Turkish M60A1 upgrade

Cyprus would be logical because there is just not much room for maneuvering.
But I would really like to see both sides tear down the military forces on Cyprus.
Turkey should think about this, especially when it comes to EU membership/partnership.

@waylander
what do you mean about the mobility problem of Sabra? If you talk about old engines, transmissions etc there is none. All the package in the old tank is replaced with new ones. Infact the only thing that remains from the old tank is the hull.

The tank uses a new 1000hp engine (i'd rather see a bigger one though).

Please provide your valuable thoughts.

If Turkey tears down the "Turkish Army Corps in Cyprus" then the southern Greek part have a chance to assault to the north. But I also accept it what you say, but it is only possible when Turkey is a EU member not sooner.

The Sabra is a good tank in Cyprus because there are few mountains in the border areas. And the region in Iran is also good. The 250 M48A5T2 and 50 M48A5T1 will be phased out from the Cyprus Corps and replaced by some M60A3, Leo-1A3T1 "Volkan" and Sabra Mk.2

The Leo-2A4 will be used in thracia and a small number against the Armenians I think. For Iran, it is possible to defend it with M60A3's I think because of their T-72. The DU rounds of the 105mm is capable to destroy a T-72 in 2000 meters I think.

Wrong, the Sabra Mk. 2 has just a 908 hp turbo diesel engine and the Mk.3 has a 1200hp turbo diesel engine. The Mobility has not changed because of the added armor and slightly more powerful engine from the original M60, my old aunt also knews that the result was the same. I hope TSK will find a better engine in the near future.

beleg said:

@waylander
what do you mean about the mobility problem of Sabra? If you talk about old engines, transmissions etc there is none. All the package in the old tank is replaced with new ones. Infact the only thing that remains from the old tank is the hull.

The tank uses a new 1000hp engine (i'd rather see a bigger one though).

Please provide your valuable thoughts.

Click to expand...

1000hp for a 55 tons tank and a top speed of 48km/h is not really mobile compared to modern tanks, just compare this with the Leo2A4 and Leclerc which weight nearly the same.
I also have a problem with the optics.
Just 8x for the daysight and 5.3x for the nightsight. This is also not that much. Should be difficult to track the enemy at bigger ranges. So using the LAHAT for what it is supposed to do, attacking the enemy at great ranges, should be nearly impossible.

Ok you have problem with it? You drive this Sabra tank you mean?

I think that the problem will be solved by installing the new "Kartalgözü" FCS designed by ASELSAN. It is unknown of it is compatible for the Sabra but when designing new systems it would fit. But for this, it is not that it is for tommorow.

I drive it? No.
What I wanted to say is that I think that the optics are not good suited for bigger ranges. Nothing more and nothing less. Just not enough zoom. Especially during night times.
This may change if you put other optics into it but the FCS has not much to do with your optics. Your FCS could be the best in the world if a target is just too small at bigger ranges you will have problems to hit it.
I don't know if Turkey puts some new optics into their Sabras. For sure you know better about this than me.
I am talking about the standard optics of the Sabra.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the version of the Knight FCS installed on the Sabra Mk-something include the autotracker feature?
If so, that would be a definite advantage, partly evening out to lack of optics I pointed out earlier.

And anyway what are the Sabras supposed to fight if they are put on the Eastern border and the new Leo2s take on any potential Greek threat? T-72S is the worst I can see around there as far as tanks are concerned. Considering irregular warfare, the TI is a BIG plus, the high silhouette can help in some terrains, but I'd regret the lack of canister rounds and a remote-controlled MG somewhere.

Waylander, just thinking about it, the LAHAT is actually semi-auto laser guidance, so it doesn't even require the firing tank to have a LOS on the target, if you have some forward designator (FO team, scouts, helo, UAV...) to laze the target. So the vision disadvantage doesn't do much in this regard.

This is for sure a possibility and gives the Sabra some extra abilites I would really like to see on other tanks but I don't think it really substitutes the lack of good optics.
Tank battles are often enough really fast and it is very hard to communicate within the platoon/company not to talk to get proper firing data from froward observers.

