Military Review

Where are the tanks, Olaf? Why Leopard-2 is still not in Ukraine

78
Where are the tanks, Olaf? Why Leopard-2 is still not in Ukraine



The structure of the German Lend-Lease


The Russian special operation probably influenced the Germans the most in Europe. From a quiet pacifist stories Germany has rapidly unleashed military spending, including for lend-lease to Ukraine. It is noteworthy that Berlin diligently did not interfere in the affairs of the post-Soviet state until the beginning of the Russian special operation. Even in January 2022, the Germans blocked the supply of German howitzers to Kyiv from Estonia. But after February 24, the tap opened, and Panzerfaust, Matador grenade launchers, engineering mines and Stinger complexes flowed into Ukraine.

By mid-summer, Bandera armed themselves with German Cobra counter-battery radar, three M270 MARS II MLRS, seven PzH 2000 self-propelled howitzers, and thirty "anti-aircraft guns" at once. tanks» Gepard and fifty M113 armored personnel carriers. As you can see, not everything on the list bears the stigma of made in Deutschland. By autumn, ten Bergenpanzer 2 engineer obstacle obstacles, as well as more than 100 sets of winter uniforms, a mobile hospital and, of course, generators, were added to an impressive arsenal. The Germans declare that they supply mainly defensive weapon.

In society, Berlin's new militaristic policy still has a very shaky foundation. The defensive profile of supplies can be argued long and hard. If, for example, the Gepard cannon anti-aircraft gun and the Panzerfaust anti-tank grenade launcher can still be called a defensive weapon, then the PzH 2000 howitzers and even more so the M270 MARS II can hardly be used as defense weapons.


Source: naukateh.ru

Kyiv, meanwhile, requires tanks - a lot of solid German tanks. Relatives of Zelensky rightly ask why howitzers and multiple launch rocket systems are allowed, but Leopard-2 is not? Indeed, a paradoxical situation. There were even rumors that the Americans were urging the Germans to supply several modern tanks to Ukraine. But more recently, Olaf Scholz upset all sympathizers in an interview with the Süddeutsche Zeitung:

"Germany will not unilaterally transfer Western-style tanks to Ukraine, and this condition will remain in force next year."


Source: m24.ru

What is the reason for such stubbornness of the German government? In fact, a whole palette of factors has formed here, which does not currently allow tanks to be transferred to the Kyiv regime. And it will be even less likely in the future. Let's start with the fact that there is no question of any mythical escalation of the Ukrainian crisis due to several dozen German tanks.

Does anyone seriously think that the Kremlin will shower Kyiv with tactical nuclear charges if Berlin supplies a Leopard 2 company? With all due respect to the combat effectiveness of tanks, a couple of full packs of the M270 MARS II are able to block several large tank units in lethal force.

Therefore, we discard the option with fear of the escalation of the conflict immediately. Euphoria and "gratitude" from the nationalists to Berlin would have no boundaries - Leopard-2, after Javelin and Panzerfaust, would have turned out to be the third saint. Arguments about the depletion of stocks of Western weapons do not work either. Simply because now NATO has no one to fight with - Russia will be occupied by Ukraine for a long time, and Germany has no other natural enemies.

Even if the Germans hand over their entire menagerie to the nationalists, this will not fundamentally affect the military-political risks for Berlin. From this area, questions with the complication of logistics and the repair of tanks. It is enough to look at what the nationalists are now fighting to understand that a few dozen Leopards will not aggravate the situation in principle.

Where are the tanks, Olaf?


One of the reasons why the Leopard-2 still does not get stuck in the Ukrainian black soil is the cautious approach of NATO countries to the supply of weapons. Not only Germany refuses to supply modern MBTs to nationalists, French Leclercs, American Abrams and British Challengers are not visible. Now the Armed Forces of Ukraine need tanks more than ever. This is not just a weapon for storming fortified areas and fighting with their own kind, it is also a large-caliber and long-range sniper rifle, and sometimes a replacement for scarce self-propelled guns - tanks are increasingly forced to fire from closed positions.

Now Western countries are supplying the Russian-Ukrainian front with two types of weapons - either high-tech "long arm" equipment from the HIMARS series, or junk equipment, which is not a pity to lose. No matter how cynical it sounds, but Ukraine has turned in the eyes of the West into a big business project, where there is no place for advanced front-line weapons. Now any tank, even if it is at least three times a new generation, will be torn to pieces either by anti-tank systems or RPGs, or a controlled Krasnopol will fly into its tower. Everyone remembers the demoralizing effect for Rheinmetall on the destruction of Turkish Leopard 2A4s by the Syrian Kurds in 2018?


Source: e-news.su

Main battle tanks are always the pinnacle, if you like, the calling card of the state's military industry. If a country knows how to independently build worthy tanks, then it can position itself as a serious player in the world market.

Roughly the same story with fighters. And if the NATO country (we are talking about Turkey) could not save expensive weapons from partisans, then what will happen in Ukraine. Neither Berlin, nor even Rheinmetall, needs a story with torn off tank turrets. These are serious reputational losses, threatening billions in losses. The Germans are now launching the flywheel of the military-industrial complex, and advertising in the future is needed as worthwhile as possible. Moreover, since March 2022, Western propaganda, as it can, humiliates the level of the Russian army. Say, the second army of the world cannot cope with the 25th in the ranking.

