ISIS Destroyed Myth Of Germany’s Indestructible Leopard 2 Tank

Donate

ISIS Destroyed Myth Of Germany's Indestructible Leopard 2 Tank

Click to see the full-size image

Originally appeared at Sputniknews

Daesh has identified a weak spot in Germany’s legendary Leopard 2 battle tanks, and has destroyed ten of the machines used by the Turkish Army in northern Syria, the German newspaper Die Welt reported.

Battles in Afghanistan and elsewhere have earned Germany’s Leopard 2 battle tank a reputation for being indestructible. In one case, Canadian forces managed to drive a Leopard through a massive Taliban bomb blast and survive.

However, Turkish troops fighting the terrorist group Daesh in northern Syria have had a different experience. According to reports, Daesh fighters in the city of Al Bab have destroyed ten Leopard 2A4 battle tanks.

Searching for answers, some German bloggers have speculated that leadership failures or a lack of experience among Turkish troops may be to blame. However, the fundamental issue appears to be whether the 60 ton tanks are suitable for use in an urban environment, the German newspaper Die Welt reported on Thursday.

​”The Leopard 2 basic concept comes from a time when the enemy was expected to attack from the front. This basic design applies internationally to the big combat tanks, even to the most modern Russian T-14 Armata,” Die Welt wrote.

“The heavy-duty tracked vehicles are designed for a duel battle and have maximum protection in the frontal area as well as a small side angle. Since, for example, the Russian anti-tank missile Kornet can penetrate even 1.2-meter-thick armor, a tank’s less-protected areas are relatively vulnerable.”

“During the course of fighting in the Syrian town of al-Bath, the Turks’ approximately 30-year-old Leopards were often shot in the rear and sometimes from the side with anti-tank weapons. There, the massive tracked vehicles are less protected. Soldiers agree that a battle in a city can’t be compared with a duel on wide, undeveloped land, where tanks usually fight their targets from two or three kilometers away.”

According to a report from the German-language magazine European Security and Technology, the Leopard tanks in service with the Turkish army are especially vulnerable because they don’t have additional protection such as reactive armor, which reacts to and reduces a weapon’s impact, or an active protection system (APS) to counterattack an incoming threat such as the Trophy APS used by the Israeli army.

Daesh have destroyed the Leopard tanks by firing anti-tank weapons at the turret, which caused the ammunition inside to explode, the magazine wrote.

However, while reactive armor and APS make tanks more resistant to attack, they also make the vehicles much heavier.

The German defense ministry told Die Welt that the newest version of the Leopard 2, the A7V, is currently being introduced to the German army and boasts higher protection compared to the 2A4, which is no longer in service with the Bundeswehr.

ISIS Destroyed Myth Of Germany's Indestructible Leopard 2 Tank

The battle tank Leopard 2 A7 is presented by German Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) on June 14, 2010 at Eurosatory 2010 in Villepinte near Paris © AFP 2016/ ERIC PIERMONT

The newest Leopard 2A7, 20 of which were introduced to the Bundeswehr in 2014, reportedly has a special composite armor which includes layers of ceramic. However, the models produced so far don’t have reactive armor, which was first installed in 1982 on Israeli tanks during Israel’s war with Lebanon.

Singapore, which bought 96 Leopard 2A4 tanks between 2006 and 2009, has upgraded them with Advanced Modular Armor Protection (AMAP), a modular composite armor produced by the German firm IBD Deisenroth Engineering.

An example of a reactive armor system is the one fitted on Russia’s 50-ton Armata T-14. These explosive reactive armor plates are comprised of “bricks” of explosive sandwiched between two metal plates, which force an incoming projectile to dissipate its impact over a larger volume of armor.

Active protection systems include Raytheon’s Quick Kill APS and Israel’s Trophy APS, which uses radar antenna to track incoming rocket-propelled grenades and missiles, and deploys multiple explosively formed penetrators (EFP) to destroy them.

Russia’s T-14 Armata battle tanks and T-15 Armata heavy infantry fighting vehicles (IFV) are fitted with the Afganit APS, which employs a combination of active phased antenna array radars and UV detectors to identify and track incoming projectiles, and mini-mortar systems which use fragmentation rounds to intercept and destroy incoming threats in mid-flight.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Daniel Castro

    Syria-NATO war have proven that in a real long standing conflict everyone will be using cage armor, it seems reactive armor is too expensive to maintain and it falls off after one hit of RPG.

