TR Land Vehicle Programs

Sanchez

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
1,461
Reactions
45 6,390
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
That's the one thing people were always criticizing Otokar of, not going for the domestic solutions.
Turns out we couldn't actually do that as well, because there were no domestic solutions at the time.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
3,755
Reactions
62 6,631
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Tuplar is a great design, I hope they make an amphibious variant of it ( not the Tuplar S, too light and not a proper IFV )
 

Sanchez

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
1,461
Reactions
45 6,390
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Tulpar or Kaplan MT for that matter both weigh more than 30-35 tonnes. They aren't going into the water anytime soon. Tulpar S and Kaplan 10 on the other hand... They were built amphibious capable from ground up.
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
3,755
Reactions
62 6,631
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
Tulpar or Kaplan for that matter both weigh more than 30-35 tonnes. They aren't going into the water anytime soon. Tulpar S on the other hand... She was built amphibious capable from ground up.
28/30 ton vehicles can swim. ( technically speaking ) For example, K21.
 

Sanchez

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
1,461
Reactions
45 6,390
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
K21 is more like a 25 ton vehicle, no? And they solved the buoyancy issue by adding floats to the poor thing. It had some mishaps where some prototypes just sunk, i remember reading about it few years back. It is actually pretty innovative, how they solved the floats but making a design amphibious takes so much away from it.

xAM9meT.jpg
 

Afif

Experienced member
Moderator
Bangladesh Correspondent
DefenceHub Diplomat
Bangladesh Moderator
Messages
3,755
Reactions
62 6,631
Nation of residence
Bangladesh
Nation of origin
Bangladesh
@Sanchez I am wondering, if with an unmanned turret, Altay's weight can be reduced to less than 60 tons.
 

boredaf

Contributor
Messages
888
Solutions
1
Reactions
11 2,486
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Aselsan has 35mm Korhan and Roketsan has 105mm MZK turret. I don't know why BMC went for a foreign turret.
I cannot imagine army would go for an IFV with a foreign turret, especially since we have domestic equivalent already. It is exceptionally stupid, borderline treasonous imo, to even think that.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,062
Solutions
2
Reactions
94 22,473
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I cannot imagine army would go for an IFV with a foreign turret, especially since we have domestic equivalent already. It is exceptionally stupid, borderline treasonous imo, to even think that.
Best case;
This is for exports


Worst case;
SSB lifts "local major component" requirement for turret
BMC enters bidding with foreign turret
BMC outperforms other bidders with lower weight turret
BMC is awarded with the project

Here comes the worst of the worst;
-Embargoe on turret-
Now BMC develops a new turret for the platform and T0 keeps resetting

And best of the worst;
Some middlemen is getting rich, turrets are delivered or locally produced-assembled


We have seen similar story with wheeled armored systems, the bidding has not begun until BMC's motor got ready, or evaluation has not been commenced until BMC's solution passed the company's internal tests. Now they are pulling tricks for the turret. Either they can not go as light as FNSS or Otokar with the chasis and needs a lighter turret to be on par; or there are dirty dirty games going around to fill some middlemen's pocket.

Let's hope this is merely for exports as they did with the engine options.

Ismail Demir has emphasized that a domestic turret solution (105mm or modular similar to the Cockreil's) will be available via a consortium or joint effort.
 

boredaf

Contributor
Messages
888
Solutions
1
Reactions
11 2,486
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Either they can not go as light as FNSS or Otokar with the chasis and needs a lighter turret to be on par;
I'd bet money on this, but obviously wouldn't rule out corruption at all. I'd prefer Tulpar/Arma II to be chosen but we'll see.
 

Sanchez

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
1,461
Reactions
45 6,390
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
@Sanchez I am wondering, if with an unmanned turret, Altay's weight can be reduced to less than 60 tons.
I really couldn't comment on that. From other unmanned turret prototypes we know that both AbramsX and T-14 weigh significantly less than tanks of their class. M1A2 was 68tons, M1A2 sep v2 comes at above 72 I think. GDLS advertised AbramsX with having a 60ton standard weight, which would make it the lightest NATO MBT out there.

We can also expect some weight savings with Altay T3.
 

BalkanTurk90

Contributor
Messages
546
Reactions
5 879
Nation of residence
Albania
Nation of origin
Turkey
I cannot imagine army would go for an IFV with a foreign turret, especially since we have domestic equivalent already. It is exceptionally stupid, borderline treasonous imo, to even think that.
Perhaps foreign company has offered soneone in BMC money (corruption) to chosse its turret , everything can happen nowdays . I aslo dont understand and dont want to buy from others just a turrent while out industry is producing 5 gen fighter and very modern MBT etc etc
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
3,673
Solutions
1
Reactions
26 13,223
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Turkish tracked IFV will be a 40-tonne beast and one of the requirements is to have a good armor protection. Sure turrets like Cockerill (4 tonnes) are light but they don't have the required protection level. Cockerill uses armor aluminium (can stop 14.5mm rounds from a certain range useless against RPGs). Roketsan MZK uses high-quality armor steel and on top of that, it has added sandwich composite armor plates with ERA capability. That is why it weighs 13 tonnes. All in all, Cockerill is a good option for lighter vehicles between 20-30 tonnes. MZK is required when you want a 40-tonne vehicle with good protection.
 

Sanchez

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
1,461
Reactions
45 6,390
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Can't make up the turret on the fourth vehicle. Tamkar launcher seems to be carried inside, so not that.
qhdQcHG.png

a0gIvth.png
 

Sanchez

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
1,461
Reactions
45 6,390
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I think it might be a collapsible crane for the engineer version. I'd expect that version to carry the Tamkar but it is what it is.
 

Sanchez

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
DefenceHub Diplomat
Messages
1,461
Reactions
45 6,390
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
According to Nail Kurt, out of 27 ZAHA AAVs, 3 or 4 carries Tamkar launchers, 2 are the command control version and 2 are recovery vehicles.
source
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom