German tanks "Leopard 2": neither Turkey nor Ukraine have soaked their reputation yet

142
German tanks "Leopard 2": neither Turkey nor Ukraine have soaked their reputation yet


To be honest, our general public has one feature, which is the opinion that any Western military equipment is rubbish, the stupidity of designers and generally useless iron on tracks and wheels. But, if in relation to most cars this is still theoretical "fabrications", then the German "Leopards 2" fell under the distribution in full, and not only in our country.



First, there was that same negative Syrian experience, when the Turks tried to use their Leopards in one of the operations, as a result, they received several torn apart and burned tanks. And then there was a special military operation in Ukraine, where these “cats” have been fighting for the third week and have already suffered losses, both destroyed and damaged. In the end, one of the "Leo" in an acceptable state of preservation was even captured by Russian troops.

There is a big reason for pride here - Western tanks are not omnipotent. And this is only to our advantage, because the more "cats" destroyed, the better. But the situation with them is not as simple as it might seem. Still, when nails are driven in with a microscope, it is not the microscope that is to blame, but the one who thoughtlessly beats them.


Tank is a delicate matter


Cannon and machine gun weapons capable of hitting most targets on the battlefield; high rates of mobility and operational mobility; armor that allows you to perform tasks under the influence of a wide range of fire and other means available to the enemy - those factors that clearly position the tank as a universal vehicle and a steel fist that cuffs everything (well, or almost everything) that is in sight.

But this versatility cannot be overestimated under any circumstances - this, as a rule, leads to the fact that the tank turns from a formidable weapons into a vulnerable and tasty target, and the names of the tankers add to the mournful list of irretrievable losses. And here there are two nuances.

The first is that absolutely any serial tank, no matter what country of origin, is built on the principle of differentiated armor, when the main body of armor is located in the frontal parts of the turret and hull. Whereas the secondary projections - the sides, the stern and the roof - are much less protected. Therefore, in fact, the tactics of the actions of tank crews are built taking into account these circumstances.

Yes, it is fair to say that they don’t really shoot at the forehead now, but resistance to anti-tank weapons is determined precisely within the course angles of maneuvering.

The second does not apply to characteristics and nationality: it is possible to kill vehicles due to their incorrect use, including the planning and implementation of military operations, as well as interaction with the troops.

The effectiveness of their combat work depends on the collective and close interaction of other units: aviation, motorized rifles, artillery, air defense and electronic warfare, reconnaissance and engineering formations. Whereas attempts to use tanks as a "club" in the hope that they will solve the task without adequate support and training end sadly.

В stories with those same Turkish "Leopards 2" just one and the other influenced the final result.

Yes, the picture there was impressive: the skeletons of burning tanks, torn off towers and other "elements" of the landscape - all this quickly scattered through the media, which almost trampled on the authority of the German machine. But in fact, the authority of the tanks was dropped by the Turks themselves.


Their first Leopard 2, which fired at the enemy in urban conditions, was destroyed by fighters from the anti-tank missile system who bypassed (without any problems, by the way) from the flank. The second - also with anti-tank systems during an ill-conceived assault on the Al-Baba hospital, when the Turks launched a senseless frontal attack on previously fortified positions. The next three units were simply abandoned by the crews due to the retreating infantry, which covered them in the same fruitless attacks. Two "thrown" the towers during the shelling from an ambush. Two more were destroyed by a mortar hit and a land mine, respectively.


Is it the fault of the machines themselves? Obviously not. What the Germans also spoke about, directly pointing to the poor planning of hostilities and the unsatisfactory training of the crews. Therefore, the only thing that can be noticed here is not the highest fire safety and insufficient isolation of the ammunition racks from the habitable compartments of the tank.

At the same time, none of the tanks was destroyed by a head-on hit, so that it can be said with confidence that their armor does not even hold the old ammunition used by the rebels. But the noise rose to the whole world: look, Leopards 2 are burning even from ancient Soviet-made missile systems! Well, if you get around the sides / stern and from the flank from an ambush, you can shoot the Abrams company with a T-90A with something that you can’t even take a fifty-year-old tank in the forehead with.

"Leopards 2" in Ukraine


In Ukraine, Leopards 2 are also constantly getting damaged, and some are permanently out of action, as evidenced by the footage taken by both military commanders and operators of unmanned aerial vehicles for various purposes. Here, perhaps, we will refrain from specifics in numbers on destroyed and wrecked tanks, but their losses are also from a series of not always adequate planning, as well as a lack of equipment in various units.

First of all, "Leopards 2" faced in Ukraine with the fact that under normal conditions of combined arms combat is not an insurmountable problem. We are talking, of course, about the minefields carefully planted by our troops before the “counterattack”.

What are "normal" conditions? This is when, before making passages in minefields, appropriate preparation is carried out: reconnaissance of the obstacles themselves and enemy positions, as well as their (positions) maximum suppression with the help of everything that shoots far away - aviation, artillery and various missile systems, if required. In general, to devastate the orders of those who guard the mines as much as possible.

However, the Armed Forces of Ukraine in some directions immediately switched to making passages and assaulting in the forehead. And this is despite the total lack of specialized mine clearance equipment. However, Western partners did not even provide their Kyiv protégés with such a significant trifle as mine sweeps for Leopards and other combat vehicles. Therefore, the result was logical.