I don't know if the Sabra also has a computer system to lock-on to the target. But the Akrep and Cobra APC's have this kind of system. Also the Zipkin and Atilgan Stinger sam systems have it. All designed by ASELSAN. The Akrep is able to lock on targets much farther away than human can see, even infantry can be locked and you can leave your vehicle is you see a missile coming your way, or if you want to play a hero to join the other infantry soldiers . The gun will be automatically fired by the computer.

The Sabra, or other Turkish tanks, can also be fitted with this kind of system. The Pakistani Al Khalid also has this kind of system, it is a French way of increasing effectiveness. especially when a bottle of whine is drunk, it is handy nfloorl:

Lock on infantry? How does this works?
I would think that the silouette of infantry is too versatile to be able to do this. Just think of the infantry taking cover and lays down. Or do you do it by using TIs?
Seems to be a very interesting system.

With regard to the mobility, top speed on roads is considered to be 30 MPH (48 KPH). Other tanks such as the M1A1 have a top road speed of 45 MPH. The point is as Waylander said that they would be great for defense but in a mobile tank engagement they would be too slow. Regardless of how much armor you add or what tyoe of engine you upgrade to, you still have an M60 hull and try as you might, you can't turn the M60 into something in the class of the M1A1.

That is correct indeed. That is why the Turkish M-60 mod is a gap filler project until new generation tanks arrive. Meanwhile the threat on west is countered by 298 Leo2A4s. Sabras and M60T3s are enough to deal with the threat on east with limited Leo2A4s for support in elite brigades.

Sabras will not get additional modernisation or optic or anything that is not on them now.

The Sabra upgrade will be a M60 tank with more cabalilities only, especially the armor and firepower will increase. There will be no changes in other things at all.

The computer system on the Akrep and Cobra APC is able to lock-on even om soldiers. How this is done by ASELSAN is not known, you may be a user of the Akrep and Cobra APC's if you want to know. But it works efficiëntly against insurgency. If the infantry hides, then the target is usually lost I think.

The Turkish Sabra gets 1000 ps Mtu-881 ka 500 engine and renk-304s transmision like the t-155 Firtina or the PzH 2000 howitzers.
kaynak S&H magazin cilt 20 2006

fylr71 said:

With regard to the mobility, top speed on roads is considered to be 30 MPH (48 KPH). Other tanks such as the M1A1 have a top road speed of 45 MPH. The point is as Waylander said that they would be great for defense but in a mobile tank engagement they would be too slow. Regardless of how much armor you add or what tyoe of engine you upgrade to, you still have an M60 hull and try as you might, you can't turn the M60 into something in the class of the M1A1.

Click to expand...

Thank you - even if you could get 45 MPH out of this old dog you would have to perform some major upgrading to the suspension. I do not care how many upgrades that you place on the M60, it doesn`t even come close to comparing to a M1A1`s abilities.

@eckherl,

The suspensions have also been replaced, and these tanks are not supposed to face M1s on battle. They will face Soviet built tanks, not even a T-80. they are tough enough to deal with the threat in the east where most of them will be placed.

beleg said:

@eckherl,

The suspensions have also been replaced, and these tanks are not supposed to face M1s on battle. They will face Soviet built tanks, not even a T-80. they are tough enough to deal with the threat in the east where most of them will be placed.

Click to expand...

I agree with you on their role, I was commenting on the fact that someone would compare it to the likes of a M1A1. The suspension upgrades are due because of the upgrades to the vehicle, not for cross country speed, they are really top heavy and after they start bouncing around they could flip over, depending on terrian conditions. We had two flip over in South Korea in my unit in a one year rotation.

eckherl said:

Thank you - even if you could get 45 MPH out of this old dog you would have to perform some major upgrading to the suspension. I do not care how many upgrades that you place on the M60, it doesn`t even come close to comparing to a M1A1`s abilities.

Click to expand...

These upgrades are a lot cheaper than an M1A1. The unit price for the the first 170, which includes development costs & setting up a factory, is much less than Australia is paying for second-hand refurbished M1A1.