@rtepic its passed that, German Army have completed trials and ordered 50 upgrade packages of existing vehicles and entering service next 2yrs, its also been shown at arms fairs :-)
@siamfd201 of course it helped, 18 of the Mk4's were penetrated, 16 survived. Its not just using modules its what you put in the modules. German firm IBD Deisenroth Engineering supply ceramic armour around the world and leaders in it. Plus the Leo2A7 has larger modules along the hull which the Mk4 didn't.
@RSprtn117 Its reported there is some DU in Challenger 2's Dorchester with several other ceramics. What you have to remeber with DU is that its a very dense material. It is waste byproduct and its cheaper to use it in armour than it is to store as waste and use an equally dense material which has to manufactured like Tungsten which was added on the Leopard 2A4 upgrade. Of all the countries using Abrams, the USA is the only country to use DU armour, non of the other countries use it :)
@siamfd201 You can visibaly see that Mk4 lacks the side modules on the hull. As I said, we dont whats in those modules, plus the Merkava Mk4 armour is about 10yrs old than Leo2A7's and IBD have made improvements in armour design since then :)
Actually, it does exist(although it's often referred to as Leopard2PSO - Peace Support Operation), there's even a more innovative version called Leopard 2a7+.
Well, there have been several times, when modern tanks where hit by RPG-7, without being destroyed. In Iraq, a Challenger 2 drove into a trench and wasn't able to get out. Whilst the crew was waiting for help, their tank was hit by roundabout 70 RPGs, but the crew wasn't hurt and when help arrived, the tank was able to get back into their camp by itself. Most modern tanks and IFVs are safe against RPGs as they are easy to counter.
@siamfd201 Many of the Merkava's desployed were older models. The Merkava Mk.4 did perform well against Kornets. They are adding active protection systems to the Merkava's. No tank is invulnerable but the Merk 4 was very survivable and the IDF was pleased by its performance. We have to remember the Kornet is a heavy anti-tank missile comparable to TOW2. I think the main problem in Lebanon was that the IDF underestimated the opponent.
Kinetic penetrators are used for heavier armoured targets and they have much higher sectional density so they do not loose no where as much as a HEAT warhead in velocity, furthermore, although the primary principle of a HEAT warhead is using explosives to blow open armour with molten copper, the energy behind the warhead is also a key factor. HEAT munitions are not very effective against MBTs due to the perlification of composite armour. LAVs are much better in urban situations...
Does the Leopard 2 have blow-out panels? In the Abrams the ammo is seperated and when the ammo is hit the panels on the top fly off forcing the blast upwards and not towards the crew compartment. The tank may be out of action but the crew survives and tank can be repaired. This has worked very well including with freindly fire Hellfire hits. I know in the Leo 2 the crew is seperated, but is there something similar to the blow-out panels?
@ModelbuildingTANKS Overal the Abrams has heavier armor. When comparing TUSK with A7/PSO the Leo 2 might have better side-hull protection. But in tank-to-tank combat I would prefer the Abrams. An M1A3 is planned. I think it will include some TUSK upgrades. I wonder if it will get L55 gun. Maybe they stick with L44 because with DU ammo its penetration is close to L55 with non-DU ammo. Drawback of L55 is that its length is less usefull in urban areas then shorter L44.
@SgtH3nry3 You got some good points there, but I disagree with your comparison to TUSK. TUSK uses ERA, so when that brick blows you are left with an exposed area. Leo2A7+ uses modular which can take multipule strikes, and this was proven with the Challenger 2's street fighter in Telic. But that doesnt mean TUSK is rubbish, its saved lifes, but it cant take as much punishment as leo2A7 or Challenger 2. Nice comment :)
...due to the fact that they are much more mobile, and they are more suited for infantry and lightly armoured targets and vehicals, their weapons can fire more ammunition more suited for infantry and structures such as buildings, furthermore they are much faster and more mobile, they can carry infantry into the area and most importantly is the overall practicality, loosing a MBT is much more expensive and due to the shortcommings it has, they fail in tight streets.