  • Ivanus59

    This tank never fought in Kosovo (maybe KFOR drove it around and knocked down some fences or hit cars with it but that’s about it)… I don’t know why it’s mentioned that way. :P

    • jj

      Right, but these tanks were used in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and I think Croatia too.

      • Ivanus59

        No, they weren’t. -.- Where the hell do people get these informations? NATO has no balls to fight on the ground unless they fight against peasants, Army of Yugoslavia would have inflicted great casualties upon potential NATO invaders, the imperialists know that and so they only attacked from safe distances using cruise missiles or bombers and fighter jets. No ground combat was ever witnessed (against the western scum that is, obviously ground combat raged against local factions on the ground instead). Unless a few small evacuations of pilots who were shot down…

        • jj

          The Danish UN soldiers used Leopard tanks against the Serbs. The Danes, after they were set-up and before they had the tanks, acted friendly with the Serbs, then after they got their shipments of the Leopards, they opened fire on them. I believe others might have used them too. I will look up the link. There are also photos of British UN firing against the Serbs from Mt. Igman.

          Operation Bøllebank
          “The seven German-made Leopard 1A5 tanks fired 72 rounds and destroyed several Serb artillery pieces, an ammunition dump and several bunkers. Serb forces brought three T-55 tanks to the scene, but apparently the Danes did not engage them, as they made no offensive moves. The Leopards, however, fired 19 armour-piercing rounds. The Danes could see in their thermal tank sights that the guns on the T-55s were cold and therefore had not taken part in the engagement according to a non-official report.[2] However, an Italian source claims that, despite the UNPROFOR rules of engagement, the three T-55s were actually hit by the Leopards.[3]”
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_B%C3%B8llebank

      • Bob

        The Yugoslav wars involved only Yugoslav tanks – T-55’s and M84’s (licensed T-72’s). Germany was a UN peacekeeping participant in Bosnia and Kosovo – but it most certainly did not participate in any offensive actions, with main battle tanks, nor supply any variant of Leopard’s to anyone – if that is what you are suggesting.
        Germany did give consignments of small arms and several air assets (MiG’s), inherited from their unification with East German in 1989, to Croat forces, and NATO air forces did attack ethic Serb militia positions, in east Croatia throughout 1994-5, but active NATO participation was all air based. Well, apart from the retired US generals that were paid strategists behind the major and decisive Croatian 1995 offensive against ethnic Serb’s centre of Nis.

        • jj

          The Danish UN used 7 Leopard tanks against the Serbs in Operation Bøllebank
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_B%C3%B8llebank
          in April 1994, then later that year (October) in Operation Amanda
          There may have been other times it was used by different contingents (there were soldiers there from many countries). Towards the end of the Bosnian war, the UN was essentially acting more and more for and as NATO. Many of the UN soldiers simply switched over being NATO forces after the end of the war.

          But yes, I specifically remembered about Danish using Leopard tanks against the Serbs, so therefore they were used, at least by them. It is telling though that they fired at Serb tanks which were cold and hadn’t even fired. It appears they were using it as an excuse to take out Serb armor. Meanwhile the Bosniaks were receiving enormous amounts of weapons from Iran, Turkey, Yemen, etc.

          • Bob

            Ahh, talking at cross purposes – assumed you meant supplies of Leopard tanks to internal fighting forces in Yugoslavian wars.
            Wasn’t aware of Danish(!!!) forces use of main battle tanks against ethnic Serb positions in Bosnia. Did however know of British treachery – securing safe passage out for their completely surrounded armor units, granted by Mladic himself to them to safely drive into Serbia proper for air extraction back to UK, before remaining British then turned their guns on same ethnic Serb’s lines.

          • jj

            “securing safe passage out for their completely surrounded armor units, granted by Mladic himself to them to safely drive into Serbia proper for air extraction back to UK, before remaining British then turned their guns on same ethnic Serb’s lines”
            Serbs were/are actually too cooperative and friendly for their own good. They are generous and open to strangers, including those who were/are spies or enemies involved in sabotage or out to harm them in the long run. Perhaps people like that will go extinct (in the Balkans) and only the suspicious, rude, mean and secretive people (like most of the Croats) will survive in the Balkans.

