@@purebloodstevetungate5418 primarily from a logistics and supply perspective overall - not everything was over-engineered, though you could certainly make the case for that with their armor. Air power, it was certainly more of an advantage than a flaw until their manufacturing and logistics started to stunt their ability to replenish their air equipment - but that was the result of the Allied bombing campaigns not because "Germans too fancy"
@@BuBornham Its been covered fairly extensively that German engineering in experimental R&D was impressive but misguided its pretty much a consensus among historians where Germany failed was the more mundane engineering field of process and production control and logistics and thats not even touching on the Luftwaffe supply issues. By 1943 it was obvious that they couldn't supply neither the eastern front or the Africa Corp but I guess thats what happens when you have a mad man running things and not generals. One of the greatest myths about the Allied Air Campaign is that it disrupted production there's no evidence that it played any role until mid/ late 1944 after DDay invasion.
@@purebloodstevetungate5418 Bigger block of text doesn't make you any more correct, what I stated has also been covered fairly extensively. No need to drop a TL;DR paragraph with your assertive and specific answer that over generalizes. I was merely responding to how silly just saying "over-engineering was their greatest flaw" when that in and of itself wasn't actually the major flaw in the overall war campaign on a macro scale.
@@purebloodstevetungate5418 The German artillery had way to many highly machined parts; American artillery had fewer highly machined parts to accomplish the same thing..
German engineering really is incredible I used to build Carding machines and the quality of the German ones was unrivaled. Its not just an empty stereotype.
i am not german but the Leopard 2 is my favorite tank. i am glad than IF ww3 starts then we wont fight against germany anymore. this time europe is united🇩🇪🇪🇺🇷🇴
Exciting times within tank tech. The new Panther aswell as AbramsX is moving the goalpost forward. That said, nobody is gonna deny the massive role the Leo 2 had in tank warfare
@@johnmorehead5008 no it's different doctrine. Germany is tiny so a very expensive and very powerful tank is better because you dont ever need to move them outside your cou try. American tanks are light and fast because America can deploy anyone and anywhere on the planet.
I once asked my German friend: Why does the leopard 2 raise its barrel after firing? And he (with his giant sense of humer) said: to heil- Me: Ok thats enough
i think it raises its barrel is to help the loader load the next shell more comfortably, im just guessing lol (because the cannon breech moves with the cannon i think)
@@thirxzy Greetings from Germany. You are right - the Leopard 2 lowers its guns after firing, so that the loader can load the shot more easily. It is actually not optimal if the gun cannot remain pointed at the target, but the load gunner can reload faster this way, as he does not have to place the shot as high. The M1 Abrams also has this function, but it is normally deactivated. The gunner could activate this function, but he has more space there than in the Leopard 2.
@@yolo6741 As far as i remember from reading is that even tho the gun is not pointed at the target while reloading, the sights of the gunner will stay on target which doesn't sound that bad tbh
And yes I'm being sarcastic 🤌, if it wasn't obvious. I just think it sounds pretentious to pronounce it "porsha", I know it's correct, but it just sounds so....idk..?bougie¿
Would like to see an honest comparison of Abrams, Challenger II, and Leopard II. The share many common features but have trade offs based on national defense goals and tactical strategies that equate to pros and cons in each type and I would enjoy exploring these.
Biggest difference is numbers and deployment capability. Challenger is very few in number Leopard has more than 7x in the world, Abrams has 2x Leopard. Challenger and Abrams are meant to be be deployed externally to their countries as invading the US or Britain is unlikely. Leopard was meant to fight on home soil though development has made overseas deployment more effective, the armies that deploy the Leopard don't have the resources for fighting away from home in numbers that the US overwhelms in and UK can do effectively.
