Why sending Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine is NOT a good thing... YET
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 янв 2023
- With recent announcement from Poland about sending some of their Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, it seems more apparent than ever that people keep ignoring these other tanks that are a better option for Ukraine...
Patreon: / redeffect
So, more news came out. Germany approved export of Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, and Poland will, apparently, be sending 14 of their Leopard 2A4 tanks. And now it seems Germany will be sending some of their Leopard 2A6 tanks, which is a massive plus from their side imo, that tank is miles ahead of the Leopard 2A4 tanks discussed in this video.
What's your Nationality?
what if it´s ALL gonna be more modern Leo2s
Germany approved export of Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine? Source, please?
Wierd that all of a sudden Germany allows export. Is there any new that Abrams might be sent? Also if those 2A6 variant is sent than maybe can be sent DM 63 which has less of a chance to explode like you said in your how to destroy leopard 2. I do doubt it and I think DM33 would be sent instead we don't know the fine details yet.
Oh, those idiots.... next Ukraine will demand fighter jets, and than ground troops.... those war mongers don't understand....
I HAVE COME FROM THE FUTURE!
And Russia fucked up the Leopards.
same goes to ur russian tanks
@@sturmhauvlercope
and russian tanks are fucked up even more lol
yes, but still they fucked our miracle tanks.@@sturmhauvler
@@TheBoyar They fucked less than 30, 3000 Russian tanks got fucked
At least a batalion of PT-91's has already been sent to Ukraine. But the whole point of sending Leopards is that it will facilitate the Ukrainians to transition to the Western equipment, even if Leo 2A4 is already pretty obsolete. The number of post soviet tanks ( and spare parts for them ) available for Ukraine is limited and the transition to Western tanks is inevitable.
Leo 2A4 is a huge upgrade from the T series Soviet tanks.
I agree the UAFs transition to western designs, organization and, tactics is going to come eventually and has been going on for years. I will respectfully disagree on one part the Leo 2 A4 isn't compleatly obsolete compared to what it's going up against. Old T-72s and T-62 model 1967 and M1 and fairly easily knocked out and even the more modern tanks Russia is fielding don't mean much if the logistics to supply them properly and the crews are crummy. If the Ukrainian crews are trained well they should do well with these. The motivation part isn't even a question for me. They will need to maintain them well though but I think there are nations willing to help with that until Ukraine can do more of it themselves
@@lurtzy_ The only main difference is the commanders independent thermal and better reverse speed. It has worse armor and a weaker gun than the T-72b3. Its ammo might even be worse than the Ukrainian T-64BV tanks.
@@voidtempering8700 weaker gun? They literally only put a bigger gun into the newest T-90's.
T-72B3 has an upgraded gun of the D-81 series. So basically they still are limited by the length their projectiles allow in case of APFSDS.
The L/44 on the A4 has simply better APFSDS projectiles because they are way longer and can deliver more kinetic energy. Also, with the L/44A1 variant most powerful available rounds developed for the L/55 and L/55A1 can be used which otherwise would be too strong for the breach to handle.
This video reeks of Dunning-Kruger gamer nerds and pro-Russian trolls. Thanks for being informed and sane.
This aged like fine wine. Videos of destroyed Leopard 2A6’s has already popped up following the recent Ukrainian human wave.
yea, because the commander was retarded enough to not move by night and with at least 50 meter distance
4 months and the delusional video no longer seems delusional
Only 1 2A6 has been destroyed the others have been damaged and more than likely are repairable
@@GarryGaz24 repairable if retrievable. In the same clip a leopard engineering vehicle can be seen burning alongside its tank variant presumably went to try and drag out the Leopard 2A4 and also got hit by antitank mines or artillery.
@@GarryGaz24 good luck retrieving it without getting killed, also the nearest repairing garage is in Poland so ya.....
People mad about this video 5 months ago are seething now. Turns out it doesn’t matter if Ukrainians can be trained on the tank, support them logistically, or if they can defeat the legendary invincible Stalinium of Russia’s objectively bad equipment.
Their deployment methods are still dated Soviet tactics. They’ll lose them to ATGMs, artillery, and helicopters well outside support range of their AA or infantry.
1. Poland already sent around 30 of Pt-91
2. 4:10 Israel blocks any attempt to send weapons made or co-made by them.
Switzerland had agreed to send Ukraine tank parts and ammunition. So we can have a nice convincing talk with Israel I guess.
Poland has sent 230+ T-72M and T-72M1(R)s and 41 Twardy's...were delivered since April till september
@@tobiasbauer198 Israel has concrete reasons to be much more cautious than the Swiss, geo-politics-wise.
It'll likely happen, but it'll take time & further waning of Russia's power in the region, and/ or Russia exporting advanced weaponry to Iran - that would also help speed israel's change of heart ^^ 👍
Meanwhile the Swiss blockade was obviously stupid & counter-productive for the Swiss interests, from the start.
Note: the ending of the Swiss blockade is only being worked on, the change of policy is not completely in the bag yet... ^^
@@tobiasbauer198 Israel is surrounded by countries that want them dead, they won't give any of their weapons
@@zadovrus1624 they sold those weapons to germany. For example their longer range version of an bazooka. It's about giving Ukraine marders with those anti tank capabilities in order to defend them against Russian tanks. The German version of this anti tank missiles can only fly around 3 km.
Turned out that they get destroyed so quickly; the maintenance issue is all sorted
true
Time has proved you right.
Not really. Some progress is made now after the breach of the main mine fields in some areas.
And videos of more battlefield tank graveyards also didn't appear.
@@user-bl4oq7fd8dyeah.........no not really lmao. Both of the things you said are wrong, a quick tour in telegram will tell you
@@user-bl4oq7fd8d Lol
Who is here after the first confirmed loss of a leo 2 a6?
Only one? Lol
no surprise! All NAZI tank are the same 😂😂
@@joeo2533 3 already
@@hongsethya4932Yup, 2000 Tanks lost for the Nazis so far death to RuZZIA urahh urahh urahhh!!
more killed, after 9 months, they are not so miracle tanks like we thought so@@joeo2533
So about the T72CZ4: it is a good modernisation, but there are two problems with sending them over.
1) We only have 30 of them. Other than them we have some the old 72s, but most of them have been canibalised for parts over the years or already sent to Ukraine, so we don't really hace a replacement. We were gifted a few old Leopard 2s to help fill our reserves but those are -as mentioned in the video - worse than what we currently run.
2) Those 30 we have, we have on paper. According to some sources, they have problems keeping all of them running due to a lack of spare parts. The one armoured battalion we have needs to be backfilled by T72Ms quite frequently. The tank company our active reserves have is also running on refurbished Ms and those are apparently also kind of bitch to keep operational.
So we really can't spare any of these without compromising our own ability to defend ourselves. And even if we got our hands on modern Leopards/Abrams, it would take time to train on them, get extra people for four-member crews and we would need to upgrade our bridges and bridge-layers, as they are also desigbed for lighter tanks.
And the Czech Republic is already sending 90 refurbished T-72Bs that the Dutch and Americans are paying for. These have new communications, optics, turret armor and glacis upgrade. They should be really good tanks for Ukraine.
same thing with Poland having 200 of them, polish army is a paper kitten.
He basically missed the point that both PT-91 and T-72 from Czech Republic are basically waiting to be sent anyway. Sending Leo’s is about the message as well and starting thinking serious instead of just plundering old Warsaw Pact reserves. Let the others contribute as well.
To point 2. If I remember correctly the Czech Ministry of Defense said they going to buy 20 Leopard 2 A7. So czech army need to train the crews either way and the A4 helps to adapt to A7 until delivery. Thats said infrastructure will be improved too who buy mbt's without proper infrastructure.
@@dougcoombes8497 Those are actually Moroccan tanks. The Chechs were upgrading them for Morocco and the Netherlands and the US bought them for Ukraine.
Today leopard are in ukraine , and they got their wings at last, so , leopards filaly can fly to sky.
not as good as russian tanks
Russian tanks got there wings a long time ago.
The abrams and challengers also flew away.Play with the Russians and you too will get wings.
