Info: Germany’s Leopard Tanks Prove Vulnerable

[shahadi]

Germany’s Leopard Tanks Prove Vulnerable in Islamic State Fight



"The reputation of Germany’s vaunted Leopard 2 tank, which forms the mainstay of NATO’s armored forces, has taken a pounding in battles with Islamic State militants in Syria." As reported by Stars and Stripes one year ago on 17 January 2017. (Stripes) Now, Turkish Leopard tanks are being hammered in battles around Afrin in Operation Olive Branch.

In last year's report, poor Turkish tactics were cited as reason for the lost of her Leopard tanks. However, in this year's fight against the YPG, a design flaw is cited giving rise to the Leopard's vulnerability.

In reporting by Sputnik, "Military experts point to the vulnerable ammunition compartment as the Leopard-2’s weakest point."

The article added, “It has been proven once again that the much-touted Leopard-2 tanks have a fatal defect, as most of their onboard ammunition is stored in the forward left section with weak armor protection on both sides, specialists at Russia’s center of Strategy and Technology Analysis wrote after watching a video of the destroyed Leopard posted by the Kurdish militants."

And, "Experts believe that the Leopard near Afrin was apparently taken out by a Fagot antitank missile launcher, developed in the Soviet Union in the early-1970s, about a decade before the first Leopard-2 tanks came along.

The Fagots are still being used by the armies of more than 30 countries around the world."
(Sputnik)

[DRG]

This " proves" nothing that couldn't have been "proven" by the game for nearly a couple of decades. Maybe it "proves" experts just like to be quoted as being "experts".( or that the Russian like to play mind games with the gullible..... ) There is nothing earth-shattering about this new "revelation" It's one reason armour was beefed up on subsequent version of the Leo 2 and why most nations that buy surplus old 2A4's upgrade them BEFORE sending them into battle.

The ONLY way to hit "the vulnerable ammunition compartment" of a Leo 2a4 is with a side turret hit. The side turret "HEAT "armour in game for a Leo 2a4 is 42 ----------the HEAT penetration of a 9M111 Fagot is 40 but the BEST HEAT PENETRATION the game can give is 55 for a 9M111 Fagot and 55 is bigger than 42 and therefore a side turret hit of a 2A4 with a 9M111 Fagot DOES INDEED have the capability of penetrating the side turret armour of a 2A4. Anyone could have set that test up in this game long before anyone had heard of ISIS/ISIL OR before Turkey bought used 2A4's and sent them into battle without armour upgrades



What the more honest commentators will admit is that the 2a4 was not designed to deal with the type of threat environment the Turks putting it into where an enemy can pop up from anyplace and launch a missile into the side of the tank.

So all the hand-wringing that's been going on over this is a big yawn really..... maybe all it proves is the Turks need better infantry screens to protect their tanks better. but really ........this is NOTHING that hasn't been proven about other tanks during the conflict in Syria. Maybe all it proves is the Turks bought into the fantasy that the leo 2 was invulnerable which is certainly is not....but neither is a T-90

[Aeraaa]

I agree with DRG, there isn't anything new about the Leo-2 in this article. It is a general rule to never leave your tanks being hit at the sides/rear. This basic rule has been in violation in Syria for so many cases it is not even funny anymore.

Btw, here's the video showing one of the deadliest disasters the TSK suffered in the Afrin operation (and the video that the article probably used as a reference). Basically a Leo was hit in the place mentioned, it exploded violently and to top it off, it was refueled right there in the line of contact, with the end result of 7 soldiers killed. I do not think that makes Leo-2 a bad tank, at least not more than how T-72's reputation was tarnished after ODS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YafzmkvVRiI

Some other instances of other "invisible" tanks:

Saudi M1A1s hit by Houthis :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1yTb3vF35M

Iraqi M1 hit by ISIS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5xKCzdhAC8

Tried to find if there is a video by Leclerc but I couldn't find. Basically the trend is the same: tanks that should have resisted the ATGMs mentioned did not because guess what: they were hit on the sides/rear.

Basically this can happen for two reasons: either the frontline is easily infiltrated and thus give ATGM crews good angles to use their missiles, or some isolated areas of resistance aren't properly cleared. In both cases, it is plain old poor tactics the main reason for tank losses.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

The LEOPARD 2A4 was designed to defeat Soviet tanks. For their part, the Soviets countered with the T-80. The 5th batch of the LEOPARD 2 series would be the one designated 2A4 and went into production between DEC 85 & MAR 87 w/370 UNITS delivered. The major improvement over the LEOPARD 2A1/2A3 was the increase in turret armor of 700mm for KE and 1000mm for HEAT rounds.
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/leo2.htm

Got to have the troops, so they can protect the tanks and hold the ground, while the tanks protect the troops well, against the tanks!
It's just a vicious cycle. Which leads me to...