Somewhere "Leopards 2" and other armored vehicles are damaged and destroyed by entire armored groups, an example of which is the incident near Malaya Tokmachka, where the chassis of the "Leopard 2A6" along with the BMP "Bradley" was broken by mines due to the head BMR- 2. And somewhere they fall under the distribution of artillery and other firepower, both in groups on roads open for review due to waiting for engineering equipment, and on pre-swept ruts, the congress from which is fraught with the detonation of a mine under the tracks.


Another misfortune of the Leopards, and indeed of all military equipment, is unmanned aerial vehicles. Moreover, for various purposes: both reconnaissance ones, performing the functions of artillery fire spotters, and kamikazes with rounds from anti-tank grenade launchers attached to the "fuselage".

Undoubtedly, it was the special military operation in Ukraine that became the first conflict in which drones began to be applied on such a cyclopean scale. But in principle there are effective means of countering them - this is not a threat that does not have an answer. The only question is the sufficient availability of electronic warfare equipment, and there are not so many of them in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which forces them to be used tightly in limited sectors of the front: somewhere UAVs cannot fly even with a secure communication channel, and in other places FPV drones with "Aliexpress" (exaggeratedly) fly more often than birds, which cannot but rejoice in terms of our victories.


But in general, when a flying grenade from an RPG buzzing from somewhere in the sky or factory-made barrage ammunition crashes into a tank - no matter what country of origin - the question is not for the tank. It is not intended to counter such threats, from the word at all, if the hit had to be somewhere further than the frontal armor. This is what makes any combat vehicle of this class vulnerable in general: the Leopard 2, the T-90M, and even the T-14 Armata. The same applies to artillery fire corrected from the air - the UAV flies, and the "art" shoots.

Here one could recall our aviation and talk about it separately, but so far it is impossible to attribute a more or less certain number of destroyed German tanks to its account, although it cracks down on other equipment with a bang. It's just that there are not enough precedents yet, and, you can be sure, there will be more.

But in general, the situation is clear: the Armed Forces of Ukraine, despite the large supply of weapons from NATO countries, have approximately the same problems with air defense systems as with electronic warfare. Somewhere dense, and somewhere empty. At the same time, the lack of a proper number of anti-aircraft systems operating further than MANPADS determines the revelry (in a good sense of the word) of our combat helicopters, which now and then shoot Ukrainian armored vehicles of various classes - from tanks to armored cars and armored tractors.

Results


This suggests itself, perhaps not entirely correct, but more or less clear comparison, when a martial arts master, a world champion in all kinds of sambo and other matters, was shot from a pistol or machine gun. On the one hand, the vaunted enemy is defeated, and on the other hand, under other conditions, it is still unknown who will emerge victorious.

This is exactly what happened with the Leopard. However, if we talk about their use in the Syrian war, then there they at least encountered classic infantry anti-tank weapons.

In Ukraine, destroyed or damaged German vehicles are out of order due to a lack of other military equipment, including aviation, air defense, electronic warfare and special. means for demining, and because of the thoughtless planning of local breakthroughs, consisting in an attack in the forehead "stupidly". But if in general, not a single Turkish and Ukrainian Leopard 2 has yet been out of action in such a way that one can clearly judge their total vulnerability and complete inability to act in battle.

In general terms, the conclusion here is as follows.

Leopard 2 is not a supernatural enemy that cannot be destroyed. The "Germans" are burning, and they are burning successfully - preferably on a larger scale than they are now. And it's good that our guys, taking advantage of the above vulnerability of the enemy, do not allow them to see the Russian positions in the sight, destroying them on the approaches.

But finally branding "Leopard 2" is not worth it. He, like any tank, can turn out to be a very formidable weapon in the hands of the enemy, who has everything in order both with the rest of the weapons and equipment, and with smart heads in headquarters. And to judge him by Turkish and Ukrainian examples is such a thing, not very far-sighted.
142 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +14
    4 July 2023 03: 51
    They would sit at home and not meow against us, maybe they would live on.
    1. +6
      4 July 2023 08: 25
      Mines decide everything in positional battles. For years, tanks can be driven to defense in depth with the same success.
    2. +5
      4 July 2023 12: 20
      I don’t really understand this weapon topic, but I understood from the text that we simply did not attack those who can control this technique, and therefore we have the result. I think that the author needs to get into the tank and show everyone his power, on the front line. Everyone around is simply to blame for the fact that the tanks are dying, but in general the tanks are good. Just mines around, and they got the wrong enemy. laughing Wag your tongue - do not toss bags.
      1. +8
        5 July 2023 08: 38
        Quote: Lumira
        I don’t really understand this weapon topic, but I understood from the text that we simply did not attack those who can control this technique, and therefore we have the result.

        Remember we were poured with mud when the Americans knocked out hundreds of our tanks in Iraq? This is when the cross-armed crew simply abandoned the tank at the sight of the Americans. But it was our tanks that got it, they say we don’t know how to do shit. Here history repeats itself, subtly now the tanks are abandoning the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
        We would turn this story in our favor, but we are noble
        1. 0
          5 July 2023 16: 58
          In Iraq, it was not only about "wonderful" crews. The point is also that pure T72s were never exported, T72Ms were delivered, which did not have combined armor and, accordingly, were pierced by Rh 120 shells, or whatever it is called in the Amer version.
        2. -1
          6 August 2023 21: 01
          Dear APUS! This is not from the "nobility" series ... It is difficult for us to turn this story in "our own direction" because of the elementary "indifference" of those who should do this and many other things, according to their position and, probably, their rank. Of course, General Konoshenkov, with his department, is ready to "turn history", but there is no command to be executed, probably ....
  2. +21
    4 July 2023 03: 57
    Leopards showed that the German school of tank building was not as cool as they were told. When the car turned out to be unbalanced, with a powerful forehead and the thinnest sides and a roof made of "foil".
    At the same time, it has a huge silhouette, which helps to direct guided missiles from helicopters at it. And if we add to this the weight one and a half times more than our tanks, it becomes clear where the designers turned out to be better.
    1. +19
      4 July 2023 05: 10
      Leopards showed that the German school of tank building was not as cool as they were told. When the car turned out to be unbalanced, with a powerful forehead and the thinnest sides and a roof made of "foil".