@Phalanxtv1875 I know your not arguing mate :) you made a good point and I agree with you, I just wasn't sure if you were picking up on a mistake I might have said, so I was confused lol :)
@SgtH3nry3 by the way, the "american tank industry" is just building the tanks. the abrams tank has mostly been developed by the german industry, an the leopard is in fact nothing more than further developement od the american MBT
As an American tanker (M1A2 SEP) I thoroughly respect the German Army and the Leopard. Awesome tank. Still, not enough in service (maybe 100) to make it viable vs. the 3,500+ Abrams (all variants) we have =p.
@Phalanxtv1875 Im sorry, did I say somewhere that Leopard 2 uses DU? or you explaining why they dont use it? the political reason is that DU is a waste by-product :)
Der Räumschild, den der Leopard 2 benutzt ist ungepanzert und wiegt quasi nur soviel, dass er zusammen mit der, im Vergleich zum Leo 2a6 verkürzten Kanone, genausoviel wiegt, wie zuvor. Außerdem ist diese Veränderung aufgrund dessen geschehen, was man im Einsatz in Afghanistan erlebt. Dort sieht man relativ häufig behelfsbarrikaden, die man ohne Räumschild nicht überwinden kann.
RPG-7, yes. After all that's a 40-year-old system that only penetrates about 250mm RHA. More modern weapons, like the RPG-27, not so much. That one can penetrate up to 600mm RHA, which makes it a serious threat even to modern tanks. Thankfully, the RPG-27 is rare among insurgents.
Overal the Abrams has better armor then Leo 2. But I agree that passive armor is better then reactive so probably the PSO has better side protection then Abrams TUSK.
@SgtH3nry3 What do you mean? There really isn't all to much diffirence between Abrams, Challenger, Leopard 2. Overal similar designs (especially the most modern versions). M1 and Leo2 both come from MBT-70 project. The Abrams has heavier armor. The Leo2A6 has better gun but M1A2 compensates this partly with DU ammo. The only major design diffirence is the gas-turbine engine but it can be fitted with a diesel. The Abrams is partly European: gun is German and armor modified British Chobham.
@bomberpilot271 und dafür braucht man nen kampfpanzer? die kosten für den turm hätte man sich z.b. sparen können oder werden neuerdings blockaden mit einem 120mm geschütz weggeräumt?
@siamfd201 My German is terrible but I think I know what you mean. A Kornet would be unable to penetrate front of Abrams or Leopard 2. Probably not the side turret either. TOW2B is better because its top-attack. Iraqi special forces used Kornets to attack US armor from flank. They were only able to disable (not destroy) 2 M1A1 and 1 Bradley. No casualties. One Abrams was hit at the engine (mobility kill) and the other at the rear activating blow out panels.
Das Ding ist halt, der T-90 kann Panzerabwehrraketen aus dem Lauf abfeuern, die die Reichweite von konventionellen Geschossen bei weitem übertrifft, ist aber bspw. in einem Nahbereichsgefecht weitaus unterlegen, da er die Panzerung des M1a2 oder Leo2a6 nicht knacken kann. Die Frage ist, ob Panzergefechte in Zukunft eher im offenen Gelände, oder im Suburbanen stattfinden werden, und da denke ich, dass man von westlicher Seite schlau genug wäre, die Stärken der eigenen Kräfte auszuspielen.
A high explosive anti tank improvies exploive device? As the name suggests it is not engineered for the task well and i dont think anyone should loose sleep over it.
Conversely, your average LAV has nowhere near the armour of an MBT, and can in fact be destroyed by a HEAT warhead that would leave an MBT lightly damaged. Not that hard to build a HEAT IED, either. Part of the problem is that the hypervelocity guns on modern Western tanks generate a massive pressure wave that's highly dangerous to anyone in front of the muzzle, but that could be addressed by low-pressure, low-velocity HE shells. IDF Merkavas do have an infantry compartment, BTW. ;)
@Eiscakeman Nein sollte er nicht. Es gab mal experimente mit einer 140mm aber wurden gleich wieder verworfen. Der 2A7+ benutzt genau wie der 2A6 die L55, hat aber wohl noch andere Munitionsarten bekommen. Ladeautomat stand wohl noch nie zur Debatte, da keine Maschine einen Menschen an der position ersetzten sollte.
