Military Review

"Leopard 2PL": an old new tank for the poor

165
"Leopard 2PL": an old new tank for the poor

Tank Leopard 2 PL


The German main battle tank "Leopard", along with the Soviet-Russian T-72 and the American MBT "Abrams" is the most widely modernized machine in the field of tank design. At the same time, Western manufacturers are not going to change the vector of development of this technology, developing all new modifications, while Russia has created a completely new modular platform with the flagship T-14, which, according to many experts, is out of competition in terms of TTX.

Thus, German and American engineers faced a rather difficult task - to quickly develop a competitor to the Russian "Armate". To date, the United States and Germany have already submitted development programs for their future tankscapable of competing with the T-14. This is “Leopard” in the A8 variant, which was presented by revolutionary MBTs, and M1A2 “Abrams” in the next modification of SEP V4.

Remarkably, both countries had at their disposal fairly recent updates - Leopard А7 + and Abrams SEP V3, first presented at the same time as Armata T-14. However, the developers, having failed to implement the new modifications, plunged into the arms race in the field of tank building.

At the same time, the Germans were working in parallel on a program to modernize the most massive of the Leopards, the Leopard 2А4 tank. Total order was made 2500 tanks of this version, not counting the Swiss licensed copy of Pz 87. After 2000, Germany began to actively sell tanks to the Allied states, and today these combat vehicles are in service with 18 countries.


Tanks Leopard 2A4 (left) and Leopard 2A5 (right) Polish forces

Yesterday at the international exhibition of weapons "IDEX 2017" German company "Rheinmetall" demonstrated the tank "Leopard 2", upgraded to version PL. The modernization program is initially focused on the Polish army, which is armed with 128 "Leopards" 2А4. In 2015, the Polish Defense Ministry signed a contract for the modernization of these machines.

It is understood that the modernized Polish tanks “Leopard 2 PL” will seriously add to the firepower and in their capabilities almost reach the level of 2А6. In the list of improvements listed:

- mounted hinged composite armor, significantly improving protection against some types of ammunition;

- increased ballistic tower defense;

- hydraulic mechanisms for stabilizing the guns and turret drives are replaced by electric ones - this improved the work of the mechanisms and increased the space inside the machine;

- cameras are installed to improve visibility for the driver and a new surveillance system for the crew;

- modernized gun L44, which allows him to use new, more powerful projectiles;

- Automatic fire extinguishing system installed;

- increased ammunition;

—A auxiliary power unit is installed.


Yes, “Leopard” will again put on weight and reach 60-ti, which is quite a lot to overcome the “old” obstacles and maneuver. In addition, the Polish version, unlike 2А6, will be content with the same supposedly upgraded smooth-bore gun, which will fire with new, more advanced projectiles. In principle, this is the whole increase in firepower.

By and large, for those countries that believe that the basic booking of “Leopard 2A4” may be insufficient (and they burn like candles when they hit almost any ATGM), upgrading from “Leopard” to the version of 2 PL may be a good solution.

The solution for those countries who a priori do not pursue "progress" in tank building, for those countries whose defense budget is happy to fork out for a mediocre modification of outdated weapons, without even thinking about the qualitative saturation of the army. A good marketing program from Rheinmetall: as they say, demand creates supply. Most likely, the proceeds will go to that very “revolutionary MBT” or at least to the serial production of А7 +, since at the moment the Germans simply have nothing to oppose to the main competitor - Russia and its “Armata”.
Author:
Photos used:
armyrecognition.com
165 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 23 February 2017 06: 49
    +25
    I did not like the article. First, no one set a goal to catch up and overtake “Armata”. In the Bundeswehr there are only about 300 tanks and their number is not going to increase. Today, when the NATO countries, in principle, are not preparing for any major war, their tank fleet is aimed at supporting the infantry of the expeditionary forces. And in general, the number of combat-ready, modern NATO tanks in Europe does not exceed 1500.
    1. apro
      apro 23 February 2017 07: 02
      +15
      The Germans did everything right by transferring Poland 250 leopards and bringing the number of tanks to 1000, so NATO has something to fight, and a leopard tank is at a level that did not like the heading tank for the poor, its price is 2 times higher than 72.
      1. Crimean partisan 1974
        Crimean partisan 1974 23 February 2017 08: 36
        +14
        his price is 2 times higher than 72.

        it’s not the price, it’s about the Leo-2 being fucked by the poor Natev’s newly arrived relatives, and by mutual agreement, the Germans didn’t much pick up the junk that was left in the warehouses for sale, so be sure, and the accepting party licks around that the MTO for Leo-2 and the warranty the service is provided by the provider, that is, RM, this is a brook of money, if you take into account the number of leo-2 units, then the money is not sickly, it’s not even a stream, but a small river, recent events with Danish leo-2 in Afghanistan are a good example
        1. apro
          apro 23 February 2017 08: 57
          +6
          The Germans are able to trade nothing more. With the provision of the ITO, it turns out that the Germans control the use of their tanks by the Poles, a reasonable decision.
          1. cake
            cake 23 February 2017 19: 02
            +1
            In accordance with the contract for modernization, a full range of services will be in Poland (Poznan). In addition, Poland received technology for the production of many components, including guns. As a result, Polish industry proposed the modernization of T-72 tanks with a 120 mm gun and new armor (Pt-16).
          2. karabas-barabas
            karabas-barabas 24 February 2017 21: 33
            +1
            Quote: apro
            The Germans are able to trade nothing more


            Well, yes, nothing more, just trade and do all sorts of things!))
        2. cake
          cake 23 February 2017 18: 43
          +1
          The Germans sold Poland 2a5 tanks. But when the war in Donbass began, the Germans decided to increase the number of tanks. Ho in warehouses there were only 2a4 and this is in poor condition, which no one from abroad wanted. Ho had no other choice, and decided to upgrade 100 2a4 tanks. Interestingly, all tanks in the German army version 2a6 are modernized tanks 2a4. The Germans did not produce new tanks for their own army higher than version 2a5. They just upgraded old tanks.
    2. Banishing liberoids
      Banishing liberoids 23 February 2017 07: 27
      +8
      Aaron hi it’s just that the author tried to express his view on the Germans’ attempt to present a deep modernization of the tank as a new version. From February 23, you! drinks soldier good
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 23 February 2017 07: 28
        +8
        Quote: Expelling Liberoids
        Aaron hi it’s just that the author tried to express his view on the Germans’ attempt to present a deep modernization of the tank as a new version. From February 23, you! drinks soldier good

        Mutually. Happy holiday! soldier
      2. EternalStranger
        EternalStranger 23 February 2017 20: 10
        +1
        An attempt to introduce as a new version the renaming of the T-72BU to the T-90.
        And here it is directly stated about the modification.
        1. family tree
          family tree 23 February 2017 21: 39
          +1
          Quote: EternalStranger
          An attempt to introduce as a new version the renaming of the T-72BU to the T-90.

