E
Lucky for Turkey instead of altay we got TB2. TB2 did wat no tank could do better and cheaper in asymetric warfare...
Last edited by a moderator:
TR Altay Main Battle Tank & Related Programs
- Thread starter Ghost soldier
- Start date
- Messages
- 718
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
OK, let's say Otokar made a design mistake there. So why did the TSK not want this situation to be corrected in the acceptance tests? As you can see, all roads lead to the TSK, not Otokar.
- Messages
- 3,667
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
This is what stabilization is
Leotay prototype has no stabilization when it was demonstrated. The turret is welded to the bottom part. There are gears between the turret and the bottom part that makes them turn independently. You can find such a solution in older tanks that don't have real stabilization and fire on the move capability. It is good for the show (göz boyama).
No official contract is signed with BMC for Leo2a4 mod because SSB knows BMC has no capability to modernize and trying hard to gain capability. To give them space to gain the ability to upgrade Leo2A4s SSB postpones the official contract. Meanwhile satisfying very urgent needs with another modernization package. This is a similar strategy to waiting for BMC to design its own 8x8 vehicles. You will see that after BMC completes 10000 km tests and live-fire tests of its 8x8 armored vehicle things will gain pace.
For the past 5 years, we are waiting for BMC to design an 8x8 armored vehicle.
For 3+ years to gain the capability to upgrade Leo2A4 tanks
For 5 years to gain the capability to produce Altay.
BMC is working on upgrading Leo2s since 2018. This is a picture from early 2019. People think BMC has just kicked off the project. 3+ years have passed with no modernized tanks in sight. Not even a fully working prototype.
This is a mobility test those bricks are simulating the weight of the add-on armor.
So why did BMC push for Leotay? According to upgrade terms BMC has to remove the old hydraulic-based turret stabilization of Leo2s and replace them with a fully electrical turret. BMC just couldn't do it. It is a big work. Only FNSS, Otokar and Aselsan has that ability. Altay turret is designed as an electrical turret from scratch and blueprints were ready. It is not a bad decision but it is pushed to gain time since they couldn't show an upgraded Leo2A4.
Do you guys think Erdo just fired Ethem and Talip from BMC for the sake of firing someone? If there is no failure why Ethem and Talip are fired and why do Qataris push their complaints as far as to Erdo?
BTW I'm hopeful from 2022.
lol... done with you on this subject. You have been proven to be wrong on this account (lol at your explanation of stabilization), I'm not going to go dig Defence Turkey magazine to prove you wrong further more - cause I'm nice like that.
- Messages
- 1,415
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
How nice, they even colored it red to indicate where the points of failure are.
What an absolute mess of a project this is.
- Messages
- 3,254
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
In a way your argument is correct. But that was only by luck that we found out the deficiencies of our leo2 tanks. Had we not had the costly experiences of the Euphrates Shield and the Afrin conflict we would not be in a position of correcting the mistakes of previous design parameters. This is now helping us in redesigning the Altay, by adding ERA panels and the addition of Akkor. Also strengthening of the old armour.
Tanks are necessary evils of any ground force. But their use and projection to the battlefield have been greatly changed. Altay too is evolving now.
E
Luck was on western tank side since end of cold war. Abrams was rightfully called good but other western tanks were incorrectly also put on the same level or even better like leopard 2 by amateurs and 'experts' just because they are also 'western'. But all these other tanks suffered from one huge flaw that Abrams didnt have and it got exposed in 2016.
Abrams in iraqi hands performed much better than leopards in Turkish hands. Abrams shrug off more and multiple hits while leopards exploded in 10000 pieces...
The difference between Abrams and leopard:
Instead of having good foundation the builder focuses on making nice house with sunroof, swimming pool etc that collapses at the first earthquake. But instead of collapsing tanks like leopard explode in 10000 bits...
Altay should have been inspired by Abrams and not leopard...
Abrams in iraqi hands performed much better than leopards in Turkish hands. Abrams shrug off more and multiple hits while leopards exploded in 10000 pieces...
The difference between Abrams and leopard:
Instead of having good foundation the builder focuses on making nice house with sunroof, swimming pool etc that collapses at the first earthquake. But instead of collapsing tanks like leopard explode in 10000 bits...
Altay should have been inspired by Abrams and not leopard...
Ryder
Experienced member
- Messages
- 10,858
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Man really good arguments from a lot of you guys. About the Altay and the Leopards.
