Turkey to buy German tanks

[Soner1980]

Turkey has a very strong army in terms of training, dicipline, equipment. But modern weaponry is shortcoming in our land forces. This is the true. Accepting it will help for a solution. But we are not sleeping. Turkey is working to built most of the weapons via license or indigenously.

All Turkish navy or air force equipment is up to date but only the MBT fleet is obsolete. The new Turkish Akinci is like the M2 bradley but with lesser armor and is smaller. The Bradley weighs araound 23 tons while the Akinci weighs 18,5 tons. Tough, Turkey is able to produce modern weaponry. Few years ago Turkey has shown it's T-155 Firtina, a 155mm 52 cal SP Howitser. It is a derivative and not a knock off because they are different from the K-9. The hull is slightly different and the turret is completely different and has the same howitser. The T-155 uses the same electronics like of the PanzerHaubitze 2000 because it is from the same NATO project. The Germans have produced the PzH-2000 with it's own tech and Turkey via a tech transfer. Still it is a Turkish design because it is derivated and derivation needs CAD/CAM supported design to produce it.

I don't think so that Turkey would purchase the Gepards even after a modernization. Recently Turkey has changed it's arms trading policy. The objective is to learn when you spend money for your sales. Turkey want to upgrade their fleet like the Sabra and also to learn. 170 Sabra's are from the M60A1 and the others will be done by the Turkish Army self. Maybe If Germany also accepts an offer to receive Turkish technicians to transfer know-how and learn when a 5 or 10 Gepards are upgraded in Germany and the rest of the 100 to upgrade in Turkey by Turkish technicians, than Turkey would say yes to it. Because Turkey has the ability to upgrade other vehicle too or other nations Gepards. This is Turkish policy in arms trade so far I have read on the newspapers or some internet sites.

The Sabra is good in design but in practical the Turkish tankers are not met when testing the prototype. I believe that the problems will be worked out and that Turkey converts their 1000 strong M60 fleet to the Sabra and the 3000 strong M48 will be reduced to 1500 wich can also be upgraded to a look a like Sabra maybe. The leopard upgrade is a good thing I think. The Volkan upgrade has the same capabilities of that of the Leopard 2 but with a 105mm gun. The Leopard 1 is not outdated I think. If you have engines that can replace the 830 hp MTU engines with 1000 or 1200 hp engines, you can add armor on it or a complete new turret like the leopard 2 with some modifications. Like the T-72 hull, the Chinese have their Type-98G (or Type-99) with almost the same capabilities of a T-90 or M1A1 Abrams.

 

[burak136]

...And coming Turkish Tank(ownself):
http://www.bmc.com.tr/eng_savunma_tank.asp

Note:Sorry for bad english

 

[Soner1980]

We all know this. It is old. FNSS, BMC and Otokar have received a request for proposal. But this is unclear what they want to do. France has delivered (very fast) within few days a proposal to Turkish officials a dossier with blueprint and technical data wich according to French technicians that it complies with the Turkish request. We will see, it is still in a phase of 'I don't know' but soon Turkey will make it's choise. French armor is known that they are less armored but have good accuracy and mobility. With It's 54 tons the Leclerc, it is a strange design. The turret armor is like it's not armored. The flat gunshield also is bad. Sloped armor is alway better to deflect hits or to bounce off.

We will see what Turkey decides. I know that FNSS for the turret, BMC for the engine and hull, maybe MKE for the gun, ASELSAN for the electronics and sights, and maybe other firms like kalekalip to support the production.

 

[Waylander]

I really like how the canadians upgraded their Leo Is. That could be an opinion for you.



It's really good if a country whants to build its own military forces. But as always it is a question of money even if you already have an established industry. And it is for sure much more expensive to build up your own military industry.
For me I am not a friend of light armored IFVs. An IFV should be able to protect its crew and infantry squad and withstand enemy guns up to 30mm and RPGs. It also should be able to defeat enemy mechanized Infantry and have some ATGM. Thats a real IFV. And even than you could get really fast into some trpuble in a full scale mechanized combat situation. Other vehicles are more APCs than IFVs.