The hypothetical but inevitable defeat of the Leopard by the "depleted Russian army" will raise fair questions. And here it’s not even in the generation of tanks - consumers associate both the first and second Leopard with high-quality, but expensive weapons that are difficult to disable. The destruction of the PzH 2000 howitzer can always be attributed to the crooked hands of the operators and the thoughtless risks of the command - in the end, self-propelled guns should not fall under direct enemy fire. But the Leopard that died from Cornet will be difficult to justify by inept users.

The German miracle weapon must take a hit. There is a strong belief that part of the Western elites have once again become disillusioned with the need for tanks on the battlefield. Cheap and portable RPGs and ATGMs seem to have equalized the chances of a tank crew and an infantryman. Therefore, why spoil the image with dubious deliveries of tanks to Ukraine?

If we send German tanks, then after the older brothers in the hope of dissolving the machines in a motley brethren. But so far, none of the NATO countries has dared to supply tanks of primordially Western production. The realization came that the image of an ideal weapon, which had been shaped for decades, would be shattered in an instant by the Ukrainian meat grinder.
Author:
78 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. User_neydobniu
    User_neydobniu 21 December 2022 05: 24
    +13
    Now any tank, even if it is at least three times a new generation, will be torn to pieces either by anti-tank systems or RPGs, or a controlled Krasnopol will fly into its tower

    Well, it started again ... I remember there was a scribbler here who yelled in every article that NATO weapons pose no threat and would be immediately destroyed, that Hymers were nonsense, we would immediately destroy artillery systems, and there was nothing to air defense at all ... It seems history is repeating itself

    And where are the leopards-2 and leclercs, I will enlighten the author a little by pulling off his rose-colored glasses. Now the West is supplying the Khokhls with the remnants of Soviet armored vehicles, how it will end will decide decommissioned NATO equipment - M60, challengers, leopards-1 with AMX-40 (which we now see with armored personnel carriers and air defense), modern weapons will be sent only after the depletion of all available stocks. Or during a powerful offensive of the Russian army (which is not even expected yet)
    1. Comrade
      Comrade 21 December 2022 05: 53
      -14
      Quote from: User_neydobniu
      And where are the leopards-2 and leclercs, I will enlighten the author a little. Modern weapons will be sent only after the depletion of all available stocks

      Did Stoltenberg personally tell you that?
      1. alekseykabanets
        alekseykabanets 21 December 2022 06: 14
        +9
        Quote: Comrade
        Did Stoltenberg personally tell you that?

        Is there an error in the logical constructions of User_neydobniu?
        1. Comrade
          Comrade 21 December 2022 06: 33
          -2
          Quote: aleksejkabanets
          Is there an error in the logical constructions of User_neydobniu?

          I will answer a question with a question.
          Why did NATO supply Harpoon anti-ship missiles to Ukraine, if older missiles are in service there? According to the logic of the colleague, they should have been sent to Ukraine first. But when they run out, then send "Harpoons" there.
          If you want, you can easily find similar examples yourself, when modern weapons systems were sent to Ukraine against the background of NATO having older systems of a similar purpose.
          So it turns out that the "logical constructions" of colleagues are far-fetched. Therefore, the question was asked to him, where did the firewood come from?
          1. alekseykabanets
            alekseykabanets 21 December 2022 06: 41
            -4
            Quote: Comrade
            NATO supplied Ukraine with Harpoon anti-ship missiles

            So far, I have not found official data on this, only promises.
            Quote: Comrade
            If you want, you can find similar examples yourself, when modern systems were sent to Ukraine against the backdrop of the presence of older systems.

            Usually junk is sent, especially if this junk is comparable in characteristics to the weapons used there by the RF Armed Forces. Naturally, they first of all need to get rid of all rubbish, and then supply more modern weapons. As I understand it, weapons are not supplied to Ukraine completely free of charge.)))
            1. alexey sidykin
              alexey sidykin 21 December 2022 14: 22
              +3
              Australian Bushmasters are quite modern armored vehicles ... the same Himers and 777. So new weapons are also being supplied.
              1. alekseykabanets
                alekseykabanets 21 December 2022 14: 30
                +1
                Quote: Alexey Sedykin
                Australian Bushmasters are quite modern armored vehicles ... the same Himers and 777. So new weapons are also being supplied.

                The old Soviet ended in these categories, so I think.
                1. Bad_gr
                  Bad_gr 21 December 2022 17: 43
                  +1
                  Former members of the socialist camp brought to Ukraine the entire range of weapons of our standard, including tanks. Tanks were supplied to Ukraine, as a rule, on the condition that their supplier countries would be replaced by Leopards. I think until Germany fulfills these obligations, at least partially, there will be no deliveries of Leopards-2 from Germany to Ukraine.
                2. alexey sidykin
                  alexey sidykin 21 December 2022 19: 37
                  +1
                  Quote: aleksejkabanets
                  Quote: Alexey Sedykin
                  Australian Bushmasters are quite modern armored vehicles ... the same Himers and 777. So new weapons are also being supplied.

                  The old Soviet ended in these categories, so I think.