This is highly dependant on which variant ur talking about. Id say the leopard 2 and Abrams are far more close to eachother than the Chally 2 is. The Leopard 2A7V and M1A2SEPv3 both have Smoothbore 120mm guns, with the Leo using the longer L55, but the Abrams in turn uses more effective DU penetrators while the Leo2 uses Tungstenalloy. So roughly equal in firepower id say. Armor wise the Leo2 is maybe a bit more modular and easy to configure. Both tanks have classified but most likely fairly comparable armor, with plans to incorporate Trophy on both. Mobility wise both use a 1500HP engine, diesel for Leo2, Turbine for Abrams. The Chally 2 currently lags behind in pretty much all factors. It uses a rifled 120mm gun with two piece ammo, which means the ammo isnt stored behind a blast door with blowout panels, and the rifled gun is lower in performance, higher barrel wear and limited in penetrator length. The chally2 is just as heavy as the latest abrams and leo2 but has a much more limited powerpack, thus lower power to weight. Also the hull armor on the chally2 is fairly weak. Even the chally3, which ill incorporate the German L55 gun and a much better FCS wont surpass the Leo2 or Later M1A2s imo.
@@Yung_pindakaas DU isn't significantly more effective than wolfram main difference is that L55 allows for better velocity with same amount of explosive, and us is using more of explosives for same effect.
Ref: Leopard II 120mm main gun: the U.S. M-1 main gun was the same as the Leopard I and had a rifled 105mm. M-1s didn't start mounting the 120mm until the M-1A1 model.
We have the Leopard 2 here in Sweden. lovely tank. a bit too expensive in many ways.. but reliable and meets every modern demands in action from what i hear
Well it’s a bit more expensive than a Dacia but that Dacia ain’t got no 48 Liters of Displacement 👀😂 Despite that the leopard is still on the lower end of costs compared to its colleagues 🤝
tanks are largely outdated, in the new form of modern warfare, they really don't have a place on the battlefield unless you want a meat shield. There's specifically made "anti tank ATGM carriers" that are able to destroy these tanks miles away before they are able to get into action. Destroyed ukranian and russian tanks proved this. Both sides suffered so much with this "tank doctrine" . Now they mostly rely on drones and missiles which is ineffective tbh.
@@neymarjr_. Well this is a widely spread statement in the last months but yet the thing is: they are not! I want to keep it short so just think of the Generals who don’t disobey Tanks. But like Britain it’s not necessarily to have a large tank force but it’s one way to go. A point often overlooked is there are tanks from the 80s fighting in a 2022 environment.
@@neymarjr_. The Leopard 2A7A1 is on the production lines now has APS Hard Kill including top protection. (APS Active Protection System). If you fire an NLAW, Javelin at the Leopard 2A7A1 the tanks ultraviolet and/or radar sensors to fire a blast of pellets or flachets to will destroy the missile. Neither missile will work against the Leo 2A7A1. The same applies to the Abrams M1A2 SEP 3. Tanks are not obsolete, they just need APS hard kill.
I’ve watched dozens of your videos on all of you channels. Man, you have one helluva vocabulary! I’m so impressed! Great video. I especially liked the music. Chasssisss……. Lol
Germany is building these tanks. Germany is going through an energy crisis. Making armor is energy intensive. What are they doing to ensure demands are met?
This beast can run on milk if it wants.. just a joke, but it's not picky to what it is capable of. I'm especially impressed with it's diving capabilities.
Milk is 4.8% fat maybe 5.5% for Jersey. If you separate it out and put it through transesterfication with a little ethanol or methanol you will have biodiesel. It will burn clean and with less soot than normal diesel.
@@Nik-jq4tx it's under a little more pressure from the inside to thwart of gas attacks, but that also means you can let a fart go, and they can smell it outside.
Its funny you talk about the Leopard 2A7+ but show a Leopard 2A6 which you don't talk about. The main thing with the 2A6 and 2A7 versions is the firepower with the replacement of the 120mm L44 to a longer barreled 120mm L55 gun. This gave the tanks firepower 30% more muzzle velocity increasing its APFSDS rounds with more penetration. Overall good vid though.
tanks are largely outdated, in the new form of modern warfare, they really don't have a place on the battlefield unless you want a meat shield. There's specifically made "anti tank ATGM carriers" that are able to destroy these tanks miles away before they are able to get into action. Destroyed ukranian and russian tanks proved this. Both sides suffered so much with this "tank doctrine" . Now they mostly rely on drones and missiles which is ineffective tbh.