      Do not rank yourself among those stupid people who literally screamed a few years ago that Soviet / Russian tanks in the same parameters are a nightmare and horror. Any tank, be it Soviet/Russian or German made, can mess things up if used correctly. That's all it was written, and keep your thoughts to yourself.
      1. +6
        4 July 2023 06: 38
        We'll have to twist the "noble" Leo ugly braziers and nets! This is clearly the end of the matter. Advertising will be great!
        1. 0
          5 July 2023 17: 00
          On the noble Leo, the ugly trunk on the tower was attached a long time ago by the Germans themselves, when they were convinced that the straight forehead a la the Tiger protects badly tongue .
          1. 0
            24 October 2023 16: 04
            what you call the “trunk” on the turret is just a container/box/screen on hinges with active armor
        2. +4
          1 December 2023 06: 54
          So Contact -1 was screwed in immediately and the grid was screwed in.
      2. +12
        4 July 2023 06: 44
        Edward, good morning! Don't worry, it's just customary here to shout "hurrah" at the first opportunity. Whoever tries to think is branded with minuses, as well as everywhere else. People want to think only about the good, about the fact that LBS can also be not only rubbish - ...
        hi
      3. +2
        4 July 2023 09: 05
        Agree. In general, the article is interesting. Without jingoistic frenzy. Weaknesses and strengths of the problem are disassembled and certain conclusions are drawn. Without any of these - Yes, we will tear them like a heating pad and not out of breath. Write more.
        1. +5
          5 July 2023 20: 31
          here the entire article can be replaced with one paragraph, saying that any tank in itself is not a warrior in the field without the support of aviation, adequate art, etc. Not a word about some performance characteristics and their analysis.
          1. +3
            10 July 2023 18: 24
            Then the article will fail and the author will not be paid. And I want to eat.
        2. 0
          24 October 2023 16: 12
          weaknesses are most likely unknown to the author.
          - the driver is completely blind on the left side
          - unresolved problems with the loading mechanism.
          - the ammunition compartment is separated from the ammunition compartment. very conditional.
          - if you enter a turn at low gas, the goose is guaranteed to get off.
          Those. it cannot turn quietly in cramped conditions.
      4. +8
        4 July 2023 11: 35
        At the expense of aviation, Ka 52 with Whirlwinds clicked, as it were, not the lion's share in this grunt. The whirlwind, in principle, does not care which tank, and I think it will take the frontal projection as well. And at the expense of the fact that you should not underestimate .. Everyone who falls into the shelling of his guns, or where he can suddenly break in, should be wary of this machine, and any. It is not for nothing that everything works against him, a huge amount of anti-tank weapons has been invented, because the tank is the most dangerous predator on earth.
      5. PPD
        +11
        4 July 2023 11: 48
        Only this was written, and keep your thoughts to yourself

        What are you so worried about Leopard?
        And why be surprised at the reaction of people?
        At first, probably the whole West broadcast stories from each iron with stories like (by analogy):
        we supply Ukraine with the latest German tanks - Tiger, Panther, Tiger B, and the Russians have tanks t 26, bt 2 of old releases, t 60 in small quantities. Of the birds, only forty-five. Success is guaranteed. Crimea in a week, in 2 Voronezh, etc.
        And here it is.
        No wonder.
        R.s.
        Yes, and "competent use" is a spherical horse in a vacuum, or attempts to reach the horizon.
        Something is bound to go wrong.
      6. +6
        4 July 2023 16: 08
        The title of your article: "German tanks "Leopard 2": neither Turkey nor Ukraine have so far their reputation soaked."
        In the article itself, you provide links to how the media successfully tarnished this very reputation, and give your opinion that, no, there was no tarnishing ... Reputation tarnishing, after all, occurs not only exclusively and due to the qualities (or their absence) of the discussed object/person.

        Tell me, do you always write headlines for each of your articles in the click-bait format?

        Don't count yourself among those stupid people
        interesting style...
      7. +4
        4 July 2023 19: 52
        Quote: Eduard Perov
        Don't count yourself among those stupid people

        But the author, if not a stupid person, is definitely right, neither Turkey nor Ukraine really tarnished the reputation of the Leopards, but they tarnished pretty well, you can’t argue with that.
      8. 0
        12 July 2023 12: 30
        "Tank" on the battlefield is an integrating and backbone element. A-priory...

        This is the IMPACT FORCE of the Ground Forces, the main task of which is to BREAK through the fortified defenses of the enemy, with the support of aviation and artillery (and the Rocket Forces of the Ground Forces). "Around" the advancing tank and "with it", "all other" components of the offensive potential of the Ground Forces involved in the offensive operation are integrated - infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, self-propelled guns ...

