Turns out we couldn't actually do that as well, because there were no domestic solutions at the time.That's the one thing people were always criticizing Otokar of, not going for the domestic solutions.
Latest Thread
Turns out we couldn't actually do that as well, because there were no domestic solutions at the time.That's the one thing people were always criticizing Otokar of, not going for the domestic solutions.
28/30 ton vehicles can swim. ( technically speaking ) For example, K21.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.
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.Aselsan has 35mm Korhan and Roketsan has 105mm MZK turret. I don't know why BMC went for a foreign turret.
Best case;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.
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.Either they can not go as light as FNSS or Otokar with the chasis and needs a lighter turret to be on par;
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.@Sanchez I am wondering, if with an unmanned turret, Altay's weight can be reduced to less than 60 tons.
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 etcI 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.
After the most recent protection upgrades they are almost up to 80 iirc, so heavy that their recovery vehicles might not be able to recover that.M1A2 sep v2 comes at above 72 I think
Good spot there, slightly clearer for those who may know what it is, it may also be facing to the rear.Can't make up the turret on the fourth vehicle. Tamkar launcher seems to be carried inside, so not that.