          • Jens Holm

            They blew a rather big ammunition depote as well, but it was relative short fight. Serbs stopped laughing of UN and others after that.

          • jj

            But it was the Muslims and foreign Mujahideen who were killing UN soldiers, foreign aid workers, journalists, etc. A lot of that was kept hush-hush.
            UN was also involved in smuggling in weapons and fighters for the Muslims. Serbs were cooperative with UN and handed the UN the airport in Sarajevo in the beginning of the war. Serbs also handed over territory on Mount Igman to the UN, and the UN then allowed this territory to be used by the Muslims to launch an attack on Serbs which killed over a dozen Serb medics.
            A former UN worker says that the UN removed the Serbs’ weapons which were defending their (Serbs’) lives.
            UN would move out of the way for Croat forces to attack Serb civilians.
            UN soldiers witnessed Croats killing Serb civilians in the Medak pocket in Croatia.

          • Jens Holm

            I cant recognize most of it at all. Im aware muslims did very bad things too, but the facts are and were, that Serbs and Croates started by there own war among them.

            After heavt loses from both sides, they attacked Bosnia, where the muslim leadership tryed to avoid all fighting, but the war went to Bosnia as well.

            There is no hush-hush here about it at all. It must be, where You are. Things are well descriebed in all medias as well as we got many refugees from Bosnia. We started with some from the borderwar between Croats and Serbs. Many were killed as well.

            But after that we got busload after busload from Bosnia(an later on Monte negro). 95% of those were muslims from etnich cleansing, which included many deads too.

            So to me, You write mainly about consequenses for those systematic etnic cleanings,which You 100% started. Murders should go free. Deporters should go free. Of course the normal procedure is by courts, but here it was revenge for killed family members. You had to suffer.

            The first real bosnian army group were made by relatives to externinated and deported family member. Why shouldnt they be high motivated paying back.

            Your succesrate was obvios none of them were in the country.

            I see most of Your words as serbian or croation constructions of the worst lying kind even corners are true, but You forget the calender in it, where You started.

            Im sure You are right in many serbs suffered hard too, but blame people as Milosovic, Mladic and Your own nationalist for it.

            Same things for croats, which made some of the worst etnic cleasings first.

            I know all about Igman very well, but it seems You have forgotten serbs up there systematicly bombarded everything in a range of 20 km before Your start the “after”. How many muslims and croats were killed from there first ?

            And You expect fairness for You 100%. There were 2-3 mountains more armed with serbian artillery. Igmann is only the best known because You kept Sarajevo closed for starvation and systematicly killed people people in and out under the airport.

          • jj

            Actually, the Bosnian Muslims were in Croatia training and participating in that war, as were the ethnic Albanians. Some of Croatia’s generals were Kosovo Albanians and who committed large-scale ethnic cleansings.

            Also, the Bosnian Muslim President was planning for an Islamic Bosnia for many years. He and his followers, who later became the government in the years just prior to the Bosnian war, were jailed in 1983 because they were seeking help from Islamic countries and groups, including terrorist groups, to help them bring about a Muslim-dominated BiH.

            Also, some Bosnian Muslims blew themselves up in their car on the Montenegrin coast, when their bomb prematurely exploded – they were planning an attack on Montenegro’s coast to take pressure off a front in Croatia during the Croatian war. That was BEFORE the Bosnian war started – like around August 1991.

            There were also ethnic tensions in BiH building up strongly starting 1989/1990 – which was well before the Croatian war.

            And the Bosnian Muslims started as ALLIES to the Croat and Alija Izetbegovic even invited the Croatian army into BiH in the months BEFORE the war actually started.
            Croatia had 40,000 troops stationed in BiH the entire war (including months before and after, in violation to the Dayton Accords).
            They were not sanctioned, bombed, nor threatened. In fact the international community was very quiet on it even though they were fully aware. It was an open secret.