        The tank, by definition, is intended for MASSIVE use on the battlefield precisely during OFFENSIVE operations (or counterattacking actions ...) ...

        All the same, "the rest", - FIRST OF ALL, - the use of TANKS in battles in settlements, dense buildings, mountainous terrain, one or a pair of tanks, as part of small mobile groups, in local tactical operations, described in the article, is precisely the use of a TANK , not tank troops.

        Those. EXCEPTION from the general SCIENTIFIC concept of the use of tank TROOPS. And in this case, yes, the INDIVIDUAL "bells and whistles" of a particular TYPE of tank can be of very great (even decisive ...) importance ... And first of all, to ensure its own survivability on the battlefield in the specific conditions mentioned ...

        On the territory of Syria, the Turks used tanks, "strengthening" their strongholds with their potential. Not in offensive operations ...

        During the SVO, the slightest attempt to organize at least some semblance of "armored fists" from any "salad set" of armored vehicles supplied by Westerners - Leopards, Bradley, BMP-1 and BMP-2, T-72, r at their strongholds in during the NWO, neither the Turks, nor the Kiev banderos, etc. to break through the defenses of the Russian Armed Forces, they were instantly and effectively suppressed by PRACTICALLY ALL anti-tank weapons of the Russian side - minefields, ATGMs, artillery, army aviation, the use of grenade launchers ...

        Behind this, where - where, and even in the course of the NWO, the "reputation" of the Leopards, as an "effective" and "tricked out" element of the OFFENSIVE potential of the Wehrmacht, NATO or Kiev Bandera - Natsiks is ALREADY pretty "shabby" ... It's just a FACT REALITY...

        And there is no reason to believe that with the Abrams, Challengers and other Leclercs during offensive operations near the Kyiv Bandera - Natsiks do go "much better" than with the Leopards ...
      9. 0
        24 October 2023 17: 20
        Any tank, be it Soviet/Russian or German-made, can do a lot of damage if used correctly.

        as well as anti-tank weapons. Even if the crew has seven spans in their foreheads and five campaigns behind them, if the tank on top is defenseless - it will be hit by a cheap drone - it’s a matter of time.
    2. 0
      4 July 2023 06: 42
      On YouTube, you can find simulations that their frontal armor is not so wonderful, and it breaks through the same Mango. Due to the large area, it cannot be covered with dynamic armor, destabilize the penetrator and reduce its effectiveness. A4, by today's standards, in fact, no armor at all.
      1. 0
        4 July 2023 21: 14
        The site was populated by Ukrainians, but I’ll leave a proof for people:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYeOCCixNQc
    3. 0
      6 July 2023 09: 04
      Any technique is created for a certain concept of application. We have one, the Germans have another, the Ovs have a third. Therefore, the parameters of booking, weight and mobility are different. Plus, without cover and with an inept crew, any tank quickly turns into a pile of scrap metal.
  3. +15
    4 July 2023 04: 04
    According to the author's logic, it turns out that no tanks are to blame for their destruction, but their crews are to blame for illiteracy and inexperience.
    1. -7
      4 July 2023 05: 12
      According to the author's logic, it turns out

      According to the logic of the commentator. No more.
      1. +8
        4 July 2023 11: 27
        Quote: Eduard Perov
        According to the author's logic, it turns out

        According to the logic of the commentator. No more.

        The article is good, I liked it, but it would be worth responding to comments not so sharply. Write if you are interested.
    2. +12
      4 July 2023 06: 05
      Yes, and the crews are not much to blame, the tank command is to blame, of course it is a thing and even has a gun, but if the tank itself is a target and that's it. Previously, the German tank school made tanks for German tactics (I'm talking about the Wehrmacht) and the tanks had both infantry (trained in interaction with tanks) and artillery and sappers. The tanks had a theory of use, and when the Hans could not use the tanks correctly, they suffered losses. But since NATO did not fight with the army, they taught the Nakhryukovites as they saw it. In a word, the result is on the face.
      1. -2
        4 July 2023 09: 39
        Quote: saigon
        But since NATO did not fight with the army, they taught the Nakhryukovites as they saw it.

        Just NATO knows both Soviet and African armies in the Soviet manner quite well. But so far, we have not observed any signs of the NATO military doctrine on the ground. Two African armies.
        1. +4
          4 July 2023 11: 14
          Judging by all the actions of NATO, too, he doesn’t know a damn thing! For the normal use of tanks, the brigade organization probably does not roll at all. The brigade cannot suppress the enemy’s firepower, well, there are few trunks and it works in both directions.
          1. +1
            4 July 2023 19: 59
            Quote: saigon
            Judging by all the actions of NATO, it also doesn’t know a damn thing

            And what kind of actions are these?
            Quote: saigon
            For the normal use of tanks, the brigade organization probably does not roll at all.

            We haven't seen a single brigade yet, not even a Ukrainian one. All the same company, maximum battalion groups. What can we say about the American brigade.
    3. +17
      4 July 2023 06: 20
      Once upon a time, an Israeli general was asked about the quality of Soviet tanks, which the Jews filled in great numbers. I don’t remember his last name (I didn’t know, and even forgot), but he said: “There is no point in talking about the quality of tanks that are used in the wrong way and in the wrong place.”
    4. +7
      4 July 2023 08: 47
      Quote: Kusja
      no tanks are to blame for their destruction

      A tank is a piece of iron; in principle, it cannot be to blame for anything.
      Quote: Kusja
      their crews are to blame for illiteracy and inexperience.