          At the 90th SM (AM) the tower is new, I won’t talk about the rest, because of the tower the limit for further modernization, the chassis will not carry away, 48 tons. Well, there’s another 12 tons of reserve soldier
          Once again, all a happy holiday!
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 24 February 2017 07: 43
            +1
            ..and MTO is already at the limit. No reserves to increase capacity.
        2. Yarhann
          Yarhann 23 February 2017 22: 34
          +1
          Well, actually these are two completely different tanks - both in equipment and in their price - look at the extreme models 72x and 90x.
          1. EternalStranger
            EternalStranger 23 February 2017 23: 24
            0
            And where does the latest models?
            There was a modification of the T-72BU. It was renamed the T-90 a few years later and presented as a new tank.
            1. Yarhann
              Yarhann 24 February 2017 10: 03
              +2
              the latest models are for tank experts to understand the difference between these tanks the size of the abyss. Just more clearly.
          2. family tree
            family tree 24 February 2017 03: 13
            +1
            Quote: Yarhann
            Well, actually these are two completely different tanks

            So, we remove from the 90th and 72th towers and engines with quirks and tell me how the rest is different from each other belay
            1. Yarhann
              Yarhann 24 February 2017 09: 58
              +5
              well, so the chassis is not a tank. Sweet man, you still have a harp in different tanks and say that if they are the same, then the tanks are identical. It is the tower that decides in a modern tank all this and the internal and external layout of the tank and its combat capabilities. The fact that they didn’t bother with the new chassis under the t90 is quite logical, it would essentially be a new tank, and so they improved the combat module, so to speak - all this is another tank. We take t 34 and t 34-85 - in your opinion these are also the same tanks.
              1. family tree
                family tree 24 February 2017 10: 04
                0
                Quote: Yarhann
                It is the tower that decides all this in a modern tank

                It's mine
                At the 90th SM (AM) the tower is new, I won’t talk about the rest, because of the tower the limit for further modernization, the chassis will not carry away

                I’m actually in the forest, and you, along the way, by firewood request
              2. EternalStranger
                EternalStranger 24 February 2017 13: 12
                0
                Quote: Yarhann
                well so the chassis is not a tank nice man

                Quote: Yarhann
                The fact that they didn’t bother with the new chassis under the t90 is quite logical, it would essentially be a new tank, and so they improved the combat module, so to speak - all this is another tank.

                Directly mutually exclusive paragraphs. So is it a new tank or an improved tower?
                Quote: Yarhann
                We take t 34 and t 34-85 - in your opinion these are also the same tanks.

                from the name it seems to be clear that this is the same tank.
                1. KaPToC
                  KaPToC 24 February 2017 14: 25
                  0
                  Quote: EternalStranger
                  from the name it seems to be clear that this is the same tank.

                  According to Malinin-Burenin, eighty-five is more than seventy-six, or do you think this is not so?
                  1. family tree
                    family tree 24 February 2017 14: 37
                    +1
                    Quote: KaPToC
                    eighty five more than seventy six

                    A hundred and more than eighty-five, though in the wheelhouse, and not in the tower, and a self-propelled gun, not a tank, but the engine and chassis with candles and a comb one in one T-34, enough children can build up of themselves, the whole muddied because of that that the 90th trough and hodovka from 72 matches and further it makes no sense to weight request
                    Therefore, the new platform is 14 tank, 15 BMPT, 16 BREM.
                    1. KaPToC
                      KaPToC 24 February 2017 18: 06
                      0
                      Quote: perepilka
                      but the engine and chassis with candles and a comb one in one T-34

                      As a person with a technical background, I can assure you not one in one T-34.
                      Quote: perepilka
                      enough can build children from themselves

                      Maybe enough to build an illiterate humanities?
                      Quote: perepilka
                      hodovka from 72 matches and further make it harder to weight

                      But is a tank not only a running gear?
                      1. family tree
                        family tree 24 February 2017 18: 17
                        0
                        Quote: KaPToC
                        As a person with a technical background, I can assure you not one in one T-34.

                        Well, assure, preferably in more detail

                        That's just about the checkpoint is not necessary, they put the four-speed and 34-85 in rembats, and I saw the picture with the support from the Panther at 34-85, I don’t know about Dryers
                2. Zaurbek
                  Zaurbek 24 February 2017 15: 50
                  0
                  Well, the difference is about the same between T-72-90 and T-34 and 34-85
                  1. EternalStranger
                    EternalStranger 24 February 2017 18: 13
                    0
                    All right. Only T-34-85 no one called a completely new tank.
                    1. family tree
                      family tree 24 February 2017 23: 49
                      0
                      Quote: EternalStranger
                      Only T-34-85 no one called a completely new tank.

                      So the 90th, only boobies call it completely new, although they are different with the 72nd. Jews, without bothering with the M-60A3, the Sabra Turks got bogged down, and they never take a steam bath at the expense of the names belay
    3. DM51
      DM51 23 February 2017 09: 42
      +7
      Quote: Aaron Zawi
      I did not like the article. First, no one set a goal to catch up and overtake “Armata”. In the Bundeswehr there are only about 300 tanks and their number is not going to increase. Today, when the NATO countries, in principle, are not preparing for any major war, their tank fleet is aimed at supporting the infantry of the expeditionary forces. And in general, the number of combat-ready, modern NATO tanks in Europe does not exceed 1500.

      What makes you think that no one set himself the goal of catching up with Armata? The French and Germans want to unite to create at least something close to the technical characteristics of Almaty. Will they succeed and how long will it take? It is not a desire (and they have it), but the opportunities that the west does not currently have
      1. cake
        cake 23 February 2017 19: 13
        +1
        The T-14 tank is an interesting project, but the Russians are not able to produce an efficient engine. So, if the Germans do not help, the T-14 will be mostly under repair.
        1. DM51
          DM51 23 February 2017 20: 13
          +5
          Quote: bolo
          The T-14 tank is an interesting project, but the Russians are not able to produce an efficient engine. So, if the Germans do not help, the T-14 will be mostly under repair.

          How can you write such nonsense, drunk or something?
          1. karabas-barabas
            karabas-barabas 24 February 2017 22: 19
            +1
            Bullshit, it is argued that the Germans and the French can’t sleep, they want to catch Armata by TTX. There are big doubts that Armata itself withstands its declared performance characteristics, especially these doubts crept in when the "Almaty production line" at UVZ in 2014 was shown with a suspended engine and the type of working workers .. Who knows how such a line should really look like, it's hardly -or convinced pictures from UVZ. After all, nothing else that closely resembles combat effectiveness has been shown.
          2. karabas-barabas
            karabas-barabas 24 February 2017 22: 19
            0
            Bullshit, it is argued that the Germans and the French can’t sleep, they want to catch Armata by TTX. There are big doubts that Armata itself withstands its declared performance characteristics, especially these doubts crept in when the "Almaty production line" at UVZ in 2014 was shown with a suspended engine and the type of working workers .. Who knows how such a line should really look like, it's hardly -or convinced pictures from UVZ. After all, nothing else that closely resembles combat effectiveness has been shown.
          3. Parsec
            Parsec 25 February 2017 11: 28
            +2
            Quote: DM51
            How can you write such nonsense, drunk or something?

            Pole.
        2. Grigory_78
          Grigory_78 23 February 2017 20: 40
          +2
          This is called a "bunch in a puddle." Feel better? On the topic - there are no problems with the engine. There are problems with something else, but that's none of your business.
        3. family tree
          family tree 23 February 2017 23: 03
          +1
          Quote: bolo
          but the Russians are not able to produce an efficient engine.

          B-2 and its derivatives are still winding in the north, where the whole, where half. In Antarctica, on Kharkivchanka, Morozov didn’t muddle up Junkers’s suitcase, but A-401, which is essentially the same derivative of B-2, this engine will survive us all, although the harsh Chelyabinsk men, if they bring it to mind, or maybe they’ve already brought shaped, the picture is not loaded, the link is long, so the X-shaped tank itself in the search engine request
        4. Jew Russian
          Jew Russian 23 February 2017 23: 03
          +4
          Sir, what is your nationality? In Russia, for understanding, there are more than 100 nationalities), but about ethnic groups who considered them)) and so in order
          1. Russian engines for battle is the best thing that can simply be because they work on everything (the so-called a lot of fuel) and not only this is laid down in them, and by the way there are gas turbine technologies with reliability higher than American ones.
          2.just look around what is basically howling in the world whose weapon? Western for parades and in the war Soviet or Russian.
          3. Why when I read you I did not understand at all? What does efficiency and reliability have to do with it? I got cognitive dissonance.
          From all of the above, I realized that you cannot be objective simply because you are offended like McCain.
      2. EternalStranger
        EternalStranger 23 February 2017 20: 11
        +1
        And what is there in the technical characteristics of Armata such that the Germans immediately had the need to catch up with him? Especially in the conditions when they are definitely not going to fight with Russia?
    4. family tree
      family tree 23 February 2017 10: 31
      +2
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      Today, when the NATO countries, in principle, are not preparing for any major war, their tank fleet is aimed at supporting the infantry of the expeditionary forces.

