Vietnam Defence Forum

[Nike]

No, less is not more, sometimes it’s a certain death. A weak armor tank is an easy prey for enemy infantry. Take the war in Syria. When launching an attack on Al-Bab, a Turkish tank battalion lost 3 Leopards 2A4 in the first major battle.The IS fighters ambushed the tanks and hit from the side where the armor is thin. A good panzer is a good combination of firepower, mobility and armor. The German army phased out all Leopard 2A4. Well... the Germans sold them to Turkey and Indonesia.

View attachment 531271

View attachment 531269

@Marine Rouge

Ours is ex Swiss leopard 2A4 though and upgraded to Leo 2 RI standard, not germany leopard 2A1 or 2 being upgraded to A4 standard in mid 90's and then sold to Turkey in 2000's, there is differences in this model.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Ours is ex Swiss leopard 2A4 though and upgraded to Leo 2 RI standard, not germany leopard 2A1 or 2 being upgraded to A4 standard in mid 90's and then sold to Turkey in 2000's, there is differences in this model.

Also erdogan didn't want to use infantry supports during the earlier skirmish because he didn't want the bad PR of having a dead turkish soldiers in syria.

So its mostly do to politics & not technological or tactical what caused the lost of the leopards.

 

[Nike]

Also erdogan didn't want to use infantry supports during the earlier skirmish because he didn't want the bad PR of having a dead turkish soldiers in syria.

So its mostly do to politics & not technological or tactical what caused the lost of the leopards.

Though, we got plenty AT weapons and platform actually like Javelin ATGM, NLAW, MILAN, KONKURS. Meanwhile we still got attack helicopter like Apache armed with hellfire, Mi35 with Ataka.

 

[Viet]

Also erdogan didn't want to use infantry supports during the earlier skirmish because he didn't want the bad PR of having a dead turkish soldiers in syria.

So its mostly do to politics & not technological or tactical what caused the lost of the leopards.

That is stupid by Turkish military command. Sending tanks to battle without air cover and infantry support.

Ours is ex Swiss leopard 2A4 though and upgraded to Leo 2 RI standard, not germany leopard 2A1 or 2 being upgraded to A4 standard in mid 90's and then sold to Turkey in 2000's, there is differences in this model.

Ok however the Leo is designed during the Cold War and has a major weakness: ammunitions are stored at the side wall. Once the thin armor is pierced, the tank will explode like a firework. See pictures of explosion where Leopard is hit by anti tank. How about Indonesia tanks?Maybe you install additional reactive armor?

I don’t know how about T90, whether tank shells are stored at the rear? Because it is considered as a safer place.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

That is stupid by Turkish military command. Sending tanks to battle without air and infantry support.


Ok however the Leo is designed during the Cold War and has a major weakness: ammunitions are stored at the side wall. Once the thin armor is pierced, the tank will explode like a firework.

1. Politics.

2. As opposed to putting it in the center & exposing the crews somehow makes it any better?

 

[Viet]

1. Politics.

2. As opposed to putting it in the center & exposing the crews somehow makes it any better?
View attachment 531295

I got this picture of T90MS: you can see ammunitions are stored at the rear section.

 

[Svantana]

42 units Indonesian Leopard 2a4 MBT

61 units Indonesian Leopard 2a4 RI MBT compare with Others

 

[dBSPL]

Also erdogan didn't want to use infantry supports during the earlier skirmish because he didn't want the bad PR of having a dead turkish soldiers in syria.

So its mostly do to politics & not technological or tactical what caused the lost of the leopards.

Sir, That's not exactly true.

Both operations began with the special units and commandos. But there are tens of kilometers of concrete tunnels on the field and thousands of ATGMs distributed uncontrollably. There is a 7-year war in Syria. Most of the world's most experienced ATGM teams are currently in Syria.

Both ISIS and the PKK tried guerrilla warfare against the Turkish army. But failed strategy is ( which was tried in ES op ) to keep the front lines of the Turkish army with low levels and limited military capacity FSA units . Already in the OB operation this scheme was abandoned. For this reason, the PKK could not hold any point in OB operation and take about 3000 losses in 2 months. Half of the power in the area has been destroyed.

The biggest casualty of the Turkish army in Syria was ISIS's Raid of AlBab-Akil. TAF Unit's sight fell to about 2 meters below, and they tried raid on dense fog with collaborators in the town. We lost 2 tanks there. Therefore, UAV's are now equipped with SAR systems. The physical conditions in the field is no longer an operative problem. In addition, special units equipments now includes tunnel detection systems and behind-the-wall radars.