            The Bosnian Muslims were also smuggling in weapons and starting up paramilitary groups for well over a year before the BiH war started.
            So they were actively involved in preparations BEFORE the Croatian war, and they were participants in Croatia’s war. Many Bosnian Muslims fought in Croatia’s war before they fought in BiH.

          • Jens Holm

            There is some true things in Your comment, but too much is serbian constructuvism of the worst kind.

            The other parts/partner are some better, then not much. You do like them – throw dirt and excuses for doing terrible things.

            If You want to know what happend, You have to go outside You nationalistic constructuvisms. They are the worst kind.

            You almost make me laugh, when You correct write, those muslims muslims bougth some weapons a Year before. What ells did the leadership do in that period. They tried to avoid all war seeing, what happend between Croats and Serbs.

            And what those worried muslim meet by some hunting riffels and a little more? Well – Tanks, aeroplanes, artillery.

            Serbs still dont get, that most of the rest wont have Their leadership at all. Tito could handle it and sometimes did it hard, but after that the rest finally should be serbia by force.

            Those muslims dint agree, bosniaks either and Slovenians said: Lets get the hell out of here.

          • jj

            Alija Izetbegovic wanted a BiH under Islamic law. He was like that his whole life. He even published a book “Islamic Declarations” spelling it out. The west hid what he was about and falsely advertised him as a moderate.

            He said himself to paraphrase “I will sacrifice peace for independence” So he and his government did NOT want to stay in Yugoslavia. People blame Serbs but it was the non-Serb separatists who wanted to tear off parts of Yugoslavia.
            They and the Croats went BEHIND SERBS’ BACKS for their independence vote – it was done at midnight and Serbs did not even know about it.
            When you have over 33% of the population left out and the other 2/3 doing maneuvers behind their backs, then *that* is recipe for war.
            What they also did besides setting up weapons importation networks – do a search on Hasan Cengic to find more about that – is start paramilitary units.
            These units were even taking over hospitals and threatening Serbian doctors. The Serbian doctors were abused and there was at least one murder before the war officially started.
            They were also training their TO (territorial defense which existed in every Yugoslav republic and was set up under Tito (and perhaps for a future dismantling of it as Tito himself said back in the early 1970’s that he didn’t think Yugoslavia would survive after his death (and he didn’t seem concerned about it either))).
            Meanwhile the U.S. government officials were meeting these separatist officials/republics behind the Yugoslav government’s back and giving them the “green light” so-to-speak.

            Also the British shipped the Slovenes millions worth in military communications equipment to Slovenia just days before the micro-war broke out there. That was started with the Slovenian TO attacking Yugoslav border guards on the Austrian-Slovenia border.

            Additionally the alleged Serb crimes were grossly exaggerated and many times lies. The media was printing ANY claim against Serbs as “news” – many of these claims were false and even made up.
            Some journalists who demonized Serbs were later discovered to be fabricating stories, such as Jack Kelley of USA Today.

            And most of the dead in the BiH war were MEN – the stats show something like 91% or more of the deaths were men. So not “mostly women and children” as the Bosnian Muslims pushed in the press.
            And that percent wouldn’t count the teen soldiers under 18 even though age 16 was when boys from ALL sides could legally fight in the war and was quite common.
            Even younger teens were fighting. Child soldiers were a problem with the war. But they would be, in such cases, genuine military targets.

  • Deamer

    it was never present in Kosovo in any of the fights..any..Only present to follow ethnic cleansing of 20 0000 Serbs after NATO moved in…and they are really good

    • jj

      It was used by Danish UN against the Bosnian Serbs in April 1994 “Operation Bøllebank” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_B%C3%B8llebank
      And then also in October of that year in Operation Amanda.
      Also, can’t rule it out being used by others in that war there were UN soldiers from SO MANY countries involved. The UN was stationed in BiH throughout the entire war, and actually, arrived in February 1992, so BEFORE the war started. They were in position to manage the war, actually.

      • Jens Holm

        I can confirm Serbian Bosniacs were enlightend by operation Böllebank” and an operation by that could have stopped the war before that.

        Danes dont shoot with plutonium only irridium.

