Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Altay MBT, Turkey's first ever home-grown tank

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
    SO Big K you pop onto the board after a long dry spell and have not told us whats been going on with you.

    Come on bring us up to date.
    :)

    well, everything seems to be in order since 2011.

    my life is a lovely routine between the work (still for Mazda Motor), home, frequent business trips, family meetings and etc.

    i wasnt absent but i could not contribute properly so i decided to read when i could find a tiny amount of time to check the WAB.

    i hope everthing & everybody is OK here too.

    :)
    Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none; be able for thine enemy rather in power than use; and keep thy friend under thine own life's key; be checked for silence, but never taxed for speech.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Big K View Post
      :)


      i wasnt absent but i could not contribute properly
      Like the rest of us "Contribute properly"

      Post crap like the rest of us do. And drop in more often.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Stitch View Post
        Agree with you on the shot-trap thing, that WAS a big deal during WWII; I am most familiar with WWII German armor, so the Panther tank would be a good example. The original cast mantlet (that held the gun) was a semi-circular design; after some analysis of battle damage, it was determined that a shot that struck the lower half of the mantlet would usually get deflected down into the (much) thinner armor of the fighting compartment roof, and would invariably do a lot of damage (if not completely destroy the tank). The solution was a "chin", or Kinn, along the bottom of the mantlet that wouldn't deflect incoming rounds down into the fighting compartment.

        Standard Panther Ausf. D & A mantlet:


        [ATTACH=CONFIG]31404[/ATTACH]

        Later Panther Ausf. G mantlet with Kinn:

        [ATTACH=CONFIG]31403[/ATTACH]
        Yep, my "well informed knowlegde of armor" ends with WWII and the tanks that might have been built in WWII (miniture gaming called for that and I was heavy involved in the 80's ans early 90's). I've always loved tanks, but haven't kept abrest of modern tanks at anything more than curious pedestrian level. We have several very knowledgeble people on the board who are far more qualified on the the topic and what they've explained above makes it clear that what I was looking at doesn't matter.

        This is what I was thinking of.
        sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
        If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
          Like the rest of us "Contribute properly"

          Post crap like the rest of us do. And drop in more often.
          thanks :)

          i can do that
          Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none; be able for thine enemy rather in power than use; and keep thy friend under thine own life's key; be checked for silence, but never taxed for speech.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
            Yep, my "well informed knowlegde of armor" ends with WWII and the tanks that might have been built in WWII (miniture gaming called for that and I was heavy involved in the 80's ans early 90's). I've always loved tanks, but haven't kept abrest of modern tanks at anything more than curious pedestrian level. We have several very knowledgeble people on the board who are far more qualified on the the topic and what they've explained above makes it clear that what I was looking at doesn't matter.

            This is what I was thinking of.
            Its been a couple of years so I might as well update the post.

            APFSDS- aka sabot. Two main styles bore riding and spool style. The Soviets tended to use bore riding, they had big fins that rode down the bore and only a small cup around the center to catch the expanding gases and propel the round. Very fast at the muzzle but energy dropped off quickly due to drag.

            The spool style was more Western until very near the end of the Cold War. These rounds use a sabot (boot) that is shaped like a spool [needle and thread] they have much smaller fins and retain velocity a lot better.

            The other thing to consider is one vs two piece ammo. Single piece ammo like the NATO 120mm allows for a much longer and heavier penetrator. It offers vastly superior performance. The down side being that armor schemes that induce shear may affect this round type more than others.

            The story of sabots is more of failure than success. Getting the designs and alloys right to allow a needle shapr object to effectively transfer its energy to the point without pancaking or deforming has been a vexing problem. I've seen pancaked and deformed penetrators that bounced off of M1A1's in Kuwait.

            The US uses DU, it is very hard, causes fires and self sharpens as it penetrates. Most countries however are wary of DU's side effects and use another alloy. The German DM-63 uses a cobalt-tungsten allow that is actually more toxic than DU go figure.

            The other main type of AT rounds is HEAT- High Explosive Anti-Tank. This is a shaped charge warhead. The fuse hits, ignites the charge which blows into a cone shaped piece of copper inverting it into a molten jet what is called an EFP or explosively formed projectile.

            More on how armors deal with these threats later.

            Comment


            • #66
              This is as good a thread as any to ask a dumb question - smooth bore tank guns.

              Foot soldiers ditched the smooth bore gun in the 1800's. What is it that makes a smooth bore gun in a tank superior to a rifled gun? I can see that a sabot round with a finned projectile is naturally stable, like an arrow, but what about conventional projectiles? How are they stabilized with a smooth bore?

              Comment


              • #67
                with fins.

                Attached Files
                "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Chogy View Post
                  This is as good a thread as any to ask a dumb question - smooth bore tank guns.

                  Foot soldiers ditched the smooth bore gun in the 1800's. What is it that makes a smooth bore gun in a tank superior to a rifled gun? I can see that a sabot round with a finned projectile is naturally stable, like an arrow, but what about conventional projectiles? How are they stabilized with a smooth bore?
                  They're not; the original reason for rifling was (obviously) to get the projectile to spin up and, therefore, due to the gyroscopic effect stabilize the projectile in flight. However, the rifling also slowed the projectile down, since some of the kinetic energy the projectile has is transferred mechanically to spinning the projectile up. Smooth-bore cannons allow a higher MV for the same amount of propellent at the cost of the inherent stability of the projectile in flight, hence the use of fin-stabilized projectiles.