Seeing the Turkish Leopards getting torn apart by Isis terrorists was painful. Atgms and suicide attacks. Really a nightmare.
Is it true the M60 Sabra performed better than the Leopard 2A4?
Seeing the Turkish Leopards getting torn apart by Isis terrorists was painful. Atgms and suicide attacks. Really a nightmare.
Is it true the M60 Sabra performed better than the Leopard 2A4?
- Messages
- 3,254
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Instead of arguing which tank design is best I would suggest reading below article in detail.
www.savunmasanayist.com
ALTAY, Leopard 2A6, Merkava IV ve Abrams’a karşı UMTAS, Hellfire, Spike NLOS ve ATAKA! | SavunmaSanayiST
Bu yazımızda Türkiye, Yunanistan, Mısır ve İsrail'in sahip olduğu en iyi tank ve anti-tank füzelerin
www.savunmasanayist.com
Huelague
Experienced member
- Messages
- 3,952
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Can you explain it a little bit?
- Messages
- 3,254
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Please explain and prove your claim with concrete evidence.
T
Instead of arguing which tank design is best I would suggest reading below article in detail.
ALTAY, Leopard 2A6, Merkava IV ve Abrams’a karşı UMTAS, Hellfire, Spike NLOS ve ATAKA! | SavunmaSanayiST
Bu yazımızda Türkiye, Yunanistan, Mısır ve İsrail'in sahip olduğu en iyi tank ve anti-tank füzelerin
Top-attack - Wikipedia
Thanks to Top attack capability , almost all modern ATGMs can destroy a MBT.
Active Protection Systems , laser jammers seems more important than armour.
A tank can be stopped in 3 ways,
1) incapacitate
2) destroy
3) immobilize
with MAM-T I observed, especially in Karabag War, that the TB2 operators first considered the first option, in which MAM-L were targeted to the engine department.
Many of the Armenian tanks hit were not destroyed but put out of action.
An explanation for this for me at the MAM-L the TANDEM heads were costructured incorrectly. Indeed, if one is wrong with the design, the HEAT jet will be diminished by the first head which is supposed to make the reactive armor ineffective, because the debris created by the pre-hollow charge can hinder the formation of the spike of the main hollow charge.
1) incapacitate
2) destroy
3) immobilize
with MAM-T I observed, especially in Karabag War, that the TB2 operators first considered the first option, in which MAM-L were targeted to the engine department.
Many of the Armenian tanks hit were not destroyed but put out of action.
An explanation for this for me at the MAM-L the TANDEM heads were costructured incorrectly. Indeed, if one is wrong with the design, the HEAT jet will be diminished by the first head which is supposed to make the reactive armor ineffective, because the debris created by the pre-hollow charge can hinder the formation of the spike of the main hollow charge.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 5,360
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I guess we will sometimes have to express what we are going to say in bold letters and visuals for some. Politic reasons related with delays have been discussed hundreds of times on this issue and people are tired of reading the same political reasons and arguments over and over. Politics will not be discussed any longer. If there is any development about Altay, please share and discuss. Otherwise, if you are going to bring up the same issues over and over, there are already dozens of similar arguments and messages on the previous pages. While almost all Mods warn some members about this issue, if there are still those who insist on doing politics in Altay topic, then we will play the game according to the rules.
Thanks!
Thanks!
I haven't seen the cross-section of the MAM-L or UMTAS / OMTAS. I hope main head is at the very back of the missile. And front head in front but in the upper part of the missile.
RULE: The more back the main head, the more penetrating power.
in order for this sting (HEAT jet) to be formed and to develop its maximum penetration power, enough time / distance is required. The so-called standoff distance depends on the diameter of the load.
Larger diameter = more standoff = more punch.
RULE: The more back the main head, the more penetrating power.
in order for this sting (HEAT jet) to be formed and to develop its maximum penetration power, enough time / distance is required. The so-called standoff distance depends on the diameter of the load.
Larger diameter = more standoff = more punch.
in tank warfare and combat is that you save yourself the question of why the Israeli tank commanders always keep their heads out.
for status awareness?
This is where the 4th crew comes into play ..
More important than how thick the armor is, how strong the tank engine is
for status awareness?
This is where the 4th crew comes into play ..
More important than how thick the armor is, how strong the tank engine is