        • Deamer

          You could stop the war when all 3 parties signed Lisbon agreement 1992 but when US ambassador Warren Zimmerman told Alija Izetbegovic to windrow his signatures EU was silent .You could stop the war but you didn’t want to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Zimmermann#Bosnian_War

        • Deamer

          I bet you never told people in Denmark about long standing friends in Bosnia http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1324483/posts

          • Jens Holm

            I do. Im from Denmark.

            I agree about Your version, but I also think Izetbecovic was the wring person to talk with at all. I also think the muslim autonomy should be in south with borderline to Montenegro and muslims should have had allowence to buy weapons right away.

            Serbs had a lot of weapons. Croats could just buy exept from artillery. We – as europeans – then had avoided having Saudi money in and 1000 Al kaidas changing the local Islam.

            Im sorry for being only a zero about that then and now and it was impossible to reacts fast and well.

            Our help were not only slow, but made by a total strange mix which made more damage then needed. And the solution of today – where USA decided too much – dont work in many matters.

            Im also against all our other socalled help operations incl. ours in Iraq as well as Syria. After many years of involvement too many danes dont know what we are doing there at all, but we are there figting and – kind of – just killing faster.

            We are even blamed for everything, which I cant see. We should let people kill each other and only try to change by sober arguments against it.

            We have no friends in the Middle East. Does it then matter who is killing who. They dont stop because we are not there, but they might slow down in lack of weapons and skills.

          • Deamer

            the problem is Please don’t get involved in any war…..do you know for this one …Be nice to US or we will bring democracy at your place….simple as that…..btw look what MORAL Brits did in Yemen selling cluster emo to Saudi thugs

          • Jens Holm

            Thats right. Not many successes.

          • jj

            The Bosnian Muslims are now fighting alongside ISIS and other terror groups in Syria, and some of them have even brought their whole families to live there.
            Also, the notorious head-cutter, who decapitated a Syrian soldier and uploaded it to youtube, and who also killed a Syrian tied to a pole with a tank an anti-tank missile (overkill), Lavdrim Muhaxeri (sp?), is a Kosovo Albanian who worked at the U.S. camp Bondsteel, and is now back in Kosovo.
            So the ones the west fought for, and did heavy propaganda for, are fighting with the terrorist groups. And Croatia sent 75 planeloads of weapons to the Syrian rebels just a few months before it was accepted into the EU.

          • Deamer
          • jj

            UN reports say that the weapons flowing to the Muslims was ENORMOUS. They were talking about the Iranian weapons: much would come through Croatia’s ports, but Croatia would skim an amount for themselves.
            Also, at the beginning of the war weapons from an organization connected to Osama bin Laden were stopped at the Slovenian border with Croatia, when Croat-Bosniak tensions started heating up, around September 1992.
            Previous to that weapons were coming through Croatia for the Bosniaks and Slovenia was the middleman, exporting its own stocks plus bringing in weapons from all over.

          • jj

            So you’re a Dane not a Swede. De Luk de sum en gay. (Sound that out, I do not know how it is spelled.)

  • Jens Holm

    As I remember it, Leopards has never been used in real battles before. afghanistan ?

    You also have to caompare correct to others. Its mainly clamed as being almost as good as the Abrams, and Abrams has been killed many times as well as all russians.

    At the chechenian war 2 they found RPG`s which could hit all russian tanks hard. Very funny strange it was russian RPG?s.

    If You back in time taking the WW2 `s like the german tiger and leopard as well as the russian KV1 & 2, they were hard to knock out,but it was possible.

    The problem was the same. If You arm the all over, they are too heavy cant drive most places and use a lot of fuel. The other kinds of protections outside the main armor are same thing. It helps a lot, but using words as indistrutuble has to be compared to other tanks and enemy skill.

    There are also many versions of all of them, and the total upgraded Leopards are the best.

    I agree very much about using them in urban warfare. They are very overestimated. Most muslims almost pray to them, but they are not flexible and SAA as well as Turks (& maybee ISIS) dont have the cluest idea about, that those tanks also has to have determinant infantery for close up protection from fx TOWS and SARS.

    Most fight is very primitive as bringing in a tank as a tower low protected behind a wall even claiming they have firecontrol.