@@sasakrstic6749 care to find a video of an Abrams turret flying 250 feet in the air?
You correctly point out the PR ... so much doesn't make much sense. who and what is being gained by whom .... not what we are being lead to believe.
Poland transfered over 200 t72s to Ukraine already and a significant number of pt91s too. They might have already given all operational pt91s for all we know. I think that should be taken into consideration in your video; which I think was a miss.
Yep, we are doing what we can to supply every possible weapon there. And don’t forget we also have a border with Russia.
@@dromeozaur I assure you there is absolutely no chance that Russia will invade Poland. The rhetoric has been created solely to scare Europe to support Ukraine, it is totally unfounded. The most likely scenario is that Russia holds some part of Ukraine long term and Russify it.
Yes they already send them all. All Poland has left is maybe some T-72 in storage that could be refurbished. But i think all unfctional tnaks already been given.
@@thomaslacornette1282 Nope Poland didn't send all pt-91, but send the amout this country can, without straining its military power. It's easy to say " Polad should send them". Then what? What about batalions thats operate those tanks? Yeah, maybe if we get some tanks in exchange. When Poland will get enough Abrams and K2 Black Panthers that replace those we send.
@@thomaslacornette1282 Poland has already given these old T-72’s as well. Last I heard they are currently in Czechia being refurbished before being sent to Ukraine. There are over 100 waiting for refurbishment and upgrades in Czechia and they will be a steady trickle to the battlefield over the next year or so
I think you are wrong - Poland already sent some amount of PT-91 to Ukraine - adding it for the older versions of T-72 (240+) that has been sent also.
Your analysis comes true... In very hard way
As mentioned a "substantial number" of PT-91 have already been sent. The Czech T72M4cz tanks were not sent because there is an ongoing problem with their italian fire control system, since they are prone to breaking and there is low amount of spare parts. Also the ministry of interior signed a contract on their modernization/refurbishment in 2018 until the year of 2025. So I expect they haven´t all been modernised yet (if any).
I think they send them all... and other T-72 they had. To my knowledge they had 238 PT-91 Twardy and already give them all.
@@thomaslacornette1282 there is no way they did that, it would mean more than 50% of their tank fleet
@@thomaslacornette1282 No, Poland sent ~308 tanks with 238 being T-72. Rest being PT-91, but remaining PT-91 are scheduled to be delivered to Ukraine this year, AFAIK.
@@kilijanek There always somebody to say contrary to what you sayon internet, all artciles i've read said the majority what they send was Pt-91so unless your polish military i'll stick to what i read ok.
Well I spoke with a tank commander from the 73. Tank Battalion (currently operates T-72M4CZs) about the condition of our tanks. He said that they frequently repair them and that they are OK. But I agree that there are some problems with the FCS. The best way would probably be to replace the FCS for more reliable one as fast as possible and send them to Ukraine.
This guy is suggesting Poland and Czech rep. to hand over all their tanks to Ukraine....so that is not just helping Ukraine but putting yourself defensless for a country to denied Navo and Europe. So they did not want Europe and Navo then, but now we have to give them all our Tanks ? I'm wondering how Ukraine would act if someone would ask them for help.... Ofcourse I hope Russia stops the war but no country should risk their own safety for Ukraine that did not want them in times of peace.
Sup ... iam from the future and the Russians fuqed those tanks up 😂
This aged poorly because on the early counter offensive Ukraine did, there's already leopard destroyed
you were right
reason for leopard 2 is the number of them available, its over 2000, that is almost 50% of all tanks in europe and there are more repair stations and parts for it. its just simple logistics/number game.
As well as the fact that, somehow, Ukraine appears to be able to incorporate up-to-date received western hardware with unexpected efficency.
Let's talk a little more about the supply chain. Parts for the Soviet-era tanks aren't likely to be as available to Ukraine as they really need since those parts predominantly come from the people that attacked them. The supply chain for Abrams tanks has an ocean in the middle of it. The supply chain for Leopards is much shorter and all land based.
Agreed. To add to the reasons, along with the ease of maintenance being carried out in friendly countries that border Ukraine, and parts availability, these tanks already work and synergize along with the intelligence systems being employed by the West for Ukraine. Data links and transmissions will be simpler, faster, if the leopards or any western MBT are on the battlefield. An extra nod to western infantry/tank tactics that Ukraine is getting now. I assume they are training with western MBTs when they go to partner nations, so again, having the same systems in the battlefield makes sense.
yes there are more than 2000 leopard 2 in europe.
BUT
and thats the problem.
Of the 1400 leopard 2A4 in storage and service with european armies, only 320 are within countries that are willing to donate such hardware to Ukraine. (germany, poland, finnland and spain)
3/4 of european leopard 2 users (10 of 14 in total) are AGAINST deliveries of Leopard 2 or wont take part in deliveries.
So unless you can talk switzerland, austria and turkiye into delivering MBT´s to ukraine, already 800 Leopard 2A4´s are off the table.
If you cant talk Turkiye out of threatening Greece, another 100 Leopard 2A4´s are off the table.
etc.
Yes in theory there are hundrets of Leopard 2 around, in practice, the number ukraine could get are around 60-80 in total.
Haha.. cool story bro. Barely 500 are operational if you combine whole european NATO.
There is a break even point where the added utility of the Leopard 2s becomes greater than the burden of extra logistical effort.
yeah but for that break point, you need upwards of 150 vehicles.
Poland, Germany, Spain and Finnland combined could only donate 40 now and 40 in 6-12 months without running into troubles.
and basicly every other european Leopard 2 user is declining the "opportunity" to donate Leopard 2 to ukraine.
Given the attrition rates in Ukraine they could use the "Russian solution", they don't have to care as much about logistics because many of the tanks will be destroyed. In WWII the problems with T-34 reliability weren't as much of a burden on soviet logistics because soviets expected their tanks to be destroyed, even using them in reckless and inefficient ways.
Leopards are easier to maintain than the soviet/russian designs.
the problem is that not all of the possible donors run the same variant of Leopard and parts are not necessarily interchangeable. this creates an even heavier burden on logistics and service crews
@@augustvonmackensen2102 That is almost assuredly not true, infact, direct opposite is the case. Western tanks and German tanks in particular are more complex and therefore harder to maintain and even operate.
Well, this aged perfectly fine, with certainly no losses at all. . .
This tankmaster predicted the construction of Bradley square months ahead
1:00 It's not PR. That claim was laid to rest. The paperwork is big. It makes no sense to do this complex paperwork if you don't have verbal permission. The same goes for any big international process
There is already PT-91 in active use in Ukraine, but the issue is 125mm ammo; getting UA onto NATO standard ammo is important for sustainment.
This. Pretty much my point. Leoparts have to start arriving before UA runs out of ammo for T-72s.
They've offered 120mm gun packages for export, so unless Kharkiv is absolutely flattened and all records are gone, I'm certain that a number of 125mm-armed tanks can be converted to 120mm.
@@Tounushi It's not just the caliber, it's also what is compatible with that barrel/loading system. Putting a NATO barrel on a T72 I would expect limits what actual rounds can be used with the auto-loader, since it's a conversion and not by design. Sending stuff that ends up being used for indirect HE only isn't as helpful.
@@Tounushi conversion is not possible.
@@seushimarejikaze1337 With JUST the gun? No. In general? Yes.
The KMDB web page has for 20 years featured upgrade packages for everything between T-54 and T-84, usually upgrading to 120mm. Check out T-55AGM as an example.
Most of their 120mm conversions involve installing a bustle with a Leclerc-style autoloader.
This Aged Like Fine wine!!🍷
As a citizen of Czech republic I want to say that our t72 m4's are great tanks but they belong to czech hangars not to Ukraine to be all destroyded on their offenzive that will most likely have no results
Not confirmed officially but Poland has allrdy sent some PT-91 to Ukraine, on top of over 300 T-72m1 , T-72R . Poland probably has no more tanks left to give.
they probably want another circle exchange (="Ringtausch") and hope for new Leo2s with Germany picking up the check.