During the ES and OB operations, over 100 asymmetric ATGM attacks were carried out against the armored elements of the TSK. Apart from electronic and hardkill / softkill systems, there are tactics and strategies developed by both the TAF and the Syrian regime forces against asymmetric terorist elements and theirs ATGM teams. I wouldn't explain them right here.

Also There is also the fact that the Syrian airspace is under Russian control and we have problems from time to time in the disputed areas with the regime. Here, we can say that risk planning is under the pressure of the time factor. In case of CAS problems, a number of systems and strategies have been developed with the experience gained in the field. In the operation to the east of the Euphrates, we will have the opportunity to see the size of this progress.

Anyway, the topic is very nice and I would follow up with interest.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Sir, That's not exactly true.

Both operations began with the special units and commandos. But there are tens of kilometers of concrete tunnels on the field and thousands of ATGMs distributed uncontrollably. There is a 7-year war in Syria. Most of the world's most experienced ATGM teams are currently in Syria.

Both ISIS and the PKK tried guerrilla warfare against the Turkish army. But failed strategy is ( which was tried in ES op ) to keep the front lines of the Turkish army with low levels and limited military capacity FSA units . Already in the OB operation this scheme was abandoned. For this reason, the PKK could not hold any point in OB operation and take about 3000 losses in 2 months. Half of the power in the area has been destroyed.

The biggest casualty of the Turkish army in Syria was ISIS's Raid of AlBab-Akil. TAF Unit's sight fell to about 2 meters below, and they tried raid on dense fog with collaborators in the town. We lost 2 tanks there. Therefore, UAV's are now equipped with SAR systems. The physical conditions in the field is no longer an operative problem. In addition, special units equipments now includes tunnel detection systems and behind-the-wall radars.

During the ES and OB operations, over 100 asymmetric ATGM attacks were carried out against the armored elements of the TSK. Apart from electronic and hardkill / softkill systems, there are tactics and strategies developed by both the TAF and the Syrian regime forces against asymmetric terorist elements and theirs ATGM teams. I wouldn't explain them right here.

Also There is also the fact that the Syrian airspace is under Russian control and we have problems from time to time in the disputed areas with the regime. Here, we can say that risk planning is under the pressure of the time factor. In case of CAS problems, a number of systems and strategies have been developed with the experience gained in the field. In the operation to the east of the Euphrates, we will have the opportunity to see the size of this progress.

Anyway, the topic is very nice and I would follow up with interest.

I'm not talking about the overall operation but just on the certain aspect where couple of leopards got lost in the process. I'm not discounting the turkish military to be clear here.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

I got this picture of T90MS: you can see ammunitions are stored at the rear section.


View attachment 531302

Not showing the whole blueprint I see what you did there[emoji6]

Even so its still not much of an improvement because its not really an isolated compartment like what the western tanks have.

 

[Viet]

Not showing the whole blueprint I see what you did there[emoji6]

Even so its still not much of an improvement because its not really an isolated compartment like what the western tanks have.
View attachment 531326View attachment 531327

Which western tanks? Look again. Each T90 carries 40 rounds with 22 auto loaded on a carousel (the picture you posted) and 18 stored in the isolated protective rear section (the previous picture I posted). Such design is clearly superior to Leopard 2 tank. Here with turret, front and side armor. So it is more difficult to bring ammunitions inside the tank hull to explode.

@jhungary

 

[jhungary]

Which western tanks? Look again. Each T90 carries 40 rounds with 22 auto loaded on a carousel (the picture you posted) and 18 stored in the isolated protective rear section (the previous picture I posted). Such design is clearly superior to Leopard 2 tank. Here with turret, front and side armor. So it is more difficult to bring ammunitions inside the tank hull to explode.


View attachment 531344

@jhungary

Not going to say autoloader tank is superior than gunner/loader tank, each have their own pros and cons, they are just different system, that's all.

However, you don't generally kinetic explode the round inside a tank, the most dangerous situation is from the round cooking off. Which mean the round is overheated in the environment. That could happen with or without hull penetration

 

[Viet]

Not going to say autoloader tank is superior than gunner/loader tank, each have their own pros and cons, they are just different system, that's all.