    To me those armies should use low barrel artillery and a lot of it, which You can effort, because they are much cheeper in everything.Those canons can – if attacked – also fire a lot of grenades rapidly agains attackers.

    Its too advanced for the armies, we see here and we also dont see constand help from above by airplanes or gunships – Mainly we see just big bombs dropped somewhere in the attackers possetions – if they are not below ground well protected by ruins.

    Many smaller canons makes fire possible right away all the time. It can also shoot in groups now and then and hit groups of enemies.

    End of novel…

    • Hunter1324

      “Almost as good as the Abrams”.

      Actually most tank buffs consider it superior at least in it’s latter itinerations. The truth is more complex of course and there’s a lot of compromisses to consider. What is not debatable however is the fact that Leopard 2’s are generally cheaper to acquire and service which explains why they were so much succesfull than the M1 Abrams in the export market.

      • Barba_Papa

        I didn’t hurt that the Germans and the Dutch basically sold all their Leo 2’s whereas the Americans basically kept all theirs. So a glut of cheap 2nd hand Leo 2’s vs more expensive new Abrams, what would you pick?

        • Jens Holm

          I not hunter, but I like gasturbines, which make them a little more as surprice and also how advanced it can fire driving.

      • Jens Holm

        Agree, even total upgraded leopards seems a little less advanced. I just referred whats written about them at least since Iraq 1 + 2.

    • Barba_Papa

      ‘Most muslims almost pray to them’

      You should always pray to your weapons. Appease the Machine Spirit that is inside. Look after your wargear and it will look after you. Blessed be the Omnissiah!!!

    • jj

      Say say Mr. Swede. You were there in the Tuzla area. Didn’t you know about Operation Bøllebank? The Danes did use 7 Leopards against the Serbs in April 1994, then again they used the Leopards in Operation Amanda in October of that year.
      Where were you, exactly, when this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_B%C3%B8llebank took place.

      • Jens Holm

        Danes the last many years has in many matters been too loyal to USA as I see it.

        We make our parts. We were honored by bombing SAA`s at Der El Zor, so we know ours can hit targets well – so to speak. We had 7 down there incl, repair, so 3 of them could fly 24 hours. We have supply groups and a big radar in Iraq handled by 100 of ours.

        We will soon have a corvette in the indian ocean hunting pirates named Peter Villemoes and 1 or to Hercules for heavy transport i Mali (and mabee Niger).

        Money to it are open or almost open in the parlament. Last extra on the budget was 55 mio dollar, but we also send some extra help by UNHCR and NGO`s and small amount by EU.

        Its a rotation system. Those F16`s were rather expensive, so this time its lower. They have made a kind of key from what we are good and and BNP.

        • jj

          Most all of Europe/EU is U.S.’s poodles. You just follow and do, in the main, according to U.S. agenda.

  • HoodooTexas

    30 year old tanks operated by Turks. They are more incompetent than the Syrians. Turkey is a paper Tiger.

    • Pekka Rastas

      The funny thing is that Turkey were offered A5 an A6 updates but they decided to save money and keep that 30 year old A4 design instead. A5 changed the straight faced turret and A6 added reactive armor among other things. On top of it all the crew decided it was a good idea to ‘go to town’ on that old hunk of metal ’cause it’s only Isis. So yeah, they got executed by fire after being held captive for a week.

      …but their country saved in those upgrades.

      • Hunter1324

        The hull armor is mostly the same though and hits to the hull it what’s killing most of those Leopard 2’s.

        • Pekka Rastas

          A6 has got reactive armor. Not that it necessarily would have made a difference. The biggest mistake was taking a tank to combat inside city walls. Tanks need space to operate, an urban combat vehicle it is not. Wonder whose idea that was.

          • Jens Holm

            Agree. Heavy tanks with long barrels are almost never fit for urban warfare.

      • Jens Holm

        Well, my private gues could be, they than had money to their Firtinas.

      • Bob

        They only needed older 1980’s version to use against domestic Kurds – the operation against ISIS opponent in Syria armed with ATGM’s – stolen from Iraq has been eye opener for Turkish command.

    • Jens Holm

      Well, most what SAA has are like a museum. Might wash my eyses. Im sure Syrians has a few better ones, than the old Leopards.