@@neymarjr_. That has been said repeatedly since the Tank was invented. Despite that, newer and better tanks are being developed by the major players as we speak. They won't be going anywhere any time soon.
Not to mention him saying that the 1st iteration of the Leopard 2 was the 2A4, no it was not, the Leopard 2 was, with minimal improvents to the original, the 1st upgrade was the 2A1, then 2A2, 2A3.2A4 etc.
@@castlekingside76 Yes, I well know it, but which is your point ? This video says the Leo II A7 + is the last Leopard model, something wrong, since as I mentioned is the Leo A7+ A1. By the way the new Rheinmetall Panther has a 130 mm main gun, not a 140....
After the collapse of the USSR European nations sold off most of their Leopard 2’s at bargain prices. To countries all over the world. Something they’re all probably regretting now.
I notice that when describing the Leopard 1 you omitted the fact that the 105mm gun was a copy of the British L7, also the video seemed to be padded out with shots of Boxers which have nothing to do with the narrative.
5:32 - increasing the armor thickness to 1500mm would be FIVE FEET THICK. This doesn't sound likely. TEN FEET of it's width would be solid steel (left and right), and the thing looks barely wider than 15 feet.
2a4 and 2a1 already had next gen armor... Thats left out. The got new Turret Armor. While these two had them internal otherwise build. After 2a4 the 2a5 and others had only outside mounted armor. The Leos Turret is pretty hard to penetrate
Why is the Leopard 2 called super tank but not the M1A2, even though it is same size to now bigger, because of all the added things in the M1A2 SEP V3?
@@aggravated_assault Uh, no. If the the platform was so successful why was not seen on front lines fighting in Iraq? They were in Iraq but chose to only do training with Iraqi forces. Even the British Challenger 2 got to see combat and got tested against multiple RPG's. The tank is good but not better the M1A2 Sep V3. The tank never upgraded to get reactive armor plates or active protection systems like Trophy. If the tank was so good, then why replace it with a totally new platform, the Panther with 152 mm gun?
@@Mal101M Hold up that doesn't even sound right. Leopard 2's were given to what Syrian faction? I know Americans gave TOW missiles to the rebels. Did Assad have Leopard 2's in his army?
@@aggravated_assault The Leopards horrendous combat record says otherwise. One issue that the Leo 2 faces is it’s terrible survivabity, while it uses blowout panels like the Abrams for its turret ammo stowages, it keeps the hull ammo rack, witch is a massive weak spot, any penetration on the frontal plate will likely result in the death of the driver + possibly gunner/commander or an instant ammo detonation/ fire. On paper the Leo 2 should be the proverbial ‘super tank’ but in practice it is beaten out by the Abrams due to its 20+ years of constant combat that has allowed the U.S. military to perfect its survabiliy on a modern battlefield.
The M256 was slightly modified as the original Rheinmetall design was considered too complex and expensive. And the Abrams is not the only one which use a licensed version, Type 90 (Japan) and K1A1 (South Korea) use the L/44 too.
Very well put together video as always but quite concerned with the amount of incorrect facts you have in this one. This can be misleading to a lot of viewers who don’t know any better
We have leopard 2 tanks here in canada. I had the honor the sit in one and look around I don't know the exact model number but it was awesome. It was at the Toronto expedition show few years ago.
the visuals in this video are cut in a misleading way, they almost never fit to what is being talked about. You show leo 1 while talking about leo 2 etc
Chek out the new Panther .
The return of the Panthers
Now with upgraded shits strapped to it XD
And the USA raises you an Abrams X
Panther is an unarmored tech concept.
waiting for the new Tiger. will buy 10/10
Now we need a new sherman
German engineering never disappoints 💯💯
German Over-Engineering was their greatest flaw in WW2 from a military perspective.
