Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

Keep in mind that the Turkish military has been degraded a lot these last few years, first with the increasing rise of islamists within the Turkish state, and then the usual purges following that failed coup.

So...

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

So yeah maybe they need an "adjustment" in the game.....and maybe I'll wait a couple months before doing that and see what transpires

In the meantime, anyone who REALLY wants to can adjust the Turkish ratings manually.

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

If only there was a way to globally adjust an OoB's exp/mor values..

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

It all goes to show the Russians were right ATGMs are very dangerous to vehicles. You need active defences or at the very least men on the ground to deny suitable firing points especially on the flanks.

Israel learnt this quite a while back when they got cocky & thought the Merkava invincible, everybody should have. Tactical awareness is first line of defence battlenet greatly improved, tanks carry drones etc & if someone does get off a shot Trophy is probably the best countermeasure system available.
No wonder the USA supports them they study there tactics & tech though they seem to want a home engineered system rather than Trophy, economic reasons I suppose.

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

political is my guess

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

While impressive when intact, the age old question "Why bother using artillery or small arms against an armored target?" is clearly answered concerning external mounted defense systems. Such systems, if simulated on a WinSP unit, it should be prone to a small % being lost as in a '*' result from Artillery or direct small arms/MG fire.

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

IF someone intentionally risks his head to shoot with a rifle a MBT, to take out some defensive system, that person has HUGE BALLS.

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

Agreed, but it should be very small. Bit like in WWII anti tank rifles could be used to shoot up tank optics. If you were close enough, brave enough, and a good enough shot...

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

Actually unless you're one of only a few people in the area fighting most tanks won't notice you. Either because there's too much else going on, because you're in a blind spot, or you're not perceived as an immediate threat. Infantry has always had the advantage over armor when they can swarm them. It's when you try to go 1-on-1 vs a tank you're an idiot with balls the size of Russia.

Re: Leo2A4 destroyed
 

What happened with their "smoke/aerosol" mortars? The 2A4 has two banks of four each per turret side for total of 16 launchers of 76mm mortars. The 2A4 did use multi-layered spaced armor though the big defensive improvement was made to the turret with the use of a titanium/tungsten armour which increased protection levels against KE to 700mm/HEAT to 1000mm all around.

The 2A4 was made in different "batches" from #6 from Dec. 1985 (When production of the 2A3 ceased that same month, for a total of 300 units. There was no 2A2.) and ceased with batch #8 on 19 Mar. 1992 with 2,125 total 2A4 units built.

I don't remember but, believe someone's tank got taken out by an ATGM a few months back-I remember now-it was a Syrian upgraded T-72 or T-90. Upon recovering the tank it was found by the Russians the crew never activated the launcher protection system. This posted I think in the MBT Thread, but, I won't swear to it over the Summer.

I have to agree it's probable this incident was somewhat related otherwise if the system worked we'd see the smoke and the hit would've occurred as a failure of the smoke to obscure and disrupt the IR/Laser beam or LOS of the shooter.

This was one of a very few at the time to meet the total precept of armor from not so much the beginning but more from WWII onward of MOBILITY, FIRE POWER and ARMOR PROTECTION which allowed the 2A4 to...

"The combined system allows the Leopard 2A4 to engage moving targets at ranges of up to 5,000 meters whilst itself being on the move over rough terrain with latest modern ammunitions."

I don't think the tank is the real culprit here, as much as potentially a lack of training and attention to detail.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/germa...res_video.html
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/leo2.htm

Turkey had the solution as early as 2010, the 2A4 Next Generation or as officially designated the LEOPARD-2T. About sixteen units were built. This tank also served as a test bed for the ALTAY.
http://www.aselsan.com.tr/en-us/capa...eneration.aspx
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/leopard_2ng.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftoVdhSL8cY

It should be noted that the Turkish LEOPARD 1 (Still in service.) designated the LEOPARD-1T by Turkey, was the original test bed for the ALTAY FCS. It still carries it with the updates (In another words it's still the active test bed.) just for FYI purposes.
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/def...nks-2011-05-06
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/co.../Leopard-I.php
http://tanknutdave.com/the-german-leopard-1-series/
https://news.am/eng/news/8563.html

The next was written by a Col. in the U.S. ARMY for the Army's War College. It very nicely ties up everything pretty much discussed here and elsewhere. And if you don't know me the answer is yes I read the whole thing, otherwise I wouldn't bother to post it.
http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Ba...imize_Risk.pdf

Finally I did go back to several sites to try to pin down which version/batch of the 2A4 Turkey received but it turned out that that search was irrelevant as all previous and active versions of the 2A4 still in service were all upgraded to the "eighth batch" models. And it goes without saying of course that Germany kept updating them until withdrawn from active service.


And about about that artillery thing, well never mind after all we did a "bang up" job on that a couple of times already. ;)

Going "Rogue" later today. Hope you all have a great week!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt: