MBT's

[luigim]

I'm not sure if it's the right thread, but I post anyway. In Turkey OOB there is an error because Leopard 2A4 are sobstituted by Leopard 2T since 2011, but this is not the reality. For now, only Leopard 2A4 are in service and no Leopard2T, maybe in the future

According to the Military Balance 2014 (I can send you the entire book if you need) these are Turkish tank forces now

MBT 2,504: 325 Leopard 2A4; 170 Leopard 1A4; 227 Leopard
1A3; 274 M60Al; 658 M60A3; 850 M48A5 Tl/T2 (2,000
more in store)

It seems that in 2011 the contract was won, but there aren't sources in the web that proof that the upgrade was completed.

I think that the best solution is to postpone leopard2A4 retire to 2020 and put Leo 2T in prototype tank maybe?

And about Altay tank I have some doubts, I think it will be fielded after next years.

The Military Balance 2014 says: "Four initial prototypes by 2014
for approx USD500m. To be
followed by an order for 250
units following testing"

If you send me PM with your email I can send you the military balance 2014, one of the best sources about current military in the world. There is a section of current equipment and a section about pending contracts for every nation.

According to defenseindustrydaily, this is similar to The Military Balance

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...project-05012/

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

From SIPRI the following tanks are still in service as previously noted here by luigim and my submissions from the 2010/2011 patch campaign.
Current inventory includes ~3000 (Multiple/non WIKI sources.) tanks of which the bulk of these are the improved M-48/M-60 series tanks ordered from the mid 50's -90's. As ordered/or donated, M-48-2850/M-48A5-20/M-60A1-274/M-60A3-658/LEO 2A4-350/
LEO 1A3-230/LEO 1A1-170 (These these tanks acted as the test beds for what was at the time 3rd Gen FCS for the ALTAY FCS developmental program.)

Notes:
1. These tanks have been modified since Turkey got them making rudimentary upgrades to them with time some with enhanced TI/GSR and the newer ones not so, i.e. none above 40 TI/GSR but with more stable FCS's.

2. When the the LEOPARD-2T was submitted I submitted refs that indicated the LEO-2A4 tanks were already in the assembly line being converted to act as the final test bed for the ALTAY and to give Turkey an intermediate tank until the ALTAY came on line. But it looks it didn't happen, so the prototype/999 unit might be appropriate as noted.

3. The answer to the above #2 lies with the ALTAY developmental issues and money. The LEO-2T it appears to have died on the vine around the time FNSS and ROTAM were having cost issues involving technological transfer and other related matters and KMW concerning the German power plants and the eventual decision by Turkey to go it's own way in the development of a power-plant.

4. The ALTAY was already in the OOB as the BLACK PANTHER what I submitted was a name change after verifying it's status five years ago. Currently it's looking like 2017 mid year.

5. With recent events with Russia and quite frankly the tension has always been there between these to countries I see the following A. ALTAY gets stepped up. B. 2T will come into fruition before 2020. C. Those older tanks aren't going anywhere any time soon. Turkey is very likely wanting to maintain that 3000 tank advantage. Modern technology in FCS, munitions and mechanics/systems will and are keeping those tanks in the field now and into this games "new" future.

Don I believe you already have the SIPRI data and that tank poster coincide very nicely to each other.

It was a very good catch.

Regards,
Pat

[luigim]

Another little suggestion to improve the game's future OOB.

The proposed T90AM (or MS) tank, according to

http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t90ms_tagil.htm

http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi..._pictures.html

http://www.army-technology.com/proje...n-battle-tank/

has an "opto-electronic screening system"

"The self-protection of T-90MS includes also an automatic screening system which can create an automatic aerosol screen laying in the direction of enemy's anti-tank means with active laser emission."

I think it refers to the classic VIRSS system.

Thank you

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Every once in awhile I get the opportunity to "close the door" on an item I got to submit, this is the case for the next item. You gotta love the Germans, all taken care of as promised. I hope you'll note the turret section and notice the advanced FCS components mounted, it confirms for me anyway, the German units I recommended to use for the recipient of these fine machines.
It just validates the time and effort put into these submissions when I can see a final result.
http://www.janes.com/article/56481/p...s-from-germany

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

One might suspect the Poles are tired of being invaded/subjugated.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

One might suspect the Poles are tired of being invaded/subjugated.

