The end of tanks as we know it?

[mezsat2]

Germany’s Leopard 2 Tank in Syria Was Beaten Badly in Battle. Why?

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... -why-78441

"Germany’s Leopard 2 main battle tank has a reputation as one of the finest in the world, competing for that distinction with proven designs such as the American M1 Abrams and the British Challenger 2. However, that reputation for nigh-invincibility has faced setbacks on Syrian battlefields, and placed Berlin in a uniquely awkward national-level dispute with Turkey, its fellow NATO member."

"This was shockingly illustrated in December 2016 when evidence emerged that numerous Leopard 2s had been destroyed in intense fighting over ISIS-held Al-Bab—a fight that Turkish military leaders described as a “trauma,” according to Der Spiegel. A document published online listed ISIS as apparently having destroyed ten of the supposedly invincible Leopard 2s; five reportedly by antitank missiles, two by mines or IEDs, one to rocket or mortar fire, and the others to more ambiguous causes.

These photos confirm the destruction of at least eight. One shows a Leopard 2 apparently knocked out by a suicide VBIED—an armored kamikaze truck packed with explosives. Another had its turret blown clean off. Three Leopard wrecks can be seen around the same hospital near Al-Bab, along with several other Turkish armored vehicles. It appears the vehicles were mostly struck the more lightly protected belly and side armor by IEDs and AT-7 Metis and AT-5 Konkurs antitank missiles.

Undoubtedly, the manner in which the Turkish Army employed the German tanks likely contributed to the losses. Rather than using them in a combined arms force alongside mutually supporting infantry, they were deployed to the rear as long-range fire-support weapons while Turkish-allied Syrian militias stiffened with Turkish special forces led the assaults. Isolated on exposed firing positions without adequate nearby infantry to form a good defensive perimeter, the Turkish Leopards were vulnerable to ambushes. The same poor tactics have led to the loss of numerous Saudi Abrams tanks in Yemen, as you can see in this video."







Been there, done that. Also, in WW2 there were similar such ideas.

What is needed ON BOTH SIDES are more effective combat formations that can integrate combined arms and reliably break into the operational depths. Tanks are big targets in modern warfare. Having a Ukrainian raise another conscript brigade of middle aged men, give it a few weeks of training, and commanded by reservists who had 2 months of NATO training, and then calling it 'airmobile' 'airborne assault' 'mountain assault' is not it.

Russian weapon that knocked out Leopard 2s:



https://archive.is/ynlSK

Russia undoubtedly has some effective hand held anti-tank weapons. That said, the current state of their infantry says they'll not be deployed with any degree of efficacy. This is the reason for the large supply of heavy IFVs flowing into Ukraine. These will allow Ukrainian infantry to clear out these types of threats to the tanks. Absent close air support, it's the only option.

[ljadw]

Another problem for the Leo2 is that he is too heavy for the Ukrainian bridges : 55 tons while motorized transport is only allowed on these bridges til 44 tons .

[Cult Icon]

Old 2021 data, British source. Their figures are somewhat different from the American 2021 IISI data and doesn't include T-62.

https://www.army-technology.com/feature ... sion-nato/

Ukraine, including NATO deliveries had over 16,000 armored vehicles

The Russian MOD currently claims something like 7000 Ukrainian armored vehicles knocked out.

Regardless it's not vehicles that is Ukraine's (or Russia's) real problem. It is effective combat formations.

[Michael Kenny]

Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64294635

[Cult Icon]

"Repair and modernization of T-62, T-62M and T-62MV tanks at the 103rd Armored Repair Plant. (1-5)

Modernization of the BRDM-2 to the BRDM-2MS variant with the installation of a new engine, thermal imaging sight and additional armor on the 103rd BTRZ. (6-9)"

https://vk.com/milinfolive?w=wall-123538639_3368723

This contract is the modernization of 800 T-62s to T-62M

[mezsat2]

Old 2021 data, British source. Their figures are somewhat different from the American 2021 IISI data and doesn't include T-62.

https://www.army-technology.com/feature ... sion-nato/

Ukraine, including NATO deliveries had over 16,000 armored vehicles

The Russian MOD currently claims something like 7000 Ukrainian armored vehicles knocked out.

Regardless it's not vehicles that is Ukraine's (or Russia's) real problem. It is effective combat formations.

Regardless of your bad intel, it's still a well-known fact that Ukraine is using Russian made armor for the
most part.

This is going to change dramatically by May. The challenge for Ukraine is the myriad of systems they're
receiving with minimal training and overall lack of fuel and ammunition.

Based on what they've achieved so far, it seems plausible that they will be able to deploy and operate
this wide array of systems. The next 6 months will tell the tale.

Yes, the assembly of effective combined arms offensive formations is the key to this war. Not endless artillery
bombardments and firing anti-aircraft missiles into civilian structures. That is terrorism, not war.

[Cult Icon]

The Russians are using artillery bombardments to attrit Ukrainian formations. You seem to be not aware that artillery inflicts most of the casualties in this war.

[mezsat2]

Anti-aircraft missiles like S-300 and 400 were not designed for ground attack and have a 1-2 km discrepancy in this role.

Nevertheless, Putin is wasting millions of dollars of missiles on militarily insignificant targets- and pissing off the entire civilized world
against him in the process.

[Cult Icon]

"5th OMSBr NM DPR during the fighting on the western outskirts of Donetsk."

This newreel is of a single tank being used as an assault gun by DPR guided by comms and surveillance

https://vk.com/milinfolive?w=wall-123538639_3370036

[Gooner1]

Trick of perspective but funny

[ljadw]

Trick of perspective but funny

As both will not fight against each other, one can not say who of both is the ''best ''.

[ljadw]

Anti-aircraft missiles like S-300 and 400 were not designed for ground attack and have a 1-2 km discrepancy in this role.

Nevertheless, Putin is wasting millions of dollars of missiles on militarily insignificant targets- and pissing off the entire civilized world
against him in the process.

The entire civilised world ???
Most people are unaware of Russian attacks against civilian infrastructure and most of those who are aware of it ,do not care .

[Cult Icon]

Newreel about the T-62M production at the 103rd Armored repair plant.

[mezsat2]

Abrams will eventually make their way onto the Ukrainian battlefield.

The logistical issues are well-known. High fuel consumption and high maintenance.

Nevertheless, they will eventually be deployed by Ukraine. Not in an offensive role,
but rather a counteroffensive role. Little fuel or maintenance will be required. This
will free the Leopards, Challengers, Bradley's to force some decent areas.

In other words, they'll be there close to the Polish border, scattered around in heavy
camo, fueled up and ready for a lightning counteroffensive should Russia choose to
embark on another Kiev suicide mission.

[Tom Peters]

As both will not fight against each other, one can not say who of both is the ''best ''.

Yes, we can say which is better. Stop pretending otherwise.

ljadw: "We cant say that a F-22 is better than a Sopwith Camel because they wouldnt fight each other"

Sounds pretty dumb, doesnt it ?

Mad Dog