@MrRammsteinKicksAss warum nimmt man keinen panzer OHNE turm dafür? z.b. sowas wie bergepanzer oder brückenleger (nur ohne brücke versteht sich) oder einfach ne leopard 2 wanne wie gesagt... braucht man zum barrikadenräumen ne 120mm kanone? ;-) oh es kann natürlich sein dass grade als man entspannt bissl räumen will ein T90 um die ecke kommt! klar, dann braucht man natürlich nen turm
Those weapons would only be effective if the tanks are stupidly commanded and led into tight urban areas which it is not designed for, shoulder fired weapons be it missles are not as capable as the main gun in the tank, and the armour can withstand shots within a certain range.
@TankNutDave: Crew safety is the most important thing of any vehicle in at least my opinion. But governments are most interested in cost-benefit ratio's or absolute cost. Also, licencing Leopard 2, Challenger 2 or any foreign designs could impact nationalist feelings of Americans. But I'm sure that the next-gen US MBT will be more like the Leopard 2/Challenger 2/Merkava Mk.4 rather than the M1 Abrams.
The Leopard 2(A7+) might be better than the M1A2 TUSK, but it is not THAT much better to justify another expensive overhaul of thousands of tanks and educating thousands of M1 crewmen. And as long as the EU (biggest Leo 2 operator) are (NATO) allies, the US Armed Forces really don't need to be one step ahead. Except for Russia, China and India maybe. But it wouldn't amaze me if the American tank industry would licence more German/European technology in the near future than it already does.
Угу, редиска! ;) Хорошие люди это те, которые сами себя обманывают и истерично, с матом пытаются навязывать это мнение другим как это делаешь ты? Оригинальная логика.
Sieht genauso aus wie der PSO nur in kackbraun. Beides Prototypen von denen es mehrere Versionen gibt, von denen widerum eine unausgereifter ist als die andere. Ich lasse mich mal überraschen,wie das letztliche Modell aussehen wird! Aber was die uns hier als "neuen" 2A7 verkaufen wollen ist nichts weiter als eine der vielen vorangegangenen Modifikationskits für den 2A6 - lediglich in anderer Tarnfarbe! P.S.: An der Heck-, Wannenboden- und Bedachungspanzerung könnte noch einiges gemacht werden!
Sigh. If you would occupy a country, you'll have to enter the cities eventually. And even in the city, tanks are a hell of a lot less vulnerable than LAVs or infantry, never mind the firepower they bring. BTW, HEAT warheads like that of the RPG-7, the LAW, etc, work the same way at any range. Even tank main guns fire HEAT rather than APFSDS once the range exceed 2500m or so., because kinetic penetrators do lose effectiveness at longer ranges.
You know that the guy you're picking at for being too patriotic is actually romanian? Don't be angry on him for being honest.He's just right. There is, and never was, no match for german tanks. Und nebenbei bemerkt, sollte perfektes Englisch kein Kriterium für einen qualifizierten Kommentar sein, da nicht jeder eine Begabung für Fremdsprachen besitzt.
I would love to see this in Dutch service. Unfortunatly the current government is making the biggest cuts on defence ever and are getting rid of all(!) the tanks (all of which are state of the art Leo 2 A6). :'( They are so stupid and know nothing about military equipment. Our Army is becoming a police force without firepower. Before the elections the largest government party promised to increase the defence budget!