@@purebloodstevetungate5418 primarily from a logistics and supply perspective overall - not everything was over-engineered, though you could certainly make the case for that with their armor. Air power, it was certainly more of an advantage than a flaw until their manufacturing and logistics started to stunt their ability to replenish their air equipment - but that was the result of the Allied bombing campaigns not because "Germans too fancy"
@@BuBornham Its been covered fairly extensively that German engineering in experimental R&D was impressive but misguided its pretty much a consensus among historians where Germany failed was the more mundane engineering field of process and production control and logistics and thats not even touching on the Luftwaffe supply issues. By 1943 it was obvious that they couldn't supply neither the eastern front or the Africa Corp but I guess thats what happens when you have a mad man running things and not generals. One of the greatest myths about the Allied Air Campaign is that it disrupted production there's no evidence that it played any role until mid/ late 1944 after DDay invasion.
@@purebloodstevetungate5418 Bigger block of text doesn't make you any more correct, what I stated has also been covered fairly extensively. No need to drop a TL;DR paragraph with your assertive and specific answer that over generalizes. I was merely responding to how silly just saying "over-engineering was their greatest flaw" when that in and of itself wasn't actually the major flaw in the overall war campaign on a macro scale.
@@purebloodstevetungate5418 The German artillery had way to many highly machined parts; American artillery had fewer highly machined parts to accomplish the same thing..
German engineering really is incredible I used to build Carding machines and the quality of the German ones was unrivaled. Its not just an empty stereotype.
What's a carding machine? No sarc
was ...
The Leopards 2 can easily be destroyed from the side with an old soviet RPG grenade launcher operated even by a woman like it was in Syria.
@@Nik-jq4tx 50cents for that comment comrade, we all gota make a living
@@bipedal-ape-man You mean 5000 rubles?
i am not german but the Leopard 2 is my favorite tank. i am glad than IF ww3 starts then we wont fight against germany anymore.
this time europe is united🇩🇪🇪🇺🇷🇴
I have always loved your delivery. Fast or slower...all good and equally gripping. Great work!!
Exciting times within tank tech. The new Panther aswell as AbramsX is moving the goalpost forward. That said, nobody is gonna deny the massive role the Leo 2 had in tank warfare
AbramsX is just a tech demo. The real Abrams replacement is unknown.
I want to add on that whatever replaces the Abrams will probably be lighter and less armored than the leopard 2. Nothing can beat the leopards armor
Other then tankers in the u.s are battle trained that's what's gives the upper strength
@@johnmorehead5008 no it's different doctrine. Germany is tiny so a very expensive and very powerful tank is better because you dont ever need to move them outside your cou try. American tanks are light and fast because America can deploy anyone and anywhere on the planet.
@@antilarge7860 the Abrams and Leopard 2 weigh roughly the same amount.
It's really nice to see you've slowed your pace down! :D keep the amazing content coming :)
I think they completed the delivery of the 44 leopards 2A7 to the Danish Army.
It should be quite a leap compared to our old A5.
I met the Leopard 1 and I was fortunate to be in this beast
I once asked my German friend: Why does the leopard 2 raise its barrel after firing?
And he (with his giant sense of humer) said: to heil-
Me: Ok thats enough
wow... this went from 0 to Deutschlad real quick
i think it raises its barrel is to help the loader load the next shell more comfortably, im just guessing lol (because the cannon breech moves with the cannon i think)
@@thirxzy Greetings from Germany.
You are right - the Leopard 2 lowers its guns after firing, so that the loader can load the shot more easily.
It is actually not optimal if the gun cannot remain pointed at the target, but the load gunner can reload faster this way, as he does not have to place the shot as high.
The M1 Abrams also has this function, but it is normally deactivated. The gunner could activate this function, but he has more space there than in the Leopard 2.
@@yolo6741 does russian tanks with an autoloader still raise their barrel? just curious because i forgot if they did
@@yolo6741 As far as i remember from reading is that even tho the gun is not pointed at the target while reloading, the sights of the gunner will stay on target which doesn't sound that bad tbh
Brilliant: Excellent explanation: Ex Armoured UK here. Toss up Abrams VS. Leopard 2 -A7+ ... I think Germany.
The Leopard 2A4 is the most beautiful tank ever made.
The Leopards 2 can easily be destroyed from the side with an old soviet RPG grenade launcher operated even by a woman like it was in Syria.