      Crews, command of different levels and political leadership. Depending on the situation.
  4. +2
    4 July 2023 04: 24
    What is the author Eduard Perov trying to convince VO subscribers? That the padded Leo is garbage, no more important than the t-64? But he didn’t write a word about the media effect and the difficulty in repairing and transporting. And did not indicate that Turkish German cats can be repaired locally (in Turkey). The article is a well-deserved minus
    1. +4
      4 July 2023 06: 50
      Quote: Alister Kroulegg
      But he didn’t write a word about the media effect and the difficulty in repairing and transporting. And did not indicate that Turkish German cats can be repaired locally (in Turkey).

      hi
      I'm not an expert, but I'm trying to understand. Please explain what this changes in the sense of the article?
      1. 0
        10 July 2023 18: 34
        Well, like this is a child prodigy, as the Western media wrote, and the Ukrainians will show the Muscovites, damn it, how much the shmat of bacon at the Kiev Bazaar. So the ukry tarnished the reputation of the leopards.
  5. +16
    4 July 2023 04: 25
    Twenty-five again ... they are again trying to convince us of the technical superiority of German tanks ... the author seems to be on the payroll of the German tank industry ... for him, footage of burnt and wrecked German tanks is a loss of image, a loss of customers ... from this point of view, the author and is trying to minimize losses for the Germans of future customers.
    smile
    Well, German tanks are burning ... there's nothing to be done ... Abrams with F-16s will also burn.
    They will not fight in sterile conditions as with natives who did not have weapons.
    All Western equipment showed itself well in Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia ... there, local fighters could not plant a long-range missile in return.
    There are such missiles in Russia ... so don't expect miracles from Abrams and Leopards ... they burned, they burn and they will burn.
    1. +16
      4 July 2023 04: 39
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      Again twenty-five ... they are again trying to convince us of the technical superiority of German tanks ..

      ... And no one was going to make sure of their fighting qualities on the battlefield by going to him head-on, arranging now "battles near Prokhorovka"! The Americans also do not want to release their Abrams for knightly duels. So it’s right that military foreign cars hit the battlefield, saving our soldiers, officers and our equipment!
    2. +5
      4 July 2023 05: 06
      There are such missiles in Russia ... so don't expect miracles from Abrams and Leopards ... they burned, they burn and they will burn.
      That is, according to the author, the Russians are to blame for everything. They don’t go out against such wonderful tanks with slingshots, they shoot at them from ATGMs. That's zhezh dishonest, do not fight according to their rules. And they don't know how to do it any other way. laughing
    3. +10
      4 July 2023 05: 33
      Again twenty-five ... they are again trying to convince us of the technical superiority of German tanks ... the author seems to be on the payroll of the German tank industry.

      In at least one sentence from the published text, find the very belief that the Germans are superior. They get wet, largely due to misuse, and that's a good thing. Let them wet more. You just don’t need to treat them in such a way that since the Ukrainians and Turks have failed in this regard, the more advanced armies of the world can repeat the same somersault. Only the short-sighted can underestimate the enemy.
      1. 0
        4 July 2023 06: 21
        Quote: Eduard Perov
        They get wet, in many ways due to misapplication

        It’s better not to send Leopards to war at all. Especially to Ukraine!

        I would like to ask the author, but are our tanks used correctly, especially the old T-54 (55)? And is it possible, in principle, to use tanks in a war only correctly?
      2. 0
        10 July 2023 05: 21
        Of course, "wrong use" - first the infantry must pass, then among their corpses make the way for the leopards, that's when they will give !!!! fellow
    4. +4
      4 July 2023 06: 11
      It seems to me that the author is not about tanks at the core, he is about tactical methods of using tanks. And any tanks will burn. I understand everything, however, the Hans themselves forgot their Gotha - tanks should be used en masse.
      In a word, there is no organization of the offensive, there is no engineering intelligence, we see the result.
      1. -1
        4 July 2023 08: 07
        Quote: saigon
        tanks should be used en masse.

        It only means that the tanks will burn en masse. In general, the question arises about the need for this class of technology and what it should be. The combination of heavy infantry fighting vehicles and modern self-propelled guns looks more advantageous. Although "infantry" tanks may remain, but their mass use as in WWII is not possible now.
        A modern heavy tank needs to be equipped with an all-aspect KAZ, built-in drones, air defense systems of the near zone, etc. This will make the price of the tank space. Or make medium tanks based on infantry fighting vehicles, cheaper but you can keep mass character. They can be protected from shrapnel, infantry weapons and mines, but from other means of destruction it is either extremely expensive or rare.
        1. +1
          4 July 2023 11: 18
          It was a long time ago that theories were developed precisely on this topic - a breakthrough of defense-saturated anti-tank defense. There, a solution was offered. Entering the breach in the firing corridors. Examples of the successful use of the actions of tank and mech corps in 1944-45.
          1. +2
            4 July 2023 12: 44
            Successfully, then successfully, but the Panzerfausts collected their tribute. And now, smart mines, and ATGMs that will break through in the forehead, and all sorts of buzzers unknown on an industrial scale have been added to the classics.
            I wonder if there is a solution at all, or has the armor already lost its battle forever?
            1. 0
              4 July 2023 15: 05
              In general, it is strange when they cite the experience of a war that took place more than 70 years ago. When every 20 years the concept of war changes.
              In general, the means of destruction are far superior to the means of protection. In general, compromises have been sought between mobility, security and means of destruction for thousands of years.
  6. 0
    4 July 2023 04: 30
    branding "Leopard 2" is not worth it

    Only when it becomes an exhibit in Kubinka, in the only copy in the whole world. Like all his predecessors.
  7. +2
    4 July 2023 04: 33
    German tanks "Leopard 2": neither Turkey nor Ukraine have soaked their reputation yet
    The Leopard 2 tanks themselves were soaked by the RF Armed Forces, but their reputation was not! laughing
    1. -1
      4 July 2023 08: 59
      Quote: Good
      tanks "Leopard 2" of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation were soaked, but their reputation was not!