@Simpsegueos The L/44 is for City and CQB like small ways and and the L/55 Long gun is for range fights i open fields ;) from the Leo 2A7 have ca. 25% L/44 and the rest the L/55
12 лет назад
По сравнению с русскими танками? Конечно ... * хихикает *
Да, я русский и из России. И что это меняет? От этого как-то зависит тот факт, что Т-90 сняли с производства потому, что российские военные и в частности главком сухопутными войсками России Александр Постников считают его плохим? От этого зависит, что известный в рунете эксперт по танкам Василий Чобиток, сам танкист, считает лучшим танком не Т-90, а корейский K2 Black Panther? Тебя на Гугле забанили? Нет? Тогда проверь.Может ты просто слишком мало знаешь и слишком много троллишь на квасные темы?
und wat is hat der leo nun wie alle anderen modernen panzer nen selbstlader? war ja geplant das ding aber dann wegen geldmangel doch gestrichen was is daraus geworden?
12 лет назад
Россия не является угрозой для любого НАТО или ЕС страны. И вы это знаете... Я надеюсь.
12 лет назад
Don't tell the Russians, they will be angry... And write about on the internet, because that is pretty much all they can do...
Двоечник несчастный, Т-90СМ это экспортный, т.е. ухудшенный вариант и есть только выставочный образец - пытаются продать, пока безуспешно. Для России был предложен Т-90АМ, но его не производят, в лучшем случае будут модернизировать имеющиеся Т-90А до его уровня. Иди учи уроки и не мешай взрослым своим квасным троллингом.
@Bloodmane1987 ja aber haste mal die russischen panzerexperten angehört^^ der leo ist besser punkt aus ende DAS IST MEINE MEINUNG du wirst mich nicht umstimmen können ;D
И это мне советует упорно занимающийся самообманом и бесящийся, исходящий на лучи дерьма из-за ерунды человек. Может стоит самому сходить к доктору и полечить мозги и психику, научиться адекватно воспринимать окружающую реальность, отучиться троллить, флудить?
Ага, молодец, мощно доказал, что Т-90 лучший в мире. Чем громче и истеричней ты тут троллишь с пеной у рта, он конечно лучше становится от этого и Постников взял свои слова обратно и возобновили производство Т-90 для российской армии, а не ждут "Армату" ;) Какой ты умный, где уж мне до тебя.
MTU repairs your engines and deliever transmission and your canon is produced in license with german machines !) On the other hand we are occpied by USA and do all their dirty jobs for them.
Двоечник несчастный, ты, конечно, прогулял тот урок, где главком сухопутными войсками России Александр Постников прямым текстом заявил, что Т-90 туфта? И наверняка прогулял тот урок, где сообщалось, что распрекрасный и лучший в мире Т-90 снят производства, что сейчас только модернизируют то, что уже стоит на вооружении, новые Т-90 не закупаются - ждут "Армату"? Иди учи уроки и да, к врачу тоже зайди - полечись от дебильного троллизма.
@rtepic its passed that, German Army have completed trials and ordered 50 upgrade packages of existing vehicles and entering service next 2yrs, its also been shown at arms fairs :-)
@siamfd201 of course it helped, 18 of the Mk4's were penetrated, 16 survived. Its not just using modules its what you put in the modules. German firm IBD Deisenroth Engineering supply ceramic armour around the world and leaders in it. Plus the Leo2A7 has larger modules along the hull which the Mk4 didn't.
@RSprtn117 Its reported there is some DU in Challenger 2's Dorchester with several other ceramics. What you have to remeber with DU is that its a very dense material. It is waste byproduct and its cheaper to use it in armour than it is to store as waste and use an equally dense material which has to manufactured like Tungsten which was added on the Leopard 2A4 upgrade. Of all the countries using Abrams, the USA is the only country to use DU armour, non of the other countries use it :)
300 active german Leopard 2 actually, and much more in storage.
@siamfd201 You can visibaly see that Mk4 lacks the side modules on the hull. As I said, we dont whats in those modules, plus the Merkava Mk4 armour is about 10yrs old than Leo2A7's and IBD have made improvements in armour design since then :)
Actually, it does exist(although it's often referred to as Leopard2PSO - Peace Support Operation), there's even a more innovative version called Leopard 2a7+.