                  For that, there is probably an old NATO ...
              2. Learned
                Learned 22 December 2022 14: 29
                0
                The point is, there are already vids in the cart that mine protection is either of low class or generally nominal, the same sieve is all in blood and guts like betors
            2. Silver
              Silver 21 December 2022 20: 45
              0
              A little different - not at all free!
          2. Galleon
            Galleon 21 December 2022 07: 03
            +4
            No need to answer a question with a question, you are not in Odessa. Harpoon is 60 years old and retired by the US Navy. But over these 60 years, the fleet did not bother to give either a normal means of detecting the work of the GOS of this PKR, or a normal means of suppressing it.
            1. Civil
              Civil 21 December 2022 07: 41
              +9
              Well, here is Leopard - 2, they threw hats .... before that, Hymars was thrown
          3. solar
            solar 21 December 2022 08: 51
            -3
            Why did NATO supply Harpoon anti-ship missiles to Ukraine, if older missiles are in service there?

            Write more about "rockets of an older design." What kind of missiles are they and where are they stored?
          4. AlevVishnevsky
            AlevVishnevsky 21 December 2022 13: 34
            -7
            And to the question: "Why and how weapons are supplied from, if Russia has superiority in everything." Or: "And why Russia crap in everything."
            There are 2 answers! And you win 1 million if you pick the right one!!!
            1. There is no Russia as a state, there are only traitors, Ukrainians, oligarchs and aliens.
            2. There is no Russia as a state because thieves, oligarchs, traitors and Ukrainians are in power.
        2. Comet
          Comet 21 December 2022 11: 48
          -2
          Quote: aleksejkabanets

          Is there an error in the logical constructions of User_neydobniu?

          Of course:
          ... M60, challengers, leopards-1 with AMX-40 (what we see now with armored personnel carriers and air defense)
        3. Eroma
          Eroma 22 December 2022 07: 44
          +1
          It seems to me that the question is worth more in money, or thereabouts. The supply of weapons to Ukraine comes from warehouses, i.e. the flow of weapons worth billions of dollars and euros is, in fact, free for the current budget! Because the supplied weapons were paid for in ancient times. The supply of Leopard 2 from warehouses is not possible without additional costs for the repair and modernization of the tank, since the warehouses have obsolete and partially disassembled vehicles. And these are already real costs, in addition, let's say they created a tank unit, at the forefront the probability of destruction, with all due respect to the Leopard, is much higher than in the rear, so tanks will be needed regularly to maintain combat capability, and this is again money. Those. deliveries of Leopards are already a real expense item from the current budget! Given the social problems, it’s not clear where the frail amounts are, this is a problem for Scholz, besides, they don’t have many tanks in the Bundeswehr, to put it mildly, and with a shortage of tanks at home, send them somewhere, also for free, these are also questions for Scholz. Therefore, Olaf says that we will give tanks if it will be at someone else's expense! Those. Germany agrees to the old scheme, weapons from the warehouse, please, but here are the upgrade and maintenance costs, someone else must pay bully
      2. TANKISTONE
        TANKISTONE 27 December 2022 17: 56
        0
        Comrade Did Stoltenberg personally tell you that?
        Did Evgeny Fedorov talk to Olaf Scholz?
    2. 1razvgod
      1razvgod 21 December 2022 06: 21
      +4
      It is logical that for now they will search, rebuy, exchange Soviet equipment around the globe and give it to the urks, then they will give their tanks, in February they thought that NATO would give armor and helmets and no more, but they eventually gave up to the RSZO, I think with tanks will be the same. Not only the tanks themselves are dangerous, but first of all the quantity, and then who knows how much they will give, in any case, they will try to complicate our life
    3. Sith
      Sith 21 December 2022 08: 58
      +3
      So decommissioned equipment and bartered Soviet equipment that was either written off or laid down for deep conservation costs a penny for the budget ... or even a negative price ... that is, it is spent only to deliver it to the 404th
      And the new one, since the industry is not deployed for wartime (they are not officially at war), you have to run and punch through all instances
      put in production queue...
      and it will cost other absolutely fabulous money)
    4. insafufa
      insafufa 21 December 2022 09: 36
      0
      Quote : User_neydobniu
      Now the West is supplying the Khokhls with the remnants of Soviet armored vehicles, how it ends will be decided by decommissioned NATO equipment - M60, challengers, leopards-1 with AMX-40
      I’m not sure that they have M60s, challengers and leopards-1 with AMX-40 in stocks, they sold them to all Papuans a long time ago. If only to go bow to the Turks. smile
      M60 - I myself am waiting for his appearance on stage
    5. BigMaxMack
      BigMaxMack 21 December 2022 09: 49
      +2
      The West, no matter how hypocritical it may sound, "diversifies the risks" when in the first months the Donbass was on fire, 150 pieces of 777 howitzers arrived in a week, but now Western partners believe that the "situation is under control" and the trump cards can be saved, thereby exchanging them for some lives of Ukrainians. But as soon as the Russian army suddenly succeeds, all the trumps will immediately be played, NATO aircraft will not be given, but all the rest are easy. Here is a progmatic approach
    6. Viktor Sergeev
      Viktor Sergeev 21 December 2022 10: 12
      -4
      All the scrap metal you specified is not on the move, there are no spare parts, the maximum will be shamanized and brought, after which it will all break.
    7. setter
      setter 21 December 2022 11: 10
      -2
      AMX-40