@@Nik-jq4tx Yes I understand. I just think it's the most beautiful tank ever. I hope they are giving it the upgrades to keep it in the game.
I like the beer stein balance at the end of the turret while attacking
They are still German, if they can’t make a tank carry a stein like a barmaid could you even call them Germans lmao
Porsche is pronounced por-sha, the e at the end isn't silent.
If you're pronouncing it in German, in American the "e" IS silent LMAO 🤣
And yes I'm being sarcastic 🤌, if it wasn't obvious. I just think it sounds pretentious to pronounce it "porsha", I know it's correct, but it just sounds so....idk..?bougie¿
@@renaissanceredneck73 - Porsche is a person’s name. He can pronounce it any way he wants. Porsche is a two syllable word/name with a hard “e”.
Kind of like pronouncing the German manufactured Leopard (english pronounce as "Leperd"), properly pronounced "Leo-pard" in German.
@@navret1707 ok, wow, sarcasm even when pointed out is lost on some people
Would like to see an honest comparison of Abrams, Challenger II, and Leopard II. The share many common features but have trade offs based on national defense goals and tactical strategies that equate to pros and cons in each type and I would enjoy exploring these.
Biggest difference is numbers and deployment capability. Challenger is very few in number Leopard has more than 7x in the world, Abrams has 2x Leopard. Challenger and Abrams are meant to be be deployed externally to their countries as invading the US or Britain is unlikely. Leopard was meant to fight on home soil though development has made overseas deployment more effective, the armies that deploy the Leopard don't have the resources for fighting away from home in numbers that the US overwhelms in and UK can do effectively.
This is highly dependant on which variant ur talking about. Id say the leopard 2 and Abrams are far more close to eachother than the Chally 2 is.
The Leopard 2A7V and M1A2SEPv3 both have Smoothbore 120mm guns, with the Leo using the longer L55, but the Abrams in turn uses more effective DU penetrators while the Leo2 uses Tungstenalloy. So roughly equal in firepower id say.
Armor wise the Leo2 is maybe a bit more modular and easy to configure. Both tanks have classified but most likely fairly comparable armor, with plans to incorporate Trophy on both.
Mobility wise both use a 1500HP engine, diesel for Leo2, Turbine for Abrams.
The Chally 2 currently lags behind in pretty much all factors. It uses a rifled 120mm gun with two piece ammo, which means the ammo isnt stored behind a blast door with blowout panels, and the rifled gun is lower in performance, higher barrel wear and limited in penetrator length. The chally2 is just as heavy as the latest abrams and leo2 but has a much more limited powerpack, thus lower power to weight. Also the hull armor on the chally2 is fairly weak.
Even the chally3, which ill incorporate the German L55 gun and a much better FCS wont surpass the Leo2 or Later M1A2s imo.
challanger 2 would definitevly be the word of the 3
@@Yung_pindakaas DU isn't significantly more effective than wolfram main difference is that L55 allows for better velocity with same amount of explosive, and us is using more of explosives for same effect.
Abrams would destroy them all
Ref: Leopard II 120mm main gun: the U.S. M-1 main gun was the same as the Leopard I and had a rifled 105mm. M-1s didn't start mounting the 120mm until the M-1A1 model.
Who needs a tank like this when all an army needs is to play this video’s background music over lowd speakers.
We have the Leopard 2 here in Sweden. lovely tank. a bit too expensive in many ways.. but reliable and meets every modern demands in action from what i hear
Well it’s a bit more expensive than a Dacia but that Dacia ain’t got no 48 Liters of Displacement 👀😂
Despite that the leopard is still on the lower end of costs compared to its colleagues 🤝
tanks are largely outdated, in the new form of modern warfare, they really don't have a place on the battlefield unless you want a meat shield. There's specifically made "anti tank ATGM carriers" that are able to destroy these tanks miles away before they are able to get into action.
Destroyed ukranian and russian tanks proved this. Both sides suffered so much with this "tank doctrine" . Now they mostly rely on drones and missiles which is ineffective tbh.