However, you don't generally kinetic explode the round inside a tank, the most dangerous situation is from the round cooking off. Which mean the round is overheated in the environment. That could happen with or without hull penetration

Ok but autoloading and isolated ammunitions compartments seem to be a good concept though. Germany for instance currently works on the Leopard 3 that copies many features of T90 tank and T14 Armata: light weight (50 tons), bigger cannon (130 mm), autoloading, unmanned turret, smaller tank personnel (2 or 3). There is plan to build 5,000 Leopard 3 for the cost of $100 billion. The question is whether or not a future Leopard 3 has a chance against Armata that is going to have a 152 mm cannon? I would say the Russians are far ahead in tank technology.

https://www.workzeitung.ch/2018/05/ruestungshysterie-5000-leopard-3-panzer-fuer-100-milliarden/

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Ok but autoloading and isolated ammunitions compartments seem to be a good concept though. Germany for instance currently works on the Leopard 3 that copies many features of T90 tank and T14 Armata: light weight (50 tons), bigger cannon (130 mm), autoloading, unmanned turret, smaller tank personnel (2 or 3). There is plan to build 5,000 Leopard 3 for the cost of $100 billion. The question is whether or not a future Leopard 3 has a chance against Armata that is going to have a 152 mm cannon? I would say the Russians are far ahead in tank technology.

https://www.workzeitung.ch/2018/05/ruestungshysterie-5000-leopard-3-panzer-fuer-100-milliarden/


View attachment 531465

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/news/256437-armata-stuck-moscow-parade/amp/

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/why-russias-armata-tank-may-never-be-threat-nato-21269

https://www.google.com/amp/s/taskandpurpose.com/russia-fancy-armata-tanks-broke/amp/

Even the chinese are mocking the armata:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.bu...s-makers-criticized-russia-battle-tank-2015-6

Fun facts: the T-14 was never designed to be a tank in the 1st place. Object 148 was designed around a universal chassis in mind. It's kinda like the US M113 but bigger.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armata_Universal_Combat_Platform

 

[Viet]

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/news/256437-armata-stuck-moscow-parade/amp/

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/why-russias-armata-tank-may-never-be-threat-nato-21269

https://www.google.com/amp/s/taskandpurpose.com/russia-fancy-armata-tanks-broke/amp/

Even the chinese are mocking the armata:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.bu...s-makers-criticized-russia-battle-tank-2015-6

Fun facts: the T-14 was never designed to be a tank in the 1st place. Object 148 was designed around a universal chassis in mind. It's kinda like the US M113 but bigger.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armata_Universal_Combat_Platform

Nonsense. Engine breakdown is not uncommon least in newest developed tanks. Armata tank seems superior than any western tanks from the US, Germany, France and UK. Germany newest Leopard 3 tank would come in 2030. Do you think the Leo won’t have any problem at all? F35 is mirred in problems. Everything takes time. Even the T90 Vietnam acquires now is still good enough.

Fyi no joke: during the height of the Cold War, the US intended to sacrifice Germany by nuking German soils, should Soviet tanks overran German defense lines annihilated allied armed forces and reached the Rhein river. A beautiful death. Should the world go down, why not in a Big Bang.

Without a quick deployment of US army, Western Europe is defenseless against Russia conventional military power. the NATO never gives up the principle of first use of nuclear weapons because they know the chance of winning in a conventional war is thin.

I bet, tomorrow should russian tanks reach the Rhein, a nuclear exchange would be triggered.

Sir, That's not exactly true.

Both operations began with the special units and commandos. But there are tens of kilometers of concrete tunnels on the field and thousands of ATGMs distributed uncontrollably. There is a 7-year war in Syria. Most of the world's most experienced ATGM teams are currently in Syria.

Both ISIS and the PKK tried guerrilla warfare against the Turkish army. But failed strategy is ( which was tried in ES op ) to keep the front lines of the Turkish army with low levels and limited military capacity FSA units . Already in the OB operation this scheme was abandoned. For this reason, the PKK could not hold any point in OB operation and take about 3000 losses in 2 months. Half of the power in the area has been destroyed.

The biggest casualty of the Turkish army in Syria was ISIS's Raid of AlBab-Akil. TAF Unit's sight fell to about 2 meters below, and they tried raid on dense fog with collaborators in the town. We lost 2 tanks there. Therefore, UAV's are now equipped with SAR systems. The physical conditions in the field is no longer an operative problem. In addition, special units equipments now includes tunnel detection systems and behind-the-wall radars.

During the ES and OB operations, over 100 asymmetric ATGM attacks were carried out against the armored elements of the TSK. Apart from electronic and hardkill / softkill systems, there are tactics and strategies developed by both the TAF and the Syrian regime forces against asymmetric terorist elements and theirs ATGM teams. I wouldn't explain them right here.

Also There is also the fact that the Syrian airspace is under Russian control and we have problems from time to time in the disputed areas with the regime. Here, we can say that risk planning is under the pressure of the time factor. In case of CAS problems, a number of systems and strategies have been developed with the experience gained in the field. In the operation to the east of the Euphrates, we will have the opportunity to see the size of this progress.

Anyway, the topic is very nice and I would follow up with interest.

Turkey army is well armed and trained. However I wonder of how long Turkey can afford a war of attrition in Syria considering turkey economy is slowing down?