      As many as four AMX-40 tanks were manufactured. They were not mass-produced and were not in service.
    8. Barberry25
      Barberry25 21 December 2022 11: 28
      0
      Well, with a powerful offensive by our army, just the opposite, the appearance of modern Western MBTs will be a very big question, but if in theory we start to suffer losses and the collapse of the army and the state is visible on the horizon, then tanks will appear to cut profit. Taking into account the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 200-500 tanks in general, it will take a very long time to wait for new tanks .. There, some Romanians have several hundred T-55 variants without any problems, I think that it will be something like this - rich Europeans will pay poor Europeans to have their old T-55s - t-72 delivered to Kyiv
    9. svoroponov
      svoroponov 21 December 2022 13: 09
      -2
      They have something else. They supply old and Soviet equipment and their tanks, until they compensate for it with their tanks for those who transferred the equipment to Ukraine, they will not transfer it to Ukraine. And the quantitative release of new technology is small.
      In addition, seeing that Ukraine is losing, there is also a selfish question, and then the Ukrainians will be able to pay off? He has them already now svirbit . It is not for nothing that they only demand a win for Ukraine, otherwise they may not pay off, from the word at all, and then they will have financial and political problems already in addition to those that they have.
    10. runway-1
      runway-1 21 December 2022 14: 51
      +1
      I agree, quite logical reasoning. And the article, from my point of view, is biased.
    11. Anachoret
      Anachoret 21 December 2022 16: 05
      -2

      Snowman Olaf Scholz makes it clear that the ruins in Europe will no longer be given gifts)) freeze themselves))
      1. Monster_Fat
        Monster_Fat 21 December 2022 23: 16
        -1
        NATO, led by the United States, will send as many weapons and types of weapons to Ukraine as they deem necessary to maintain the conflict in the state they need to bleed Russia specifically. There will not be enough Ukrainian proxies for this, the so-called "volunteers" of their "young European" countries will go into action - there are already hundreds of thousands of "wishers". So, you can "crack" and throw "caps" about Western arms supplies indefinitely, but this will not fix the situation - more and more modern weapons have already poured into Ukraine and will continue to be supplied. And it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to compete in the quantity and quality of weapons produced with the coalition of "friends of Ukraine" Russia and its allies due to the different economic potential and financial opportunities due to sanctions. So, personally, I do not have bright prospects for the future, rather, on the contrary. request
    12. Learned
      Learned 22 December 2022 14: 44
      +1
      So you are the same scribbler: any tank can take off its shoes on a mine or get stuck in the mud and it is an easy target for anything, any newest NATO tank is armored at a rate, sides, feed breaks through easily from almost anything, even an autocannon, old archaic Soviet tanks with new ammunition with a 125mm cannon is still dangerous and you need to understand that training three Vasyans in a cheap piece of G is ten times cheaper than a pack of Hans + all this weapons were built in fun, calm times, and now, in any case, making up for the losses of Lepiks will be an unbearable burden for the freezing European economy, I do not argue that this can be done painlessly, but then it means transferring the latter to a military footing and here you can already get popular unrest. A simple example: you have a new Gelding, you serve it, but hard times are coming, you have to let it work, you feel sorry, you understand that it’s easier to buy five Niva and stagger them than part with it, there is an option that you can use the profit sell this one and buy a new one, but will you have time in a wildly growing market, or will you have to go into debt for the sake of a new one, or will you have to stay with the Niva altogether.
    13. Jager
      Jager 22 December 2022 18: 24
      0
      Well, at least someone remembered the M-60. A time-tested and reliable tank. By the way, how many of them did the Americans have left in storage? It is strange that they are nowhere to be seen. All Negrolands and the Middle East ride T-55/62/72.
  2. glock-17
    glock-17 21 December 2022 05: 45
    +3
    Scholz is well aware that a Leopard 2 with a detached turret, if sent to Ukraine, is a matter of time. There are no impenetrable tanks. Any tank should be competently used with proper reconnaissance, infantry support and aviation. I believe that it was the illiterate use of tanks at the beginning of the SVO with the hope of a chance that led to such large losses.
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 21 December 2022 05: 52
      +3
      Quote: Glock-17
      Leopard 2 with a detached turret if sent to Ukraine is a matter of time.
      They don't want to burn down the office ....
  3. Leader_Barmaleev
    Leader_Barmaleev 21 December 2022 05: 56
    +3
    Cheap and portable RPGs and ATGMs seem to have equalized the chances of a tank crew and an infantryman.

    It’s a pity for fans of BIG AND TERRIBLE vehicles on the battlefield, but the image of a future war has already been formed - an infantryman packed to the most do not indulge in compact but very effective weapons in conjunction with which robotic systems work, covered and guided by drones, networked with the same as he is monsters, and heavy tracked and wheeled vehicles are stupidly transporting ammunition, missiles and other ammo.
    1. Comet
      Comet 21 December 2022 11: 53
      +6
      Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
      Cheap and portable RPGs and ATGMs seem to have equalized the chances of a tank crew and an infantryman.