Well, there have been several times, when modern tanks where hit by RPG-7, without being destroyed. In Iraq, a Challenger 2 drove into a trench and wasn't able to get out. Whilst the crew was waiting for help, their tank was hit by roundabout 70 RPGs, but the crew wasn't hurt and when help arrived, the tank was able to get back into their camp by itself. Most modern tanks and IFVs are safe against RPGs as they are easy to counter.
leopard 2 is a beast.
@siamfd201
Many of the Merkava's desployed were older models. The Merkava Mk.4 did perform well against Kornets.
They are adding active protection systems to the Merkava's.
No tank is invulnerable but the Merk 4 was very survivable and the IDF was pleased by its performance. We have to remember the Kornet is a heavy anti-tank missile comparable to TOW2.
I think the main problem in Lebanon was that the IDF underestimated the opponent.
Germans do it best :P
Canada went shopping around the world, and bought these.
Kinetic penetrators are used for heavier armoured targets and they have much higher sectional density so they do not loose no where as much as a HEAT warhead in velocity, furthermore, although the primary principle of a HEAT warhead is using explosives to blow open armour with molten copper, the energy behind the warhead is also a key factor. HEAT munitions are not very effective against MBTs due to the perlification of composite armour. LAVs are much better in urban situations...
Does the Leopard 2 have blow-out panels?
In the Abrams the ammo is seperated and when the ammo is hit the panels on the top fly off forcing the blast upwards and not towards the crew compartment. The tank may be out of action but the crew survives and tank can be repaired.
This has worked very well including with freindly fire Hellfire hits.
I know in the Leo 2 the crew is seperated, but is there something similar to the blow-out panels?
Ihave never heard of the leopard 2 a7 before just the leo 2 a6
@ModelbuildingTANKS
Overal the Abrams has heavier armor. When comparing TUSK with A7/PSO the Leo 2 might have better side-hull protection. But in tank-to-tank combat I would prefer the Abrams.
An M1A3 is planned. I think it will include some TUSK upgrades. I wonder if it will get L55 gun. Maybe they stick with L44 because with DU ammo its penetration is close to L55 with non-DU ammo.
Drawback of L55 is that its length is less usefull in urban areas then shorter L44.
@SgtH3nry3 You got some good points there, but I disagree with your comparison to TUSK. TUSK uses ERA, so when that brick blows you are left with an exposed area. Leo2A7+ uses modular which can take multipule strikes, and this was proven with the Challenger 2's street fighter in Telic. But that doesnt mean TUSK is rubbish, its saved lifes, but it cant take as much punishment as leo2A7 or Challenger 2. Nice comment :)
Very interesting video. Thumbs up! :)
...due to the fact that they are much more mobile, and they are more suited for infantry and lightly armoured targets and vehicals, their weapons can fire more ammunition more suited for infantry and structures such as buildings, furthermore they are much faster and more mobile, they can carry infantry into the area and most importantly is the overall practicality, loosing a MBT is much more expensive and due to the shortcommings it has, they fail in tight streets.
@Phalanxtv1875 I know your not arguing mate :) you made a good point and I agree with you, I just wasn't sure if you were picking up on a mistake I might have said, so I was confused lol :)
@SgtH3nry3
by the way, the "american tank industry" is just building the tanks. the abrams tank has mostly been developed by the german industry, an the leopard is in fact nothing more than further developement od the american MBT
As an American tanker (M1A2 SEP) I thoroughly respect the German Army and the Leopard. Awesome tank. Still, not enough in service (maybe 100) to make it viable vs. the 3,500+ Abrams (all variants) we have =p.
@Phalanxtv1875 Im sorry, did I say somewhere that Leopard 2 uses DU? or you explaining why they dont use it? the political reason is that DU is a waste by-product :)
Der Räumschild, den der Leopard 2 benutzt ist ungepanzert und wiegt quasi nur soviel, dass er zusammen mit der, im Vergleich zum Leo 2a6 verkürzten Kanone, genausoviel wiegt, wie zuvor. Außerdem ist diese Veränderung aufgrund dessen geschehen, was man im Einsatz in Afghanistan erlebt. Dort sieht man relativ häufig behelfsbarrikaden, die man ohne Räumschild nicht überwinden kann.