@@luna-hw9li Yeah no. They already bought K2 Black Panther and some probably already were delivered. Why should they try to maintain 3 and more different MBTs.
@@Johannnes125 because they have a rather large fleet of Leo2s?
They are free to send them all to Ukraine of course, if they don't like them anymore.
@@luna-hw9li Poland bought 250 ambrams A2sepV3 from usa, 120 ambrams A2 in older version(bought with partial help of usa in exchange for T72m1,T72R sent to Ukraine). K2 from Korea is on order 180, plus 800 to be produced in Poland, 10 been delivered. Poland has about 250 Leopard2 tanks in A4,A5 and A4PL versions.
@@djka8083 then there are 236 more Leos for Ukraine, apparently.
Poland sent PT-91 "Twardy" tanks to Ukraine in late July if I'm correct
They did send T72m1s but not sure on 91
They did but not all if this is gonna help
@@b-17gflyingfortress6 they did, it was confirmed by Ukrainian gov representative Andrij Jermak in his tweet on 25.07.2022. No information about how many, but they definitely were send.
i've also heard that rumour but if it's true, why haven't we seen a single one? not a picture, a video, zero loss. you don't need six months to train on a pt91 if you are already familiar with the t72
@@b-17gflyingfortress6 RedEffect even made video about it lol ruclips.net/video/T_m5Bvb1rD0/видео.html
T-72M4CZ has a pretty significant problem though. In many parts it's not compatible with the other T-72 models and there were only 30 built with many of them currently serving as a source of spare parts. The production facility no longer exists and some of the foreign contractors are already defunct as well.
turns out it wasnt a good idea since they still explode easly to drones...
I do not agree.
- Poland is already sending PT-91 to Ukraine since July'22 - should be at least 60 already.
- Ukraine needs more tanks. Even if You consider that russian era tanks are supposedly easier to maintain for Ukraine, the big variety of different countries/models/variants is a challenge on its own.
- The transition to NATO equipment is unevitable. Training has to start as early as possible and to postpone the decisions was a major mistake from the start of this war on.
Ukraine demanded tanks since 10 months, Zalushny told concrete numbers 2-3 months ago. It took so very long to get at least where we are now.
Most likely there is coming a bigger mobilization and offensives of Russia soon. It would be a huge strategic mistake to hesitate with equipment if they can handle it.
France is donating the AMX-10. It's a light tank that Ukraine needs to make use of very careful. And yet, it is mobile, it is armed and it has a gun. So if You hesitate to send Leo2 A4, You should let the AMX-10 at home too.
- Poland is abandoning its Leopard fleet on the long term. They go for K2 & Abrams. Since they have their beef with the Germans they have chosen a different path. It makes sense for Poland to slowly give them to Ukraine. They will never pay for an upgrade and so might others do too. So You suggest to wait for an event that will never happen.
- The Leo2 discussion is much more than about detailed comparing single models. For Germany it's about pressing also Abrams into Ukraine (coward Scholz), for Ukraine it's about transition to NATO standards as far as possible to ensure becoming NATO member in the future. It's highly political.
PiS tries to win the upcoming election no matter how ignorant you can look at politics (I'm not saying you do, i mean just in general) a big part is only against Germany, not to mention other countries also take their time to communicate but the endboss is Germany and that's why PiS is pushing and pushing and talking a lot of smack. Yes there are good reasons to send Leopards 2s (which i also think is still an good idea) but it's so tragic that PiS almost only cares about their election and use Ukraine as an point to win it
👍👍👍
@@strate6002 Totally possible! Poland is no angel after all. Now - as leopards are confirmed - we can say: polish efforts worked out anyway.
Didn't Poland already send the first PT-91 in July? And transfering more of them to Ukraine would be easy as, like you said, the logistics and training for T-72 type tanks is already in place. If countries want to deliver Leopard by the summer, those crews and maintenance need to start training ASAP. I think also part of the reason that some countries are pushing for leopards (Beside PR, thats definitly also a very important part) Is because there are a lot more leopards in storage/available to send to Ukraine in Europe than there are upgraded T-72 (And if I'm not mistaken a Leopard 2a4 is still better than a T-72M(1))(I am also unsure how many old T-72 are still in storage in Europe after the 400+ that have already sent to Ukraïne). So getting everything set up for Leopard sooner rather than later enables more tanks to be easier send in the future.
Also on the ammo storage in the hull: Ukrainian tankers already only take the munition thats in the autoloader in the soviet tanks due to the other stowage being seen as to hazardous. Don't see why they would suddenly start using the hull storage in leopards when they got them knowing full well its more danger than its worth.
Spain already was training Ukrainians on Leo 2 months ago.
In Poland right now with these 58 t-72 (all of the t-72 m/m1/m1r left with these 58 t-72 is something around 100-120) which will be sent after ramstein and pt-91 is something around 300-350 t-72 based tanks and what i know it will be max what poland could send
NATO Abrams crews don't use the Hull storage for ammunition either its too much of a liability. They use it to store cold drinks,snacks or small equipment depending on what the TC says.
Also as others in the comments have pointed out the concern that bridges would not be able to handle the weight of Leopard 2s or Challenger 2s is not correct. A bridge can handle the weight of alot more than 55 tones. They are usually built to withstand more than double that weight. If a bridge can only handle lets say 55 tons you would see everyone of them built collapse if they have two semi cargo trucks with loaded trailers crossing at the same time.
They did, I couldn't see why they wouldnt send more, they just bought a bunch of Abrams and K1 tanks.
Yeah, if a Ukrainian adds reactive armor kontakt 1 to the Leopard 2A4, it will be better than the T72M. but it's still heavy
Ukraine doesn't need high tech stuff. They just need tanks that work, period. They say "priority #1 is tanks that start when it's cold, ones that work at least 90%. That would be far better than what we have"
Its not about the better tank but the quantity of tanks that exist in EU and the leopard occupy 47% of the tanks that many EU countrys use and Portugal i think is one of the few that will send the leopard 2A6
Germany sends 2A6 (its basically the oldest one we still have "in working condition")
Also there is a massive poroblem with the Leopard 2s in europe. While it is the most coman tank most of them are lo0cated in countries that for varies reasons will not give up their tanks to Ukraine like Hungary (Putin ally), Switzerland (neutrality), Austria (neutrality), Turkey (needed to face off greece and fight kurds in syria) and Greece (needed to face of turky).
The biggest Leoapard 2 users that can share them would be Spain, Germany, Poland and Finland with each having a few hundred.....but then again Finland will never send a lot because its their only tank in the army and they border russia, Germany will never disarm its army of tanks to a substantial degree (it actually promised to NATO to increase its tank force until 2025 by over 50 and form a new tank division...let alone general NATO comitmeants to the VJF and Lithaunia defense requireing tanks.....and the problem in general with combat readiness of existing vehicles...), Spain still has tanks stationed in its 2 colonial cities in north africa claimed by marroco where both countries have significant tension and Poland is only very slowly receiving their Abrams and will harldy give up all Leopard 2s until then.
In total while there are on paper 2000 Leopard 2s available in Europe...realisitically at most 100-300 could be made available to Ukraine within the short to mid term.
Meanwhile there are 2000 US Abrams tanks standing in the texan desert....but they have "classified 40 year old armor" so the US refuses to send any of them. Realistically, Ukraine needs hundreds of Abrams by early to mid 2024 when europes spare Leopard 2s are drying up...because one thing is for certain by this point: Russia is not backing down, they are going full war economy and are in it for a long war.
poland has (allegedly) already sent hundreds of tanks. they can't continue stripping at infinitum their own armed forces and sending that hardware to ukraine. at the same time, germany et al. have basically refused to send immediate replacements to poland, so your suggestion comes down to poland serving as a tank depot for ukraine. that is politically very problematic.
the US is giving them Abrams to take the Leopard's place so much for your fake drama
Germany hasn't refused.
But they offered the A6 version, which will delivered to Ukraine now probably.
Poland has wanted the A7 (2) version, which even isn't available in large numbers.
Poland has sent at least 240 tanks
Poland had more than 2x as many tanks as Germany.