      It’s a pity for fans of BIG AND TERRIBLE vehicles on the battlefield, but the image of a future war has already been formed - an infantryman packed to the most do not indulge in compact but very effective weapons in conjunction with which robotic systems work, covered and guided by drones, networked with the same as he is monsters, and heavy tracked and wheeled vehicles are stupidly transporting ammunition, missiles and other ammo.

      These big and scary machines are the only ones that survive the use of nuclear weapons. "An infantryman packed to the very best with a compact but very effective weapon" dies first and en masse when using a nuclear weapon.
      1. Leader_Barmaleev
        Leader_Barmaleev 21 December 2022 12: 01
        -1
        People brought up by propaganda tend to be mistaken. Modern low-yield nuclear munitions are basically munitions that give the strongest neutron flux with a weak shock wave just to stop all tanks and other armored vehicles. And the foot soldiers, unlike you, DIE and do not die.
        1. Comet
          Comet 21 December 2022 12: 16
          +4
          Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
          People brought up by propaganda tend to be mistaken. Modern low-yield nuclear munitions are basically munitions that give the strongest neutron flux with a weak shock wave just to stop all tanks and other armored vehicles. And the foot soldiers, unlike you, DIE and do not die.

          Armored vehicles are the most protected object from the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion. All factors. If you rested less on propaganda and studied more, you would know how the "strongest neutron flux" affects armor, and that protection against it has been implemented in armor barriers for a long time. On old tanks, it was necessary to add protection outside and inside the armor, and on modern ones already inside the armored barriers. From a nuclear strike, all living things die, and the foot soldiers too. Only tankers survive. At least, it is the tankers who retain the greatest long-term combat capability.
          1. Leader_Barmaleev
            Leader_Barmaleev 21 December 2022 12: 37
            -3
            It’s already a little disgusting for me to communicate with you - it’s hard to perceive as a normal person someone who uses the word die to fighters, soldiers. THEY DIE. Well, about studying more - I’m a RKhBZ specialist, with diplomas, certificates and other candy wrappers, and unlike you, who receive information from the Internet, where they can’t lie, I know exactly what the anti-neutron protection of a tank costs and how the secondary component affects the body of tankers - induced radiation. So go and work on yourself so that you are not painfully ashamed.
            1. Comet
              Comet 21 December 2022 13: 22
              0
              Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
              It’s already a little disgusting for me to communicate with you - it’s hard to perceive as a normal person someone who uses the word die to fighters, soldiers. THEY DIE. Well, about studying more - I’m a RKhBZ specialist, with diplomas, certificates and other candy wrappers, and unlike you, who receive information from the Internet, where they can’t lie, I know exactly what the anti-neutron protection of a tank costs and how the secondary component affects the body of tankers - induced radiation. So go and work on yourself so that you are not painfully ashamed.

              So what? Do you deny that it is the tankers who retain the greatest long-term combat capability compared to the infantryman?
              1. Leader_Barmaleev
                Leader_Barmaleev 21 December 2022 13: 35
                -4
                I'm a little lost in conjecture - what exactly do you want to prove to me? Neutron munitions will not be used against depleted formations or single targets. That is, both the tank and the infantryman will be in the affected area. The infantryman will die immediately. The tanker will be jealous of him for several minutes - so, the vitreous body of the eyes is ionized under the influence of radiation and the tanker will look at the world for the rest of his life - five minutes maximum - as if through frozen glass, ionization of the brain and spinal cord will lead to uncontrolled psychomotor reactions, the intestines will begin to bleed and VERY STRONGLY SICK, while the tank's electronics will fail - neither aim nor shoot. Well, what will change globally, that the tanker outlived the infantryman for several minutes, having completely lost his combat effectiveness? Learn materiel.
                1. Comet
                  Comet 21 December 2022 13: 54
                  0
                  Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
                  I'm a little lost in conjecture - what exactly do you want to prove to me? Neutron munitions will not be used against depleted formations or single targets. That is, both the tank and the infantryman will be in the affected area.

                  Yes.
                  Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
                  The infantryman will die immediately. The tanker will be jealous of him for several minutes - so, the vitreous body of the eyes is ionized under the influence of radiation and the tanker will look at the world for the rest of his life - five minutes maximum - as if through frozen glass, ionization of the brain and spinal cord will lead to uncontrolled psychomotor reactions, the intestines will begin to bleed and VERY STRONGLY SICK,

                  And replace the tanker with an infantryman: where for an infantryman "the vitreous body of the eye is ionized under the action of radiation ..." what will happen to the tanker?
                  Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
                  ... in this case, the tank's electronics will fail - neither aim nor shoot.

                  The tank is capable of fighting with non-working electronics. Efficiency drops significantly, but the tank is capable of moving, aiming, shooting and hitting.
                  Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
                  Well, what will change globally, that the tanker survived the infantryman for several minutes, having completely lost his combat effectiveness? Learn materiel.

