What's new

Altay & Turkish Main Battle Tank Programs

I am curious to know which RPG they used for testing as flying 100m in 300ms would mean roughly 330 meters per second velocity. Anyone know of a munition that flies at that speed.

I am suspicious of what he stated. Considering that the M72 LAW is known to be used for testing the Akkor and the LAW flies at 145 meters per second. Meaning at 50m it would take 300miliseconds to reach its target. I believe he is speaking about the LAW and not the RPG.
I definitely don't think he's blundering, Aselsan is one of 100 biggest defense companies around the world. They won't just make things up.
 
. .
I definitely don't think he's blundering, Aselsan is one of 100 biggest defense companies around the world. They won't just make things up.

You posted what the expert said. But you wrote RPG. There is not many anti tank RPG round in existance that flies at 350 meters per second. Are you sure the expert didn't say Rocket ?

Because if he said rocket then he is clearly referring to the LAW, which was 100% used in testing we saw the pictures of the destroyed LAW rocket after tests. LAW would take roughly 340 milliseconds to fly 50m. Meaning 300 millisecond reaction time is accurate not 150. Also remember different rockets different velocities. He said we can destroy rockets at 50m....that means some rockets depending on velocity.

Granted a 150 millisecond reaction time isnt impossible, the Russians EXPORT VERSION has a 70 millisecond reaction time. We don't even know how fast the Russian Army Version reacts. Its not impossible, just difficult.
 
Last edited:
.
You posted what the expert said. But you wrote RPG. There is not many anti tank RPG round in existance that flies at 350 meters per second. Are you sure the expert didn't say Rocket ?

Because if he said rocket then he is clearly referring to the LAW, which was 100% used in testing we saw the pictures of the destroyed LAW rocket after tests. LAW would take roughly 340 milliseconds to fly 50m. Meaning 300 millisecond reaction time is accurate not 150. Also remember different rockets different velocities. He said we can destroy rockets at 50m....that means some rockets depending on velocity.

Granted a 150 millisecond reaction time isnt impossible, the Russians EXPORT VERSION has a 70 millisecond reaction time. We don't even know how fast the Russian Army Version reacts. Its not impossible, just difficult.
O, my bad. He really says rockets shortly after he said RPG. So he's referring to rockets in general, he means some rockets can reach 100m within 300ms. AT4 for example has velocity close to 300m/s.
 
.
O, my bad. He really says rockets shortly after he said RPG. So he's referring to rockets in general, he means some rockets can reach 100m within 300ms. AT4 for example has velocity close to 300m/s.

That makes more sense. The only hand held/portable weapon that the Akkor would have trouble with inside 100m is the RPG16.

The large high velocity munitions that pose a bigger threat would not engage inside 50m anyway.
 
.
You posted what the expert said. But you wrote RPG. There is not many anti tank RPG round in existance that flies at 350 meters per second. Are you sure the expert didn't say Rocket ?

Because if he said rocket then he is clearly referring to the LAW, which was 100% used in testing we saw the pictures of the destroyed LAW rocket after tests. LAW would take roughly 340 milliseconds to fly 50m. Meaning 300 millisecond reaction time is accurate not 150. Also remember different rockets different velocities. He said we can destroy rockets at 50m....that means some rockets depending on velocity.

Granted a 150 millisecond reaction time isnt impossible, the Russians EXPORT VERSION has a 70 millisecond reaction time. We don't even know how fast the Russian Army Version reacts. Its not impossible, just difficult.

A standard PG-7V has a max velocity of about 300m/s. For the newer ones this is probably even higher. Also, I have no doubt they would've tested Akkor on many different rocket systems, not just LAW, and not just unguided rockets either.

Also, in your post above you're confusing detection distance and minimum engagement distance. Akkor has a detection distance of over 500m and minimum engagement distance of 50m. The detection distance is much better than both KAPS and Arena. As someone else mentioned, Akkor also uses a different kind of munition than the others. It also is the only one which can engage KE projectiles. All this info is from the Aselsan expert on the video which you don't seem to have watched, or maybe you can't understand Turkish? No offense intended, it's just you were asking for a source after the video was already posted.

You're welcome to link some sources, but it should be obvious that if Akkor development started in 2008 and it's still not complete, then it isn't a copy of KAPS made with technology transfer, because that wouldn't take anywhere near 7 years.
 
.
A standard PG-7V has a max velocity of about 300m/s. For the newer ones this is probably even higher. Also, I have no doubt they would've tested Akkor on many different rocket systems, not just LAW, and not just unguided rockets either.

Also, in your post above you're confusing detection distance and minimum engagement distance. Akkor has a detection distance of over 500m and minimum engagement distance of 50m. The detection distance is much better than both KAPS and Arena. As someone else mentioned, Akkor also uses a different kind of munition than the others. It also is the only one which can engage KE projectiles. All this info is from the Aselsan expert on the video which you don't seem to have watched, or maybe you can't understand Turkish? No offense intended, it's just you were asking for a source after the video was already posted.

You're welcome to link some sources, but it should be obvious that if Akkor development started in 2008 and it's still not complete, then it isn't a copy of KAPS made with technology transfer, because that wouldn't take anywhere near 7 years.