@@mu994 Well they could but there is no replacement yet so if they don't want have paper division they should wait for korean tanks otherwise they would have to maintain crew without tanks.
This also applied for Leclerc
Let us keep our Leclerc, we barely have enough for our own army
Who are you gonna fight? China? No, you're gonna fight Russia, which is why they will be deployed against Russia either way.
@@michalandrejmolnar3715, do we have to fight someone in order to keep our tanks ?
No, just like nukes, they are part of our passive defense plan.
But you’re never going to use them? At least Ukrainians will use them 🤷♂️
@@smyers820gm With no training, they're as good as cannon fodder
@@Ent1610 How do you suppose a tank crew would operate a Leclerc with no training?? Obviously there’ll be training
Aged well
A Pole here, we've already sent our PT91s maybe not all of them, but still. As for the leopards even if they are a 80s tank, they'll be a match for the other tanks on the battlefield. Your argument about the weight and infrastructure is valid though, I hope they can reach an agreement on that too, if the coalition is to send 100 Leopard 2s it would be worth it to equip Ukraine with adequate bridges to support them. In any case Ukrainians have proven they can use the supplied ammunition to great effect and retro fit whatever they need on the battlefield
Czech Republic is already modernisizing atleast 90 T72 tanks for Ukraine since November, we are getting there
I remember we alredy delivered a few since november, accurate numbers are secret tho I believe
These comments are such a clown fiesta...
I cant remember conflict where nato take action and Russia help other side with instructors and wargear, like this were neighbors conflict rise to cold world war
The main problem with M4CZ is many of them are not operational. They will need significant repairs before they can be functional. In particular, the engine for the M4CZ is no longer produced.
According to some Polish sources all of PT-91 will be send till the end of 2023 (and there is a schedule how it will be done, but probably not publicly available), we just need to wait for some deliveries of K2 and Abrams for our own army to not disarm it completely. As of now there is probably no T72 serving in polish army and PT-91 will be all Poland have to send, so sending Leo 2 (of which there is discussion to send only few, which is not in active service) in coalition with other countries will be also kick to start converting UA army to tanks of NATO production because otherwise there is almost no more russian design tanks to give to Ukraine.
Byu turet.
except that the Leopard 2 is 54% of all the MIC tanks sold , that means it is the majority if all tanks and has the most spare parts of any other tank manufacturer so to buy another tank is sheer stupidity
and sending Leo 2s is economical game too, germany selled them to poland for 1 euro but poland cannot upgrade them or even repair them without germany approval and modernisation to leo 2pl will take forever because germany dont care and whants to make money deal on it. So its obvious that polish generals and goverment whant to send this machines to ukrane and get rid of the problem and convert to K2s and M1s
@@bartekb4191 This. Very much this.
There are news for July where stated that Poland gave Ukraine PT-91 twardy of unknown quantity. And there are videos of those tanks on the front. I think you missed something here)
That's T-72M1, it's has different ERA set-up..
he didnt because he made video about it himself lol
idk why he didnt include this
@@SuperChodot just Google it
about the Bridges: A bridge is designed to carry about double it's maximum weight. The weightlimit is mainly for the bridge to get less strain and deteriation in it's lifecycle, which rn isn't the biggest concern of Ukraine.
And it does seem a bit like Poland is trying to strengthen it's own position in the Eu while making Germany less likable through PR (ofc their support to Ukraine is not to be underestimated)
i think the spanish Leopard 2E does have thermal sights for the commander. it also has the armor layout of the newer 2A6 leopards, though it may differ a bit.
Yes, the leopard 2E have ~1357mm on the frontal armor and a similar thing on the frontal armor of the turret XD and uses the Rheinmetall 120mm/L55 so It can be more usefull than a leopard 2A4
Poland already send around five companies of pt91 with recovery vehicles and bridges up to date. And the rest of them are not in the best shape i think, that's why Poland sends small numbers in seveeal batches
That RedEffect doesn't know that or chooses to ignore it eliminates him as a credible commentator on just about everything.
@@richardthomas598 yep, thats true.
Thermals and fast reverse are a massive upg for any T-72 ,I agree about maintenance and bridging but even if the tanks are used as reserves to allow other tanks to go to the front line its still a good move, cheers sir ,well done with all the work you put into the video it shows
the 72's armor is dog shite junk them
Ultimately I'm guessing that we're going to have to start sending NATO tanks as they just run out of old T-72s to dig up and send.
Might as well get on with it.
We shall see about that when the first Leo2s burnt down to carcass will appear on the front pages.
The video misses the political (!), maintenance, tech & doctrine-training bonuses of sending western tanks - IN ADDITION to (eventually) sending the afore-mentioned old Soviet-style gear. Governments are not videogames - politics, public opinion, and signaling resolve matters.
Spooling up training & maintenance pipelines takes time. Details matter. ^^
Classified shit & long-term plans few of us know & those who know, can't say, matter. ^^
I get the video's point, and it's not a useless point; but it misses the real-world messiness of non-ideal compromises that are often crucial to get sh*t done. ❤
Hey Red, im polish and "involved" in the military. poland has already sent "officially" 50 PT-91s however my friends from diferent units arround the country mentioned that a lot of their working PT91s are "missing" so maybe there is something the general public does not know about hence why there are talks about leopards? no idea. Aslo the fact that Poland will capitalize politicaly on this action is another thing, imho poland is using this opportunity since germany is putting itself in a shameful position right now, time will tell. there is also about a 100 T72M1 pulled out of storage, but they needed funds to bring them to working order. the big pain for all theses tanks here is the barrel, they need replacing. Im guessing when abrams will arrive then the PT91's will be donated. at least so it looks imo.
one thing to note, you wond find it online: poland is sending a lot of lubricants for ukrainian armour to operate. i do not have knowledge about any other country, but without this ukrainian brigades would not opperate, this as i learned recently is a very critical aspect and if these donation would stop, ukranie might lose the war.
Also Ukraine has assembled 10 new brigades, but they still lack the hardware to fill the up. hence not only tanks but IFVs are needed and in even greater number. ukraine now would need around a 300 tanks more. and
I must say that these pt91s are very... puzzling. I remember Poland announcing a 'number of' them being sent to Ukraine in summer, yet I haven't seen them on any photos or videos from Ukraine, not a single one (moving, fighting, destroyed, etc.) I saw a few of the (ex) Polish t-72s there, even one or two captured by the Russians, but not a single pt91. And i'ts also baffling that Poland's making noise about sending their Leopards 2 now, in their oldest A4 variant, when they had about 230 of those Pt-91. Most of them, presumably, were never sent to Ukraine in the first place, why not? Perhaps they're not combat-ready? Though technically not a priority, after Polish Abrams and Polish Leopards they'd be the 3rd in line of 'care', Poland has already supplied to Ukraine their '4th line', i.e. T-72s, which, by this logic, would be in even worse state of 'readiness' than pt-91...
So Poland is more gung ho about this than red laid on?
@@nusuthiluvatar1569 I
If Poland were To give away every PT-91 at this very moment, it would be left with only ~150 Leopard 2 tanks(A4 mid refurb and upgrade). This is why Poland will not fully commit PT-91 to Ukraine yet. Poland will receive its first Abrams this/next year most likely + there are
The PIS is just being obnoxious because of political reasons.. Orban wannabes
I agree on this political capitalization. Poland is using this to counter Germany and challenges its leading capability rightfully so! It's about time to see Eastern European countries to take its place as equal rather than just tag along as seen by some!
NATO: _Receives destroyed and captured Russian MBTs for studying_
Russia: *My turn.*
Snake in the grass Turkey has already compromised every NATO weapon it can get it's hand on. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.
would be a tad embarasing if they gained some massive insights from tech that's been around since the 90s
@@hlary8320 Not all of these tanks are from the 90s. Leopard 2A6 is being sent which is pretty recent. Challenger 2 is also fairly recent for an MBT.
-Look, Igor, the crew doesn't have to sit on top of ammunition!
-No way!
-And it can drive more than 3km/h in reverse.
