Turkish Leo2 tanks struggle in the Syria

[Armorgunner]

12 hours ago, akd said:

T-72B3 turrets arrive for flight school in Syria:

Only the turrets? Because those ERA plates on the hull side, don´t seem to be Syrian original? Or is it the entire tanks that may be new to Assad?

[akd]

Joke that did not translate, I suppose.   Entire tank obviously.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Definitely stick to the day job. 

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Definitely stick to the day job. 

You must be a lot of fun at parties.

[Rinaldi]

He's certainly no fun here.

Edited March 13, 2017 by Rinaldi

[Sgt.Squarehead]

[Armorgunner]

It would not surprised me. If Putin where sending just the modern turrets, to equip older T-72´s in Syrian inventory. As a cheaper way to get Assads forces to be more effective. However, we have been seeing a lot of T-90´s around in Syria. So Putin seems to go all in with Assad. Would it even be possible, to put a T-72B3 turret on those old Syrian M/M1 models?

[IMHO]

T-90s in SAA hands - even those sent recently - are the earliest production models. "Just testing"  It's a wrong view that Russia (or Iran) is married to Assad. Everyone's pursuing their own goals - not Assad's.

[DreDay]

9 hours ago, Armorgunner said:

It would not surprised me. If Putin where sending just the modern turrets, to equip older T-72´s in Syrian inventory. As a cheaper way to get Assads forces to be more effective. However, we have been seeing a lot of T-90´s around in Syria. So Putin seems to go all in with Assad. Would it even be possible, to put a T-72B3 turret on those old Syrian M/M1 models?

I suppose it's possible, but why? It's not like T-72B hulls are super-expensive, and Russia certainly has plenty of them in storage...

[cool breeze]

I think you guys are still missing the joke, it was in reference to the"fact"  that "syria is where tank turrets go to learn to fly"

[Sgt.Squarehead]

It still isn't funny. 

[Armorgunner]

1 hour ago, cool breeze said:

I think you guys are still missing the joke, it was in reference to the"fact"  that "syria is where tank turrets go to learn to fly"

Oh now i get it  well, that was really funny  I never saw that reference before.

[John Kettler]

Armorgunner,

Was watching what I thought was a Russian video on the ISU-152, but it was really an on the fly translation of someone saying I couldn't tell what. Next thing you know, up pops a placard I'd never seen before. Ding! Ding! It's the "Inside the Chieftain's Hatch" ISU-152 episode, which was much easier to follow in English. And what do I find in the sidebar? Strv-103 grog goodness! The information content of these Strv-103 videos is practically unbelievable, though I would note he missed a point about the value of the glacis plate ridges, which is ripping up HEAT projectiles or causing them to fire in bad geometries and through the dreaded discontinuous media which are the bane of HEAT jets. Decades ago, I got to see the JMEM devoted to tank damage from the 1967 War. One unexpected discovery there was how things like headlight guards, lifting eyes and other excrescences prematurely triggered otherwise deadly HEAT hits and saved the tanks involved. Essentially, the ridged glacis is a giant collection of those things. The design also puts all sorts of localized stresses on various types of KE munitions, too. Localized stresses, unless in compression from the front, are generally bad for projectiles.

Exterior

 

Interior 1

 

Interior 2 & Test Drive!

Regards,

John Kettler

 

[John Kettler]

Armorgunner,

Believe this is the film of the entire survivability test series for the Strv103. As luck would have it, the kind soul who posted it provided his own English translation. Early in the antitank like fire portion, you can clearly see those welded on slats sacrificially protecting the main armor of the glacis plate. This is the most comprehensive live fire survivability test footage I've ever seen for any AFV.

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited July 21, 2017 by John Kettler

[Armorgunner]

13 hours ago, John Kettler said:

Armorgunner,

Was watching what I thought was a Russian video on the ISU-152, but it was really an on the fly translation of someone saying I couldn't tell what. Next thing you know, up pops a placard I'd never seen before. Ding! Ding! It's the "Inside the Chieftain's Hatch" ISU-152 episode, which was much easier to follow in English. And what do I find in the sidebar? Strv-103 grog goodness! The information content of these Strv-103 videos is practically unbelievable, though I would note he missed a point about the value of the glacis plate ridges, which is ripping up HEAT projectiles or causing them to fire in bad geometries and through the dreaded discontinuous media which are the bane of HEAT jets. Decades ago, I got to see the JMEM devoted to tank damage from the 1967 War. One unexpected discovery there was how things like headlight guards, lifting eyes and other excrescences prematurely triggered otherwise deadly HEAT hits and saved the tanks involved. Essentially, the ridged glacis is a giant collection of those things. The design also puts all sorts of localized stresses on various types of KE munitions, too. Localized stresses, unless in compression from the front, are generally bad for projectiles.