      Well, why are they yelling? About Russian aggressors what Incidentally, the DPR LPR are fighting, and they have more tanks than the Bundes request And all we have is, well, the 1st Guards Order of the Red Banner, well, the army, cho, so in Rostov, the 150th Idritsko-Berlin, just a division, bliiin! as many as 300 spar, pooh tanks what
      1. cake
        cake 23 February 2017 19: 20
        0
        But if the separatists had German tanks instead of Soviet ones, they would have been in Kiev for a long time.
        1. DM51
          DM51 23 February 2017 20: 15
          +7
          Quote: bolo
          But if the separatists had German tanks instead of Soviet ones, they would have been in Kiev for a long time.

          Ahh, that's the thing! So you are a troll, and inept - you are a very fat troll, I'm sorry, I didn’t recognize right away
        2. family tree
          family tree 23 February 2017 21: 17
          +4
          Quote: bolo
          But if the separatists had German tanks instead of Soviet ones, they would have been in Kiev for a long time.


          Treptow Park, Berlin
          I would not touch the turtles, cho? You look and live calmer what
        3. user1212
          user1212 23 February 2017 21: 48
          +3
          Quote: bolo
          But if the separatists had German tanks instead of Soviet ones, they would have been in Kiev for a long time.

          Turks have German tanks, but it turned out that even the ancient bassoon copes with leopards
        4. Yarhann
          Yarhann 23 February 2017 22: 37
          +2
          well, a Guderian connoisseur tell us how the tanks decided everything in this conflict)) child - go to the tanks play from potatoes or from snails - there you definitely decide everything)))
        5. lewerlin53rus
          lewerlin53rus 23 February 2017 22: 44
          +4
          Quote: bolo
          But if the separatists had German tanks instead of Soviet ones, they would have been in Kiev for a long time.

          Well, to begin with, the real separatists are sitting in Kiev. And the fact that the militia is still not in Kiev is not because their tanks are not the same. here are completely different reasons. And this is a separate conversation
    5. Megatron
      Megatron 23 February 2017 16: 32
      +4
      Well, the Tigers were also considered super-weapons.
      Here are their glorious heirs. Huge, slow, with exorbitant weight, and certainly the same capricious.
      They and leklers only ride in parades.
      I alone want to plant in this ledge under the tower?

      PS Oh, why is it my enemy badge? I am writing from home, from St. Petersburg ....
      1. Grigory_78
        Grigory_78 23 February 2017 20: 45
        +2
        Cool. I wonder what kind of joy Peter is defined as Sweden ...
        1. family tree
          family tree 23 February 2017 21: 25
          +2
          Disable proxies, the flag on the server is determined
          1. Megatron
            Megatron 24 February 2017 09: 56
            +2
            I am aware, wrote without any stray.
    6. Agent_017
      Agent_017 24 February 2017 20: 43
      0
      But painted well)))) ...
  2. demiurg
    demiurg 23 February 2017 07: 00
    +8
    Europe and the USA do not need tanks much. What for? They are not going to fight with equal rivals.
    Here MRAPs for traveling white bwan are needed and constantly. We need aviation, drive Papuans from palms to work.
    1. Mystery12345
      Mystery12345 23 February 2017 07: 42
      +6
      Quote: demiurg
      Europe and the USA do not need tanks much. What for? They are not going to fight with equal rivals.

      Poland does not need tanks in principle.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 23 February 2017 09: 37
        +8
        "Poland does not need tanks in principle" ////

        Why? Geographically, they have almost the entire country treeless flat terrain
        without natural barriers. Ideal for tank applications. Both the aggressor and the defenders. Such a terrain is very difficult to defend in principle, but if it is locked, then a maneuverable tank battle on it is the very thing. And Leo-2, as an anti-tank weapon, is more effective than for supporting infantry.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 23 February 2017 12: 33
          +10
          ... and for army aviation, the flat terrain is the most!
        2. sandrmur76
          sandrmur76 23 February 2017 13: 27
          0
          Geographically, they have almost the entire country treeless flat terrain
          without natural barriers. Ideal for tank applications.
          And there’s nowhere to hide from aviation. Yes, and from other means of hitting tanks. If the sky is occupied by the enemy, I can’t even imagine where the tank will be (comfortable). Absolutely all tank crews just try to evade the tank. request
        3. cake
          cake 23 February 2017 19: 25
          0
          You have never been to Poland. 35% of the country is forest. Especially on the border with the Kaliningrad region and Belarus there are many forests, swamps, lakes.
          1. AllXVahhaB
            AllXVahhaB 23 February 2017 23: 57
            +1
            Quote: bolo
            You have never been to Poland. 35% of the country is forest. Especially on the border with the Kaliningrad region and Belarus there are many forests, swamps, lakes.

            You should at least open GoogleMap before writing such nonsense)))
            Most of the forests were preserved in the Carpathians, Sudetenland and in the lakeside zone, and in central Poland the forest is very rare. Only the remains of the ancient forests of Mazovia are found, and forest plots are preserved only on the barren sandy hills and bogs.
            Total not more than 25%
            1. cake
              cake 24 February 2017 21: 30
              0
              I live here. In Poland there are many forests not only in the mountains. in central Poland there are fewer forests but there are many orchards. In addition, villages — almost every house is surrounded by trees, often conifers. Very good conditions for hiding and destroying tanks using anti-tank missiles. The Polish army has mainly Spike missiles.
              1. AllXVahhaB
                AllXVahhaB 25 February 2017 00: 17
                +1
                Quote: bolo
                Very good conditions for hiding and destroying tanks using anti-tank missiles.

                In orchards and gardens with trees? belay Are these forests in Poland? Well then, it’s impossible to clean out the Polish partisans laughing laughing laughing
              2. AllXVahhaB
                AllXVahhaB 25 February 2017 00: 23
                +1
                Quote: bolo
                In addition, villages — almost every house is surrounded by trees, often conifers.

                cakebefore the tanks go to your house, surrounded by coniferous trees, the FAB-100 will fall and hi to Spik))) Do you not understand this?
                1. cake
                  cake 25 February 2017 19: 39
                  0
                  before a Russian pilot approaches my house amraam will destroy his plane
                  1. AllXVahhaB
                    AllXVahhaB 26 February 2017 00: 56
                    +1
                    Quote: bolo
                    before a Russian pilot approaches my house amraam will destroy his plane

                    Released by the Polish pilot-ass? laughing laughing laughing
                    Well ... Polish ambition is byword))) Only History shows the opposite ... you also boasted at 39 hi
                    And you still do not understand Brzezinski’s words that today Poland is a geopolitical desert between Russia and Germany.
                    So don’t bother and don’t take part, but grow more coniferous gardens around your huts and dream how you will burn Russian tanks sitting in these bushes fellow
                    1. cake
                      cake 26 February 2017 13: 20
                      0
                      Germany and Russia are no more. Te they do not have demographic resources for the march through Poland. Today it is Russia a geopolitical desert between Europe under the influence of America and Asia (maybe under the influence of China but even China itself is enough). This is not the twentieth century. In the twenty-first century there will be a clash of true giants and Russia is not a giant, and there will also be a geopolitical desert.
                      1. KaPToC
                        KaPToC 26 February 2017 16: 05
                        0
                        Quote: bolo
                        Germany and Russia are no more.

                        Offended log
                      2. AllXVahhaB
                        AllXVahhaB 6 March 2017 20: 26
                        +1
                        Quote: bolo
                        Germany and Russia are no more.

