Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

Some milestones have been reached in the developments of the 1000HP and 1500HP powerpacks:




It is a power pack development project of BMC Power, which is carried out on behalf of SSB, consisting of engine, transmission and cooling package. The power group developed within the scope of the project is planned to power New Generation Light Armored Vehicles and Track Howitzers up to 45 tons. The engine of the system, which has a 1000 HP engine, a transmission with steering and braking capability, a low-volume high-efficiency cooling system and a multi-functional electronic control unit, was successfully fired at the beginning of 2021 and the transmission was successfully started in April 2021. Testing and qualification studies are continuing at the BMC POWER Test Center. The project completion date is planned as 2023. Within the scope of this project, it is aimed to localize the turbocharger, torque converter, hydrostatic unit, engine and transmission control units that could not be developed in our country before.


Feature table: 1000 HP Power Pack 8 Cylinder - V Type Engine 6 + 2 Cross Drive Transmission




BATU Power Group Project is a power group development project consisting of engine, transmission and cooling package given to BMC POWER by SSB to power our domestic and national tank ALTAY tank. The engine developed within the scope of the project provides 1500 HP power, the cross drive transmission has the ability to transfer high torque, the cooling group works with high efficiency in the low silhouette vehicle structure, the control unit has a wide range of functions, and the development of our total power group ALTAY tank to provide uninterrupted power to our tank in all operating conditions. is targeted. In this context, the BATU project, whose engine start-up was successfully carried out in April 2021, continues with the testing and qualification studies at the BMC Power Test Center. The commercialization calendar is targeted as 2024.


Feature table: 1500 HP Power Pack 12 Cylinder - V Type Engine 6 + 2 Cross Drive Transmission



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice! The 54th carrier for the OMTAS missile carrier is in production for a total of 184 OMTAS/Kornet tracked carriers, with an additional 76 wheeled OMTAS/Kornet carriers in production, for a total of 260 tank destroyers produced by 2022.


Edit: It seems the total number has been increased to 344


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By SH_MM
      Well, if you include TUSK as armor kit for the Abrams, then you also have to include the different Theatre Entry Standards (TES) armor kits (three versions at least) of the Challenger 2. The base armor however was most likely not upgraded.
      The Leclerc is not geometrically more efficient. It could have been, if it's armor layout wasn't designed so badly. The Leclerc trades a smaller frontal profile for a larger number of weakspots. It uses a bulge-type turret (no idea about the proper English term), because otherwise a low-profile turret would mean reduced gun depression (breech block hits the roof when firing). There is bulge/box on the Leclerc turret roof, which is about one feet tall and located in the centerline of the turret. It is connected to the interior of the tank, as it serves as space for the breech block to travel when the gun is depressed. With this bulge the diffence between the Leopard 2's and Leclerc's roof height is about 20 milimetres.

      The problem with this bulge is, that it is essentially un-armored (maybe 40-50 mm steel armor); otherwise the Leclerc wouldn't save any weight. While the bulge is hidden from direct head-on attacks, it is exposed when the tank is attacked from an angle. Given that modern APFSDS usually do not riccochet at impact angles larger than 10-15° and most RPGs are able to fuze at such an angle, the Leclerc has a very weakly armored section that can be hit from half to two-thirds of the frontal arc and will always be penetrated.

      The next issue is the result of the gunner's sight layout. While it is somewhat reminiscent of the Leopard 2's original gunner's sight placement for some people, it is actually designed differently. The Leopard 2's original sight layout has armor in front and behind the gunner's sight, the sight also doesn't extend to the bottom of the turret. On the Leclerc things are very different, the sight is placed in front of the armor and this reduces overall thickness. This problem has been reduced by installing another armor block in front of the guner's sight, but it doesn't cover the entire crew.

      The biggest issue of the Leclerc is however the gun shield. It's tiny, only 30 mm thick! Compared to that the Leopard 2 had a 420 mm gun shield already in 1979. The French engineers went with having pretty much the largest gun mantlet of all contemporary tanks, but decided to add the thinnest gun shield for protection. They decided to instead go for a thicker armor (steel) block at the gun trunnions.

      Still the protection of the gun mantlet seems to be sub-par compared to the Leopard 2 (420 mm armor block + 200-250 mm steel for the gun trunion mount on the original tank) and even upgraded Leopard 2 tanks. The Abrams has a comparable weak protected gun mantlet, but it has a much smaller surface. The Challenger 2 seems to have thicker armor at the gun, comparable to the Leopard 2.
      Also, the Leclerc has longer (not thicker) turret side armor compared to the Leopard 2 and Challenger 2, because the armor needs to protect the autoloader. On the other tanks, the thick armor at the end of the crew compartment and only thinner, spaced armor/storage boxes protect the rest of the turret. So I'd say:
      Challenger 2: a few weakspots, but no armor upgrades to the main armor Leclerc: a lot of weakspots, but lower weight and a smaller profile when approached directly from the turret front M1 Abrams: upgraded armor with less weakspots, but less efficient design (large turret profile and armor covers whole turret sides) So if you look for a tank that is well protected, has upgraded armor and uses the armor efficiently, the current Leopard 2 should be called best protected tank.
    • By Belesarius
      Cobra's on the hunt again.
    • By Belesarius
      Someone who was once regarded as a moderate reformer getting an ego and arresting 16 year olds as political prisoners.
      Power corrupts.
  • Create New...