Shots bouncing of of sloped armor are rather rare. Modern Ammo do not bounce of. There are pictures of KE shots going throug tank guns.
If shots would bounce of the new armor of the Lepoard A5/A6 would be a real trap. You normally use sloped armor because the penetrator have to go through more armor on its way into the tank.
These picture is from firing trials with german 105mm and 120mm HEAT and APFSDS against T-72M1. Look at the gun. Even there nothing bounced of.

http://www.militaertechnik-der-nva.de/Aservatenkammer/Beschussversuche3/Gesamtansicht2.gif

 

[Soner1980]

Yes the Leopard 1 upgrade by the Canadians is beautiful. Is it also domestic upgrade?

Turkey has now a bit more money to built weapons. Yes, still in need of more money to comply their mission to built MBT's. After several years Turkey will become to the top 10 in the world economy. Now Turkey is the 17th world economic power.

About the armor with slope, yes you are right. 60% slope is doubling the effective thickness of the armor plates original thickness. But if a 100mm HVAPDS KE round fired from an old T-55 on a leopard 2A6's turret front, the bullet will bounce because of the armor is to heavy for the round and doesn't have enough Kinetic Energy to penetrate. But HEAT warhead (shaped charge or CE) will melt a hole in the armor without penetrating it. I think like this. It is possible that I'm wrong because I don't spend my time with testing armor you know? I don't have seen the test results but I have seen a very slowmotion of the firing of an APFSDS round from a M1A1 on TV. The impact after, you hear a noise like you hit metal with a hammer but with a deeper sound. No explosion occur what most people think that MBT are destroyed by explosives. Isn't it that a tank will only burn when it's penetrated by KE? If a M60 or Leo1 or 2 is penetrated, will the tank be on fire? Chinese Type 59/69 and russian T-55/62 will burn like newspaper I have seen in the 1991 gulf war. But the M60 or newer in US inventory and leo1 or moderner has to be designed to withstand after a penetration.

 

[Soner1980]

Hey I saw the picture later with a T-72 and it's gun. Strange, but the speed will be like a knife cutting the sides of from a banana. It's all techniques to kill a human in a new way...

 

[Waylander]

One of the main Problems of the T-72s in Iraq were their auto loaders. One load is in the carussel and when it is hit the turret says bye bye.
A hit with a KE may cause a fire or may not. Depends on what it hits. If a Leopard 2 is penetrated on the front hull the ammo storage maybe hit and blows of because of the pressure and heat produced by the KE. Thats not good.
Maybe one or more members of the crew are killed but the tank is ready to go after some minor repairs. Or maybe the KE gets throug but with low power after penetrating so the spall liners take the rest and nothing happens. It is really hard to say.
If you do not hit fuel, ammo or some other things like oil plastic etc. catch fire nothing will happen. If you are lucky the fire control system than kills the fire (And maybe you, too )
For example a Bradley burns better than an Abrams because there is much aluminium in it.

An APFSDS will never bounce of the front turret armor of an A5/A6. The new armor is not developed to let KEs bounce of. It is difficult to explain. The KE projectile is "catched" by the armor and the special layers in it should change the course of the projectile or at best break it into pieces before it hits the original main armor.

 

[Soner1980]

Ok, I have learnt something. It is known that sub-caliber (KE) round uses their speed for increasing the penetrating capabilities. The 120mm smoothbore gun can fire rounds that will make speed of almost 1800 meters/sec. I guess. But I alway thought that ammo bounces off when has sloping. But when waching pictures you linked above, you can see that KE has perforated the armor of the T-72M1 MBT's like it was not armored. The spaced armor on the T-72 turret is also nothing for KE. If the Soviets used laminate or something, that it could be better. But NATO countries know that Soviet tanks are lighter armored than expected...