                  AFAIK, you can't fire a non-FS round out of a smooth-bore cannon without drastically affecting the accuracy and/or stability of the round, but Gun Grape or zraver could probably answer that question better than I can.
                  "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Stitch View Post
                    They're not; the original reason for rifling was (obviously) to get the projectile to spin up and, therefore, due to the gyroscopic effect stabilize the projectile in flight. However, the rifling also slowed the projectile down, since some of the kinetic energy the projectile has is transferred mechanically to spinning the projectile up. Smooth-bore cannons allow a higher MV for the same amount of propellent at the cost of the inherent stability of the projectile in flight, hence the use of fin-stabilized projectiles.

                    AFAIK, you can't fire a non-FS round out of a smooth-bore cannon without drastically affecting the accuracy and/or stability of the round, but Gun Grape or zraver could probably answer that question better than I can.
                    Generally in 100% agreement with the caveat that I am not sure how good modern FCS could correct for a smooth bore projectile without fins. Even with fins rifled guns are generally more accurate. Also rifling can actually interfere with APFSDS which is why a lot of the old 105 ammunition was APDS.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      There is also cone stabilization. Here is one used in a target practice round. I don't know if it is used in combat munitions. I expect it imposes higher drag than fin stabilization, loses velocity more quickly, like a badminton shuttlecock.

                      M865 TPCSDS-T Ammunition (120 mm)




                      edit adds for comparison:

                      M829A3 APFSDS-T Ammunition (120 mm)



                      Last edited by JRT; 04 Jan 13,, 22:31.
                      .
                      .
                      .

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        I have read about bands on fin stabilized projectiles (for use in rifled tubes) with bearings under them to takeup the rifling spin without transfering very much to the projectile. Are these still in use?
                        sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                        If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Sabot ammo in WWII

                          The British had some remarkable success with APDS later in WWII. They adopted it to the 6 Pdr and the 17 Pdr. It made the 6 Pdr a Tiger I killer - firing a tungsten 2 pdr sized (40mm) solid shot from the 57mm tube. The 17 Pdr was even able to address the King Tiger - using a solid 6 Pdr sized projectile. The biggest drawback being range, which was significantly reduced. Also the projectile itself was somewhat less destructive than a full sized APBC type (if both penetrated) - since it was small and carried no filler. The British got it working well enough to make the tanks so equipped into priority targets for German gunners (especially the 17 pdrs). The Germans had tungsten shot before the Allies (not sabot, though they did have "squeeze bore" rounds), but they stopped producing it early on, due to shortages of tungsten.
                          sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                          If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
                            The British had some remarkable success with APDS later in WWII. They adopted it to the 6 Pdr and the 17 Pdr. It made the 6 Pdr a Tiger I killer - firing a tungsten 2 pdr sized (40mm) solid shot from the 57mm tube. The 17 Pdr was even able to address the King Tiger - using a solid 6 Pdr sized projectile. The biggest drawback being range, which was significantly reduced. Also the projectile itself was somewhat less destructive than a full sized APBC type (if both penetrated) - since it was small and carried no filler. The British got it working well enough to make the tanks so equipped into priority targets for German gunners (especially the 17 pdrs). The Germans had tungsten shot before the Allies (not sabot, though they did have "squeeze bore" rounds), but they stopped producing it early on, due to shortages of tungsten.
                            Again, since I know a little more about German armaments/armour from WWII: I know the Germans developed a fairly sophisticated sub-calibre round known as the the Pzgr.40, which had a tungsten sub-calibre core. It was very effective for the '40's but, as Whisky said, the Germans were pretty short on tungsten, so only a few thousand of the tungsten rounds were ever actually produced. Tank crews (especially in the Panther and the Tiger) carried a few in case they ran into a KV-2 or a JS, but otherwise they used the Pzgr.39.

                            Apparently, towards the end of the War, they produced Pzgr.40 rounds with either cast iron or steel cores which, obviously, weren't nearly as effective as the tungsten-cored rounds.
                            "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

                            Comment


                            • #74

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Altay tank frt

                                ALTAY TANK FRT IS ON













                                LEOPARD-2 Next Generation


                                The Turkish firm Aselsan Elektronik Sanayi ve Ticaret is expected to conclude by current March the performance trials of its Leopard 2NG (Next Generation) main battle tank.

                                The Leopard 2 NG consist of a Kraus-Maffei Wegman (KMW) Leopard 2A4 main battle tank of the Turkish Land Forces Command (TLFC or in Turkish Türk Kara Kuvvetleri Komutanlığı-TKKK) upgraded with new advanced technologies to provide the vehicle´s with improved protection and fire power. The upgrade package gives the vehicle´s another life of 25 years and minimum life cycle cost.

                                The solution feature modular add-on ballistic and mine protection modules integrated on the turret and the hull, suspended driver seat, crew compartment fire suppression system, driver´s sight system composed of a forward and rear thermal cameras and rear charge-coupled device (CCD) camera, gunner´s periscope and commander´s panoramic sight with associated electronic units, advanced fire control system, battle management system, laser warning system, electrical gun & turret drives, inertial navigation system, user interface, and as well as stabilized remote weapon station armed with a 12.7mm heavy machine gun, 40mm automatic grenade launcher or 7.62mm light machine gun and fitted with thermal imager, day TV camera and laser range finder and automatic tracking capability.

                                The new fire control system includes the gun elevation system, turret azimuth sensor, military automatic weather sensor, muzzle reference collimator, gun/turret inertial measurement units, ammunition and the temperature sensor. The battlefield management suite includes the digital intercom system, digital displays units, software defined tactical radio systems, command and control computer and command and control software.

                                The Turkish company could be in talks with the Finish authorities to upgrade the country´s army Leopard 2A4 vehicles to the Leopard 2NG standard.

                                171 of the TLFC´s Leopard 1 main battle tanks were upgraded with the Volkan fire control system from Aselsan Elektronik Sanayi ve Ticaret.

                                Source: LEOPARD-2 Next Generation - Page 2

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X