TR Altay Main Battle Tank & Related Programs

Ryder

Experienced member
Messages
10,857
Reactions
6 18,707
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
Turkey
Tanks will get smaller. There will be 3-man crew tanks and later 2-man crew tanks will take over. UGVs will be deployed with tanks. There will be tank pilots similar to fighter pilots. One of them will drive the other one will be responsible for controlling UGVs and weapons. AI will help tank pilots to keep everything in control and to keep the workload of pilots in check. A small fighter-like cockpit is all you need with just 2 pilots and this will pave the way to very light tanks(40t) without sacrificing armor protection.

Excellent post explains the future.
 

Stimpy75

Committed member
Türkiye Correspondent
Messages
222
Reactions
4 928
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Was this shared before?
GHh5HP5WwAA9hBO.png
 

Scott Summers

Contributor
Messages
493
Reactions
2 805
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
Was this shared before? View attachment 66178

Is that the Altay?

Fucking beautifull.

We need at least 2000 of them to boost our economy and get all those unemployed lazy people to work.

If Egypt and Israel maintain 3000 tanks each, than a big nation like Turkey must have 2000 at least.

We must sell all those Sabras and Leopards and invest heavily in Altay.
 

Tornadoss

Contributor
Messages
1,376
Reactions
4 2,624
Nation of residence
Czechia
Nation of origin
Turkey
Is that the Altay?

Fucking beautifull.

We need at least 2000 of them to boost our economy and get all those unemployed lazy people to work.

If Egypt and Israel maintain 3000 tanks each, than a big nation like Turkey must have 2000 at least.

We must sell all those Sabras and Leopards and invest heavily in Altay.
This is M-60 tank with MZK turret developed by Roketsan.
There is no way Turkey could effort 2000 tanks. If you take unit price as $16M each, it would take $32B and this is only the purchasing cost.
 

boredaf

Contributor
Messages
1,414
Solutions
1
Reactions
16 3,928
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
We really need a rolling eyes reaction in addition to the ones we have because that is really the only appropriate way to react to some of the posts in this forum.

:rolleyes:
 

Scott Summers

Contributor
Messages
493
Reactions
2 805
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
This is M-60 tank with MZK turret developed by Roketsan.
There is no way Turkey could effort 2000 tanks. If you take unit price as $16M each, it would take $32B and this is only the purchasing cost.

We have 2,330 tanks now, all German and American crap.

Sell them to other countries and replace them with 2000 Altay.

You can maintain 2330 old Western tanks for years now, but not 2000 domestic Altay tanks?

How much Altay should we purchase? Just 100 ?

So much investments, headaches, researches for years to build the first domestic main battle tank for only purchasing 100 of them?

Then this project is failed.
 

YeşilVatan

Contributor
Messages
668
Reactions
16 1,690
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
There are ways to reduce price per unit. But that's not the point. We don't need that many tanks anymore.

I've read somewhere that Turkish Armed Forces had the most tanks per soldier ratio. The guy who wrote it explained that because Turkey had to face Soviets in the caucasus front, and because we had no way of countering their indirect fire support (artillery) we opted for direct fire in the frontline which was somewhat feasible. Needless to say, we are not in 1980 anymore. So this strategy is outdated.

Our need for tanks is way down. But perceptions both in the army, the populace and the defence enthusiasts didn't change. We are simply used to having a huge amount of tanks, and we don't like it when we don't have them.

I believe a more moderate tank force of, say 200-300 and maybe a little more is not only more achievable, but it's also more desirable. We have massively increased our indirect fire support capabilities, and the nature of warfare is changed. What we need is more MRAPs, IFVs, APCs, SPA, UCAVs, loitering munitions and network integration.

At least this is what I gathered.
 

Scott Summers

Contributor
Messages
493
Reactions
2 805
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
There are ways to reduce price per unit. But that's not the point. We don't need that many tanks anymore.

I've read somewhere that Turkish Armed Forces had the most tanks per soldier ratio. The guy who wrote it explained that because Turkey had to face Soviets in the caucasus front, and because we had no way of countering their indirect fire support (artillery) we opted for direct fire in the frontline which was somewhat feasible. Needless to say, we are not in 1980 anymore. So this strategy is outdated.

Our need for tanks is way down. But perceptions both in the army, the populace and the defence enthusiasts didn't change. We are simply used to having a huge amount of tanks, and we don't like it when we don't have them.

I believe a more moderate tank force of, say 200-300 and maybe a little more is not only more achievable, but it's also more desirable. We have massively increased our indirect fire support capabilities, and the nature of warfare is changed. What we need is more MRAPs, IFVs, APCs, SPA, UCAVs, loitering munitions and network integration.

At least this is what I gathered.