This is why Turkey is slowly if reluctantly going to revive the LEOPARD-2T as already posted along with other armor improvements. To possibly include more M-60T conversions (IMI has about 150 packages stored from when Turkey backed off on it's commitment to upgrade 300 tanks to the M-60T.) Partly due to the fact the ALTAY as of this week will be delayed further.

Also back in Dec. 2017 or just before that, the USA was approached by Rheintall on a possible joint project concerning the an APS for their LEOPARDS in conjunction with the USA's decision to arm the ABRAMS M1 with the TROPHY System by 2020 or sooner. JANE's reported they would be put on the ABRAMS M1A2 SEP V3.

All armor for the 2nd BCT in Europe will receive priority on the install of these systems.

The USA has made it's decision as follows ABRAMS/TROPHY by 2020, BRADLEY/IRON FIST and the STRKER/IRON CURTAIN to follow shortly after the TROPHY install.

Will post it in the MBT Thread. Along with a revised date for the ALTAY with supporting refs.

This all goes to prove one thing, every army in the world needs to purchase the CD version of the game for advanced combat training, or at a minimum, consult with us first!!

I'll have more on this hopefully by later this evening or Monday.

Celebrating "V-Day" early since I have to work that day.

I better get to bed so I can stay awake for it all.

Regards,
Pat

[Wdll]

I am the last person who is going to feel sorry for the Turkish losses (though I don't like people are dying), but this is what you get for using stupid tactics.
This is what you get when you use your MBTs like if they were used for police duties inside your oppressive regime. While a lone Leo2 (or any in other MBT in fights in the region) tank would spread fear and stop any of your own citizens trying anything, it just makes them easier targets in actual warfare, against forces who can "shoot back".
How can they not use infantry? A lot of infantry. They have one major advantage against the "terrorists"(lol), their large military. IF you want to win, send them "all" in. Else you are just going to lose more and more tanks, helicopters, people without gaining anything. You have to set specific goals and do everything you can to attain them. This is the result of a half-arsed campaign.

They remind me of the AI in the first RTS games. Having huge armies and sending 1-4 units at a time to get destroyed.

EDIT: Typos, and added a couple of things.

[Suhiir]

Most tanks are designed for head-to-head engagements. The fact that they are more vulnerable in the sides and rear hasn't been news to anyone since about 1939.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Most tanks are designed for head-to-head engagements. The fact that they are more vulnerable in the sides and rear hasn't been news to anyone since about 1939.

or earlier..

The first Tiger was taken out by a side shot with a 6 pounder ( 57mm ) gun

On 21 April 1943, a Tiger I of the 504th German heavy tank battalion, with turret number 131, was captured on a hill called Djebel Djaffa in Tunisia. A 6-pounder solid shot from a Churchill tank of the British 48th Royal Tank Regiment hit the Tiger's gun barrel and ricocheted into its turret ring, jamming its traverse and wounding the commander. The crew bailed out and the tank was captured

but a 6 pounder with plain AP does have the capability of penetrating the side of a Tigers hull AND turret without the fancy richocet.

[DRG]

THIS is what a Leopard 2A4 needs to look like 30 years after it was built




https://youtu.be/gpi26A9hbC4?t=31

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

This is why Turkey is slowly if reluctantly going to revive the LEOPARD-2T as already posted along with other armor improvements. To possibly include more M-60T conversions (IMI has about 150 packages stored from when Turkey backed off on it's commitment to upgrade 300 tanks to the M-60T.) Partly due to the fact the ALTAY as of this week will be delayed further.

.....and this may all be " palace intrigue "... one faction wants to to do this the right way and upgrade to modern standards ( as they have shown they are capable of doing with the M60T ) and another faction that is dominate ATM just thinks what they have will do the trick.......it won't and if they continue handling this the way they have been then there will be more similar reports.......it doesn't damn the 2A4 as much as the "leadership" that is sending 1980's era tanks into a modern chaotic battle environment without modern armour upgrades.

The bottom line is those 2A4's should never have been sent in without the upgrades similar to the 2a4MCAN......and I'm betting there are Turk commanders now saying " I TOLD you so !"

[phil74501]

What the OP is referring to isn't new. I've seen several videos/news stories/ online posts over the last several years about some, supposedly, "invulnerable" Western tank being taken out by an ATGM. The one thing that's always left out in those videos and news stories, as has been mentioned in previous posts on this thread, is that those tanks aren't the latest models...which is what's always implied. It's the result of a lot of people, especially news reporters, who think that every Western tank X is exactly the same as every other tank of that model because they all look exactly alike on the outside, which we all know isn't the case.

A year or so back a video was making the rounds of an Iraqi M1 being taken out by some ATGM. The news reports were trying to imply that EVERY M1 would've suffered the same fate. Left out was the fact that the M1 in question wasn't even the HA version of an M1a1. Not every Leopard 2 is exactly the same anymore than every T-72 is exactly the same. Normally speaking, most Western countries are not going to sell their latest top of the line tank to some Third World country...mostly because those Third World countries couldn't afford a top of the line Leopard 2a7.