  • King_GeorgXIII

    Gyus its A Leo 2A4 this armor is outdated! They destroyed nothing! Its like compareing a T-72 with a T- 72B3. but the russians need a boost to sell their arms!

    • Jens Holm

      Yes, there are several versions in the Turkish army. Saw a list 1 year ago. Many are old standard type.

  • Aung Naing

    It Is leprosy ,not leopard.

  • adzsiam

    At the end of the day, a tank isn’t invulnerable no matter who advertise it to be otherwise.

    • Jens Holm

      Thats right, nothing are and more and more automatic systemes are develloped, but they are still usefull in many matters, if they are used right.

  • Hunter1324

    Also a rather large and relativelly thin LFP with the left side being packed full of 120mm ammo.

    It makes a lot of sense. Leopard 2′ were meant to be as mobile a possible and take a somewhat more deffensive approach staying hull down and concentrating in performing night operations. Therefore lackluster frontal hull armor and side and rear armor.

  • TRG-42

    Just shows that US has anti-tank weapons capable of destroying Leopards, and ISIS can use them.

    • Jens Holm

      No, it shows at least one more thing. SAA and Turks dont use determinant clever infantery. which is a must in modern warfare.

      Too many in that region still think tanks are invisible fortres in the most naive way – or cant handle tanks even its well known procedure since germans invaded Polen.

      • TRG-42

        OK, so ISIS is well trained by US/Israel.

        • Jens Holm

          Yes an no. Qaida was an answer to the russian invasion in Afghanistan. They were trained well as guerrilla as well as got their main problem solved learning to kill tanks/armed vehicles as well as airplanes.

          I would say it stopped in Tjetjenian war 2, where USA helped russians to defeat them by crushing their communikation system.

          I dont think USA has given ISIS much training, but Hillary Clinton and a few more in the US adm. gave help in weapon.

          ISIS are there own and the infantery part is taken in from many sources. An important one are the local armies in Syria and Iraq but mixted will ultimative contracts for employment it make a devastating míx.

          I dont know how much influence has in that. They have been teachers for several countries in guerrilla as well as antiguerilla warfare. That includes Turks against kurds(in Turkey/PKK).

          But its not fair to go back like that. The german sturmgewehr was a great succes for nazies, but it was the next generation – as a number 1 – The kalishnokov, which really did in and do.

          I will remind You about, that there was a lot of terror in that region as well as the rest of the world before that incl. the famous assasinates and much “special troops” tecnichs actually are available from several countries, can read, and are clever or lucky.

          One copy is enough.

        • Jens Holm

          I will once again remind You about, that its a big advantage an enemy dont know how to handle the weapons they actually got. ISIS can.

          Seems SDF are kind of optimized as well.

          If You take why ISIS took Palmyra once again, the SAA armed vehicles were covered by second class milisias, which had their own camp and probatly hardly knew, they should protect tanks.

          Infantery shall sleep around the tanks and between them especially when the attackers are fast incommers.

          SAA has still not laerned that after years.

  • its a construction from the 70s what do you expect ?
    in the 70s that was top notch but now its crapp
    Germany doesnt invest in Military it invests in “social warefare”
    Refugees cost Germany billions and there wont be any money left
    for the construction of a new top notch tank and who has a doubt Germany would
    not be able to put sonething up if they realy wanted to?

  • Superfly

    Tanks driven by Turkeys sums it.

  • DB100-SM2

    The Turks are so unhappy with the Leopard 2’s that they are withdrawing them from the frontlines and substituting them with M-60T Sabra’s (basically Turkish/Israeli modernised M-60’s). Turkish officials state that their Otokar Kobra APC’s have sustained direct ATGM hits and not ended up like their Leopard MBT’s. Some Leo’s have had their entire top halves detach after ATGM hits. Turkey is so unhappy that it is spending another $500 million on the modernisation of its reserve M-60 fleet to Sabra level and also commencing production of the first batch of 250 Altay MBT’s to replace its entire Leopard 2A4 fleet.

  • Armando

    The Turkish army uses the Leopard 2A4 which is sold by the Dutch, they are tanks from the 80’s. The newer versions like the Leopard 2A6 or even 2A7 are not comparible with the 2A4.