RPG-7, yes. After all that's a 40-year-old system that only penetrates about 250mm RHA. More modern weapons, like the RPG-27, not so much. That one can penetrate up to 600mm RHA, which makes it a serious threat even to modern tanks.
Thankfully, the RPG-27 is rare among insurgents.
Overal the Abrams has better armor then Leo 2.
But I agree that passive armor is better then reactive so probably the PSO has better side protection then Abrams TUSK.
@TankNutDave so, what about the AR complecs colled Shtora? it's uses on t90, or what about the russian AR systems? it's too old on your own opinion?
Yeah, we have seen about 70 years ago...
@SgtH3nry3
What do you mean? There really isn't all to much diffirence between Abrams, Challenger, Leopard 2.
Overal similar designs (especially the most modern versions). M1 and Leo2 both come from MBT-70 project.
The Abrams has heavier armor. The Leo2A6 has better gun but M1A2 compensates this partly with DU ammo. The only major design diffirence is the gas-turbine engine but it can be fitted with a diesel.
The Abrams is partly European: gun is German and armor modified British Chobham.
@bomberpilot271 und dafür braucht man nen kampfpanzer?
die kosten für den turm hätte man sich z.b. sparen können
oder werden neuerdings blockaden mit einem 120mm geschütz weggeräumt?
What exaclty is the Leo2A7?A TUSK for the 2A6?
@CristiClujeanul thank you :)
@Abensberg Andere Frage: kann es denn schaden, trotzdem eine dabei zu haben?
@siamfd201
My German is terrible but I think I know what you mean. A Kornet would be unable to penetrate front of Abrams or Leopard 2. Probably not the side turret either. TOW2B is better because its top-attack.
Iraqi special forces used Kornets to attack US armor from flank. They were only able to disable (not destroy) 2 M1A1 and 1 Bradley. No casualties. One Abrams was hit at the engine (mobility kill) and the other at the rear activating blow out panels.
Das Ding ist halt, der T-90 kann Panzerabwehrraketen aus dem Lauf abfeuern, die die Reichweite von konventionellen Geschossen bei weitem übertrifft, ist aber bspw. in einem Nahbereichsgefecht weitaus unterlegen, da er die Panzerung des M1a2 oder Leo2a6 nicht knacken kann. Die Frage ist, ob Panzergefechte in Zukunft eher im offenen Gelände, oder im Suburbanen stattfinden werden, und da denke ich, dass man von westlicher Seite schlau genug wäre, die Stärken der eigenen Kräfte auszuspielen.
A high explosive anti tank improvies exploive device? As the name suggests it is not engineered for the task well and i dont think anyone should loose sleep over it.
@XxLIVRAxX yeah
Conversely, your average LAV has nowhere near the armour of an MBT, and can in fact be destroyed by a HEAT warhead that would leave an MBT lightly damaged. Not that hard to build a HEAT IED, either. Part of the problem is that the hypervelocity guns on modern Western tanks generate a massive pressure wave that's highly dangerous to anyone in front of the muzzle, but that could be addressed by low-pressure, low-velocity HE shells.
IDF Merkavas do have an infantry compartment, BTW. ;)
@Eiscakeman
Nein sollte er nicht. Es gab mal experimente mit einer 140mm aber wurden gleich wieder verworfen. Der 2A7+ benutzt genau wie der 2A6 die L55, hat aber wohl noch andere Munitionsarten bekommen. Ladeautomat stand wohl noch nie zur Debatte, da keine Maschine einen Menschen an der position ersetzten sollte.
@MrRammsteinKicksAss warum nimmt man keinen panzer OHNE turm dafür?
z.b. sowas wie bergepanzer oder brückenleger (nur ohne brücke versteht sich)
oder einfach ne leopard 2 wanne
wie gesagt... braucht man zum barrikadenräumen ne 120mm kanone? ;-)
oh
es kann natürlich sein dass grade als man entspannt bissl räumen will ein T90 um die ecke kommt!
klar, dann braucht man natürlich nen turm
@NationalSniper yeah same sytem
Welche zwei anderen Panzern könnten zum Nachfolger werden?