I had no Idea we were speaking about a video here I thought he was referring to speaking to an expert himself ?

Again The detection distance I noted above is for the munitions not Radars. A radar with a deteciton distance if 50 meters is ridiculous you should know better.

Again that KE nonsense is more propaganda and usual of our defense industry antics of claiming shit without even knowing if its true. There are 2 systems already capable of hitting KE projectiles. Isreali Iron Fist and the Russian Afghanit. Both Systems have been around and had live tests long before the Akkor even entered testing.

The Israeli Iron Fist system, which began live round testing in 2007, and was designed in 2006, uses smart proximity munitions, a 2 round launcher, uses explosives instead of fragments, and proved effective against KE projectiles. The Akkor is extremely similar to this system, even in looks.

Do not believe every marketing ploy you hear in our media mate. Anyone with some basic military knowledge here will know there is a tendency in Turkey to say, the worlds first or worlds best without even checking if its true.

The Akkor is our first attempt at making an APS. We have had outside assistance to get started and the lads at Aselsan and Tubitak can certainly create an upgraded version in the future. It saddens me when someone representing our nations number 1 defence company makes statements that are false like the KE nonsense. Do they really think that the experts they are trying to sell the system to will not be discouraged by them lying in their faces.

As a matter of fact, when hearing these statements why are none of you checking if they are true first before repeating them.

The issue here is if I commented that Akkor is the best and can take down nukes a lot of members would not question it and would repeat it as if it were true. People tend to have a problem when someone bursts their bubble and tells them that the system is one of the best but certainly not the very best yet until we find out the full details and also the success probabilities.

Akkor has been delayed and will not roll out with the tanks. There is a reason for the delay, and I for one am hoping they are modifying the system to tackle weapons like the RPG30.
 
Last edited:
.
Again The detection distance I noted above is for the munitions not Radars. A radar with a deteciton distance if 50 meters is ridiculous you should know better.

Again that KE nonsense is more propaganda and usual of our defense industry antics of claiming shit without even knowing if its true. There are 2 systems already capable of hitting KE projectiles. Isreali Iron Fist and the Russian Afghanit. Both Systems have been around and had live tests long before the Akkor even entered testing.

The Israeli Iron Fist system, which began live round testing in 2007, and was designed in 2006, uses smart proximity munitions, a 2 round launcher, uses explosives instead of fragments, and proved effective against KE projectiles. The Akkor is extremely similar to this system, even in looks.

Do not believe every marketing ploy you hear in our media mate. Anyone with some basic military knowledge here will know there is a tendency in Turkey to say, the worlds first or worlds best without even checking if its true.

The Akkor is our first attempt at making an APS. We have had outside assistance to get started and the lads at Aselsan and Tubitak can certainly create an upgraded version in the future. It saddens me when someone representing our nations number 1 defence company makes statements that are false like the KE nonsense. Do they really think that the experts they are trying to sell the system to will not be discouraged by them lying in their faces.

Akkor has been delayed and will not roll out with the tanks. There is a reason for the delay, and I for one am hoping they are modifying the system to tackle weapons like the RPG30.

The munitions for Arena and KAPS don't have any ability to detect anything so that doesn't even make sense. They are just time fused. Also, you can make a radar with 1m range if you want. It's just a matter of power and other factors. Arena has no need to waste power on making the radar have a range any higher than 50m because it has no need to. Akkor, on the other hand, needs to because it has to detect very fast moving KE projectiles a long distance away to give it enough time to engage them.

For the rest, I was only comparing Akkor with KAPS and Arena, not other systems, which may have similar or better performance.

What makes you think the KE stuff is nonsense? By the way I know the media has a tendency to exaggerate. I'll only believe what I think is plausible. Also, sometimes people do the opposite of the media and think everything Turkey makes must be a copy, and they provide no evidence...
 
Last edited:
.
The munitions for Arena and KAPS don't have any ability to detect anything so that doesn't even make sense. They are just time fused. Also, you can make a radar with 1m range if you want. It's just a matter of power and other factors. Arena has no need to waste power on making the radar have a range any higher than 50m because it has no need to. Akkor, on the other hand, needs to because it has to detect very fast moving KE projectiles a long distance away to give it enough time to engage them.

For the rest, I was only comparing Akkor with KAPS and Arena, not other systems, which may have similar or better performance.

What makes you think the KE stuff is nonsense?

Here is Iron Fist in TV...This episode was aired in 2008.

By KE stuff I mean saying Akkor is the first and only in the world to work against KE is nonsense since there are systems around almost 10 years doing it. The "expert" there doesn't look credible when he clearly lies. And imagine how bad it looked at that event when he was speaking to officials from all over the world. The people at that event would know there are systems already capable of hitting KE rounds yet he turns and says Akkor is the first.

Aselsan, a globaly known defence company, trying to enter the APS market and that guy is there clearly 100% lying. Do you think those officials are gonna show interest in other Aselsan products after hearing that guy lying ?

Realistically, it makes me doubt everything else he says.