                  Where the infantryman has already lost combat capability, the tankman still retains combat capability. And the result of the use of nuclear warheads is the higher, the higher its power.
                  1. Leader_Barmaleev
                    Leader_Barmaleev 21 December 2022 14: 10
                    -3
                    My friend, your perseverance and good deeds ... Not only are you completely unaware of the subject, you also persist in the correctness of your words because they are yours. Go on living in a world of rainbows and unicorns - this is your world, and tanks and radiation protection are not for you - you don't need knowledge, you have faith. I think that this discussion can be completed due to its unproductiveness.
                    1. Comet
                      Comet 21 December 2022 14: 24
                      +2
                      Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
                      My friend, your perseverance and good deeds ... Not only are you completely unaware of the subject, you also persist in the correctness of your words because they are yours. Go on living in a world of rainbows and unicorns - this is your world, and tanks and radiation protection are not for you - you don't need knowledge, you have faith. I think that this discussion can be completed due to its unproductiveness.

                      So everything is simple here. The distance from the epicenter of the explosion, at which the tank crew and the infantryman receive combined defeats leading to the same result, will be less for the tank crew. So the tank retains its combat capability better. It is clear your desire to reduce the power of nuclear warheads to reduce this difference ... But this difference will always exist.
          2. the Urals
            the Urals 21 December 2022 14: 20
            +1
            Can you clarify how protection against a neutron flux is implemented? It's just that it's very difficult to protect yourself from neutrons in principle
            1. Comet
              Comet 21 December 2022 14: 50
              +1
              Quote: Ural
              Can you clarify how protection against a neutron flux is implemented? It's just that it's very difficult to protect yourself from neutrons in principle

              Combined barriers. They include layers containing (in alloys, in ceramics) steel, tungsten, uranium, boron, polyurethane, polyethylene ...
            2. Leader_Barmaleev
              Leader_Barmaleev 21 December 2022 16: 27
              -4
              The boy read fairy tales. And now how it really is - a neutron NOT BRAKED UP will create irradiation, ionization and induced radiation - the consequences as I described above. A neutron BRAKED UP in any shielding substance will give up all its energy in the form of heat. Calculate the neutron flux of tactical nuclear weapons - the tank will heat up INSTANTLY !!! up to 800-1000 degrees - the crew will fry, the ammunition will explode. Generation G (Google) knows how to find all sorts of crap on the Internet and believe in it.
              1. Jager
                Jager 22 December 2022 18: 43
                0
                Tell this to the Australian "Centurion", which was 300 meters from a nuclear explosion and left the test site under its own power. And he served for several decades. Or Soviet vehicles equipped with anti-radiation lining, lining and FVU. If a nuclear bomb explodes 500 meters away, tankers are unlikely to survive, and if they survive, they will not last long. BUT! No one was going to shoot from the epicenter of nuclear weapons at the time of the explosion from a tank gun. The ability to pass through this very epicenter or through a radioactive trail in an hour or two without consequences - that's what all the protections are for. The infantry, under these conditions, will not be able to pass quickly, they will be covered and swallowed by radioactive dust.
                As for Chernobyl, the equipment was not designed for such a case. At all. None.
                1. Viktor Sergeev
                  Viktor Sergeev 22 December 2022 19: 55
                  +1
                  A 1kt neutron bomb destroys all life within a radius of 400-500 meters, regardless of protection, armor does not save. A nuclear explosion works differently, so the tank partially holds it.
  4. Galleon
    Galleon 21 December 2022 06: 58
    +4
    Tanks and aircraft are the last thing the West is not yet supplying for this war, and only the blessed can talk about NATO's caution. They were not afraid to confiscate finances, they were not afraid to admit (Merkel) to the deception of the Russian Federation and the preparations for this war, they were not afraid to send mercenaries, instructors, to supply communications and intelligence 24/7, but then they suddenly got scared ... This is a calculation, which the author talks about in the second parts of the article, and evasion of informational compromising of goods.
  5. GRAFIN_32
    GRAFIN_32 21 December 2022 07: 07
    +11
    The whole info agenda about deliveries is already fed up ... Every time the same result. More precisely, the conclusion. "What are they going to do to us..."
    "Yes, they have a massive impoverishment of the army there ..."
    "Yes, we will bang them with the most modern + 100500 times ..."
    "Yes, they are all scared and ashamed of shame..."
    Well, in that spirit. It's boring to read and think. At least some analysis was carried out by all the hacks. Impoverished forum on rich topics. Oh, and poor.
  6. GRAFIN_32
    GRAFIN_32 21 December 2022 07: 10
    -5
    And of course, for a naked tank, then the PG-7 can be safely ... You can give the blonde an RPG and she will do everything. First of all, of course. That's why she's blonde.
  7. Dmitry Trukhtanov
    Dmitry Trukhtanov 21 December 2022 07: 54
    -7
    And I, in general, doubt that the Russian Federation will use our full potential ... The number of troops there, God forbid% 25. No matter how cynical it may sound, old samples are being disposed of. It is already clear that the plans of the Darkest do not include any quick victories. What is being prepared in the rear, I think only a few know. So all these tears about can not the same idle talk
  8. svp67
    svp67 21 December 2022 08: 13
    +5
    There are no purely "defensive" and "offensive" types of weapons, any weapon can be used in all types of combat, it all depends on the plan and decision of the commander for battle
  9. demiurg
    demiurg 21 December 2022 09: 32
    +4
    Modern machines will not be sent, not because of reputational losses, but because here:

    1. Exorbitant price of one unit. For colonial wars, this is tolerable when two or three vehicles are lost in six months, of which one or two will also be restored. But in a normal war, tanks are lost by the dozens a week. The entire current composition of the panzaffe will wear off in a couple of months. No money is enough to replenish the park. The printing press is broken.
    2. Operational and strategic mobility. 70 tons is beyond good and evil. If in local conflicts this can be put up with, justifying it with greater survivability of the crews, then in a total war it is not.
    3. Price and terms of production/repair/maintenance. Okay, a new replacement tank is being made for a year and a half to two years. Where to repair Leo's hodovka / electronics / weapons? Every time to Poland / Germany to carry? These are not 10-30 European-made self-propelled guns. It's about five hundred cars. Which still need to be dragged to the railway. And by the way, who will do it? How many repairmen are there?
    1. Silver
      Silver 21 December 2022 21: 27
      0
      Valera, you are absolutely right! The question is still in the training of crews, the Germans are unlikely to want to fight in Ukraine themselves, and it will not work to prepare a combat-ready crew from raguli in less than a month.
      1. Jager
        Jager 22 December 2022 19: 07
        0
        How is this fundamentally different from the Leopard-2 T-64? So the T-64 is structurally much more complicated - the Leopard does not have an automatic loader, there is no guided weapon system, there is no very complex engine, there is a good old V-shaped model. What's new there? Get a projectile out of the stowage, manually load it, point it... Of the innovations for the "Soviet" tankers, there are only communications and more advanced detection devices and sights.
        The leopard is also a very ancient product, in the series since 1979. It is clear that the upgrades raised combat capabilities significantly, but still. It roughly corresponds to the T-80.
        This is far from a "Tiger" for Soviet tankers in the summer of 1943; in general, modern tanks do not have overwhelming superiority over each other.
        1. Viktor Sergeev
          Viktor Sergeev 22 December 2022 19: 57
          0
          The Leopard has a guided weapon system, though worse than the T72, but it does.
  10. alexey_444
    alexey_444 21 December 2022 09: 33
    +1
    Tanks are expensive and the result is minimal, well, the arms market has not gone away, at least American perseverance speaks of this, Khokhlyad talking heads about the supply of German tanks (there are English, golden French, Korean at worst) there will be anti-advertising and the Germans will have a lot more spent on the military budget, which is what the Americans need.
  11. Illanatol
    Illanatol 21 December 2022 09: 46
    +1
    Quote: aleksejkabanets
    Usually junk is sent, especially if this junk is comparable in characteristics to the weapons used there by the RF Armed Forces. Naturally, they first of all need to get rid of all rubbish, and then supply more modern weapons.


    Oh really?
    Give examples of more modern analogues of such Western weapons systems as:
    1. Howitzers M777 and "Caesar".
    2. ATGM "Javelin".
    3. MANPADS "Stinger".
    4. SAM manufactured by Germany, which even the Bundeswehr has not yet adopted (the name, I confess, I forgot, but I know what it is about).

    So - past the box office your statements.
  12. Maks1995
    Maks1995 21 December 2022 09: 55
    +2
    And, again, an owl on the globe.
    Already discussed many times.
    Weapons are supplied in metered portions so as not to "scare" Russia. And first of all, junk is easier to write off, easier to train, there is less danger from capture, to free warehouses and logistics from old stocks, it is politically easier to explain, etc.
    Everything is logical.
  13. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 21 December 2022 10: 10
    0
    Yes, Germany does not have tanks, from the word in general, for the whole country a little more than 200, of which 70 are not on the move.
  14. Last centurion
    Last centurion 21 December 2022 10: 22
    -1
    They did not allow the capture of Kyiv in the spring. One city would solve the problem of all. Here is the result. The West understands only force. All their diplomacy (from Reagan to Merkel) is a lie, and therefore there is no diplomatic solution to this conflict.
  15. Kusja
    Kusja 21 December 2022 11: 14
    0
    Either made in Germany, or already hergestellt in Deutschland.
    It seems that the West is also in no hurry with the supply of everything and everything, but is watching and waiting ...
  16. gromit
    gromit 21 December 2022 12: 09
    +3
    Leclercs, abrams and leopards did not appear in Ukraine, because. a lot of cheap Soviet tanks in the countries of Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa.

    If you can not find a cheap analogue, then you have to supply Western samples.
    Therefore, tanks go to Ukraine from Morocco. And winter uniforms are brought from Germany and Great Britain.

    In fact, the NATO countries are using the same strategy that worked in 1 and 2 MB - to crush the enemy economically but not overstrain themselves.
  17. Negro
    Negro 21 December 2022 12: 48
    0
    )))
    It rarely happens, but this time the article about "little, late, useless" is almost to the point.
    1. Scholz does not give tanks in the first place because he does not have tanks. This is especially noticeable against the background of just Biden, who has heaps of these tanks.
    2. Tanks are not really needed, there are enough tips for now. Especially against the background of the rightly noted problems with artillery. So now the main line of action is the buildup of repair capacities, primarily for Soviet equipment, and the resumption of the production of ammunition and barrels, primarily Soviet calibers. It's funny, but on the part of Ukraine now it's not only and not even so much the military-industrial complex of NATO, but the military-industrial complex of the Department of Internal Affairs.
  18. Skif
    Skif 21 December 2022 12: 58
    -2
    "Germany will not unilaterally transfer Western-style tanks to Ukraine."
    It seems to me that this phrase is the whole point. Herr, the grandson of a former SS officer, does not want to be in the forefront. Yes, and he is well aware of the "reliability" of senior partners. Classic! Involve as many countries as possible into the war and get out of the way before it ends. And make money on it again. Maybe Hans understood something?
  19. Arabfun
    Arabfun 21 December 2022 13: 56
    0
    Quote: AlevVishnevsky
    There are 2 answers! And you win 1 million if you pick the right one!!!
    1. There is no Russia as a state, there are only traitors, Ukrainians, oligarchs and aliens.
    2. There is no Russia as a state because thieves, oligarchs, traitors and Ukrainians are in power.