-Write that down! Write that down!
You think they don't have them already ?
Germany already send some bridge layers (Biber) and other not specified bridge laying equipment. Additionally, if Germany will deliver Leo2, it will be most likely A5 (used for training to display enemies). Polish Leo2 are A4 PL which have a lot of upgrades (including better turret protection). For other countries nothing was announced yet. Germany stocks consist of A4 and A5.
Shhhh don’t tell red effect that he likes to pretend he knows what he’s talking about
We have the A7 here in Denmark. They talk about removing some of the new electronics first because it is classified.
Only about 40 of Polish A4 were upgraded to A4PL. There is another 100 A4 not upgraded and Polish goverment never specified which variant they want to send.
Biber is needed for PzH2000, so it's unlikely it can be used for the Leo II as well (considering PzH2000 stays 25km behind the Leo)
Just confirmed that germany is sending Leo 2 A6, as well as possibly up to 27 more Leo 2 A7s in the neat future.
As far as I am aware, of the main reason for the push for NATO Tanks is the issues of finding ammunition for Russian style tanks.
For me the main reason is that i dont see germany training ukranian crews for leopards as long as it doesnt decide to give them to ukraine. And i want slecifically germany to train the ukranians. The perfect solution would be to give ukraine now all the pt91s and t72s or t80us and train ukranian crews to leopard tanks for several months. I am talking about a 6-7 month training at the very least so ukraine could have a tank fleet of highly trained crews at the end of the summer. Soviet tanks will run out sooner or later. It frustrates me how slow germany goes. They should have already been training ukranians to the leopards
That. It's also key to remember that there are tens of thousands of armored vehicles in storage in the west, all of them better than all but a handful of Russian kit. Keeping them costs money, and everybody wants to replace them in the next 10 to 20 years. Meanwhile, because we aren't Russians or Germans, most of us actually pay to maintain this stuff.
Sending it to Ukraine SAVES money, while the cost was paid 20 years or something ago.
It's really rather stupid to not just send 300 Bradleys and 300 Leopards like in November. Only dimwit gamer fanboys who think they are smarter than pros and pro-Russian trolls think otherwise.
@@danielallan8061 All sources for Soviet ammo are already tapped. So if the concern still exists, it's because the depots are empty and the few factories can't keep up.
@@richardthomas598 They should politely ask Russia for ammo, free market you know...
They are.
78 years later, who would’ve thought that German panzers will once again engage Russian tanks in the eastern front?
They say Leopards can hit from much further distance than their Russian counterparts. Surely that means something. The newer ones can hit a refrigerator in fog 3 km away with 95% success. That’s what I read today
You need to consider more than just the tank. There are clearly significant ammunition/spare parts concerns for Ukraine. Hence they keep asking for western tanks, even if they are older. The plan appears to be to send about 80-90 to stand up a full brigade. Not just 4 or 5.
Yep. NATO and Ukraine has limited maintenance capabilities for ex-soviet tanks.
There is a need to diversify. Some L2's and Abrams need to go as well.
Long term UAF needs to train NATO tank crews, tank doctrine and logistics.
He talks about tanks and compares them in a scenario of tank vs tank, which is not really smart, considering that it barely happens in this war. Tanks are a versatile tool that can be used by commanders not only to combat other tanks. For example, Ukrainian tankers were trained to use tanks in IDF, basically as a mobile and very armored frontline artillery. Also, like you mentioned, Europe has a lot of spare parts, and whats even more important - maintenance crews. Ukrainian maintenance crews are already busy repairing the existing stock of soviet tanks, so sending more would just be making the situation even harder for them. Some tanks are already being sent to Czechia and Poland for repairs, meanwhile all the European countries operating Leopards cannot help with them. Sending Leopards would expand the maintenance capacity, even if it means sending tanks abroad for repairs.
@@user-dr2wk2tz7x at this point NATO should just drop the 'not involved in the war statement' don't you think?
@@justacomment1657 at this point Iran and North Korea should just drop the 'not involved in the war statement' don't you think?
We have often seen how Ukraine first gets a small amount of new equipment fist, and then later gets send a larger amount of said equipment. Same with the Challenger 2. I assume in the near future a delivery of more Challengers will be announced. And even if 2A4 variant of Leopard 2 is quite shit, it is still better than nothing. They are still formidable tanks, especially if you are not a main battle tank. A lot of countries have Leopard 2A4 just lying around. So if Ukrainians manage to maintain it, they could get send quite a lot of leopard 2A4s.
There was no sense in Poland making a request from Germany as they was quite public with the refusal.
they knocked the turret off of one somehow, kekw
Germany has already sent bridgelayers and towing vehicles which are compatible with leos way back. :)
Initially, Six of the Turkish Leopard 2 tank operating in Syria were destroyed by ISIS fighters using old 1970 anti-tank missile systems (possibly Soviet Era Fagot anti-tank guided missiles) .In mid-December 2016, two Leopard 2 tanks were captured by ISIS near al-Bab city in Syria during Euphrates Shield operations. Amaq News Agency posted video of vehicles claimed to be captured Leopard 2 .
By late December 2016, ISIS had destroyed 20 Leopard 2A4s. These were damaged by anti-tank weapons .Additional ISIS images and video depicting several completely destroyed Leopards, some with their turrets blown off, were published in January 2017.
In total, ISIS has actually destroyed 473 Leopard 2 tanks, mostly using WW1 weaponry.
@Jinping the Bear - only if they photographed every destroyed leopard 2 from 22 different angles and counted each photo as a confirmed kill. In fact, the number of leopard 2 tanks confirmed destroyed in Syria to date is 8.
There are not all that many alternatives though. Polish T-72s are running out and considering all the reasons related to the long training, repairing and sorting out logistics, there is not much OTHER tanks available. Except from M1s ofc.
And while PT-91 argument seems valid, it is not in terms of politics. Poland have already delivered over 25% of its total tank park. Think about it. And you can be sure that as soon as K2 and M1s arrive in higher numbers, all PTs will find their way to the Ukraine. You can’t expect single country in NATO to basically disarm its tank units, while other countries keep their vehicles.
This war is so much different than most wars fought recently.
UAV's and artillery, ATGM's makes tank use extremely hazardous.
Abrams without their uranium armor and 2A4's have blown up just fine in the past.
I'll be excited to see the the 2a6 in action though!
I doubt it's the mircale cure.
Imagine what fizzle would rise when Ukraine will still lose the war with all these trillions worth of lend-lease thrown to them.
Indeed a very well chosen thumbnail. I was very curious about your conclusion and now I've seen the video I'm not disappointed because you make a fair point. Just like Stan I learned something today. Thank you!
Didn't Poland already send a batch or more of Twardy's?
Yes,I also think that RedEffect forgot that having 230 tanks doesnt mean all of them are operable at the moment.
Thanks Red Effect!
As a Turk, sending Leopard 2A4s to Ukraine is a bad idea. As in the video, 2A4s have an old armor structure and technology (we lost 15 Leopard 2 in Syria). Compared to this, the modernized M60 tanks (M60T Sabra) in the Turkish army were much more successful than the Leopard 2A4s and none of them were not lost. But it would be a good idea to send Leopard 2A6 or A7 (if they can use it of course)
The PT-91 would make more sense as Poland is already in the process of procuring replacements such as the M1 and the K-2, while the Czech Republic is very likely to procure new Leopard 2A7 tanks in the near future they aren't anywhere near actually recieving the tanks unlike Poland.
PT-91 is alredy in Ukraine and RedEffect even made video about that himself: ruclips.net/video/T_m5Bvb1rD0/видео.html
idk why he didnt mention it in this vid
Problem is that Poland does not have replacements ( K2s) for PT91s implemented yet even in 1% , PT91 consist majority of armor forced on Eastern border with Russia and Belarus in Masuria region where Nato tanks like M1s and Leo2s are too heavy to operate, thats why Poland will not send PT91s until they are able to replace at least some divisions with K2s but so far they have like 4 for crew training
@@Juras2137 Definitely bizarre
@@jPlanerv2 US could bring a tank fleet in poland until poland receives the k2s
@@Juras2137 is it tho? We read about it in summer but since then we know nothing about it. We dont even know how many would poland give to ukraine back then
There are upgrade kits for the a4 variant, that can push the protection level relatively easy (never provided to turkey). Those are available today.
