Posted on 01/18/2017 5:02:51 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
KAISERSLAUTERN, Germany — 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.
At least 10 of the 60-ton main battle tanks have been destroyed during a Turkish attempt to recapture the strategically important northern town of al-Bab, located just 15 miles south of the Turkish border, media reports have said.
The Turks have deployed several thousand soldiers in the operation, which began in September. But despite airstrikes by Russian warplanes in support of the advancing troops, they have been unable to take the town in the face of determined opposition.
Several dozen Turkish soldiers and local allies have died in the combat. Germany’s Die Welt newspaper said at least 10 Leopard 2s were destroyed and many others damaged in street fighting on the outskirts of al-Bab. The rebels are said to have used both U.S.-made TOW and Russian Kornet anti-tank missiles in attacks on the tanks.
A German army Leopard 2 tank during Saber Junction exercise 2012 in Hohenfels, Germany. The tanks, which form the mainstay of NATO's armored forces, have been used by the Turkish army in its offensive against the Islamic State in Syria.
MARKUS RAUCHENBERGER/U.S. ARMY
Turkey’s leaders have criticized the Obama administration last month for not providing strike support to their units engaged in the al-Bab operation.
The 60-ton Leopard 2, built by Bavaria’s Krauss-Maffei, has been in service since the 1980s. A total of 2,100 were bought by the German army. But after the Cold War, defense cuts caused a sharp reduction in numbers, and only 325 of a modernized version currently remain in the inventory of the country’s panzer units. About 20 of these are the heavily redesigned and modernized A7 model, but many are earlier A4 models — the same as used by the Turkish army.
Leopard 2s were widely exported over the years. A number of countries — including Austria, Denmark, Finland, Greece, the Netherlands, Turkey, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland — have equipped their armies with the model. After the end of the Cold War, the German army started selling off surplus armored vehicles, and many other allies, such as Poland, took advantage of discounts to equip their armored fleets with the German panzers.
The tank gained a reputation as “indestructible” in 2003, when a Canadian Leopard 2 famously survived without casualties and only minor damage a massive Taliban land mine explosion.
But critics have said the tanks, which were specifically designed to counter a Soviet armored thrust through the north German plains, are not suitable for combat in an urban environment.
The frontal armor on the hull and turret on the Leopard 2 is much thicker than on the sides and rear of the tracked vehicle.
The tank’s designers, who sought to achieve an optimal combination of protection, agility, and fire power, have always stressed the need for maneuverability on the battlefield, making the armor on its flanks and back lighter than on other other Western tanks such as the U.S. M1A2 Abrams or the British Challenger 2.
Also, the Turkish Leopards don’t have explosive reactive armor or active protection systems to block incoming rounds. Active protection systems deal with threats such as rocket-propelled grenades or anti-tank guided missiles by combining electronic detection of hostile fire with jammers, smoke screens and interceptors intended to destroy the threats.
The Islamic State militants appear to have seized on this vulnerability to attack the Leopards when they entered al-Bab, targeting its flanks and rear in attacks that forced the Turkish army to abandon its thrust into the city.
Ralf Rath, head of the Panzermuseum in Munster, said the photos and videos on the internet that showed the destruction of Leopard tanks in Syria made it clear that the tanks were vulnerable.
“Contrary to common perceptions, tanks are no individual fighters,” he said. Referring to videos that showed the Leopards moving alone into al-Bab, he said that on urban battlefields “tanks always need infantry alongside that can protect their vulnerable flanks.”
Marcus Kloeckner contributed to this story.
That’s a big ruh roh, ISIS beating back tank attacks.
As obsolete as cavalry against a soldier with a handheld missile.
How many TOW missiles did we sell ISIS at the bazaar in Benghazi?
“That’s a big ruh roh, ISIS beating back tank attacks.”
Well, aren’t the ISIS troops trained by the US and using US weapons?
Also, the Turkish Leopards don’t have explosive reactive armor or active protection systems to block incoming rounds...
In 2016? Is this common for tanks i this day and age not to have these capabilities
IIRC, Kornet was effective against our Abrams as well...
ERA is not effective against a Kornet.
“As obsolete as cavalry against a soldier with a handheld missile.”
Leopard A4s yes. Survival time with same set of missiles (TOWs, Kornets) against Russian-made Syrian T-90s? Less than 2 seconds. Damage to T-90 = paint chips at best. Shooter damage = hard to find parts and pieces.
There’s a video somewhere on YouTube or Live Leak. Final comment after shooting Kornet at T-90, “Mufsta’s dead.”
I’m not sure how much this report really says about the leopard 2.
it has been well known tanks are vulnerable in cities and even in towns and must operate closely with dismounted infantry in order to guard against exactly the type of sudden ambush that surely led to these losses.
Tanks are not magic; they need to be supported properly. While certain groups of fighters are excellent against women and children, they are often very poor at the coordinated tactics that are needed to keep heavy equipment in a fight. When that flaw is present on both sides of a battle, the foolhardy on one side will kill off some of the heavy equipment on the other side.
So let me get this straight...Russia is providing air support for Turkish forces fighting ISIS in Syria.
Are the US led “allies” defending their proxies?
As noted by others, I’m not sure how much of this report is cause for worry. Tanks by their nature are not good in MOUT (Military Operations in Urban Terrain). Urban Terrain fighting is always messy even under the best of circumstances. Before making any assessment of this report, we would have to know more about the type of tactics and support that the Turks used during this assault. Send a tank by itself down the street and any properly equipped and trained enemy is going to ensure that it doesn’t make it to the end of that street.
Tanks have always been vulnerable in urban warfare even before the days of antitank missiles to well placed mines and guns firing at point blank range. Tanks fight best in open country.
There's an interview of a WWII German Tiger tank commander moved from the Steppes of the Eastern Front to the Bocages of France.
He noticed that too. He also saw what air power, in the form of a 500lb aerial bomb does to a Tiger tank when it lands directly on top of one.
Tanks are meant for breakthroughs and need support.
There should be smoke and artillery suppressing anyone shooting at them.
Tanks are meant for breakthroughs and need support.
There should be smoke and artillery suppressing anyone shooting at them.
Close quarters it may not matter, but don’t the Israeli’s have what is essentially a phalanx system to take out RPG and TOW missiles?
That's what got my attention too. What a crazy, mixed up place the Obama admin has created.
Watch the missiles blow up the tanks on liveleak.
The tankers are dumb enough to park them in an exposed place, giving the missile shooter ample time to aim.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.