      Did you mean to say "Ukrainians drove equipment into mines"? Yes, that is right. However, the reputation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine did not suffer too much - it was like that.
  8. +7
    4 July 2023 05: 02
    What kind of ode to the "Leopard"? Yes, it’s not complete shit, but it didn’t produce the “Tiger” effect either, it’s an ordinary modern Western tank that our equipment is simply obliged to destroy, since it was created specifically for this and not for parades, biathlons and sales to third countries.
    Maybe someone just scared himself and then lowered him, etc. ... (I ask you not to take anyone personally at your own expense)
  9. +13
    4 July 2023 05: 22
    And somewhere they fall under the distribution of artillery and other firepower, both in groups on roads open for review due to waiting for engineering equipment, and on pre-swept ruts, the congress from which is fraught with the detonation of a mine under the tracks.

    Yesterday I wrote, I repeat - in the photo below in the first row of four cars - two Leopard -2R and one Bergpanzer, behind them is another Leopard-2R, that is, out of the FIVE first cars, FOUR are mine-clearing engineering vehicles blown up by mines in a crowd! That is, this is not a "derailment", but a complete G ****, namely Leorpardy-2 and Leopard-1, since specialized demining machines clear mines at the rate of one mine - one engineering tank. It’s not the track that’s to blame, but the CRAZY TECHNOLOGY
  10. +16
    4 July 2023 05: 33
    German tanks "Leopard 2": neither Turkey nor Ukraine have soaked their reputation yet

    By and large, the "Leopards" were summed up by the advertising and propaganda that did everything to present these machines as "wunderwaffes" capable of defeating thousands of enemy tanks, putting it in various ratings in first place in the world. The crews believed in this, which turned out to be their fatal mistake.
    So "Ukraine and Turkey" did not "soak" the reputation of "Leopards-2", they simply "thrown them off the pedestal", proving that he was not rightfully there
    But now the main thing for us is not to rush to the other extreme, namely, we should not consider Western technology to be bullshit. It just now fell into the hands of those who learned to fight on equipment built to completely different requirements for the training of personnel.
    However, Western partners did not even provide their Kyiv proteges with such a significant trifle as mine sweeps for Leopards and other combat vehicles.
    And that's just what they gave. Well, this is the Leopard-2r engineering vehicle. It is another matter that they were not able to fully fight the minefields of the RF Armed Forces and were lost, for the most part, in the very first days of their "counterattack"
    1. +7
      4 July 2023 06: 19
      But now the main thing for us is not to rush to the other extreme, namely, we should not consider Western technology to be bullshit. It just now fell into the hands of those who learned to fight on equipment built to completely different requirements for the training of personnel.

      Two shots of strong Armenian tea for this gentleman. wink
    2. PPD
      -2
      4 July 2023 11: 05
      It just now fell into the hands of those who learned to fight on equipment built to completely different requirements for the training of personnel.

      And these are also disadvantages of this technique.
      And it's good that the Germans do not seem to understand this. If for the successful use of the tank, the entire crew needs to graduate from an institute with graduate school .... wassat
      And for repair, open R&D fellow
      Such tank troops will not last long.
      This logic led the same Japanese to a dead end.
      There are aircraft carriers, there are no trained pilots.
  11. +2
    4 July 2023 05: 48
    It is not intended to counter such threats, from the word at all, if the hit had to be somewhere further than the frontal armor. This is what makes any combat vehicle of this class vulnerable in general: the Leopard 2, the T-90M, and even the T-14 Armata
    It does what it does, just in a different way. The smaller silhouette/projection starts to work again, even the visor for the T-ashes is much less needed than for the westerners. Everyone has already seen the broken roof of Leo, but it was not anti-tank ammunition, and most likely the T-90 would have escaped with external damage.
    1. +3
      4 July 2023 05: 56
      The smaller silhouette/projection starts to work again, even the visor for the T-ashes is much less needed than for the westerners. Everyone has already seen the broken roof of Leo, but it was not anti-tank ammunition, and most likely the T-90 would have escaped with external damage.

      There, apparently, was a mine 120-ka. A terrible contraption for any tank, but I could be wrong about the caliber.
      1. +3
        4 July 2023 06: 24
        Quote: Eduard Perov
        There, apparently, was a mine 120-ka.