But cost money and are not cheap. Also it takes time to build and install them
2a4 even with upgrades is nothing special.
Another down to earth video and not click-bait 👍
The depth of your information and the history always make your content so interesting to watch.
As for sending tanks I couldn't agree more. Our government has pledged 12 or 14 Challenger 2's, again with mostly late 1980's equipment level. I think these are still good tanks, not great but good. The trouble is, what difference can such small numbers achieve compaired to the massive learning curve for a significant number of crew and technician. Then the supply chain must cater for a vehicle with zero commonality with any of its others. These are not things that happen over night. None of this is really worth it for less than say 100 tanks.
Then, the last issue. The UK has suddenly realised decades of cuts and failing to maintain the skilled labour to build them have left us in the predicament of needing every tank we can get. Our needs at this precise moment in time are not as dire as Ukraine and that we should give to them, atleast 100.
Hopefully this is all a wake up call.
Update: extra 60 pt-91 Twardy will be sent on top of Leopars from Poland
I don't comment that often, but I really appreciate the community around RedEffect's channel, and this might be informative for you guys, especially for the casual tank-buff, I'd like to shed some light on the most overlooked aspect of operating western tanks, especially when it comes to comparing them to soviet/russian tanks. Serving as a tank gunner in the HDF, I've spent a fair amount of time working with T-72s before I had my conversion training for the Leopard last year, took about 16 weeks to get from the basic know-hows of the tank - to effective operation in a unit on the company level, and this was in peace time, I bet the battle-hardened ukrainian tank crews can easily manage to do it in 2 months, training to operate a tank is the easy part, how to maintain and service the tank day-to-day to keep it in operation, that's a whole other story. A well trained and experienced crew can keep a T-72 going forever and troubleshoot/repair almost every automotive or weapon related issue, using only the tools and eqipment the tank carries around itself. The Leopard 2 ? They are uncomprehensively more complicated machines, especially when it comes to the powerpack and transmission, not to mention the electronics and the FCS. KMW actually created a Hungarian subsidiary just for the maintenance of the tanks, they have their own workshop and sevice-hangar on the base, it takes years to master maintaining these cats , and even then there are things only a dedicated team of engineers can solve.
Replacing your Lada with an Audi has it's pros and cons, and it's only worth it if you do it en masse, a couple dozen leopards and challengers only create unnesecary logistical strains if you want to use them for anything besides training...... P.S.: Much love and all the best to you Red Effect! Been in love with your channel since the infamous Arjun.incident 😅❤
I agree entirely, training the tankers while very important...in terms of the % of effort of the whole package it seems pretty small. I imagine it takes a 'small', specialized army to support a series of tank. That specialization in terms of skills, parts(like handy spares), tools (from working on the stuff, to moving it, to making it easier to work on the stuff), depots of parts...none of these are cross compatible. You need two, entirely different specialized logistical armies, to support something like an abrams, and also to support something like a T72. Add in leopards, and that is a third army of support personnel, equipment, etc etc. Training a mechanic takes awhile, training a mechanic to be a tank mechanic is even longer. Huge host of separate, specialized knowledge on each piece and how many does ukraine have? Are they forced to drain their effectiveness on keeping soviet armor maintained, just to boost start leopard/abrams personnel? I may be able to guess with 80% accuracy a PC problem, pop in a spare part i happen to have, and have a windows PC going in 20 minutes, but put an apple in front of me and maybe that is a 3 day order, after hours of digging into documentation/forums/support lines to identify what might be the problem....with low accuracy.
What good is a tank force if a significant portion break down before they reach the battle, another portion in the middle of the battle? And how long do the rest last going into the following battle? Not knowing how many tanks will make it to the fight could be the difference of an entire operation failing or succeeding, if you have no idea ur going to be screwed. At the very least you need a rough idea of what you can even expect to last, and Ukrainian commanders are going to have no idea. Low confidence, and any failures are just going to compound poor morale around the equipment and spell its failure going forward. If no one trusts it, doesn't matter even if the platform is good, its going to cause problems.
They already have to move all the tanks, equipment, etc across a massive amount of land, that has been under siege. Doing so with significantly heavier tanks? Do they have rail lines all the way there? Do they have bridges that support the heavier weight? If they are driving them all that way....that is a massive amount of wear and tear, how much maintenance do they have to do at the end, relatively close to the front lines just to make sure they keep working through the whole following battle. It must already be a logistical hellscape over there
@@deadlydays3401 You are deadly on point(pun intended)about the dispersion of maintenance personnel! The ukrainian army already has the most insane amount of different equipment, I don't think we've seen an army with this diversity of hodge-podge vehicles since the wehrmacht with their endless list of beutepanzers, every civil repair shop has been contracted to solely work on maintaining/refurbishing equipment, it's an impossible task and they've been screaming about this problem virtually non-stop since mid-summer, you always try to standardize and streamline equipment, especially high-maintenace ones. NATO should only send leopards, partly financed by the US and Britain instead of sending their own "dick-measuring" MBTs ,they are the most common MBT in europe, every second nation in europe has a reapir facility dedicated to them, there is a healthy amount of surplus spare parts to go around. This is the same reason why I'm so baffled by the recent polish procurement announcement about the K2 and the Abrams to complement the Leopards alreadyin the hundreds, yeah sure, having not one, but three of the most advanced and complicated MBTs, what could go wrong?
Maintenance is a issue but in reality all Ukraine needs to do is transport the equipment and perform basic maintenance and repairs. Everything else can be done in Poland like how is being done with the pzh2000s. Also all the modern western mbts use the power pack design so Ukraine just needs to be good at swapping them out. This war is abnormal in how Nato is providing everything from intel, to training, to weapons.
"trained and experienced crew can keep a T-72 going forever" yes in peace time. In war, it only needs to last until its turret pops of.
Don't overthink the maintenance, during times of war any machinery is likely to not last long enough to get its first oil change, and in fact is designed with that knowledge.
@@carpathianhussar8553It's all about money 💰💰. Who gets a cut.
the russian tank reverse speed proves to be quite deadly in warthunder.
average WT sofa general. imagine russia bought chinese tanks…😂
@@yourbelowaveragewarthunder8654 ayo the espionage gang is here
@@yourbelowaveragewarthunder8654 Tbh war thunder generally does give some insight knowledge on capabilities of tanks, even if other important battlefield factors are neglected
LOL! 😆
@@slavicemperor8279 WT gives you absolutely no valuable Intel on how tanks will perform IRL whatsoever..
Excellent content as always. Thanks!
Poland just announced 60 PT-91 tanks for Ukraine on top of their Leopards.
Confirmation just dropped. 15 Leopard 2 A6s will be sent by Germany. Poland has also officialy requested permission to give their Leo's.
The problems with the Leopard 2 to Ukraine can apply to all Western tanks.
To be fair, you go with the army that you have, not what you want. In comparison to other Western tanks, the Leopard 2 is a relatively good choice.
Leclerc would be probaly the best but then again there are not enough of them for Something massive. Even 44 or a batillion woud be hard
Nah the PT-91 Twardy would be best, but Poland is daring Germany to send her tanks first
@@jonseilim4321 i looked at it from the western standard and PT-91 is for me kinda eastern tech tree ^^
@@kqckeforyou4433 There are around 200 that are in working condition. France could send 100 now and start refurbishing the 200 or so that are in storage.
@@JohnHughesChampigny220ish tanks have they and 100 in storage but 2015ish they said only around 30 or 50 in storage are working so yeah but the Produktion line should still be functional
One major problem as I understand it, is long term access to enough ammunition for old soviet MBTs - which should be less of a problem with NATO standard equipment.