That is why in almost every one of my posts I said until the system is released and we are given the real specs we are not certain on anything. I personally I think the delay was to improve the response/re-activation time and also maybe to introduce simultaneous engagement capabilities, having a 50m minimum range with a 300 millisecond response time is dangerous. Munitions with purposefully varied thrust which are in developement would prove difficult as well as the RPG30. The Israelis went back to the drawing books and introduced Trench Coat which works more like the Arena to complement the Trophy. I am really hoping Aselsan have delayed to create a compliment to the current Akkor munitions, hybrid systems seem to be the way forward.

My only issue is if the military does not make it a requirement for the system to be capable of defeating these systems.
 
Last edited:
.
That makes more sense. The only hand held/portable weapon that the Akkor would have trouble with inside 100m is the RPG16.

The large high velocity munitions that pose a bigger threat would not engage inside 50m anyway.
Are you ex-military or do you work in the defence industry?
 
. . . .
After all the successful projects i have seen from our defense industry, i have no doubt Akkor will also be succes.
The hardest part must be rapid positioning of the system, which is most likely done with military grade stepper-motor. Sure its time consuming and demands alot of trial and error. But its not like rocket science or whatever,
 
.
For a Service that keeps talking about preparing itself for future conflicts against increasingly capable state and non-state adversaries, the U.S. Army sure isn’t doing much. It has basically given up in the near and medium terms on any substantively new armored fighting vehicles. Its only serious new vehicle programs are the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle and the Armored Multipurpose Vehicle. The Paladin tracked howitzer is undergoing a long-overdue Product Improvement Program. The situation is basically the same in rotary wing aircraft, soldier systems, counter improvised explosive device technologies and missile defenses. Nothing new. In a number of areas, the Army and Marine Corps are waiting on Special Operations Command to develop and test new capabilities which they then may adopt.

The threats aren’t standing still. Both Hezbollah and Hamas have acquired advanced Russian rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) and anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), some with tandem warheads designed to defeat the reactive armor on most Western tanks. In its 2006 operation against Hezbollah, the Israeli Defense Forces lost a number of its top-of-the-line Merkava tanks and the lives of soldiers to these ATGMs. These same weapons have shown up in the hands of Ukrainian separatists. In five years, when the conventional arms embargo on Iran ends, you can be sure that these RPGs and ATGMs will be high on Teheran’s shopping list.

The U.S. Army is beginning the re-pivot to Europe. In order to deter Russian aggression in Eastern Europe, U.S. forces will need to demonstrate that they can take on the best that the Russian Army can send their way. The Stryker Brigade Combat Team commander in Europe recently put out an urgent request to have his vehicles upgunned with a 30mm cannon in order to give them some capacity to take on Russian armor.

So, it might be a good idea to equip the current fleets of tanks, armored fighting vehicles and Strykers with better protection. The Army has already conducted failed experiments in providing force protection by making its armored fighting vehicles light but agile (Future Combat System) or slow but heavily armored (Ground Combat Vehicle). It appears that the only avenue left open is some kind of active protection system (APS).

Fortunately, there are a number of APSs readily available. Most of them operate the same way. A set of sensors are deployed around the vehicle to provide 360 degree coverage. When an incoming threat is detected a battle management system determines where the attack came from, its incoming vector and the best moment for interception. At the right moment a countermeasure is launched for the purpose of defeating the inbound weapon.

So far there is only one APS that has been tested in combat. This is the Israeli Trophy system. Integrated by Rafael and employing an ELTA-built radar, the Trophy can detect RPGs, ATGMs and kinetic rounds from tank cannons. It fires a series of small shaped charges at the incoming target. A brigade of Trophy-equipped Merkava tanks were employed during the 2014 conflict with Gaza in extremely complex urban terrain. Some 15 Merkavas were reportedly attacked with RPGs or ATGMs; none were lost.

There are other APSs that have been developed and even tested. There is the Iron Curtain, built by Artis, an American company. Iron Curtain employs both radar and optical sensors and uses explosively forged projectiles as its defeat mechanism. Another Israeli company, IMI, developed the Iron Fist similar to Trophy. Rheinmetall, a German company developed a modular APS, the AMAP-ADS, which is reported to employ some form of directed energy as its defeat mechanism. Finally, there is Raytheon’s Quick Kill APS which has been reported to perform well in tests against RPGs.


With so many options from which to choose, you might think that the Army could easily get an 80 percent solution to its APS requirements, conduct a competition and buy at least enough units from the winner to equip a brigade. That would allow for experimentation to take place leading to new technologies and tactics. Instead, the institutional Army, led by the Tank and Automotive Command, has decided to begin a multi-agency effort to deliver a common Modular Active Protection System framework that will enable affordable, reduced-weight, protective systems for ground vehicles across the fleet. In other words, the Army is going to spend a lot of time and money trying for the perfect solution that will work equally well on all Army vehicles and probably end up with nothing to show for its efforts. Apparently the Army has learned nothing from its failures in the FCS and GCV programs.



- See more at: Now Is The Time To Provide U.S. Armored Vehicles With Active Protection Systems - Lexington Institute
 
.
Back
Top Bottom