Not needed anymore?

Go tell this to Ukraine and Russia. Both sides wished they had 10.000 tanks each.

Turkey needs a lot of tanks not only in Turkey, but also in North-Syria, North-Iraq and West-Libya.

We need a minimum of 2000 pieces.

Every produced Altay is a boost for the local economy and the army.
 

YeşilVatan

Contributor
Messages
668
Reactions
16 1,690
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Not needed anymore?

Go tell this to Ukraine and Russia. Both sides wished they had 10.000 tanks each.

Turkey needs a lot of tanks not only in Turkey, but also in North-Syria, North-Iraq and West-Libya.

We need a minimum of 2000 pieces.

Every produced Altay is a boost for the local economy and the army.
Read what I wrote again. I said "What we need is more MRAPs, IFVs, APCs, SPA, UCAVs, loitering munitions and network integration." Ukraine is a special case, somehow those two managed to get locked in trench warfare in 2024. I don't believe this is, or will be the new normal for us. Not one of our neighbours can get into a stable trench warfare style of conflict with us. It's simple not going to happen. And even then, you can see tanks are way less useful then the other things I counted. It's still a hefty amount of weaponry.

If you combine those with 300+ Altay and some MZK turret M60s, we will have the most modern tank force in the region, and it will be one of the largest. But 2000 Altay is a massive overreach and frankly a waste.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,684
Reactions
55 4,801
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Today many of MBTs are being used as artillery and All MBTs arent used for MBT hunt .

Today we could see MBTs as a destroyer of buildings where the enemy is hidden.

Long lasting tit to tit Tank battles were in WW2. So Today we have enough tankkillers such as ATGM loaded IFVs and troopers .

Our land forces know their new doctrine very well.

Though i would love to see wheeled IFVs with the 90mmLP guns in order to decrease the workload of MBTs in case of urban warfare.
 

CAN_TR

Contributor
Messages
1,474
Reactions
17 5,211
Nation of residence
Austria
Nation of origin
Turkey
A smaller but much better trained and equipped Armored Division is the way to go, this outdated cold war massed tank tactics were over 20 years ago and by now everyone should have understood it.

Rather invest in exercises, practice and communication among combined arms.

The Land Forces need modern IFV/AFV's for the Mechnized units, more capable AT weapons and night/thermal vision for the Infantry. Those are the real force multipliers on the ground.
 

UcanTost

Active member
Messages
80
Reactions
1 108
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Today many of MBTs are being used as artillery and All MBTs arent used for MBT hunt .

Today we could see MBTs as a destroyer of buildings where the enemy is hidden.

Long lasting tit to tit Tank battles were in WW2. So Today we have enough tankkillers such as ATGM loaded IFVs and troopers .

Our land forces know their new doctrine very well.

Though i would love to see wheeled IFVs with the 90mmLP guns in order to decrease the workload of MBTs in case of urban warfare.

A smaller but much better trained and equipped Armored Division is the way to go, this outdated cold war massed tank tactics were over 20 years ago and by now everyone should have understood it.

Rather invest in exercises, practice and communication among combined arms.

The Land Forces need modern IFV/AFV's for the Mechnized units, more capable AT weapons and night/thermal vision for the Infantry. Those are the real force multipliers on the ground.
thats like saying fast missile boats will render anything on sea useless..
 

YeşilVatan

Contributor
Messages
668
Reactions
16 1,690
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
thats like saying fast missile boats will render anything on sea useless..
But that's not what we are saying. The point is, role of the MBT shifted a little with he recent developments, so the tank itself should change with APS and whatnot, which would make it more expensive. Also its new role requires fewer of them, as their previous role of being tank hunters are taken over by other platforms. You still need to have tanks to punch through, just not in mass numbers as was the case previously.
 

UkroTurk

Experienced member
Land Warfare Specialist
Professional
Messages
2,684
Reactions
55 4,801
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
thats like saying fast missile boats will render anything on sea useless..
Who said " today MBTs are useless ?"

Today the mission of your frigates is as same as before in WW2?

Today you use huge frigates for Anti-Pirate operations that OPVs could fulfill.

You miss the point
 

Saithan

Experienced member
Denmark Correspondent
Messages
8,634
Reactions
37 19,746
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Turkey
Lets start with 250 with 250 in version 2-3.

Let me remind you how much fun we made of of Russia when museum pieces started rolling onto battlefield.
What matters is that we have continuous tank, ifv etc. Production.

considering the fucking trouble we had with Altay, I’d say being able to produce Altay MBT is more important than spitting out MRAPs. Today our defence industry could shitout MRAP in their sleep.

So it doesn’t matter if it’s 500 or 2000. Just continuous production the next 100 years.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom