TR Land Vehicle Programs

Abdelaziz

Contributor
Messages
491
Reactions
1 821
Nation of residence
England(UK)
Nation of origin
Lebanon
some versions of these upgrade package had akkor anti atgm systems but the one on video lacks that
Akkor and APSs in general are too expensive .. it will increase the costs massively .. the vast majority of world armies havnt yet started to use APSs even in their tanks apart from 15 tonn ACV
 

TheInsider

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
4,066
Solutions
1
Reactions
34 14,482
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I think they produce them with a licence
So what is the problem with that? MKE produces G3, MP-5, and 120mm L55 cannon under license too. TAI produces T-129 under license from AW. It depends on the type of license. MKE bought complete rights to Oerlikon 35mm autocannon. A new national 35mm cannon would be very good but it is not urgent.
 

B.t.N

Committed member
Messages
280
Reactions
299
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Akkor and APSs in general are too expensive .. it will increase the costs massively .. the vast majority of world armies havnt yet started to use APSs even in their tanks apart from 15 tonn ACV
No one says we should have APS on anything that moves, even the wheel barrels! In all all out war, to survive, no one cares. But we need some sort of protection to save soldiers’ lives, whether it is an anti-terror or cross-border operation. To refrain from providing such support to our fighters, saying it is “way too expensive“, is called murder at best...
EDIT: I am kind of hovering around the word “trison”(?)
 
Last edited:

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Pulat APS can be easily integrated and it's cost effective.
1650043781976.png
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,252
Reactions
142 16,314
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
I have a feeling that the reason that Akkor is not finding widespread use among our armoured vehicles and tanks has it’s roots at the cost of this system being a bit prohibitive for the time being as well as some technical issues that need to be ironed out.
Israel’s Trophy system costs close to a million dollars per Merkava tank. That sort of money doubles the cost of most personnel carriers and takes a good portion of the value of any modern AFV. Hence the Pulat solution.
But the loss of human life should not be measured with dollars if it can be prevented.
OK ; Akkor needs to be made cheaper. But even if it can’t be made any cheaper, we have to find the money to ensure our military personnel’s life is well protected.
 

Hexciter

Experienced member
Messages
2,575
Reactions
4 11,451
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
According to whom? ACV has protection up to STANAG 4569 Level 4, and can withstand 10kg mine blast beneath it's tracks.,, You telling me ACV can't withstand a side blast?
Pulat is a explosive charged weapon which explodes in vicinity of the side armour. ACV’s side armour is not related withstanding against mines. You can pierce it with small explosives. What’s more she has aluminum armour which can burn unlike steel ones. So, it’s unlogical to use Pulat but, there’ll be no problem with Akkor which explodes at a distance.
 

Combat-Master

Baklava Consumer
Moderator
Messages
3,667
Reactions
15 25,474
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
Pulat is a explosive charged weapon which explodes in vicinity of the side armour. ACV’s side armour is not related withstanding against mines. You can pierce it with small explosives. What’s more she has aluminum armour which can burn unlike steel ones. So, it’s unlogical to use Pulat but, there’ll be no problem with Akkor which explodes at a distance.

Unless you have some official document which states that ACV can't withstand open air blasts but can withstand confined blasts beneath it's belly and tracks, I'm going to have immense difficulties understanding you.

Also, ACV on sides, front and rear has add-on spaced laminate steel armour - just like M2/M3 Bradley. Just to expand your knowledge on ACVs..

PULAT is the way to go, for near term active protection.
PULAT.gif
 

Hexciter

Experienced member
Messages
2,575
Reactions
4 11,451
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Unless you have some official document which states that ACV can't withstand open air blasts but can withstand confined blasts beneath it's belly and tracks, I'm going to have immense difficulties understanding you.

Also, ACV on sides, front and rear has add-on spaced laminate steel armour - just like M2/M3 Bradley. Just to expand your knowledge on ACVs..

PULAT is the way to go, for near term active protection.
View attachment 42644
How do you know that she can withstand? With referencing bottom protection. That’s not the way.
 

Fairon

Well-known member
Messages
410
Reactions
6 1,023
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
Well the real problem is we are still trying to modernize ACV's. I know it is probably a budget problem but we really need to get new vehicles. We could still use ACV hulls in other ways but for infantary we either need Kaplan or Tulpar.(Or completley transfer duty to the wheeled platforms)We are wasting money on ACV.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom