Jump to content
exsonic01

Turkish Leo2 tanks struggle in the Syria

Recommended Posts

kinophile,

There are indeed times when I suck big time on the EEI front. There've been all too many times when I've gone back the next day and looked at some long post generally written in the wee hours--only to find that, were I driving, any cop would've pulled me over on strong suspicion I was DUI/DWI, what with all the weaving and sudden swerves. Sometimes I'm sort of a military technical E.E. Cummings stream of consciousness poster (who also has typing issues). The problem is that while I know what I'm trying to convey, what's clear as a freshly washed window pane for me tends to be perceived more as distorted and murky, maybe even opaque to at least some readers. Doubtless a number of my veritable essays have provided unintended entertainment!

Regards,

John Kettler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More information has emerged. The APC has been identified as an ACV-15, a critter I never heard of before. 

http://defense-watch.com/2016/12/22/photo-captured-turkish-leopard-2a4-released-isis/

Now I know why. It's a Turkish! The thing in the video is, for all intents and purposes an IFV--an amphibious one. It carries a squad and has a 25 mm auto cannon but no ATGMs. That is but one configuration available on a common chassis. This version is called Adnan. If it is giving you M113 twinges, it's because it's based on the AIFV derived from it.

https://www.fnss.com.tr/en/product/acv-15-armored-combat-vehicles

ACV-300_Adnan.jpg

Image Credit: Mjabb via Wikimedia Commons

There's even a cool video.
 

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, John Kettler said:

Sometimes I'm sort of a military technical E.E. Cummings stream of consciousness poster (who also has typing issues).

That made me LOL. :D But I can think of any number of posters on these boards to whom it equally applies, and although I do make strenuous efforts to not fall into that trap, I do too.

:wacko:

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ran up a quick CM:SF scenario based on the (rather beautiful, kudos to whomever made it) 'NATO Borders' campaign map, it was loosely modelled on the TV footage we saw in the UK at the time of the first Turkish incursion into Syria.....At the time all we were seeing were M60s on TV, so I used Canadian upgraded Leopard 1s to replace them (Turkey has AFVs of a similar spec), and Dutch mech infantry to provide the AIFVs.  Now that we know they sent Leopard 2s (and will probably soon have a Fennek variant in service) it's quite easy to model a reasonably representative Turkish force for CM:SF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sgt.Squarehead,

While I don't have that game, I love your enthusiasm and creative approach. When I read the AIFV Wiki, I had a fleeting thought along the lines of  "Oh, the Dutch have it, and aren't the Dutch in CMSF? Wouldn't it be cool if...?" I say "fleeting" because I was target fixated at the time. Noted with interest the Turks seem to have abandoned that dark OD or whatever it was that made their tanks such easily spotted targets earlier.

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have CM:SF.....Dude buy it!  :o

At the current price, with all the modules it's a steal.....Seriously get it.  :mellow:

You'd be staggered at just how much content there is for it and just how creative some of that content is.  B)

PS - If you don't have CM:A get that too!  ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sgt.Squarehead,

The fundamental problem here is that I have, relative to most here, plenty of time, but very little online generally of the part of the brain that deals with all the complex spatial relationships, timing and sequence issues needed to play CM. You can see for yourself how long it can take me to play a few tens of tuns of CM, since it's detailed on the GDF in the thread Wargame. Doctor's orders!  I have a fully tricked out CMBN, own CMBS and CMFB, yet have hardly been able to play anything. TBIs aren't like normal injuries. There is no timetable, and when it comes to high order cognition, in some ways I'm worse off than I was in, say, 2014 because of delayed appearance of effects stemming from my TBI. I have days in which I can't do the simplest mental math. Happily, I seem to be making real progress in a number of areas. Reading not just books, but a bunch at a time. Now, if that cognitive leap would also appear in my CM brain!

I know a fair amount about the CMSF gamer's feast in Syria, because I've read assiduously about it ever since discussions began and eventually became the CMSF Forum. Am well aware of the wide range of forces--and LLF's astounding Ramadi map! Since CMSF was the first game of its type, I know it's got more scenarios than all the other CMx2 games combined. Funding issues aside, I don't have the game because there was no Mac version. Believe getting one took something like four years. As for CMA, which to me is quite interesting because I was keeping a professional eye on things there while a Threat Analyst, there was no Mac version at all, a situation I believe still is the case.  We practically wet ourselves over Stinger footage from Afghanistan, staring in wonder at some muj in clothing probably not changed in style, construction and materials for hundreds of years, hold a high tech and closely controlled Stinger launcher,  stand on some rock outcrop in towering mountains,then use it to down a Russian helicopter. Positively surreal experience.

Look forward to seeing your Turkey in Syria, doubtless understated, creation!  Now, all you need is a Vehicle Pack: M60T, Turkish AC, technicals with 57 mm rocket launchers or 37 mm guns with extensive shields, jitneys, etc.

Regards,

John Kettler

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Al Bab is pretty much in Turkish hands:  http://www.voanews.com/a/islamic-state-flees-northern-syrian-stronghold-al-bab/3737910.html

Which according to the Washington Post may lead to trouble:  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/22/donald-trumps-plan-for-safe-zones-for-syrian-refug/

All good news again then!  :rolleyes:

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy cow... just shows what a couple hundred $ low-tech can do vs all the billions we spend.  :blink:

Can't help but think we should be operating a few thousand of these little commercial drones for pinpoint attacks vs personnel and vehicles instead of the large overly destructive predator systems that almost guarantee large collateral deaths.

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we sure this is real? Does it not bother anyone that when the ordnance is released the drone does not even flinch. If these are supposed to be small drones then releasing a bomb of that size should cause the drone to rise up. Something does not feel right with that video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erwin,

Am not entirely sure I believe the video as shown, since it's a little too slick for my tastes, but it's absolutely true ISIS is dropping small bombs from hovering drones. You may be interested in a a recent publication from ARES. ARES Special Report No. 2. Emerging Unmanned Threats:The use of commercially-available UAVs by non-state actors 2016 applies the firm's gimlet eye the use of COTS drones, but not by nations, as you suggest would be effective and far less damaging. Believe you will also find this in-depth visual analysis and ordnance discussion "Death from Above" by bellingcat on ISIS's drone bombs of real interest.

While I certainly support the idea of more tailored, less destructive strikes, what you're seeing is no panacea. Combat experience has shown even military drones can be jammed or taken over. The sort of bombing shown in the video requires zero/near zero wind in order to be effective. There are targets such a weapon delivery platform can't readily keep up with, such as a speeding car, whereas there's no outrunning a Hellfire. If the target's in an actual building, then a piddly weapon of the type shown would be woefully inadequate to the task. As a point of reference, to kill Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the US dropped 2 x 500-pound bombs, and despite those shattering detonations, he was still alive and didn't die for nearly an hour. On balance, I would say drone bombing a la ISIS creates useful new capabilities on the warfare spectrum, but while useful, in no way can carry out all the desired tasks.

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, IanL said:

Are we sure this is real? Does it not bother anyone that when the ordnance is released the drone does not even flinch. If these are supposed to be small drones then releasing a bomb of that size should cause the drone to rise up. Something does not feel right with that video.

Good point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IanL said:

Are we sure this is real? Does it not bother anyone that when the ordnance is released the drone does not even flinch. If these are supposed to be small drones then releasing a bomb of that size should cause the drone to rise up. Something does not feel right with that video.

It is real.  Seems people are still getting used to HD video miniaturization.  Remember, these are stabilized quad-copter drones designed to provide smooth video feeds.

Captured one with ordnance still loaded (40mm HE grenade):

LsAvuD6.jpg

Edited by akd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. There ya go.

I'm still having trouble with this. I had heard that booby trapped drones were being used to fly explosives to targets but I had not heard of them dropping stuff. So for me this the first time hearing about this.