    there are also scammers / shchitsy and Pinocchio / nits ...

    but then someone takes out the garbage for you in the morning, cleans the snow, maintains transport, how many people live on budget money, it means that private traders do not have the entire budget, so there is a state within the state?

    specifically your claim to the work of special services for tightening, but you are not yet in Kolyma, although you promised 1 lemon, publicly, but you deceived!?!
  20. Arabfun
    Arabfun 21 December 2022 15: 10
    0
    Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
    Cheap and portable RPGs and ATGMs seem to have equalized the chances of a tank crew and an infantryman.
    the image of a future war has already been formed - a packed infantryman in conjunction with robotic systems, covered and guided by drones, networked
    have already switched to bio-weapons, on new principles, genetic ones are on the way, artificial intelligences, counter-battery fight of machines against machines: there will be space battles, naval games.
    maybe their mother, there in the west, forbade them to play computer toys as a child, so the boy walked and beat blood from his nose to the face of other children.
  21. Russian Patriot
    Russian Patriot 21 December 2022 15: 42
    0
    Dear Evgeny Fedorov lives in some kind of parallel reality (https://topwar.ru/200010-konec-operativnoj-pauzy-gde-zhdat-novoe-nastuplenie-rossijskoj-armii.html).
    German self-propelled guns and air defense systems can be supplied, tanks cannot. You see, moral damage will arise from the loss of the Leopard. And if the PzH2000 is lost, it will not arise.
    Amazing logic chain.
  22. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 21 December 2022 18: 57
    0
    Everything is fine, but for the 404m offensive, tanks are needed and a lot ..... Soviet ones end anyway. It is necessary to give some tanks to the Wehrmacht.
  23. Vladislav Vitgeft
    Vladislav Vitgeft 21 December 2022 19: 18
    0
    Thank you very interesting article. What prudent and practical Germans "delivered a mobile hospital" to UkroEvroWehrmacht. Remember.
  24. Vladislav Vitgeft
    Vladislav Vitgeft 21 December 2022 19: 23
    0
    Just recently I read that about 20 Puma infantry fighting vehicles were fascist, they broke down during the exercises. Everyone went to repair. Again, the Nazis will drive around Germany on marders.
    1. Silver
      Silver 21 December 2022 21: 39
      0
      Vlad, they got away with it so as not to deliver to Ukraine, they say, it is necessary to bring it to perfection, and then deliver ... German equipment is not designed for Russian frosts, in Ukraine -30 * C is not uncommon, you never know how it behaves there ... The Germans already had a sad experience in the Great Patriotic War, they remember, bastards ...
  25. Thorvlobnor IV
    Thorvlobnor IV 21 December 2022 21: 51
    0
    Come on, clung to these Leopards. Ukrainians simply think in advance on what to base the post-war armored forces on, beat out a contract that tastes better.
    For current purposes, it is much more profitable to use the bottomless African resource T-72 with modernization according to the latest fashion in the Czech Republic or Poland.
  26. Illanatol
    Illanatol 22 December 2022 09: 52
    0
    Quote: Max1995
    Weapons are supplied in metered portions so as not to "scare" Russia. And first of all, junk is easier to write off, easier to train, there is less danger from capture, to free warehouses and logistics from old stocks, it is politically easier to explain, etc.


    And what, "frightened" Russia will be very dangerous?
    And that these "dosed portions" are growing? Warehouses are already bursting with weapons, there is nowhere to put them?
    Despite the fact that the contracts for the supply of weapons to Taiwan, the United States has already dried up.

    What junk? Is the above old? Well, give specific examples of more modern weapons.
    I also have a problem - "it's easier to write off." Such problems are relevant for supply sergeants, and not for heads of state.
    Politically, no one explains anything to anyone, and is not obliged to. Excuses are not needed when there is a Holy War for the triumph of Freedom and Democracy laughing
  27. val_67
    val_67 26 December 2022 18: 04
    0
    The only thing that is now needed in the Armed Forces of Ukraine from German manufacturers is mobile crematoria. And the more the better!
  28. shark507
    shark507 28 December 2022 11: 13
    0
    Quote: Comet
    "An infantryman packed to the very best with a compact but very effective weapon" dies first and en masse when using a nuclear weapon.

    And how many have already "died" in Ukraine from the use of nuclear weapons?
  29. zenion
    zenion 29 December 2022 19: 38
    -1
    Leopards are often confused. There is he and there is she. And if she is in a position, she will never leave the cave in order to go somewhere from there, she will calve as much as she likes. And he won’t let anyone in abortions, such a leopard life.