        In your article, you brought a photo with a lancet that flew into the side of the Lepa-2 tower. Let me show you what happened next:

        The turret blew through both sides. And the sides of the tower are thicker. And the Lancet for warheads is an analogue of mine-82ki, approximately. Ok, the 120th would have broken through the roof and torn already in the tower, there the thickness is definitely less than 10 cm of Abram ... And everything is thinner than the side.
        I understand that one thing is cumulative, it seems, in the Lancet and an ordinary mine, but it would break through ...
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. 0
          4 July 2023 06: 36
          Ok, the 120th would have broken through the roof and torn already in the tower, there the thickness is definitely less than 10 cm of Abram ... And everything is thinner than the side.

          ok, you showed the action cumulative warhead and for some reason compared it with fragmentation. True, in terms of penetration it turns out strange. To break through a steel plate a couple of centimeters thick with a free-falling mine ... so that it explodes right inside. What... recourse

          UDP: what the hell is an ordinary mine in the Lancet??? What are you talking about?
  12. -1
    4 July 2023 05: 51
    Olive branch, Source of peace, Afrin... The Turkish army has always reached its goals. Yes, they lost military equipment, armored vehicles, soldiers died, but they did not give the United States the opportunity to create pro-American Kurdish states. Tanks, armored vehicles ... they are in the armies for this in order to solve the task set for the troops.
  13. +2
    4 July 2023 05: 56
    Quote: Eduard Perov
    Only the short-sighted can underestimate the enemy.

    By no means do I underestimate Leopards as a weapon.
    Any weapon kills ... it's just that the enemy is trying to psychologically suppress us by advertising his weapon as superior to our weapon ... you can't play along with him in this matter.
    On the contrary, it is necessary to show the shortcomings of the Leopards, Abrams ... indicate ways to level the strengths of these tanks, ways to fight them on the battlefield.
    In general, do as our soldiers and officers did in the Second World War.
    The enemy against us in terms of readiness to fight with us is the same as the Germans.
    1. +2
      4 July 2023 06: 04
      By no means do I underestimate Leopards as a weapon.

      And I don't play along with the enemy. By going to my profile, you can see the article "how can we punch a German cat in the face", which shows both the means of destruction and the vulnerabilities of the vehicle. Yes, they messed up in terms of using the advertised "Leo 2", but the car itself cannot be assessed as a complete failure simply because in the hands of a more skilled enemy this car will turn out to be more serious than in Ukrainian ones. In the same way as Russian tanks were branded in Chechnya, they say, there are only "turret throwers", but the situation is the same - a tank cannot be considered a club.
  14. +1
    4 July 2023 05: 59
    Still, when nails are driven in with a microscope, then ...

    Wow what! For cats, they did not create comfortable conditions, which means. Otherwise, the leopard would certainly have become a child prodigy. The Fritz is not lucky - not worthy users come across, but solid pots.
    Before licking this miracle of technology, it would be more logical to point out how it compares favorably with tanks from other manufacturers, in which it has proven itself. Not finding anything like that, the author decided to go from the other side)))
    A tarnished reputation will most likely be indicated by other indicators than what we were rubbed here.
    The author spread some vulgar demagogy, in general.
    1. -1
      4 July 2023 06: 12
      Wow what! They didn’t create comfortable conditions for cats, that means. Otherwise, the leopard would certainly have become a child prodigy.

      Do you seriously think that a combined arms operation can be accepted by "comfortable conditions" only for a German tank? Do you need to clarify that without the use of the appropriate units, any tank formation is coffins on tracks? The author did not breed anything, but only said that the Ukrainians use Western cars incorrectly, like the Turks. Calm, just calm.
      1. 0
        4 July 2023 06: 34
        The author did not breed anything, but only said that the Ukrainians use Western cars incorrectly, like the Turks.
        Or maybe it's not the wrong use of tanks, but the availability and professional use of excellent anti-tank weapons, and on the other hand, the poor training of the crews of these same "Leopards"?
        1. +1
          4 July 2023 06: 41
          Or maybe it's not the wrong use of tanks, but the availability and professional use of excellent anti-tank weapons, and on the other hand, the poor training of the crews of these same "Leopards"?

          This is a complex problem of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Ours skillfully shoot, and "theirs" do not have full-fledged means for combined arms combat.
          1. -3
            4 July 2023 12: 55
            Quote: Eduard Perov
            theirs" do not have full-fledged means for combined arms combat.

            You somehow justify yourself beautifully ... And the fact that the left is heavier than the same breakthrough and was essentially created for riding on asphalt and sand (where, by the way, you also crap - Turkish) is modestly silent. Just like about "hyperelectronics", to work with which you need to graduate from universities, and not 3 months, like Ukrainians. If it's not difficult, simulate the battle of leopards with crews of trained Hans and t 90, naturally with all the support, from air to infantry, in the conditions of the Ukrainian black soil? Who has a higher chance of dying faster? Therefore, I agree with you, you should not underestimate the enemy, but also you should not sing praises to him, complaining only about ignorance and weak support. If Nata gets involved, then both the Levs and the Abrams will die stupidly due to the weight and lack of repair bases, which is what we are now seeing with the example of kaklov.
    2. +1
      4 July 2023 11: 22
      Quote: Tagan
      Wow what! For cats, they did not create comfortable conditions, which means. Otherwise, the leopard would certainly have become a child prodigy. The Fritz is not lucky - not worthy users come across, but solid pots.

      Absolutely. In those situations in which the Leo burned, any other tanks would have burned in their place in the same way. It wasn't about the bobbin... © smile
      In general, looking at the tank counteroffensive, for some reason I immediately remembered Belton Cooper:
      Each task force had one minesweeper tank. Having overcome the crest of the hill and overtaking the infantry, they drove straight into the minefields. Although they had to fight not only with mines, but also with thick mud, at first these tanks showed themselves well. Under the blows of the chains, several minutes exploded, adding an extra pair of funnels to the field. But in the end, both minesweeper tanks got bogged down, because on wet ground the engine power was not enough to crank the drum and tracks at the same time. Frozen, they were excellent targets and were soon knocked out.