                        Blessed is he who believes. Good luck !!!
                      3. AllXVahhaB
                        AllXVahhaB 6 March 2017 20: 29
                        0
                        Vasilin already stocked up ??? wink
                      4. isergil
                        isergil 5 January 2018 13: 52
                        0
                        Do not boil. No one is going to fight with you, unless you yourself climb or give the Americans your land.
                        You yourself are the creators of your happiness. Just leave Russia alone.
          2. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 24 February 2017 10: 10
            0
            the key phrase here is "air dominance"
        4. Grigory_78
          Grigory_78 23 February 2017 20: 50
          +2
          Well, yes, Poland is a stony desert without rivers, lakes, swamps ... But you, by the way, do not confuse Poland with Israel?
        5. family tree
          family tree 24 February 2017 03: 34
          +2
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Why? Geographically, they have almost the entire country treeless flat terrain

          Well, in the 39th they had tanks, and aviation, and ambition full of pants, and all the world ...
          And what? 39-40 Jews are killed, in Edbavna, the same, then ukrov, in response to Volynskaya, and it is unlikely that those who slaughtered, but in the 45th Germans that remained east of the Oder-Neise line, jackals are short if what What kind of tanks do they care, men need more tanks than armor in a tank
          1. cake
            cake 24 February 2017 21: 38
            0
            in the 39th, both tanks and aircraft in very small quantities. it was in the Soviet army in the 41st there were tanks and aircraft in huge numbers. Despite this, the blitzkrieg was much faster than in other places. it is good that winters in Russia are much harsher than in Europe.
            1. family tree
              family tree 24 February 2017 23: 31
              +2
              Quote: bolo
              it is good that winters in Russia are much harsher than in Europe.

              Well, let's say, at first, the fascists rejoiced in winter, because the road appeared, only they rejoiced for a short time, the 4th tank brigade drew from nowhere, Katukova Michal Efimycha, and Heinz immediately plak-plak, this is not fair, they have 34 matches although at first he sang a completely different song what
              Well, then she became the 1st Guards
  3. Banishing liberoids
    Banishing liberoids 23 February 2017 07: 24
    +1
    It was necessary to give more detailed material, but thanks for that and plus +
  4. gla172
    gla172 23 February 2017 08: 23
    +2
    ... That's what they need 7TP .... cheaper ... and, in principle, what's the difference on what to ride .... there’s no one to fight and no one to fight ....
  5. Crimean partisan 1974
    Crimean partisan 1974 23 February 2017 08: 45
    0
    Most likely, the funds received will go to the very “revolutionary MBT” or at least to serial production of A7 +,

    It is doubtful, since RM provides high warranty for sold Leo-2s, and they, as luck would have it, not only burn like candles, but also fail, and some are written off tightly and sent to the manufacturer with compensation claims, so this is just the case the bull-calf staggers, sighs on the go, the water runs out, now I ........... (any verb can be put in points)
  6. DM51
    DM51 23 February 2017 09: 50
    +1
    Why do the Poles dear Lerpard, who showed himself poorly in the very first real hostilities in which he participated - in Turkey, if they have a good modernization of the T-72 - PT-72U or PT-91U?
    1. DM51
      DM51 23 February 2017 10: 25
      0
      Of course, not in Turkey, but by the Turks in Syria (he corrected himself smile )
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 23 February 2017 10: 58
      +9
      What is stronger on the T-72 side of the tower than on the Leo-2?
      They are equally weak against ATGMs.
      But the SLA, especially at night, in Leo-2 is definitely better.
      The T-72 is better at marching.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 23 February 2017 12: 36
        +3
        In general, I also don’t understand, Poland had a pretty good version of the T-72 (close to the T-90 in terms of capabilities) and access to the western OMS. Could support their industry.
        1. EternalStranger
          EternalStranger 23 February 2017 20: 14
          0
          they probably consider it more important to support civilian industry.
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 24 February 2017 10: 11
            0
            or they were given a second-hand Leo2 at a discount, with a big discount ...
            1. EternalStranger
              EternalStranger 24 February 2017 13: 14
              0
              It does not interfere. If there is an opportunity to cheaply and efficiently arm an army - why not? And it is better to invest money in something more necessary for the country's population.
      2. DM51
        DM51 23 February 2017 12: 50
        +6
        Quote: voyaka uh
        What is stronger on the T-72 side of the tower than on the Leo-2?
        They are equally weak against ATGMs.
        But the SLA, especially at night, in Leo-2 is definitely better.
        The T-72 is better at marching.

        If they, as you say are equally weak against ATGMs, then why overpay twice? On the T-72 you can hang a DZ and then the security will increase dramatically, if you attach a DZ on a Leopard, then its mass will increase, and it is already very heavy. In Poland, there are many small rivers and bridges, as well as marshy places - you need a tank of up to 50 tons, not to mention the fact that modernization in Poland of the T-72 creates jobs in Poland itself, and for Leopards, money goes to Germany. it is being modernized and in the latest modifications of the Polish T-72 it is not so bad anyway
      3. n0001
        n0001 23 February 2017 19: 27
        +1
        The industry is working on the modernization of the T-72 named PL 16
  7. Aitvaras
    Aitvaras 23 February 2017 11: 00
    +5
    The author forgot to state that modern Leopard will have -130 mm guns, with new shells, which will significantly increase their power and also new systems - active and passive protection.
    1. neri73-r
      neri73-r 23 February 2017 11: 31
      +1
      They won’t be expensive!
      1. Aitvaras
        Aitvaras 23 February 2017 12: 54
        0
        As far as I know, it is precisely such tanks that will be delivered to the German tank group, which will soon be located in Lithuania as part of the NATO allies.
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 23 February 2017 14: 52
      +2
      Only on Leo does it make no sense to change the caliber, 300 tanks in the war with the Russian Federation will not do the weather (and 130mm is needed for this, there are no other enemies with protected tanks). Therefore, it is necessary to rearm All countries NATO at 130mm. Our 125mm caliber tolerates (it is more powerful than 120mm and will be slightly weaker than 130mm). And then, we wait for the adoption of a new caliber and approve 152mm
      1. Ivanov2i
        Ivanov2i 11 November 2017 17: 33
        0
        For horseradish change the gun when you can change the shell.
        And that you, father, will come to Big Berta.
    3. user1212
      user1212 23 February 2017 22: 10
      +1
      Quote: Aitvaras
      The author forgot to state that modern Leopard will have -130 mm guns

      Planned preparedness for the series in 25
  8. exo
    exo 23 February 2017 11: 26
    +10
    You are already starting to get tired of praising Armata. A tank that is unlikely to be massive. And it’s not very clear when. At the same time, Leopard 2, the car is very worthy. And now, it can fight.
  9. Maximillian von Adelheid
    Maximillian von Adelheid 23 February 2017 12: 02
    +1
    So there it is !!! belay And we didn’t know !!! sad Leopard, it turns out, only beggars are buying ... crying And we are in the Russian Federation - there is a lot of money, therefore, we will buy Almaty at a price 10 times higher than all Europe there !!! tongue
    "Armata. Everything else is a compromise!" (I apologize to the company Mile, for, I love her, and use winked )
    1. DM51
      DM51 23 February 2017 12: 58
      +4
      Quote: Maximillian von Adelheid
      So there it is !!! belay And we didn’t know !!! sad Leopard, it turns out, only beggars are buying ... crying And we are in the Russian Federation - there is a lot of money, therefore, we will buy Almaty at a price 10 times higher than all Europe there !!! tongue
      "Armata. Everything else is a compromise!" (I apologize to the company Mile, for, I love her, and use winked )

      This is where the cost of Almaty is 10 times more - in your parallel universe? Why flog open lies and bullshit?
  10. svp67
    svp67 23 February 2017 12: 05
    +12
    Author: Balalaika ... consonant with the "balobol", which, in principle, proves this article. One name:
    "Leopard 2PL": an old new tank for the poor
    It’s the same as saying: “Mercedes is a car for the poor ...”
    The author did NOT UNDERSTAND the material, but "gave" a mountainous propaganda article, and la was ours best of all. So this tank "Leopard 2PL" is a VERY SERIOUS adversary, VERY. For any of our tanks. And the fact that the Germans are quickly modernizing the Leopards-2 now shows the power of their industry and the fact that the German tank school is one of the best in the world. Russia would not be left behind now, but in time it would preoccupy with the adoption of new generations of ATGM troops and timely saturation. That, God forbid, again not send your soldiers with Molotov cocktails against foreign tanks
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 23 February 2017 12: 38
      0
      But, fortunately, there is no such dominance as between the Tiger / Panther and the T-34. The 125 and 120mm guns are mutually dangerous for all modern tanks ....
      1. svp67
        svp67 23 February 2017 13: 08
        +4
        Quote: Zaurbek
        The 125 and 120mm guns are mutually dangerous for all modern tanks ....