My two favorite nations the world: America and Germany
yay, upgrade, now the US has to compete with this
Those weapons would only be effective if the tanks are stupidly commanded and led into tight urban areas which it is not designed for, shoulder fired weapons be it missles are not as capable as the main gun in the tank, and the armour can withstand shots within a certain range.
@Abensberg den T90 muss man ja nachdem man ihn kaputtgemacht hat auch noch wegräumen
bester Panzer..deutsch...what more is nessessary?
@TankNutDave: Crew safety is the most important thing of any vehicle in at least my opinion. But governments are most interested in cost-benefit ratio's or absolute cost.
Also, licencing Leopard 2, Challenger 2 or any foreign designs could impact nationalist feelings of Americans.
But I'm sure that the next-gen US MBT will be more like the Leopard 2/Challenger 2/Merkava Mk.4 rather than the M1 Abrams.
The Leopard 2(A7+) might be better than the M1A2 TUSK, but it is not THAT much better to justify another expensive overhaul of thousands of tanks and educating thousands of M1 crewmen.
And as long as the EU (biggest Leo 2 operator) are (NATO) allies, the US Armed Forces really don't need to be one step ahead. Except for Russia, China and India maybe.
But it wouldn't amaze me if the American tank industry would licence more German/European technology in the near future than it already does.
@PolysiusHanoi Eine lange Kanone (wie beim T90) ist da wohl auch eher hinderlich
imagine if i rolled up to work in this....
Угу, редиска! ;) Хорошие люди это те, которые сами себя обманывают и истерично, с матом пытаются навязывать это мнение другим как это делаешь ты? Оригинальная логика.
The only tank better than an Abrams.
I can't believe how much you ignore other countries on this post.
@CristiClujeanul
What?!
Japan is the most advanced, not Germany.
@mwillis1000 in what copying of technology? ok ur right! :)
@smilo996 Leopard 2 is British? No, it´s not. Challenger 2 is British, but Leo 2 is German.
@KarasGameChannel
LOL, our education system is one of the best in the world.
Sieht genauso aus wie der PSO nur in kackbraun. Beides Prototypen von denen es mehrere Versionen gibt, von denen widerum eine unausgereifter ist als die andere. Ich lasse mich mal überraschen,wie das letztliche Modell aussehen wird! Aber was die uns hier als "neuen" 2A7 verkaufen wollen ist nichts weiter als eine der vielen vorangegangenen Modifikationskits für den 2A6 - lediglich in anderer Tarnfarbe!
P.S.: An der Heck-, Wannenboden- und Bedachungspanzerung könnte noch einiges gemacht werden!
Sigh.
If you would occupy a country, you'll have to enter the cities eventually. And even in the city, tanks are a hell of a lot less vulnerable than LAVs or infantry, never mind the firepower they bring. BTW, HEAT warheads like that of the RPG-7, the LAW, etc, work the same way at any range. Even tank main guns fire HEAT rather than APFSDS once the range exceed 2500m or so., because kinetic penetrators do lose effectiveness at longer ranges.
"BMW" в мире танков
You know that the guy you're picking at for being too patriotic is actually romanian? Don't be angry on him for being honest.He's just right. There is, and never was, no match for german tanks. Und nebenbei bemerkt, sollte perfektes Englisch kein Kriterium für einen qualifizierten Kommentar sein, da nicht jeder eine Begabung für Fremdsprachen besitzt.
leo 2 is still better then
leo a7
That’s leopard 2 PSO
Most tanks are better than the Abrams.
Разве ж только по сравнению с танком на базе платформы "Армата", который ещё не скоро появится в войсках.