I will see Turkish Leopard-2A4 tanks on a military parade in 30 august 10.00 hours on Turkish TRT channel and maybe other weapons too.

 

[Waylander]

When a shot doesn't bounce of a 125mm gun (Which is one of the stable parts of an MBT) which it is hitting with not more than 10° it wont bounce of sloped armor even when it is layered.
During the Tests in Germany they found at that the T-72 is actually better armored against HEAT warheads than expected if you hit it at the upgraded ceramic parts of its armor. The other parts are no match for HEAT warheads not to speak of KE which goes right through the turret.
That's one of the reasons why the sovjets and now the russians use and developed so much active defense systems which are quite capable against ATGMs, HEAT and old APFSDS warheads.
Maybe my old tank is one of the Leos you get. There could be still a bottle of coke in its ammunition storage. During our last maneuver it fell into it and whe never found it.

 

[Soner1980]

I'm 1,84 meters long, maybe I will become a tanker and I will post it back tou you as a rememberance. The world is small...

Yes I have read about that that Russian tanks are lighter armored than expected. Of the Shtora is a good defensive system, I don't rely on it. But it is handy if a Leopard-2 is also equipped with it for just in case. The Russians have only composite or laminate armor on their hull front. The T-80 is sayd it has fyber glass in it turret armor but I don't believe it. If you look to the Soviet tanks turret, it is all rounded not like the leopard in flat shape and used sloping armor. The Russians rely on their Kontakt series reactive armor with only the first hit is stopped and then the second will penetrate. And the spaced armor, nothing is nothing for KE round, air would not stop the round but for HEAT it is to spray the jet empty and not to penetrate. The US bradley in 1991 Gulf war is known to penetrate the side of a T-72 tank with it's 25mm DU rounds. Did you read about it? And 2 T-72's can be destroyed with one 120mm DU rounds. Funny isn't it to fight against Soviets?

 

[Waylander]

An M1A1 has also been penetrated on the sides and rear by 25mm DU friendly fire.
The Iraqi T-72 were T-72M (Export Version with bad armor, optics and electronics) using very, very old ammo and driven by bad trained crews. Not to forget the demoralizing air and artillery strikes and the fact that they used their tanks like bunkers and not in a mobile warfare stile for which the T-72 is designed for.
I also prefer a good passive defence system instead an active system, but it is an effective and cheap way to improve a tank.
But there is a reason for the israelis not using ERA on their new Merkava Mrk.IV like they do on their Sabra, Sherman, et. upgrades.

 

[Soner1980]

Can you mention that after 20 years a new ammo will be used and with 40 or 50 mm autocannons you can destroy today's best MBT at a distance of 1000 meters.

But the Sabra what Turkey will have after 2007 is the Mk. 2 version, will it also have ERA? I think it will have passive armor on it so far I have read about it.

 

[Waylander]

Ah, ok I see you get the Mrk.II upgrade.
I don't like that it just has an x8 optic for the gunner and a speed on streets of 46 km/h. That's not very fast.

 

[Soner1980]

The Sabra Mk.2 has a 'Knight' fire control system. Is it 8x zooming level? It is not so good for long distances and precisely aiming at a range. And the engine is only a barely 908hp. What you say, it is a big M60A3. Only with a more deadly 120mm smoothbore gun with ATGM capability and better armor. The speed and mobility will be the same. But the Mk.3 has a 1200hp engine and slightly more armor on it.

I see that it is not worth it to upgrade. The S120 upgrade with a complete M1A1 turret was better and a 1200hp engine. But for the M48 it is a good way to upgrade it to a Sabra not?

 

[Waylander]

The Sabra is an upgrade for which increases the capabilities of the M60 but is is no match for new generation tanks especialliy not without ERA upgrades.
An x8 optic is far to less for a modern MBT, even the Leopard II or M1A1 has problems to concentrate on a target with their x12 optic.

