our M60A3 (and their potential modernisations) as fully fledged main battle tanks. Our armed forces has been using M60A3s as heavy direct close fire support vehicles for quite sometime. Since this direct close fire support practice is embedded in army's doctrine, I don't think we can get rid of M60A3s or similar vehicles in any time soon.

That being said, M60A3 modernisation having 105mm cannon is absolutely fine as their main job would be destroying entrenched enemy positions more then engaging armor. Also as far as I'm concerned, MKE does not produce any kinetic rounds for 105mm at the moment, MKE had license produce FP105 in 1980s though it seems they did not come up with anything local. This would be kind of disheartening as having at least few sabot in the rack would be nice in case of anything more than a Toyota shows up.
Yes i seen this modernizarion and the other one with new mzk gun turret and both visually dont look compact . Thats why i ask can Turkiye upgrade A60A3 to Sabra style like israeli did ?
First they need to change engine , they have only 750hp engine so Turkiye can change to 1000 buy it from S korea like it do with firtinas engine and fit it if is possible always .
Then add strond Era amd other protection + 120mm gun and other modern devices inside .
 

Chocopie

Contributor
South Korea Correspondent
Messages
634
Reactions
35 2,277
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
South Korea
Yes i seen this modernizarion and the other one with new mzk gun turret and both visually dont look compact . Thats why i ask can Turkiye upgrade A60A3 to Sabra style like israeli did ?
First they need to change engine , they have only 750hp engine so Turkiye can change to 1000 buy it from S korea like it do with firtinas engine and fit it if is possible always .
Then add strond Era amd other protection + 120mm gun and other modern devices inside .
Suitable 120 mm L/44 cannons for M60T are only available from US, Germany, Israel or Japan.

Or MKE has to develop a Turkish L/44 version which costs time and money …
 

lLiberté

Member
Messages
20
Reactions
2 43
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Yes i seen this modernizarion and the other one with new mzk gun turret and both visually dont look compact . Thats why i ask can Turkiye upgrade A60A3 to Sabra style like israeli did ?
First they need to change engine , they have only 750hp engine so Turkiye can change to 1000 buy it from S korea like it do with firtinas engine and fit it if is possible always .
Then add strond Era amd other protection + 120mm gun and other modern devices inside .

Well I doubt you can get more compact than that with wedge-style turret. MZK on the other hand reduces silhouette quite a bit. Question is a bit iffy, theoretically we should be since we have expertise and know-how. We must consider and ask this question how long we can abuse those M60A3s at this point.

I'm all down for modernising them don't get me wrong I hate to see our tanker wrestle with decades old equipment, but trying to modernise them to proper main battle tank level is kind of a delusion, M60s are old and been on active service for 30 years (in Turkish Armed Forces) chassis probably took a heavy toll.

Suitable 120 mm L/44 cannons for M60T are only available from US, Germany, Israel or Japan.

MKE lists IMI's MG253 in their website as M60 Tank Cannon, though I'm not entirely sure if they have expertise to produce something based of it.

Modernized 105 mm MBTs are still useful assets. Since 2014 ROKA has improved over 1.000 K1 tanks (late 80/90s) to K1E1 standard (FCS, BMS, IFF, night sight thermals, front/rear cameras) and now upgrading to K1E2 with modern gunner sights, NBC positive pressure system, APU, air con etc.

105 mm K1E1 upgrade to K1E2:

K1 is a third generation main battle tank while M60A3 is second generation, there physical limitation, also when K1 was first revealed A3 were already decade old and M60s were in service for two decades. I'm not implying you are comparing them but our situation a little different than Koreans, their platform is/was more future proof than M60.
 
Last edited:

Chocopie

Contributor
South Korea Correspondent
Messages
634
Reactions
35 2,277
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
South Korea
K1 is a third generation main battle tank while M60A3 is second generation, there physical limitation, also when K1 was first revealed A3 were already decade old and M60s were in service for two decades. I'm not implying you are comparing them but our situation a little different than Koreans, their platform is/was more future proof than M60.
You‘re right M60 is much older and I wasn‘t directly comparing it to K1.

In Türkiye‘s situation the modernization of 105 mm M60s without bigger cannon is still useful as fire support or dated MBT. There‘re no better options until Altay comes into TSK inventory in relevant numbers. The delay of Altay is the main cause of this dilemma.
 

Kartal1

Experienced member
Lead Moderator
Messages
5,231
Reactions
108 19,477
Nation of residence
Bulgaria
Nation of origin
Turkey
The 120 mm Altay gun by MKE is a L/55 caliber (variant of Korean K2 gun). It‘s too long and heavy with severe recoil for M60. A 120 mm gun outbalances the tank, changed turret and enhanced torsion bars needed, reduced ammo rounds.

120 mm cannon length:
L/55 = 6.6 m (Rh Leo 2A6, MKE Altay)
L/44 = 5.3 m (Rh Leo 2A4, Merkava) /
5.593 m (M256 M1A1 & K1A1)

105 mm gun length (M60A1/A3):
M68 = 5.55 m

120 mm Sabra Mk II (M60T):
MG253 = 5.3 m

Israel‘s M60T Sabra Mk II upgrade uses the compact MG253 120 mm L/44 gun by IMI. Afaik MKE hasn‘t developed a L/44 version yet. It‘s not simple as shortening the length and be done with it. Koreans use licensed US M256 L/44 guns with a length of 5.593 m on K1A1/A2 tanks.

Modernized 105 mm MBTs are still useful assets. Since 2014 ROKA has improved over 1.000 K1 tanks (late 80/90s) to K1E1 standard (FCS, BMS, IFF, night sight thermals, front/rear cameras) and now upgrading to K1E2 with modern gunner sights, NBC positive pressure system, APU, air con etc.

105 mm K1E1 upgrade to K1E2:
How different would be to develop L/44 on the technological base of the already developed L/55? I think it shouldn't be so difficult for MKE.

Some time ago FNSS said that if needed a national 105mm turret can be developed (an alternative to Cockerill turrets) for a light/medium tank as TSK was interested in the concept.

Don't you think MKE is capable enough to develop it without much delays?
 

Follow us on social media

Latest posts

Top Bottom