I would love to see this in Dutch service. Unfortunatly the current government is making the biggest cuts on defence ever and are getting rid of all(!) the tanks (all of which are state of the art Leo 2 A6). :'(
They are so stupid and know nothing about military equipment. Our Army is becoming a police force without firepower.
Before the elections the largest government party promised to increase the defence budget!
@Simpsegueos The L/44 is for City and CQB like small ways and and the L/55 Long gun is for range fights i open fields ;) from the Leo 2A7 have ca. 25% L/44 and the rest the L/55
По сравнению с русскими танками? Конечно ... * хихикает *
Да, я русский и из России. И что это меняет? От этого как-то зависит тот факт, что Т-90 сняли с производства потому, что российские военные и в частности главком сухопутными войсками России Александр Постников считают его плохим? От этого зависит, что известный в рунете эксперт по танкам Василий Чобиток, сам танкист, считает лучшим танком не Т-90, а корейский K2 Black Panther? Тебя на Гугле забанили? Нет? Тогда проверь.Может ты просто слишком мало знаешь и слишком много троллишь на квасные темы?
@CristiClujeanul were
und wat is hat der leo nun wie alle anderen modernen panzer nen selbstlader? war ja geplant das ding aber dann wegen geldmangel doch gestrichen was is daraus geworden?
Россия не является угрозой для любого НАТО или ЕС страны. И вы это знаете... Я надеюсь.
Don't tell the Russians, they will be angry... And write about on the internet, because that is pretty much all they can do...
@CristiClujeanul And the Russians did too.
@smilo996 no the leopard 2 is not british it is german.best micro chips arem ade by u.s my ass.
Двоечник несчастный, Т-90СМ это экспортный, т.е. ухудшенный вариант и есть только выставочный образец - пытаются продать, пока безуспешно. Для России был предложен Т-90АМ, но его не производят, в лучшем случае будут модернизировать имеющиеся Т-90А до его уровня. Иди учи уроки и не мешай взрослым своим квасным троллингом.
@Abensberg Soll man nun einen Panzer zusätzlich mit der Fähigkeit zum Barrikadenräumen ausstatten oder lieber ein völlig neues Fahrzeug zu entwickeln
Oh ja das stimmt! (Y)
Deuschte ingineurs kunst ist nicht zu übertreffen !!!!
@CristiClujeanul
@Bloodmane1987 ja aber haste mal die russischen panzerexperten angehört^^ der leo ist besser punkt aus ende DAS IST MEINE MEINUNG du wirst mich nicht umstimmen können ;D
Нет.
Hunga :D:D
@CristiClujeanul Just a quick guess: You are a little bit too patriotic?... Think about it and before you give an answer, learn proper english.
И это мне советует упорно занимающийся самообманом и бесящийся, исходящий на лучи дерьма из-за ерунды человек. Может стоит самому сходить к доктору и полечить мозги и психику, научиться адекватно воспринимать окружающую реальность, отучиться троллить, флудить?
@benedicimuste dann hast du keine ahnung....sag nur staßensperren im stadtkampf......beispiel somalia 1993
Ага, молодец, мощно доказал, что Т-90 лучший в мире. Чем громче и истеричней ты тут троллишь с пеной у рта, он конечно лучше становится от этого и Постников взял свои слова обратно и возобновили производство Т-90 для российской армии, а не ждут "Армату" ;) Какой ты умный, где уж мне до тебя.
MTU repairs your engines and deliever transmission and your canon is produced in license with german machines !) On the other hand we are occpied by USA and do all their dirty jobs for them.
Двоечник несчастный, ты, конечно, прогулял тот урок, где главком сухопутными войсками России Александр Постников прямым текстом заявил, что Т-90 туфта? И наверняка прогулял тот урок, где сообщалось, что распрекрасный и лучший в мире Т-90 снят производства, что сейчас только модернизируют то, что уже стоит на вооружении, новые Т-90 не закупаются - ждут "Армату"? Иди учи уроки и да, к врачу тоже зайди - полечись от дебильного троллизма.
Pfft ... T-90 carries this trough!
The name is 2a6+ 2a7 dosen´t exist!