Jump to content
munckmb

Turkish m60's

Recommended Posts

Interesting to see the Turkish army is using the 'old' M60 instead of the newer Leo2's. Those second gen TIS sights are probably very liked by the tankers. Anyone more info?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some theories why they do not use Leo2A4's there.

 

1) They want to keep their currently most advanced tanks in reserve, at least till Altay production will start.

 

2) There might be problems with spares for Leo2's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ones we are seeing on the news here don't look like that one. They appear to be standard M-60s. Probably risking their oldest stuff in a support role.

 

maxresdefault.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a strange choice...

 

Even if it doesn't get other upgrades, an M60 really needs ERA to go into a modern combat zone.  If only to keep the crew alive.  But only if you care about keeping the crew alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The IDF put blazer ERA on their M60 what, 30 years ago? The Turkish army must know the advanced ATGM threat in the region. So indeed a remarkable choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, munckmb said:

The IDF put blazer ERA on their M60 what, 30 years ago? The Turkish army must know the advanced ATGM threat in the region. So indeed a remarkable choice.

40 years.

It seems the Turks also still use M48s. Perhaps they prefer to keep the better tanks closer to Istanbul.

It would be interesting to see SB scenarios on an Eastern Thrace map, including Leopards and M60s (and hopefully M48s in the future) with Turkish and Greek skins, or perhaps some T-55/62/72 with Bulgarian skins (Bulgaria was the sole user of T-62s in Europe other than the Soviets themselves).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ChrisWerb said:

Alleged Kornet hit on uparmoured M60/Sabra. I have seen unuparmoured vehicles in news footage too.

 

The M60 has certainly made itself an attractive target, skylined like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2016 at 6:54 PM, Iarmor said:

40 years.

It seems the Turks also still use M48s. Perhaps they prefer to keep the better tanks closer to Istanbul.

It would be interesting to see SB scenarios on an Eastern Thrace map, including Leopards and M60s (and hopefully M48s in the future) with Turkish and Greek skins, or perhaps some T-55/62/72 with Bulgarian skins (Bulgaria was the sole user of T-62s in Europe other than the Soviets themselves).

 

Perhaps surprisingly, they also use M42s, particularly in hilltop positions along the border. It seems an excellent system for what they use it for, though more extensive enemy use of systems like MILAN and Kornet may change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/25/2016 at 3:28 AM, munckmb said:

Interesting to see the Turkish army is using the 'old' M60 instead of the newer Leo2's. Those second gen TIS sights are probably very liked by the tankers. Anyone more info?

 

AFAIK the Leopards are stationed closer to Greece (1st Army). The M-60s are from second line units (2nd Army) that have been involved in their Kurdish conflict. Evidently these troops have not benefited from fighting poorly armed Kurdish militants. That said there was a very credible report of Turkish Leopard 2s being redeployed to the Syrian border a couple weeks ago after the first Turkish ATGM casualties. As far as I'm aware they have yet to make an appearance. That said judging by the performance of these troops I wouldn't expect much from the 1st Army forces.

Edited by TankHunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a few observations...

 

1. They don't seem to have a well programmed defensive reaction... 

It's one thing to be caught by surprise.  Yes it would have been best for them to be hull down, or even turret down, and scanning, but I have to assume that not even the best tank crew can be constantly scanning, always hull down, always front to enemy.  Sometimes you HAVE to stop scanning to do other stuff. 

 

But when your wingman's tank gets blown to pieces for you to just sit there and not do anything other than traverse your turret and go "Oh hey look, Daskal just got roasted." is just stupid.  You have been taken by surprise.  An unknown enemy is attacking you.  You need to start acting instead of reacting.  Pop smoke, try to get into cover.  If you don't know what direction it's coming from pop smoke anyway and try to minimize your exposure all around.  Do something!

 

2. The M60 is still a good tank, but my god, it needs some survivability upgrades to deal with modern ATGM threats.  After the fire ball, was that yellowish colored smoke from ammo cooking off or other stuff?  Since that thing can't be prevented from burning, apparently, it better get armored up to prevent penetrations, and it should probably get a spall liner since it's going to get penetrated anyway.

 

I'm big on crew survivability.  You can build another tank.  The tank crew that gets a vehicle shot out from under them an lives has a chance to learn from that mistake and come back smarter and better at killing what got them last time.

 

3. The current General Dynamics upgrade program for the M60 is, IMHO,  severely lacking...  I would rather have an M60-2000 with only ammo stored in the turret than to have any quantity of 120mm laying around without blow-off panels for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That second Sabra got hit in the rear, wow! Like Maj. Hans said, no smoke, no SA. And it looks like the Sabra upgrade is not very effective against modern ATGM's? The first one got hit on the front, with the upgraded armor it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have gone with the M60-2000 / 120S...

 

At least then you'd have modern turret armor and the possibility of surviving a penetration.

1401786550-tumblr-mgwkkmroxc1rlrdk6o1-1280.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too expensive and IMHO a waste of a turret considering how weak protection have a hull of such vehicle.

 

It's better in general to purchase a completely new vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that governments who fund these things don't see it that way...

 

You and I look at the 120S and see an imperfect solution.  The hull armor is weak and will always be weak, and ammunition stowage would be limited to the 34 (36 with improved racks) in the turret bustle in a "safe" configuration without hull storage.  Additional ammo in the usual racks left and right of the driver would make the vehicle vulnerable to a catastrophic kill.  The upgrade is relatively expensive, and the vehicle will still be relatively slow.

 

The number crunchers do the math and say that you're getting 50% of the benefits of buying a new tank for 75% of the cost of buying a new tank.

You and I look at that and say "It's not worth it, just buy the Abrams or the Leopard 2 instead."  In our mind we wasted 75% of the cost of a new tank on every one we bought.

 

The politicians look at this upgrade and see that you're getting "An upgrade combining the armor, technology, and firepower of a new tank in an upgrade package that reduces the cost of your tank replacement program by 25%!"...  In their mind, they didn't waste that 75%, they saved 25%...

 

 

All I'm really saying is that, if they wanted to get a 120mm main gun, they should have done this upgrade.  I think if Sabra had kept the old 105mm main gun, or even installed new 105mm main gun tubes, it would have been a superior upgrade.  At least then the ammunition would be somewhat protected by it's casings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well as one can see they are operation without the vital inf support in a area where the grunts are required. There is a reason we train with grunts, to save our ass!

 

Tanks are most efficient in open ground where the sights and wpn systems give them a huge advantage. Fail to them in the two above points and one will see more vids like those. 

Edited by 12Alfa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2016 at 3:25 AM, TankHunter said:

More M-60s, this time Sabras. One frankly wonders about their competence.

 

 

counting the seconds between impact and explosion, that one was about 4km away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, 12Alfa said:

Well as one can see they are operation without the vital inf support in a area where the grunts are required. There is a reason we train with grunts, to save our ass!

 

Tanks are most efficient in open ground where the sights and wpn systems give them a huge advantage. Fail to us them in the two above points and one will see more vids like those. 

Also leaving them in one place to long, is giving ATGM teams the time they need to approach or even infil....it will not end well :-(

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...