 

[Soner1980]

Like I said before, the Sabra has many problems in the requirements of the Turkish Army. I think that Turkey have made a decision to Leopard-2A4 tanks because of this. The Leopard 2 is self a new tank compared to the Sabra. But it was cheap. I had read about 180 million dollar including tech. transfer. And it is better than the original.

But what do you think about the armor of the Sabra? The M60 had a good armor except for the 120mm and 125mm guns, but for the 105mm gun without DU munition and all 100mm and 115mm guns is it good armored. Also for ATGM the M60 lacks good armoring. The Sabra has proven well I think with ERA on it. What do you say about it?

 

[amqb_az]

It would be great if Turkey decides to produce its own MBT tank.

 

[Waylander]

The Problem of the Sabra without ERA is that nowadays 125mm guns and ATGMs are widespread in the countrys around Turkey. For sure the Sabra Mrk.II is able to cause some serious damage and in fortified positions its vulnerability isn't that serious but if it comes to a more mobile stile of warfare, not to speak of offensive actions, it really has a problem. For that it is too slow, the armor without ERA is not thick enough for most of the threats out there, its silouette is too big and it's optics are not good enough. For the Israelis it serves very well if they put them into fortified positions in the golan or they use it in low intensive conflicts in gaza etc. They may also serve good for you in the same role.

 

[Soner1980]

If you ask for my opinion, than Turkey is to buy 300 Leopard2A4 (wich is already done and delivery has begun), upgrade its 1000 strong M60 fleet to the Sabra or Turkish variant of it, phasing out of the 3000 M48 series of service and after 10-15 years, Turkey is to produce it's own indigenous tank. The companies whit are now planned for the production and design are FNSS, Otokar, BMC and ASELSAN wich produces many years for the army.

Turkey has now signed a project to produce it's own tank with involvement of Turkish industries as a 'main contractor' and German or French industries as an 'alt contractor'. This time Turkey want to produce it's own weapons no matter what and at least it will do it with a tech transfer or full license like the G3 and HK-33 rifles and the ACV and F-16's. Turkey has developed it's own sniper rifle with 12,7mm and a range of 1800 meters. The rifle is called Avunya (is the same name for a Turkish traditional food in Kayseri) and is also ablt to fire anti-material munitions that penetrates of 13mm armor plate at a distance of about 1100meters.

And the Sabra is a good weapon for the "2nd line" units and the Leopard-2A4 and later in the futere Turkish indigenous for the "First line" units.

This is my opinion but Turkey is known that it can not decide wich weapon it must choose. What Turkey want's is alway expensive. Maybe 5 years later, Turkey has the same economy like Italy or Spain with this groth rate and is able to invest in it's own weapons factory.

 

[Soner1980]

The Problem of the Sabra without ERA is that nowadays 125mm guns and ATGMs are widespread in the countrys around Turkey. For sure the Sabra Mrk.II is able to cause some serious damage and in fortified positions its vulnerability isn't that serious but if it comes to a more mobile stile of warfare, not to speak of offensive actions, it really has a problem. For that it is too slow, the armor without ERA is not thick enough for most of the threats out there, its silouette is too big and it's optics are not good enough. For the Israelis it serves very well if they put them into fortified positions in the golan or they use it in low intensive conflicts in gaza etc. They may also serve good for you in the same role.

Yes they are slow and it's very dangerous when a tank have bad mobility. But Turkey uses it against the PKK and DHKP/c terrorist wich they alway make trouble in southeastern Turkey. Turkey has always used their old M48A3 tanks against the PKK because the M48A3 was planned to phase out and use it for the terrorist without serious AT capability. The M48A3 tanks are always in a hilltop dig-in and protected by Turkish infantry. In the future the Leopard's will take it over from the antique M48's. Maybe Turkey can give it to it's ex-Soviet allies like Azerbaijan and other Turkish counties. Because Azeri's need more AFV to fight the Armenians.