        I’m afraid that not modernized T-72 guns will not be able to break through the enhanced defense of this “Polish” “Leo 2”
        1. DM51
          DM51 23 February 2017 20: 17
          +3
          Quote: svp67
          Quote: Zaurbek
          The 125 and 120mm guns are mutually dangerous for all modern tanks ....

          I’m afraid that not modernized T-72 guns will not be able to break through the enhanced defense of this “Polish” “Leo 2”

          I'm afraid you can only speculate and most likely wrong
          1. svp67
            svp67 24 February 2017 00: 11
            0
            Quote: DM51
            I'm afraid you can only speculate and most likely wrong

            Yes, until there were direct clashes between this tank and our tanks, we can only guess and compare mathematical models with test results, and now they show that our old cannons are not able to penetrate the main armor of Western tanks.
            1. DM51
              DM51 24 February 2017 03: 20
              +2
              Quote: svp67
              Quote: DM51
              I'm afraid you can only speculate and most likely wrong

              Yes, until there were direct clashes between this tank and our tanks, we can only guess and compare mathematical models with test results, and now they show that our old cannons are not able to penetrate the main armor of Western tanks.

              Yah?! And when the Germans made Leo 2, why didn’t they calculate on their mathematical models that their tanks were “sewn” by the Soviet anti-tank systems and did not hang DZ on them, but only relied entirely on miracle armor? Reality is not computer numbers or Discovery ratings, reality is when the very first battles in Syria showed what the vaunted Leopards are worth and which tanks are actually the best in the world
              1. svp67
                svp67 24 February 2017 07: 13
                +1
                Quote: DM51
                And when the Germans made Leo 2, why didn’t they calculate on their mathematical models that their tanks were “sewn” by the Soviet anti-tank systems and did not hang DZ on them, but only relied entirely on miracle armor?

                And where are our ATGMs “sewing” them? In the side projection of the stern of the tower, where you do not always get there. Yes, and if you understand, then destroyed the modification of the "A4", which has long been out of service with the Bundeswehr. It would be interesting to see the confrontation between our ATGMs and Leo2 modifications of A5 and higher ...
                Quote: DM51
                Reality is not computer numbers or Discovery ratings, reality is when the very first battles in Syria showed what the vaunted Leopards are worth and which tanks are actually the best in the world

                And what? You have some kind of children's performance. You want to say that there are few destroyed Soviet tanks, peers "Leo2A4"? So there are hundreds of times more. This is the grief of Turkish soldiers that the government did not bother to modernize the tanks purchased from Germany. And it’s time for us to draw conclusions, and most importantly, actions, in particular, to increase compensation for our soldiers who died, so that their death would cost the state more than measures to improve the same armor protection of our tanks. Indeed, God forbid, but our soldiers will have to go into battle on the “new” T72B3, with its DAMAGING armor protection, and yet it is considered NEW. So, leave your enthusiastic exclamations with you.
                Quote: DM51
                Reality is not numbers in computers or Discovery ratings.

                Yes, the reality for the tanker has its own smell and it is not very pleasant, it is the smell of burnt human flesh. And to protect the crew of the designer must come up with new means of protection. But the trouble is, our "foreign partners" have a lot of our modern models of equipment and weapons and they can afford to conduct field tests, but we can not, so we are forced to build mathematical models and make many assumptions during the tests.
                1. DM51
                  DM51 24 February 2017 22: 26
                  0
                  You want to say that there are few destroyed Soviet tanks, peers "Leo2A4"? So there are hundreds of times more

                  Of course more, because our tanks of various modifications only do that they are fighting, unlike Leo 2, who really didn’t take part anywhere, therefore there are many times more losses
                  Yes, the reality for the tanker has its own smell and it is not very pleasant, it is the smell of burnt human flesh

                  How pathetic, but the case has something to say?
                  But the trouble is, our "foreign partners" have a lot of our modern models of equipment and weapons and they can afford to conduct field tests, but we can not, so we are forced to build mathematical models and make many assumptions during the tests.

                  I don’t even want to comment on this nonsense.
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 25 February 2017 10: 50
                    0
                    Quote: DM51
                    Of course more, because our tanks of various modifications only do that they are fighting, unlike Leo 2, who really didn’t take part anywhere, therefore there are many times more losses

                    Not only. But also due to the fact that their level of armor protection does not meet the requirements on the battlefield. So the Syrians are trying to improve their protection, within their means.
                    Quote: DM51
                    I don’t even want to comment on this nonsense.

                    Well, we’ve talked ... Have you ever taken part in such trials or read about it? You may just say something and not what.

                    There will be a desire, read this article, from open sources:
                    http://www.zelezki.ru/articles/1691-russiatank.ht
                    ml
                    1. DM51
                      DM51 25 February 2017 14: 10
                      0
                      Not only. But also due to the fact that their level of armor protection does not meet the requirements on the battlefield. So the Syrians are trying to improve their protection, within their means.

                      Leo 2 did not participate in urban battles at all, unlike our tanks, but what kind of combat stability can be argued if he did not even smell gunpowder? The very first clashes and such problems - what would the Turks in the city hang on him, just so that Leo could hold out there at least for how long?
                      There will be a desire, read this article, from open sources:

                      They made fun, an article from the Serdyukov times - 2010, when good money was paid to various "experts" just to denigrate domestic weapons. They bought imported armored car Lynx, Mistral, even our tanks wanted to be replaced by Leopards or Leclerks, but time and Syria put everything in its place - wake up, in the yard in 2017, in 7 years the whole world has found out where the best tanks in the world are made, probably you're the last dunno stayed
              2. Zaurbek
                Zaurbek 24 February 2017 10: 14
                0
                Leo2A4 was shot from a 125mm gun, modern shells at that time ... over 30 years, new ATGMs and Shells appeared.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 24 February 2017 14: 42
                  0
                  Quote: Zaurbek
                  Leo2A4 shot from a 125mm gun, modern shells at that time ...

                  In the frontal projections - NO. Our, modern at that time BPS, or rather standing on armament for 125 mm - TP, did not penetrate this tank. The exception is "Mango" and "Lead", but there were almost none in the troops. COP, including TUS, yes they could break through, but in the second quarter their tank was very few.
                  1. Zaurbek
                    Zaurbek 24 February 2017 15: 47
                    0
                    What I wrote about is that the potential has not been exhausted. T-72 and T-80, the same in the forehead did not shoot 120 BPS. You also note that the modernization of Leo (to protect against a 125mm gun) brought its weight to 60-65 tons, as did Abrams ....
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 24 February 2017 16: 37
                      0
                      Quote: Zaurbek
                      T-72 and T-80, the same in the forehead did not shoot 120 BPS.

                      they shoot through, in the area of ​​the observation device, the fur-water and the gun mask of our tanks are weakened zones
                  2. DM51
                    DM51 24 February 2017 22: 35
                    0
                    Quote: svp67
                    Quote: Zaurbek
                    Leo2A4 shot from a 125mm gun, modern shells at that time ...

                    In the frontal projections - NO. Our, modern at that time BPS, or rather standing on armament for 125 mm - TP, did not penetrate this tank. The exception is "Mango" and "Lead", but there were almost none in the troops. COP, including TUS, yes they could break through, but in the second quarter their tank was very few.

                    And what, we have an agreement with the Germans to shoot them only in the forehead? Yes, and this is your statement under a big question, because the Reflex M breaks through the frontal armor of all tanks, and from a distance of two more than Leo can get our say T-90 with his DM53 BOPS
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 25 February 2017 00: 09
                      0
                      Quote: DM51
                      And what, we have an agreement with the Germans to shoot them only in the forehead?

                      You grab words, but you can’t cancel the fact of non-breaking
                      Quote: DM51
                      Reflex M breaks through the frontal armor

                      TUS - tank guided missile, but maybe, and I talked about this. But there are only three of them in the BC and not in every tank.
                      Quote: DM51
                      than Leo can get our say T-90 with his BOPS DM53

                      You got into a conversation about old types of tanks. But if we return to the current situation, then it is worth recalling that on the European theater of operations the average maximum firing range for tanks, due to the terrain, is 2,5 km ... So consider who will get whom and how at such a range
                      1. Zaurbek
                        Zaurbek 25 February 2017 08: 25
                        0
                        ... and the area near the guns is weakened only in our tanks? On Abrams and Leo, for example, the lure under the tower is quite imaginary.
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 23 February 2017 20: 41
          0
          Everything is quite complicated there:
          1. Industry of the Russian Federation supported the release of modern BPS, they were already developed in the 1980s
          2. Developed and tested a set of new 125mm guns and AZ for a longer BPS
          IP.1 shows that the potential of the old gun is not exhausted, paragraph 2 shows that when replacing the barrel, it is quite possible to update the entire system ...
          1. svp67
            svp67 24 February 2017 00: 12
            0
            Quote: Zaurbek
            IP.1 shows that the potential of the old gun is not exhausted, paragraph 2 shows that when replacing the barrel, it is quite possible to update the entire system ...

            Well, you replaced the trunk, and everything else left the "old"? And then what is the point of the new trunk? At least the POU doesn’t interfere with changing either ...
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 24 February 2017 07: 40
              0
              An example of modernization of the T-90MS, the gun and the AZ will take the place of the old ones in the T-72, the MSA will also stand up, there are examples of modernizations. The weapons stabilizer there is different on different versions, but on new machines it’s like electric ... This is quite enough.
              1. svp67
                svp67 24 February 2017 14: 43
                0
                Quote: Zaurbek
                but on new machines it’s kind of electric ..

                He has electric control and executive drives, with the exception of VN. And STV T-72 is gyroscopic.
    2. DM51
      DM51 23 February 2017 13: 02
      +2
      Quote: svp67
      Author: Balalaika ... consonant with the "balobol", which, in principle, proves this article. One name:
      "Leopard 2PL": an old new tank for the poor
      It’s the same as saying: “Mercedes is a car for the poor ...”
      The author did NOT UNDERSTAND the material, but "gave" a mountainous propaganda article, and la was ours best of all. So this one like this “Leopard 2PL” is a VERY SERIOUS adversary, VERY. For any of our tanks. And the fact that the Germans are quickly modernizing the Leopards-2 now shows the power of their industry and the fact that the German tank school is one of the best in the world. Russia would not be left behind now, but in time it would preoccupy with the adoption of new generations of ATGM troops and timely saturation. That, God forbid, again not send your soldiers with Molotov cocktails against foreign tanks

      ISIS in Syria somehow with our old ATGMs with Leo 2 do a good job. Of course, in some areas of armaments we are lagging behind (in some areas it is critical), but I think that our tank school is the best in the world
      1. svp67
        svp67 23 February 2017 13: 07
        +6
        Quote: DM51
        ISIS in Syria somehow with our old ATGMs with Leo 2

        With this modernization, they eliminated this "blunder". And even if the old additional defense of our T-62M is capable of protecting against 2nd generation ATGM, which was practically proved in the same Syria, then the additional protection of Leo-2 will do this, as it did at a much higher level ...
        Quote: DM51
        but I believe that our tank school is the best in the world

        This is undeniable. But this makes it even more offensive when you see that the T-72B3 "artwork tank" is entering the troops, and not for little money ...
        1. KaPToC
          KaPToC 23 February 2017 15: 11
          +2
          Quote: svp67
          then Leo-2’s additional defense will do so, as it did at a much higher level ...

          It still needs to be proved, it can protect, or maybe not.
          1. svp67
            svp67 24 February 2017 00: 15
            0
            Quote: KaPToC
            It still needs to be proved, it can protect, or maybe not.

            The Bundeswehr from the NNA GDR got a large arsenal of our ATGMs, moreover, our Cornet is produced in Bulgaria, so they have the opportunity to conduct field tests, I don’t think that current buyers, that is, Poles, were not invited to conduct them.
            1. DM51
              DM51 24 February 2017 03: 27
              0
              Quote: svp67
              Quote: KaPToC
              It still needs to be proved, it can protect, or maybe not.

              The Bundeswehr from the NNA GDR got a large arsenal of our ATGMs, moreover, our Cornet is produced in Bulgaria, so they have the opportunity to conduct field tests, I don’t think that current buyers, that is, Poles, were not invited to conduct them.

              You can think anything, but we don’t know how things really are. When the Turks bought Leo 2 they also showed something? Probably not, since it happened with the Leopards in Syria
              1. svp67
                svp67 24 February 2017 07: 20
                +3
                Quote: DM51
                When the Turks bought Leo 2 they also showed something?

                But tell me in what year it was? In 2005. At that time it was far from a new, but still a good tank. Moreover, the Turks stinted on the modernization proposed by the Germans and bought them the way they were from the Bundeswehr storage bases. And even in this form, this tank EXCEEDS everything that Syria had at that moment.
                And the Germans since 1991 released a modification of the A5

                And since 2001, A6. which has significantly increased the armor protection of the tower and exactly where the "sew" ATGMs.

                And compare Leo2, in the background are the ones that the Turks have, and in the foreground, the one that the Germans are currently ordering, as they say, feel the difference

        2. Yarhann
          Yarhann 23 February 2017 22: 59
          +2
          take an interest in how tanks are used in modern wars and your short-sighted conclusions as to why weapons that are outdated by your logic, t 72b3, will disappear by themselves.
          The armata platform is good, but I think that the main thing in this line will not be tanks, but BMPs and armored vehicles. Although by the time the armata goes to the troops, it’s most likely to start running around the same hot spots on Earth.
          In modern conflicts, a tank is a means of fire support for infantry and reconnaissance equipment due to good optics. Take an interest in how many direct battles of fire since the time of the Great Patriotic War there were Iraq. We don’t take into account the tanks of the Hussein’s army that were removed from the air - although some of the shortcomings also fell on the abrash.
          T 72 and similar tanks are just the best modern weapons - the main task is mobility and infantry support, as well as high maintainability and unpretentiousness.
          The conflict in the Donbas also showed that most of the armored vehicles were destroyed from the air and from the underground, so to speak - the Grad AR RS and large-caliber mortars as well as anti-tank mines - there were also very few combat losses in direct tank collisions.
          Take an interest in the use of ISIS tanks - there are also means of supporting infantry when attacking a stoned enemy)
          A modern tank is a rather expensive and complex weapon that cannot operate autonomously and will be easily destroyed with free use. The main task is precisely the application of damage - in essence, this is a mobile bunker.
          And yes, I forgot about the Israelis to mention their merkavas, probably the best thing now that there is after the circular protection armata and at that time they beat them up - and they use the Merkavas as well as in all other conflicts I described above.
          Something like this . It is worth evaluating real military conflicts and not comparing technology in a spherical vacuum.
      2. Costeneshty
        Costeneshty 23 February 2017 14: 06
        +4
        coped by falling into a weakened, recessed niche, the same will be the case with t 72/90 and carrots without kaz, and with any bang, the best is in this regard the abrams is protected.
        1. user1212
          user1212 23 February 2017 22: 39
          0
          Quote: Costeneshty
          Abrams is best protected in this regard.