Exterior

 

Interior 1

 

Interior 2 & Test Drive!

Regards,

John Kettler

 

I will be sure to watch these movies, after dinner. I always belive that, i know what i need to know about the Strv 103. But every time i get suprised.

Thanks John

[Armorgunner]

10 hours ago, John Kettler said:

Armorgunner,

Believe this is the film of the entire survivability test series for the Strv103. As luck would have it, the kind soul who posted it provided his own English translation. Early in the antitank like fire portion, you can clearly see those welded on slats sacrificially protecting the main armor of the glacis plate. This is the most comprehensive live fire survivability test footage I've ever seen for any AFV.

Regards,

John Kettler

This one I Think, Me myself have linked to in this topic? Or maybe some other topic in the CMBS.

But thank you anyway. It is very interesting to see, for anyone here. The S-tank, was actually quite good for its time. But when the stabilization of guns got better. And the Soviet tankrounds got better (when they stoped bouncing of the slope) The S-tank was not the way to go anymore.

But when introduced, it was pracitcally imune frontally. To anything in the Soviet arsenal.

[John Kettler]

Armorgunner,

My recollection is that there was a short, super fuzzy version of the survivability film, for which there were no captions. Couldn't tell you who posted that one. Glad you enjoyed what I turned up.

Regards,

John Kettler

 

 

[IMHO]

Sinai: an VBIED tries to attack an Egyptian Army column, fails to explode and gets run over by a tank

[Kinophile]

I'm no tanker, but surely driving over a VBIED is a pretty dumb thing to do in an M60... These guys seem super lucky. 

Even if your underHull withstands the possible blast (which you have no idea will be shaped or not, even though unlikely) the concussion transmission woukd hurt your crew, the blast would almost certainly de-track you and you're now immobile and far less useful for convoy defense. What if there's a follow up wave of VBIED/ground attack? 

Just back up, clear everyone back,  MG the car and be done with it. 

Why risk your tank? 

[Erwin]

Looks like we was blocked by another vehicle to his rear and maybe just panicked by going ahead as fast as he could.  Or thought he would sacrifice himself?

[c3k]

That close, with the vehicles/convoy/crunchies behind the tank, I don't think the tank's weapons could depress enough. Crushing the car would immobilize it. Parking a tank on it would help tamp down the blast effects. Yeah, it may've set it off, but points to the tankers (or at least the driver) for showing some aggression and taking action.

Was their decision the "best" decision? Hell, sitting here in an air conditioned room, drinking a cup of coffee, looking at it from an elevated perspective, with no threat of harm and no emotional attachment to the action, sure, something "better" may have been possible. But that's Monday morning quarterbacking...or doing what politicians do. Personally, I'd promote the tank crew, stick medals on their chests, give 'em some leave, and send them some bottles of good booze. Or lemonade. Not sure about whether the whole Halal thing applies to Egyptian armor crews.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Brave but still a bad idea IMHO.....I've seen a few images of VBIEDs with large tanks of chlorine aboard (something that appears to have escaped the media's attention completely). 

[Kinophile]

My angle (not to disparage the tankers bravery) is that youre taking a chance with the convoy's primary defense asset, especially since ISIS etc have a habit of multiple waves of VBIED/Suicides.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

The frontal attack (& lack of massive explosion) shows this is a newcomer group.....In Syria the VBIEDs tend to attack from the flanks.

Have a poke around in my Mosul thread, you'll find plenty of links to videos of them attacking from the side-streets, often with drones causing a distraction first.  

Edited July 25, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[Erwin]

What was more strange was that the tank then did a panicky 3 point turn and then headed back the way it came.  I thought it was going go over the car again, but it just went by the side.  Now, THAT was lucky since the car blew up after the tank was clear.