@@neymarjr_. Well this is a widely spread statement in the last months but yet the thing is: they are not! I want to keep it short so just think of the Generals who don’t disobey Tanks. But like Britain it’s not necessarily to have a large tank force but it’s one way to go. A point often overlooked is there are tanks from the 80s fighting in a 2022 environment.
@@neymarjr_. The Leopard 2A7A1 is on the production lines now has APS Hard Kill including top protection. (APS Active Protection System). If you fire an NLAW, Javelin at the Leopard 2A7A1 the tanks ultraviolet and/or radar sensors to fire a blast of pellets or flachets to will destroy the missile. Neither missile will work against the Leo 2A7A1. The same applies to the Abrams M1A2 SEP 3. Tanks are not obsolete, they just need APS hard kill.
The Leopards 2 can easily be destroyed from the side with an old soviet RPG grenade launcher operated even by a woman like it was in Syria.
Absolute massive tank 👍👍👍
Even to this day, The Krauts make Superior Armor amongst other things!!!!!
Leopards 2A7 are a massive upgrade, say the soldiers who use them.
But the most current in service version is the A7V and the most modern version that is currently offered is the A7A1.
I’ve watched dozens of your videos on all of you channels.
Man, you have one helluva vocabulary! I’m so impressed!
Great video. I especially liked the music.
Chasssisss……. Lol
Love the channel!!! Keep it coming
Your choice of music is ace.
My favorite tank, always loved the leopards
Not so massive with just over a 2 meter profile, that is frikin amazing.
3.03m. For all versions since A5
THE SPIRT OF KRUPP LIVES ON!
The final S in the word chassis is always silent.
Even in American.
My great uncle did winter testing on them in Canada back in the 60s.
On Leo 1....Leo 2 started in 1978
Oh he's a beeeg boi 😮
Sweet destroyer
POV you leave three unsupervised German engineers in a room for 30 minutes
Not great in regard to the use of footage during certain segments. (showing WW2 tanks and US tanks).
The A4 was not the first production model!
Always enjoy the dulcet tomes of the commentary.
Could you do the Abrams X?
The MBT-70 program led to the M1 & the Leopard 2 tanks.
Would look good parked on the drive every house should have one
So much footage of tanks that AREN'T the Leopard 2, while speaking about, and describing the Leopard 2. Dark Tech does that a LOT.
Germany is building these tanks. Germany is going through an energy crisis. Making armor is energy intensive. What are they doing to ensure demands are met?
This beast can run on milk if it wants.. just a joke, but it's not picky to what it is capable of.
I'm especially impressed with it's diving capabilities.
If it burns it is a fuel
Milk is 4.8% fat maybe 5.5% for Jersey. If you separate it out and put it through transesterfication with a little ethanol or methanol you will have biodiesel. It will burn clean and with less soot than normal diesel.
The Leopards 2 can easily be destroyed from the side with an old soviet RPG grenade launcher operated even by a woman like it was in Syria.
@@Nik-jq4tx it's under a little more pressure from the inside to thwart of gas attacks, but that also means you can let a fart go, and they can smell it outside.
It's amazing
Official vehicle of The Lord Strathcona's horse regiment 🇨🇦
What's Canada?
Greece has many of them they have one of the bigest Tank army in EU
The latest variant is the Leopard 2 A7V, not the 2 A7+.
Nope. The 2A7V is the first upgrade of the 2A7. The 2A7+ is the second one.
Its funny you talk about the Leopard 2A7+ but show a Leopard 2A6 which you don't talk about. The main thing with the 2A6 and 2A7 versions is the firepower with the replacement of the 120mm L44 to a longer barreled 120mm L55 gun. This gave the tanks firepower 30% more muzzle velocity increasing its APFSDS rounds with more penetration. Overall good vid though.
They switched the gun, when they upgraded from a5 to a6
The 2A6 already uses the L55....
SPO version went back to the shorter L44 due to preceived urban combat restrictions with operating a longer barrel on narrow streets
great tiger upgrade after all
In Chile, we have the Leopard 2A4-CHL which has improved electronics and other stuff for high altitude operations
The MBT 70 look excellent on paper, and in illustrations, I still wonder how well it would have fared?
tanks are largely outdated, in the new form of modern warfare, they really don't have a place on the battlefield unless you want a meat shield. There's specifically made "anti tank ATGM carriers" that are able to destroy these tanks miles away before they are able to get into action.