          Bassoon and Abrams in Yemen
          http://www.ruscur.ru/news/0/10/03/100354.shtml?ut
          m_medium = referral & utm_source = lentainform &
          utm_campaign = ruscur.ru & utm_term = 125753 & ut
          m_content = 3739762
          1. Costeneshty
            Costeneshty 23 February 2017 23: 46
            0
            it’s like the armor is something, and the fact that it was punched with a beat of 600, it’s not surprising + each abram has a different package of armor, depending on the modifications, it looks like m1 a1 +, the package also differs from strange on export abrashes, but Australian abrash packages are much worse than the new m1 a2 sep 2/3, let alone Middle Eastern countries.
            1. user1212
              user1212 24 February 2017 02: 21
              0
              Quote: Costeneshty
              here it looks like m1 a1

              Not at all like the SA did not have such tanks
    3. KaPToC
      KaPToC 23 February 2017 15: 10
      0
      Quote: svp67
      German tank school is one of the best in the world

      And how many “tank schools” are there in the world? Two - European and Russian. Russian is the best, and European is one of the best laughing
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 23 February 2017 20: 42
        +3
        There is still an American. From the very beginning (from Sherman) they had a difference: comfort for the crew. In conditions of prolonged continuous battles, this becomes an important factor.
        When the crew is exhausted in cramped and crooked poses, the effectiveness of shooting and target search is sharply reduced. Second: soft suspension. The rest - the SLA and the reservation - the Americans copied the Germans and Russians.
        1. KaPToC
          KaPToC 23 February 2017 21: 58
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          There is still an American.

          There is no American tank building school. They do not have a school, but simply the good work of engineers, multiplied by huge resources, nevertheless, their tanks are worse than Russian and European (German, English, French)
          Quote: voyaka uh
          In conditions of prolonged continuous battles, this becomes an important factor.

          Quote: voyaka uh
          In conditions of prolonged continuous battles, this becomes an important factor.

          I don’t even know what to answer, speechless lost from the unexpectedness of your words. How long does a tank live in modern combat? Seven dash ten minutes? What do you think of a fleeting battle if it is a protracted one?
          1. svp67
            svp67 24 February 2017 16: 41
            +2
            Quote: KaPToC
            There is no American tank building school.

            But it’s silly to deny the obvious. There is an American school of tank building
          2. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 February 2017 00: 44
            +1
            "I don’t even know what to answer, speechless lost from the unexpectedness of your words" ////

            It is simply from ignorance. Nothing wrong. Tank shootings in the Arab-Israeli wars dragged on for many hours and days. In frontal attacks izr. tankers do not go: maneuver, hide behind the folds of the terrain. And shoot from long distances - 3-4 km. And those who had comfortable workplaces, air conditioners, could shoot and hit. And those who fought in tight red-hot boxes went crazy after a short time, constantly missed and finally threw tanks. I was glad to have the opportunity to expand your horizons hi
      2. svp67
        svp67 24 February 2017 00: 19
        0
        Quote: KaPToC
        And how many “tank schools” are there in the world?

        Now quite a lot, even in Europe:
        - German
        - Russian
        - English
        - french
        - Czech
        - Polish
        - swedish
        - Ukrainian
        1. KaPToC
          KaPToC 24 February 2017 00: 59
          +1
          Quote: svp67

          - German
          - Russian
          - English
          - french

          These are two schools - Russian and European.
          Quote: svp67
          - Czech

          Quote: svp67
          - Polish

          Quote: svp67
          - Ukrainian

          The Soviet heritage, which they did not drink to the end.
          Quote: svp67
          - swedish

          Heh, the main thing in this school is originality.
          1. svp67
            svp67 24 February 2017 08: 52
            +1
            Quote: KaPToC
            These are two schools - Russian and European.

            Sorry, but why do you refuse American and Japanese "schools" of identity?
            1. KaPToC
              KaPToC 24 February 2017 14: 23
              0
              Quote: svp67
              Sorry, but why do you refuse American and Japanese "schools" of identity?

              Because they do not have this very identity. They have no concept of using tanks, they just don’t know what tanks are for and stupidly use them to support infantry on the battlefield.
              1. svp67
                svp67 24 February 2017 14: 47
                +2
                Quote: KaPToC
                They have no concept of using tanks, they just don’t know what tanks are for and stupidly use them to support infantry on the battlefield.

                You just said it without thinking. See how the Americans used tanks during the warrior with Iraq. They have a clear understanding of the role that tanks can play on the battlefield. As in the rest of the British. The rest have not yet participated in large-scale armed conflicts. Although I'm lying, Israel, the same is the school and understanding.
                1. KaPToC
                  KaPToC 24 February 2017 18: 09
                  0
                  Quote: svp67
                  They have a clear understanding of the role that tanks can play on the battlefield.

                  Keyword - can?
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 24 February 2017 18: 37
                    0
                    Quote: KaPToC
                    Keyword - can?

                    There are many of these "keywords". Including the "use of tanks in the war with Iraq." I will add another "mass"
              2. Zaurbek
                Zaurbek 25 February 2017 08: 28
                0
                more precisely: English, German, French ....
  11. The comment was deleted.
    1. shinobi
      shinobi 23 February 2017 16: 39
      0
      The concept of an uninhabited tower has been circled since the late 90s. That's all. It’s just that we were the first to cut it on tanks. And the first to come to a modular line-up on armored vehicles. The Navy, for some 30 years they have abandoned habitable weapon modules. the west does not sculpt new cars, so they are only going to fight with us on paper. We are more like a horror story. Here and our rearmament is not shaky, not swift. There’s no hurry much. In general, the Latin and the presence of numbers in your nickname makes you think that You made a mistake by the resource. Or maybe the bad man too.
      1. Freeman
        Freeman 23 February 2017 18: 54
        0
        Shinobi Today, 16:39
        The concept of an uninhabited tower has been run in since the late 90s. That's all. It's just that we, on tanks, were the first to gash it

        But what about the French AMX-13? I mean as a "concept."
        https://topwar.ru/1461-legkij-tank-amx-13.html
        1. Grigory_78
          Grigory_78 24 February 2017 09: 20
          0
          AMX-13 is not a tank. Closer to BMPT with very limited capabilities. For landing equipment - the restrictions are unacceptable, in my opinion.
    2. Lesorub
      Lesorub 23 February 2017 19: 31
      +3
      ,
      Quote: ivanov2i
      I love our "urapatriots." They boast of what is not yet there: 5th generation airplanes, piece spill fittings.
      "The T-14 is primarily used as a reconnaissance, target designation and fire adjustment vehicle for self-propelled guns, SAMs and an escort from T-90 tanks of its tactical level." (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2-14). If the E-14 is a light tank, then the Leopard is medium and it’s incorrect to compare them. In the T-14 case, it has not been tested anywhere. And the concept with an uninhabited tower is too extravagant, to say the least. On modern tanks, towers, on the contrary, only grow in size. In my opinion, this is another joint “cut” of the Moscow Region and the dying Uralvagonzavod.


      I especially liked the phrase "Like a reconnaissance vehicle" !!!!!!! ))))))))), The rest of the comment does not lend itself to logic !!!
    3. user1212
      user1212 23 February 2017 23: 06
      +2
      Quote: ivanov2i
      The T-14 is primarily used as a reconnaissance, target designation and fire adjustment vehicle for self-propelled guns, SAMs and escort from T-90 tanks of its tactical unit. "

      Enchanting nonsense
      Quote: ivanov2i
      If the E-14 is a light tank, then the Leopard is medium and it’s incorrect to compare them.