The Challengers being sent was announced to break the deadlock in negotiations with Germany over sending leopards and less likely a PR stunt to be honest. 14 Challengers are IMO unlikely to ever see combat, due to it being a unique tank with its own parts, ammunition, support and training required to operated them. As you mentioned regarding the infrastructure of east Ukraine,also, they are a weighty beast at nearly 80 tonnes with all its stowage, fuel and battlefield ready components attached.
They can be used to protect posicions neer Kyiv and release more T's to the frontline.
It's going to be 40 challengers and lebanon, if I am informed correctly, is going to dissolve it's Challenger stocks with around 200 tanks, so Ukraine could maybe get a profit out of it.
@@tobiasbauer198 True, Jordan is replacing its Challengers
@@questionmaker5666 right Jordan, sorry somewhere in that general direction I meant...
The thing is....Germany doesnt give a shit about what the UK are doing. The UK is basically treated as a traitor after Brexit inofficially and no longer a relevent ally from the german Point of view.
The only 2 relevant allies that have any influence on german policy are the USA as NATOs leader and Germanys nuclear protector (as germany doesnt have nukes) and France as germanys loyal european ally and fellow EU leader.
Oh and Poland is just seen as a shitshow run by the PIS lunatics, hardly more important then Hungary. Wouldnt be suprised if germany doesnt even answer polands calls. After all every time germany tries to do something to repair relations with poland their gouvernmeant turns it into a giant anti german PR stunt like with the Patriots...
Any tanks without logistical, ground/air support are sitting ducks.
The reason is simply numbers, there are like 2000 Leopards out there. If NATO can provide, lets say 200/300 Leo's to Ukraine they have an easier time to repair them. The problem with T-72's is spare parts, NATO has to scavenge the world for them and buy them from other countries, like the Moroccan tanks they recently bought are probably just spare parts.
And its not like Ukraine is fighting a hyper modern army...... Most of Russia's stuff comes from the 70's. The T90m is really rare encounters to begin with.
Abrams are more difficult to maintain, even low-level maintenance is hard on them while a Leo can be operated by basically a conscript.
You are missing one critical factor. There currently a shortage of 125mm tank rounds but plenty of 120mm rounds available.
Any Leopards being sent to Ukraine have a separate logistics tail and won't be feeding on what is already needed for T-variants present.
We didn't know which country Red Effect was from, but now it's obvious that he's from Poland. With such delight, only a Pole can talk about the old degraded version of the T-72.😂
Good video, but it ignores a few things that are the current reality for the Ukraine:
1. Ukraine is running low on ammunition, especially for the Russian/Soviet era tanks. They have used a LOT of that amunition, and used up a lot of tanks in general. Going to a Western tank (exception to this is the Challenger 2, which doesn't use NATO standard main gun ammunition, so it won't help in this regard, and it will complicate matters) will allow access to the massive stocks of NATO standard 120mm shells. These shells will be from various types, from earlier to the very latest, and I don't expect Ukraine to get the very newest, but even if they get the oldest of the existing stocks, at least they have something to shoot. Getting Russian/Soviet tanks will not address the ammunition issue; they still won't have ammunition. Tanks without ammunition are moving road blocks, nothing more, or mobile machine gun platforms at the most.
2. While there have been some tank to tank encounters, most tank usage in the Ukrainian war uses tanks as mobile artillery, not tank on tank. So the issue of armour (thickness, composition, etc.) really isn't a big issue. Yes, the Leo 2A4 doesn't have as good protection as the 2A5/2A6, but when being used as a mobile artillery piece, this isn't as big a deal as it might seem. I know people are going to point out that the Turkish 2A4s were blown up on multiple occasions by the Taliban, but the Turkish commanders were brain dead, allowing the tanks to go in without infantry support. In the Ukrainian's case, the commanders seem to have a pretty good grasp of combat tactics, at least so far, and I would think that they have been briefed on how to use the tanks effectively, and how to run a combined force to help the tanks from being ambushed by RPGs/ATGMs. I think the Bradleys and Marders will help in that regard, along with the tanks' own thermal imagers and night vision capabilities, as well as reconnaisance drones and even satellite imagery.
3. The tanks will have a lot of support in terms of trank retrievers and similar type engineering vehicles. The British did/will be sending tank retrievers with the Challenger 2s (as somebody said, it is beyond the realm of possibility that a Ukrainian farmer's tractor will be able to pull a 70+ ton Challenger 2 out of a situation where it is stuck or disabled).
4. Ukrainians have been training on the Challenger 2s in the UK and Leo 2s in Poland for over a month. They did not start training when Germany approved the export of the Leo 2s, nor for the announcement of the Challenger 2s being sent to the Ukraine.
5. The leopard gets raped by even the RPG7. It deciding survivability was optional is a problem.
@@brianmead7556the leopard 2A1-4 does. The later versions feature improved survivability, especially against mines and better NV. Germany is intending to send their Leo2A6, the version also features save ammo storage.
Ukraines main battle doctrine is soviet. It doesn't include tank and infantry tactics, without all out doctrine combination of infantry and armour isn't as effective, at least in HOI4 🤓
@@brianmead7556 only from the sides not on the front armor
@@zadovrus1624 Not really true. US "military observers" I am sure have been working with Ukrainian Army officers/generals for a while now. In the August/September counter offensive, the Ukrainians were using "thunder run" tactics, which explains a lot of the very rapid advances they made at that time. The "thunder run" idea was revived by a US Marine Colonel/Major when the US was in Iraq (in the run into Baghdad, I believe). How do you think the Ukrainians learned about that, considering that the Russian army doesn't employ that tactic. And by the way, this is a modern equivalent of a cavalry charge, just with massive, powerful armour instead of horses. Nothing new under the sun, just modified versions of old ideas to fit the modern battlefields. It is "The Charge of the Light Brigade" but with the "Light" part replaced with 70 ton M1s, and M2s being used as lookouts.
If some of the news reports are true, the Ukrainians that are now training on the used of the M1 (probably M1A1 SA) are not only being trained in how to operate the tank, they are also being trained in combined operations tactics. WIth 109 Bradleys (M2A2) and an unknown amount of Marders (supposed to be 40) already on their way, and with their superior sensors, the ability of Russian infantry getting anywhere near the M1s or Leopard 2s is in serious doubt. Don't forget that the Tturkish Leopard 2s were ambushed in an urban environment, and I am sure that the Ukrainian military will be made very aware of the danger of putting tanks into urban environments without having the infantry go in first.
Small thing to note. Idk if the Leo 2A4 can withstand a Konkurs frontally but the destroyed turkish ones were destroyed by rear and side shots.
A TOW missile will take out anything.
The first thing any tank crew learns is not to rely on their armour for protection. It's a last resort.
A tankers main strategy is to see first and shoot first. If a Leopard 2 comes within range of a Russian anti tank unit, it will be taken out.
There will be Leopard 2 losses in Ukraine. Just like there are T90 losses.
That is not true. Ammo compartment next to driver was hit through frontal armor. That let to immediate kaboom of whole tanks. Check those photos again.
@@a5cent Tank x tank combat is very rare. Most tanks are removed by artilery when some drone spots them. And there is no armor capable to withstand 152mm howitzer.
@@xmeda Where did I mention tank on tank battles?
There is no artillery in Ukraine that is affective against mobile tanks, but against stationary tanks, absolutely.
Problem with PT91 is its terrible reliability of whole power pack and the rest of systems. Our Leopards A4 are spending less time in workshop although they are older than PT91
The premise of the video has become obsolete. Czech and Poland are also sending the PT91 and T72 mentioned in the video. Therefore the Leopards now promised are the FIRST bactch of Western tanks overlapping with what is probably the LAST batch of Sovjet tanks. It's exactly the right time (but sooner would still have been better) to send the Leopard.