Destroyed ukranian and russian tanks proved this. Both sides suffered so much with this "tank doctrine" . Now they mostly rely on drones and missiles which is ineffective tbh.
@@neymarjr_. That has been said repeatedly since the Tank was invented. Despite that, newer and better tanks are being developed by the major players as we speak. They won't be going anywhere any time soon.
It failed due to overbudget and German bureaucracy.
@@neymarjr_. You have no clue pal better to keep your mouth shut. 🤣🤣
@@viceralman8450 tank fanboy haha
Its not just the tanks, But the well trained men using the armour. Otherwise its just a lump of steel.
Great narration but shame about the random inclusion of wheeled and tracked old and modern vehicles that bear no relation to the script
I know, I saw challenger, abrams, T-34, M113, M60a2, merkava, Bradley, T-72, coyote LAV
Not to mention him saying that the 1st iteration of the Leopard 2 was the 2A4, no it was not, the Leopard 2 was, with minimal improvents to the original, the 1st upgrade was the 2A1, then 2A2, 2A3.2A4 etc.
Finally a channel that uses the perfect metric system instead of the orkish dumb imperial one
Best seller market tank
I was having the oil changed the other day on my 2005 Porsche Cayenne S
and the mechanic told me that it was built like a Tank.🙂
It better be for that price.
Lol some of these pics don`t fit at all. Who did the editing on this?
wut about the new KF51 Panther? no info on it?
Still a sexy tank.
Saying numbers with a decimal point like "9.64 meters" makes it hard to use. Much better to round "almost 10 meters"
Can we get a video about the WW2 German "stealth" submarine? U-480
Battery powered diesel generator autonomous tanks are the future.
Instead of the crew being protected, the power train will be.
Actually the latest operational Leopard version is the A7 + A1, which incorporates a Trophy APS system, among other new things.
The Germsns have a new tank. The Panther K51. It has a 140 mm gun.
@@castlekingside76 😊
@@castlekingside76 its 130mm. 50% more penetration than the 120mm (DM73 is about ~850mm so the 130mm should have about ~1200mm)
@@castlekingside76 Yes, I well know it, but which is your point ? This video says the Leo II A7 + is the last Leopard model, something wrong, since as I mentioned is the Leo A7+ A1. By the way the new Rheinmetall Panther has a 130 mm main gun, not a 140....
@@castlekingside76 Its only a prototype which isnt in service. The video is abt the german service tank.
Nope the new Panzer was just announced and will replace it. That's right Panzer is BACK !!!!
The 120MM smooth bore Cannon? Comes from Germany. Damn skippy!
Nobody can beat German engineering. You want the best, you go to Germany
800mm is pretty thick armor.
Not thickness but RHA effectiveness of the composite.
Need to remember, we learned our knowledge from the Germans WW2. THEY BADASSES
After the collapse of the USSR European nations sold off most of their Leopard 2’s at bargain prices. To countries all over the world. Something they’re all probably regretting now.
Just wait till you see the new superheavy, twin barreled Sabertooth
Rheinmetalls new Panther is top notch. but i will wait for the new Tiger Panzerkampfwagen. will buy 10/10.
Maybe a little early to start singing the praises of a tank that so far only exists as prototype. But yes, the Panther commercial clip looked awesome.
I notice that when describing the Leopard 1 you omitted the fact that the 105mm gun was a copy of the British L7, also the video seemed to be padded out with shots of Boxers which have nothing to do with the narrative.
Exactly, there were a lot of videos from ww2 and also from the VW Beetle boxer, all edited together incoherently. Sorry for my bad English...
Fun fact the background music is made by hippies 😂
Armor's survivability is dependent on full spectrum dominance of the battlefield environment or it will be scrap metal.