      And you celebrate violently 23 laughing
      Quote: ivanov2i
      The T-14 case has not been tested anywhere.

      This did not stop the leopard from being considered the best for a long time. Syria slightly ruined his reputation
    4. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 February 2017 00: 51
      +1
      "Yes, and the concept with an uninhabited tower is too extravagant, to say the least" ///

      The armored capsule for the crew and the uninhabited tower are true ideas. But no one dared to implement them. As it turned out in Armata, it is not yet clear. But there is a step forward.
  12. shinobi
    shinobi 23 February 2017 16: 24
    +2
    Leopard, the tank is good. The modernization reserve has not been exhausted. It will be battered if something happens, with 90mi. And then everything will depend on the skills of the crews. As long as Armata reaches the troops and the required number is riveted. There are only two insuperable shortcomings in the cat, price and weight .
    1. alexx-fenix
      alexx-fenix 23 February 2017 18: 23
      +1
      It will be possible to speak seriously about Armata when it lights up somewhere in Syria or elsewhere. And so far it is only possible to discuss the concept and that's it. Even the tank biathlon is not displayed
      1. user1212
        user1212 23 February 2017 23: 11
        +1
        Quote: alexx-fenix
        It will be possible to speak seriously about Armata when it lights up somewhere in Syria or elsewhere. And so far it is only possible to discuss the concept and that's it. Even the tank biathlon is not displayed

        Leopard 30 years in battles did not shine. No one really questioned his quality. Why should there be a different approach to T14?
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 23 February 2017 20: 43
      +2
      Leo’s modernization potential is higher than that of the T-90. In view of the more serious platform ... the T-90MS version is the limit of modernization ....
    3. Grigory_78
      Grigory_78 23 February 2017 21: 44
      +1
      It seems so to you. Price, weight, dimensions, small angles of maximum protection (course angles + -15 degrees), a large area of ​​insecure zones. Crew training is, of course, a very important parameter, then I agree with you. And about the not exhausted modernization stock - well, yes ... A couple of nets from the shell beds can be welded. Just kidding, of course. But in every joke ...
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 24 February 2017 07: 42
        +1
        that’s the point, but on the T-90 MS you don’t weld a couple of extra grids, so the question arose and we want to switch to the universal 7-roller platform ....
  13. Grigory_78
    Grigory_78 23 February 2017 21: 22
    +2
    Most of all enrages the beginning of the article. Abrams is MBT, and T-72 - it is not clear what. MBT - medium tank with weapons and heavy defense. So, T-64A, T-72B, T-80, T-90 (and modifications listed), T-14 correspond to this. But the aforementioned Abrams and Leopard 2 are classic cords.
    1. garri-lin
      garri-lin 24 February 2017 12: 38
      0
      I don’t know how a leopard is, but the abrams is more like a heavy turret of a tank destroyer. It was basically designed specifically for such a concept of use. Even the PF did not have at first.
      But the classification of tanks can be discussed separately. In my understanding, a TT is a tank that holds almost everything that can be put into it. Including his own weapon, and alas, no such and not expected. The guns beat the armor by a significant margin.
      There remains a MBT with its compromise weight / mobility / syshennost / firepower.
  14. shmelik45
    shmelik45 25 February 2017 10: 57
    0
    Quote: bolo
    But if the separatists had German tanks instead of Soviet ones, they would have been in Kiev for a long time.

    So same as the Turks on Leo A4 ended up in Al-Bab
  15. MKPU-115
    MKPU-115 25 February 2017 11: 18
    0
    Quote: exo
    You are already starting to get tired of praising Armata. A tank that is unlikely to be massive. And it’s not very clear when. At the same time, Leopard 2, the car is very worthy. And now, it can fight.

    Leopard 2 is already fighting, the Turkish offensive at the city of Al-Bab.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 February 2017 00: 55
      +1
      You can throw a lot of such pictures with the T-shkami, and with the Abrams, and with the Merkavas.
      They say only one thing: there is real combat experience. Based on the results of these losses, they carry out upgrades, strengthen protection, and change tactics of application.
    2. Recoil
      Recoil 28 February 2017 14: 03
      0
      All tanks are burning
  16. MKPU-115
    MKPU-115 25 February 2017 11: 47
    +1
    Quote: shinobi
    Leopard, the tank is good. The modernization reserve has not been exhausted. It will be battered if something happens, with 90mi. And then everything will depend on the skills of the crews. As long as Armata reaches the troops and the required number is riveted. There are only two insuperable shortcomings in the cat, price and weight .

    WoT outplayed? If anything, then by and large the “butt” will have Leopard 2 with anti-tank systems and the airborne forces.
  17. family tree
    family tree 25 February 2017 12: 59
    +1
    Trolley mergedAndrewhi Kars could finally be in the dust, even for a long time not to be seen, Well, if you hear, artillery is a holiday, a descendant of Samokhd
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 25 February 2017 13: 27
      +3
      Quote: perepilka
      Trolley merged: Andrew Kars could finally be in the dust

      Volodya, hello!
      hi
      It seems that Kars is now not up to ....
      fellow
      1. family tree
        family tree 25 February 2017 14: 16
        +1
        Health fishing, il not? And then your Yurka ...
        In March, they will send a disabled person to Arkhagelsk, well, if they send him, I’ll go and hug the IS-3, he’s so small, ironic, sweetheart, it’s better to keep silent about my son better
        1. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker 25 February 2017 14: 17
          +3
          Quote: perepilka
          In March, a disabled person will be sent to Arkhagelsk

          Good luck,
          be healthy!
          drinks
          1. family tree
            family tree 25 February 2017 14: 34
            +1
            Quote: stalkerwalker
            be healthy!
            drinks

            To God’s ears. figs wait, still on the claw on my belly I will turn around drinks wassat
  18. Wolka
    Wolka 25 February 2017 15: 17
    0
    building up classic armor is a way to a standstill, the Yankees and Fritzes understand this unambiguously, because they are hastily busy developing protective equipment (attachment modules) for suppressing artillery and missile weapons, but this is not a matter of one day, and it’s a very expensive financial pleasure, because and they’re obviously not selling new in excess to their failed brothers in arms ..
    1. family tree
      family tree 27 February 2017 13: 55
      0
      Quote: Volka
      building up classic armor is a way to a standstill, the Yankees and Fritz clearly understand this,

      Well, well, and DZ and KAZ on cats and abrams, straight all hung wassat
  19. Recoil
    Recoil 28 February 2017 14: 01
    0
    Quote: DM51
    The French and Germans want to unite to create at least something close to the technical characteristics of Almaty.


    TTX Armata already published?
  20. golem
    golem 1 March 2017 00: 04
    0
    First, some facts. Tanks Leopard 2A4 (128 units) Poland received almost free in 2002/2003.
    Paid only for transport and re-conservation (90 million zlotys).
    In 2013, they bought 105 Leopard 2A5 tanks and 14 Leopard 2A4 tanks. They paid about 180 million euros.
    The modernization concerns only the Leopard 2A4 tanks.
    In addition to leopards, in Poland there are also PT-91 Twardy tanks (281 units) and the usual T-72. (about 300)
  21. Alexaner Arier
    Alexaner Arier 29 March 2017 22: 59
    +1
    Germany does not advertise or offer its weapons, there is a line for German weapons and many are denied political reasons.
    It is difficult to compare leopard 7a with armature due to the unknownness of the armata; there was no use. it is unclear whether the armata has become a finished product and when it comes into service.
    demand shows which tank is the leader and why. demand for leopards exceeds all the dreams of other tank manufacturers. many countries tried to get Abrams to buy, but with all the pressure on them, they bought leopards.
  22. The comment was deleted.