Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 19th, 2012, 09:28 AM   #51

KUZGUN's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 345

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poly View Post
It would be easier and better to build the German Leopard II under licence - what tanks does Turkey have right now?

Just how good do you need your tanks to be? The Leopard II is a pretty good tank and used by a lot of countries

I'm not sure how big the tank market is in the Middle East, most have bought US, French, British or German tanks and I don't think they'll need any more for quite some time.
Leopard 2A4 - 339
Leopard 1 - 391 (171 of them are upgraded)
Sabra - 170 (M60 upgraded by Israel)
M60A3 TTS - 619
M60A3 - 752
M60A1 RISE Passive - 104
M48A5T1 - 619
M48A5T2 - 758

Source: Türk Kara Kuvvetleri - Vikipedi

In my opinion Altay will be slightly better than Leopard 2A6 at all aspects, but i'm not sure if it will be as good as 2A7. I'm not sure because Altay's armor is not ready yet.

By the way there is a Leopard 2 upgrade developed by Turkey, name is Leopard 2NG:

Leopard 2 Next Generation Main Battle Tank | Military-Today.com

Click the image to open in full size.
(2NG on the left)


It's not decided yet if we are going to upgrade our 2A4s to 2NG.

Last edited by KUZGUN; November 19th, 2012 at 10:30 AM.
KUZGUN is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 19th, 2012, 10:28 AM   #52
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,110

Quote:
Originally Posted by infestør View Post
the problem with leopard 2 tanks is that germany did not want to sell (let alone license permission) the demanded amount to turkey over (afaik) terrorism* concerns...
I'm not sure Turkey needs a large tank fleet but if it can't licence the Leopard II, perhaps there are others it could licence rather than go to the expenditure of developing its own tank just to make a few hundred?

Upon checking the Altay tank I see Turkey has reduced costs by collaboration with South Korea and licencing the Rheinmetall 120mm smooth bore gun

I would be willing to bet that few if any of those tanks fire their guns in anger.
Poly is online now  
Old November 19th, 2012, 10:30 AM   #53
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,110

Quote:
Originally Posted by KUZGUN View Post
Leopard 2A4 - 339
Leopard 1 - 391 (171 of them are upgraded)
Sabra - 170 (M60 upgraded by Israel)
M60A3 TTS - 619
M60A3 - 752
M60A1 RISE Passive - 104
M48A5T1 - 619
M48A5T2 - 758

Source: Türk Kara Kuvvetleri - Vikipedi

In my opinion Altay will be slightly better than Leopard 2A6 in all aspects, but i'm not sure if it will be as good as 2A7. I'm not sure because Altay's armor is not ready yet.

By the way there is a Leopard 2 upgrade developed by Turkey, name is Leopard 2NG:

Leopard 2 Next Generation Main Battle Tank | Military-Today.com

Click the image to open in full size.
(2NG on the left)

Aselsan Leopard 2 NG Upgrade Program - YouTube

It's not decided yet if we are going to upgrade our 2A4s to 2NG.
Interesting stuff

Do you really think Turkey would be able to sell many tanks to the Gulf states?
Poly is online now  
Old November 19th, 2012, 10:49 AM   #54
Suspended until November 2nd, 2014
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk.
Posts: 5,909

Yes, tanks, and Inf, are still very much relevant in todays battles. Air power can't take and hold the ground. And tanks are still very useful in todays operations even in urban enviroments.

In Itaq in 06/07 the Challenger II's proved very useful in support of Armoured Inf operations.
Bish is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 10:52 AM   #55

KUZGUN's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 345

It depends on their requirements, Altay's capabilities and the price. I heard that Altay won't be cheap, so i'm not sure if we will be able to sell many of them. Time will tell.
KUZGUN is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 10:57 AM   #56
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,110

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bish View Post
Yes, tanks, and Inf, are still very much relevant in todays battles. Air power can't take and hold the ground. And tanks are still very useful in todays operations even in urban enviroments.

In Itaq in 06/07 the Challenger II's proved very useful in support of Armoured Inf operations.
As mobile pill boxes

If you don't have control of the air though, they're sitting ducks

I used to think that every inf brigade should have a battalion of heavy APC's built on an MBT chassis. The Russians actually tried this albeit on the cheap...and the number of dismounts was only about 6 by removing the turret.

However had they put the engine up front your'd have a very strong fire base, room for a full section (with all their kit) and still with a pretty useful gun in a smaller turret.
Poly is online now  
Old November 19th, 2012, 10:57 AM   #57
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,110

Quote:
Originally Posted by KUZGUN View Post
It depends on their requirements, Altay's capabilities and the price. I heard that Altay won't be cheap, so i'm not sure if we will be able to sell many of them. Time will tell.
That's the down side of a small production run.
Poly is online now  
Old November 19th, 2012, 11:03 AM   #58

KUZGUN's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 345

Small by US standards. Maybe we should build 10000 of them.

Last edited by KUZGUN; November 19th, 2012 at 11:13 AM.
KUZGUN is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 11:08 AM   #59
Suspended until November 2nd, 2014
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk.
Posts: 5,909

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poly View Post
As mobile pill boxes

If you don't have control of the air though, they're sitting ducks

I used to think that every inf brigade should have a battalion of heavy APC's built on an MBT chassis. The Russians actually tried this albeit on the cheap...and the number of dismounts was only about 6 by removing the turret.

However had they put the engine up front your'd have a very strong fire base, room for a full section (with all their kit) and still with a pretty useful gun in a smaller turret.
As in the Merkava you mean. My concern with that would it would tie the tank to closely to the Ifnfantry. Also, with the engine at the front, doesn't this reduce the protection afforded by the armour.

Armour has always fell victim to air power, control of the air is always vital for any operations. But you can't always be certain that air power will be up tehre when you need it. The tanks can be there right next to you.

They may be mobile pill boxe's, but they proved very useful in the close confines of basra. and it was very nice to hear the sound of a 120.
Bish is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 12:31 PM   #60

infestør's Avatar
Surprise pølse!
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Ẍ
Posts: 3,831
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by KUZGUN View Post
It depends on their requirements, Altay's capabilities and the price. I heard that Altay won't be cheap, so i'm not sure if we will be able to sell many of them. Time will tell.
turkish citizens will be paying for those tanks with their tax, so i very much doubt that the military cares about the high price tag of the tank. the companies involved in r&d and serial production of altay are partly owned by the state. i also doubt that they will be very competitive against other tank manufacturers. if turkey can export altay, then it's good profit but otherwise the idea is to renew the fleet and reduce the dependency in military equipment.

correct me if i am wrong but tanks are not used against PKK, artillery and howitzers are. turkey is very much a defensive country. so there is not much need for a massive tank fleet (except the intimidation factor...against which country, i don't know). imho, this tank project should have been a secondary goal after missile or helicopter development. afaik, turkey has no domestic short or long range missiles (of course i dont mean ICMBs )
helicopters are much more useful against terrorists that fight mainly in mountains (also for medevac).
infestør is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
battles, crucial, tanks, today


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Confederacy uses tanks Nick Speculative History 7 April 27th, 2013 05:45 PM
Crucial battles of the antiquity duccen Ancient History 2 January 16th, 2012 05:55 AM
Tanks THut95 War and Military History 254 September 16th, 2011 04:04 AM
Three most crucial battles in your nation's past? JohnnyH General History 60 December 4th, 2009 06:58 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.