Regarding PT-91; Poland already've send to Ukraine around 50 of them*, and here in Poland everyone pretty much agree that all 232 of them is going to end up in Ukraine, but there is one problem - each one of those that we'll send we have to draw from our own units, and Poland already send around 300 tanks with pledge made recently in Ramstein to send 150 more (T-72 i think) so we've depleeted all reserves of soviet era tanks that we had pre-war outside of profesionall units, and most likely disarmed some units (namely in 18th and 16th mechanized divisions) that are going to be rearmed with western tanks,
With all that being said we have untouched reserves of some 20 Leopard 2 (Polish tank batalion is around 58 tanks, x 4 batalions is 232, and poland has aprox. 247 leopads A4,A5 and PL),
Suming up: all PT-91s and T-72s are most likely going to Ukraine, and thats great, but until their replacements are here in significant numbers, it is a lot harder to send even one more PT-91 than a company of Leopards,
And if 8 countries would send a company, we could equip a mechanized brigade (that's importand because a stand alone company of western tanks will be more of a logisticall strain than a benefit)
And lastly we have a case of the ammo - i belive that polish and czech reserves might be alredy not so steep, reserves of 120mm NATO ammo most certainly are..
*www.pap.pl/aktualnosci/news%2C1381879%2Cpolska-przekazala-czolgi-pt-91-twardy-sa-juz-w-ukrainie.html
How many PT 91 destroyed?
@@oogie493 I didn't see any info about any destroyed PT-91,
But to be honest, since the first reports of Poland transfering PT-91 to Ukraine by Ukrainian and Polish sources, combined with a recording of transport inside of Ukraine, there was no furter info about any use of PT-91 in the war.
Na ta chwile po ramstein oddamy 58 sztuk t-72 z mozliwoscia przekazania do max 100 ( prawdopodobnie to jest nasz max jaki mozemy przekazac ukraincom pozniej juz oewnie zostaja tylko twarde)
@@patrykszczecina5002 I haven't seen any videos of the PT 91s on the battlefields and that's surprising because the Ukrainians are infamous for recording everything, literally everything
Poland is not sending Pt-91's yet, because we don't have enough tanks , we've already sent most of the tanks that Ukraine received(around 330 of which some are T-72M1/M1R and some are Pt-91). Right now we're receiving Abrams and K-2 and renovating what's left from our T-72s so we can send them to Ukraine also we first need to do some overhaul of our Pt-91s because their guns haven't been changed in a long time. Sending leopard 2 by poland/Spain/finland is a way of kicking Germany to send their storage leo2, because of their political ties to Russia they didn't send any serious heavy equipment before, only when US decided to send Bradley they send marders, same thing with leopard UK together with countries that want to send leopards is trying to force Germany into giving tanks to Ukraine. Also right now Ukrainian soliders and training on and receiving T-72's and BMP's in Poland and we're giving them as much tanks as we can. One more time, sending leo2 is just a way of showing support and at the same time forcing Germany to take action.
I love your content, much love :)
This israeli apsdfs ammunition was designed, but not adopted in large quantities. Less than a thousand was bought some years ago. These shells wear the barrel very fast, hence Poland still uses mainly 3BM-13 and 3BM-18, which are subpar. Also Poland did send most of its T-72s and estimated 50 of PT-91, with the rest to be sent when they recieve more abrams and K2 tanks, so saying that Polish help is a PR stunt is rather unjustified
Almost did not watch this video because of the title. But very glad that i did, as you bring up some very interesting points.
"They're simply not the best"
Whilst I appreciate underselling the age of them, we must remember that perfect is the enemy of good.
The gun's powerful, the engine's powerful and the frontal armor's good against much of what the Russians can dish out. From then on, tactics need to be honed to keep losses to a minimum and their firepower is exploited to the fullest.
leopard has anything but good frontal armor
@@SweatyFeetGirl It sure as shit doesn't have side armor to speak of.
@@Tounushi There's no tank that can survive an ATGM hit to the side. If you exposed your side to the enemy you fucked up.
Kornet can penetrate any tank in any part of hull
It will be glassed by Artillery or CAS.
Actually the fact that leo2 was produced in large numbers and a lot of countries are still using them (therefore a lot of spareparts are avaible to be sent quick tu Ukraine) is kinda the main reason its being sent
They weren't really produced in large numbers, only 2,000+ of different Leopard variant tanks were sold to different countries as quite frankly they're very expensive and technological tanks. Hence, why Germany only have like 350+ of them tanks and i doubt that some countries are willing enough to send spareparts since they only have limited units of them. If they are willing to send some tanks, they're probably replacing the old ones
Very interesting update. Respect from Australia.
so sending 40 year of Leopard 2 is a bad idea while it's a fantastic idea to send 80 year old T54 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
do you mean the M-55S? or the russians sending some T-55s to get converted into something else? (the russians no longer made ammunition for the 100mm gun of the T-55)
I just talked to my dad, a retired egineer, about what "rated" means in the context of bridges. The rating simply refers to the design requirements. He said, a bridge could typically withstand twice the tonnage as the officail rating. When I told him why I was asking - I was chiecking out the argument that a 55 ton tank couldn't cross a bridge rated at 44 tons, he said that's a redicoulous argument. ---- Any other egineers out there -particulary ones who took a few civil engineering courses or went into civil engineering please, pipe in.
Too elaborate on why so much extra margin of safety is added to bridges arcording to my Dad:
In the long it doesn't cost much to add the extra capacity. The only added initial cost is the added cost of construction. Compare that with an airplane where the extra weight cost you extra money every time you fly. That's why ariplanes's rating have less of a margin of error. Obviousy the margin of air in airplanes is still pretty good otherwise, planes would be constantly fallig from the sky.
Double stack medium girder bridges are rated for 50 tons but can easily take a combat weight abrams at 70 tons+ i think ratings are for health and safety reasons and only adhered to in training exercises not in actual combat.
Yes. It's bollocks. Typical European semi truck with trailer has 45 tones or more (e.g. overloaded). Then you can have 2 driving in opposite directions. It's 90 tons. Then you can have traffic jam with more semis on the bridge. Then again, the semi goes like 90 km/h through the bridge. Dynamic load is like 1.5-2x.
So, any bridge in Europe (apart some v. small and old) can manage not one, but 2 Leos.
Yes. Bridges are designed with a safety margin in mind. It depends on which country but there are additional norms: fe in Singapore they build bridges to withstand typhoons, et cetera. It’s just like the oil light in your car: it goes on when the level is perceived to be low, but you can drive up to 50 miles with that light on.
I would guess that you are not from Ukraine/other former USSR member, so I wouldnt be so sure that your dads opinion is correct for this situation. USSR was famous for building infrastructure that barely holds together, especially without proper maintanence in 1990s
@@user-te7rf8ik7z re: " I wouldnt be so sure that your dads opinion is correct for this situation"
1. That's why I invited the input of others.
2.My dad is a smart dude and he may have considered that.
3. He's actually traveled to the Ukraine and Russia multiple times on business trips in the 90s soon after the fall of the Soviet Union. Besides him being just generally being smar,t, I am sure he is familar with the infrastructure of the former Eastern Block and I am sure it has improved in the 15 plus years since he has been there. I do remember him talking about how backward the railroads and airports were. Full disclosure, observing bridges, railroad, and aiports would not have been part of his job. He worked ofr AT&T and they were working on deals involviving communication infrastructure.
4. It's the best information I have on the topic. No reason to presume the Ukranians or any other former Eastern Bloc country has ZERO margin of error in their tank especially, with no evidene the contrary. The video doesn't even address that issue.
5. Other people have replied specifally talking about bridges in Europe and how much tonnage they typically withstand. To befair, I don't know if that info was made before or after your close to naked insinuation. I shall have to check to see.
6. If the RUclipsr meant something different by "rating" than what English speaking egineers mean by "rating", he should have specilficed that. After all, the video is made for English speaking audiences.
If they send Leopard 2A4 I'm gonna laugh lol
Why I wanted Abrams tanks.
watch Leopards 1 arrive
What about those T 55?
@@jefkeperemans6621 hey the leopard 1 is great in it's BR
OFC they send them. when you get rideoff your old tanks you can buy new ones :) this KF panter looks nice. +50% more pen and range what leopard have, even leopard out range russian tank allready. BUT overkill is allways beter.
Well informed video thank you.
Soviet tanks, Leopard2 A4, Leopard 2 A6, Challenger 2, Abrams. The logistics office of the ukrainian military must be weeping