A lot has changed in 70 years.......Germany sending tanks to Poland used to mean something quite different than the subject of this article......however from a more cynical POV by sending these tanks to Poland they are strengthening and deepening their buffer with Russia. It wasn't that long ago that a heathy % of the population expected a NATO / WP conflict at any time and it thankfully did not occur. ( Pink Floyds " The Wall"......" mother do you think they'll drop the bomb ? " and "Two suns in the sunset " from "The Final Cut" is all about the fears and paranoia of the Cold War and that was written" only" 32 years ago.) Steel Panthers 2 was originally , primarily designed to "what if" all of that so from that POV Germany is expanding it's border defenses using Polish crews in German tanks and the irony is really thick.

further--------- http://www.defence24.com/239167,poli...-by-the-poles#

Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I'll be giving this some thought over the coming year, however, I did bring this issue up when and before I submitted the M1A2 SEP V2 and the AH-64E GUARDIAN, the issue is where do we set the upper limit for TI/GSR and when will we come to the understanding that some OOB's will just have a technological advantage over other ones or do we limit ourselves to "parity" to some degree. A couple of + years ago I indicated this decision point would come up sooner then later (We started the increase of TI/GSR from 40 TO 45/or 50 for many MBT's and APC's.) and now it's almost upon us again to figure out what direction to go. In those intervening years Germany has developed the ATTICA FCS (Already being retrofitted to the LEO 2A6 and will be on the LEO 2A7+.) and now IFLIR will be installed on the M1A2 SEP V3 coming to an ARMY base near you-sooner than expected. My first thought is "parity" sets the limit for armor at TI/GSR 55 enough to recognize for now, Germany's and the U.S. technological advantage while still not being an overwhelming advantage in the game (Real world we're seeing well beyond that as noted already in previous posts.) and I'm leaning towards "parity" because we do have game issues and limitations plus, with the extension of the game, I feel we need to save the "60" for when the new next best FCS comes out. Just my thoughts for what's not that far down the road/or already here. Anyway, posted on this already now the contract is signed.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/decem...116121510.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/unite..._11710154.html

The next will "shake up" the region a little but certainly it'll be a major improvement to this countries armored capabilities...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/decem..._41612152.html

Well the "body count" is in and I'm still standing so good night and have a good weekend-some of us will be working-take care!! PM to follow soon.

Regards,
Pat

[luigim]

Seems that some t90s are in Syria too for syrian crewman training purposes ( a lot of photos around the internet).. But the reality is that Syria will cease to exist in actual forma. There will be a alauistan coastal and down to the lebanese border state ( heritage of former Syria), a Kurdistan between Iraq and Turkey and a sunnistan aka ISIS. Time to upgrade mujaheddin OOB too..

[Imp]

My first thought is "parity" sets the limit for armor at TI/GSR 55 enough to recognize for now, Germany's and the U.S. technological advantage while still not being an overwhelming advantage in the game (Real world we're seeing well beyond that as noted already in previous posts.) and I'm leaning towards "parity" because we do have game issues and limitations plus, with the extension of the game, I feel we need to save the "60" for when the new next best FCS comes out. Just my thoughts for what's not that far down the road/or already here

The only downside to the ranges extending is it tends to make you use wider maps.
A difference of just a few hexes in vision aids makes a huge difference if you have a weapon that can take advantage of firing undetected with lower global visibility.
Early Chieftains come to mind with 22 hex vision vs the 20 of Russian tanks.
Against an advancing Russian tank that's 3 shots you can let off before it can see you & take one.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

In short have to agree with John, the map issue was what I had in mind also. But on balance the player(s) will still have LOS issues to contend with as well given the battlefield environment and would those factors act as an equalizer overall to the extended vision issue? It's again something that some thought has to be given to over the next year or so. I don't propose these things lightly and try to think it through the best I can, it's as always, trying to find a fair balance between "real world" vs. "game world" is all. And I really gotta go!!

Regards,
Pat