I get that they are stabilized - very true.  Stabilized does not mean that a sudden change in weight would have no effect it means the effect would be mitigated and smooth instead of sudden. I saw no camera movement. Then there is the question of explosion size. Is that an expected size of explosion from a 40mm grenade? I'm no expert but that seems pretty big.

The issue of dropping something with that level of accuracy is something I wonder about as well but it can also be explained by saying that they just publicize the ones where they score a hit so OK I can deal with that :). I'm off to do some internet searching and see if I can find any evidence this is a fake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there is a lot of talk about this - it certainly seems like a popular subject. Drones that size can carry up to 2.3 Kg so it is at least theoretically possible. I don't see any high quality sources talking about it. That could mean its real but no one has written a story about it yet. Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Internal catastrophic explosion is wot I thought (like the Bismarck blowing up HMS Hood).

The implications of this for terrorists everywhere in the world are immense.  There are far larger model aircraft that can carry dozens of pounds of payload that could be used anywhere - eg: flown into skyscrapers as in 9/11. 

Amazed that this hasn't been discussed publicly.  Picture the model seen in the video with ISIS markings flying into another aircraft or a building = propaganda coup.

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

akd,

Quite the video, though I smell FX big time in this in this. Am not arguing with the terminal effects, but rather the whole weapon release and tracking to impact part. Seems like a canned segment used over and over. The red inserts have the effect on the unwary of making it look like ISIS has some sort of weapon lock to which the bomb guides, but it's really just FX inserted in post production. Even so, I found this very scary, and I can only imagine what it must be like to be opposing ISIS and watch Death drop in. Imagine manning checkpoints and such will become very unpopular duty if this keeps up. The hit on the Abrams turret and the TC who fell into his tank right after detonation make me cringe. 

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a weird mix of naivety and strange confidence in ISIS propagandists having FX skills that far exceed anything coming out of Hollywood or the games industry. The post-process arrows and dots have become fairly routine in propaganda videos, probably because they want these consumed by people who are not "militarily literate" and would just look at these types of videos and think "what I am supposed to be seeing here?"  I recall the US military (or maybe CNN) doing the same with their "kill reels" starting back in the Gulf War (just without the latest animated graphics).

Going to have bring something more than gut feeling to claim they are faked.

Edited by akd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The smoke plume alone would be extremely difficult to model/render to the clarity shown here. Theres no match shading, no post-processig, no smudged granularity, it progresses upwards in 3D space and drifts realistically. Light shining through and off it is real. 

For me, the smoke plume is real, the explosion is real, the debris is real. 

The drone strike is real. 

Edited by kinophile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

I never said the drone vertical strike wasn't real. In fact, I find it terrifying how easy it is to execute. My issue is with the weapon release and fall to target part. I have no doubt a 40 mm grenade, with a lethal radius of 5 meters and a casualty radius of 15 meters, can kill an exposed TC. Nor do I have any doubt dropping something like that into the interior of a Hummer full of ammo and other explosives could generate a K-Kill. As these attacks continue, I think it might be good to keep a weather eye for ISIS reuse of things like weapon release and fall to target, explosions, etc. We all know that such visuals are routinely handled that way here in the States as stock footage. One of the more infamous ones is the endlessly iterated Pearl Harbor attack sequence using Dauntless dive bombers. I would fully expect ISIS to exploit its most spectacular explosions by porting them into its other videos, since the odds are few viewers would notice something was off and even fewer care. Piddly terminal effects do not make for good propaganda. Watch the video again, noting the difference in how you feel from seeing the nuking of the first Hummer, as opposed to the mere fire on the one by the overpass. For me, the difference was considerable, and propaganda is about generating a visceral response. Big boom + better than modest fire. In any event, the ability to deliver bombs or grenades with precision higher than a JDAM, unless countered, represents an enormous expansion of ISIS's real and perceived military capabilities. The damage potential and flexibility of this new weapon system/s blows my mind. Seems to me any cluster of people is vulnerable, likewise ammo dumps, POL, motor pools, refineries, shipping, control towers, aircraft, etc. 

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...