There's a reason all the good tanks use a Rheinmetall gun.
what is that background musig you have used ?
fun fact Indias Arjun MBT is based on Leopard 2
But way worse
Not much about the Arjun is based
@@aggravated_assault well Leopard 2 is being modified for Lahat missile while Arjun already fires Lahat and other Anti tank missiles
@@soumyajitsingha9614 so what
5:32 - increasing the armor thickness to 1500mm would be FIVE FEET THICK. This doesn't sound likely. TEN FEET of it's width would be solid steel (left and right), and the thing looks barely wider than 15 feet.
1500 mm is 5,90 inches. 12 Inch in a feet so not even half a feet.
@@Mart687 I'm being sarcastic, there. wink wink
Composite is not steel.
Music is amasing! Are there a track list?)
2a4 and 2a1 already had next gen armor... Thats left out. The got new Turret Armor. While these two had them internal otherwise build. After 2a4 the 2a5 and others had only outside mounted armor. The Leos Turret is pretty hard to penetrate
It’s weird to hear the M240 called the FN MAG😂
Yeah the 2a7
6:03
Why is the Leopard 2 called super tank but not the M1A2, even though it is same size to now bigger, because of all the added things in the M1A2 SEP V3?
Because 2A7V is simply better
@@aggravated_assault Uh, no. If the the platform was so successful why was not seen on front lines fighting in Iraq? They were in Iraq but chose to only do training with Iraqi forces. Even the British Challenger 2 got to see combat and got tested against multiple RPG's. The tank is good but not better the M1A2 Sep V3. The tank never upgraded to get reactive armor plates or active protection systems like Trophy. If the tank was so good, then why replace it with a totally new platform, the Panther with 152 mm gun?
@@alexincobra7379 its not being replaced and thier is a kit for era
It wasnt used in iraq as there was no country present that used the leopard
@@Mal101M Hold up that doesn't even sound right. Leopard 2's were given to what Syrian faction? I know Americans gave TOW missiles to the rebels. Did Assad have Leopard 2's in his army?
@@aggravated_assault The Leopards horrendous combat record says otherwise.
One issue that the Leo 2 faces is it’s terrible survivabity, while it uses blowout panels like the Abrams for its turret ammo stowages, it keeps the hull ammo rack, witch is a massive weak spot, any penetration on the frontal plate will likely result in the death of the driver + possibly gunner/commander or an instant ammo detonation/ fire.
On paper the Leo 2 should be the proverbial ‘super tank’ but in practice it is beaten out by the Abrams due to its 20+ years of constant combat that has allowed the U.S. military to perfect its survabiliy on a modern battlefield.
Wait, Porsche makes tanks!???
8:50 That's false. The most up-to-date version is the _Leopard 2A7V._
The whole over engineering thingy? Yup! they were good. Russia made 54 thousand T-34. Germany made 1560 Panzer MK V.
ah yes, ww2 germany's reputation for agile tanks
The 120mm gun on the abrams is a german gun and related to the one in this tank.
The M256 was slightly modified as the original Rheinmetall design was considered too complex and expensive. And the Abrams is not the only one which use a licensed version, Type 90 (Japan) and K1A1 (South Korea) use the L/44 too.
Very well put together video as always but quite concerned with the amount of incorrect facts you have in this one. This can be misleading to a lot of viewers who don’t know any better
Ah those german kittens....
0:31 why it got tires?
Those are road wheels of the tracks.
Make a video on future European Tank Project as well as FCAS
We have leopard 2 tanks here in canada. I had the honor the sit in one and look around I don't know the exact model number but it was awesome. It was at the Toronto expedition show few years ago.
ours is one of the oldest variants Canada loves having old crap
@@tombillard5264 we have 2A4 and 2A6.
@@tombillard5264 but yet they never lost a war and always break records with their snipers they got to be doing something right.
Wait till you hear about the KF51
What was that leopard 2a7!?
You are included in the many reasons our democracy may fail.
Random clips. Why?
Has he done one on the m1x abrams?
the visuals in this video are cut in a misleading way, they almost never fit to what is being talked about. You show leo 1 while talking about leo 2 etc
Just try to stay calm when this beast comes tearing down towards you…
You didn’t mention track tension
You didn't do much of a research Leopard 2 has in hull magazine as well
CHECK OUT THE KF51 PANTHER PLEASE