      The next tanks of the columns had no choice but to go around the minesweeper tanks and break through. It ended in a nightmarish domino - the first of the tanks rounded a minesweeper and walked several meters before being blown up by a mine. The next one went around both of them and moved a little further, when he also came across a mine and was blown up.

      This continued until one tank finally broke through the minefield to continue the attack. The one behind him tried to move along the same route, and sometimes he managed to pass the minefield unscathed. By the third tank, however, the soft ground turned into a swamp, where the armored vehicles bogged down, despite the "duck feet" that we put on the connecting links of the tracks. And each stuck tank became a stationary target for deadly anti-tank fire.
      1. -1
        4 July 2023 23: 01
        That's why they made a four-track object 279.
        1. +1
          5 July 2023 10: 08
          Quote from: ln_ln
          That's why they made a four-track object 279.

          It was made so that the fairy from the well-known anecdote would not have to suffer with the tower: for real sensations, it is enough to make the crew change also internal caterpillars. smile
          1. +1
            5 July 2023 10: 43
            Quote: Alexey RA
            also change the inner tracks.

            Strange. It seems that the anti-fascist Knipkamp did not work in the USSR.

            But we decided to go ahead.
            1. 0
              5 July 2023 11: 39
              Quote: Negro
              Strange. It seems that the anti-fascist Knipkamp did not work in the USSR.

              Rollers and tracks are not the same thing.
            2. 0
              5 July 2023 19: 19
              Quote: Negro
              Strange. It seems that the anti-fascist Knipkamp did not work in the USSR. [

              But we decided to go ahead.

              We traditionally shod a flea. smile
          2. 0
            19 August 2023 23: 21
            You should watch a movie where 279 goes in a rut under the very turret leaf and drags a T-54 behind it.
            Such a machine is not a pity to give rem. department.
            And how is the replacement of the inner caterpillar fundamentally different from the outer one? Is the cable difficult to pull?
  15. 0
    4 July 2023 06: 07
    A strange attempt to justify the failure of the use of Western technology and Leopard-2 tanks in particular. If their use is not a failure, why did the Armed Forces of Ukraine decide not to use these tanks on the offensive, although tanks are a breakthrough technique? Why don’t tankers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine want to be in the crews of Leopards, but prefer tanks from the times of the USSR?
    1. Eug
      -3
      4 July 2023 06: 45
      I hope, because Western equipment is for exercises and parades, but it’s still better to fight on Soviet ...
  16. -2
    4 July 2023 06: 15
    Someone received a money transfer from Rheinmetall ... wassat
    1. 0
      4 July 2023 09: 12
      Quote: svarog77
      from Rheinmetall

      Krauss-Maffei Wegmann
  17. +1
    4 July 2023 06: 19
    Quote: Eduard Perov
    in the hands of a more skilled enemy, this machine will be more serious than in Ukrainian

    Yes, I agree here ... if retired mercenaries from NATO countries are put in tanks ... then there may be problems.
    But not every mercenary will agree to burn in the Leopard in the fields of Donbass ... so for now we can relatively calmly burn these tanks.
    Moreover, it should be taken into account that the Armed Forces of Ukraine completely thoughtlessly throws tank columns into battle, without providing them with conditions for safe movement and combat ... there is no air cover, demining, safe passages and much more.
    Something and NATO advisers here sat in a puddle. what
  18. +3
    4 July 2023 06: 24
    German tanks "Leopard 2": neither Turkey nor Ukraine have soaked their reputation yet
    . The whole text can be reduced to one conclusion ... it was not the reel, the races were clumsily sitting in the cockpit!
    However, the author tried and the text did not ... everything is so, approximately / no, it looks like it.
    The fact that somewhere, someone, did not come up with fantasies for himself and continues to live in them .... it happens, life itself corrects this, or does not correct it, that's how it will turn out.
  19. +3
    4 July 2023 06: 28
    not a single Turkish and Ukrainian Leopard 2 has yet been out of action in such a way that one can clearly judge their total vulnerability and complete inability to act in battle.
    And how, other than knocking out, destroying or breaking down on the march, should a tank be out of action? The author, does anyone say that they are totally vulnerable and completely incapable of acting in battle? Any tank is vulnerable, with a successful hit it burns, and even the turret flies off (when the ammo rack detonates). Crew professionalism plays an important role. But "Leopard" in Ukraine confirmed a simple fact - it is not a panacea for achieving victory, especially in inept hands.
  20. +1
    4 July 2023 06: 38
    If the enemy has everything in order with the rest of the weapons and equipment, as well as smart heads in headquarters, then he will not need Leopard 2 either. He'll deal with us with a T-64. And from the German car, they just expected that, having outstanding characteristics, it would compensate for the lack of the above. But, it didn't work! It turned out that without the support of "Leopard 2" is no better than the T-64. Isn't it too expensive in this case? And this is just the fault of the machine.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +1
      4 July 2023 09: 17
      Quote: sansan
      It turned out that without the support of "Leopard 2" is no better than the T-64.

      Better of course, but crooked hands and an empty head completely negate its advantages.
      Quote: sansan
      Isn't it too expensive in this case?

      Of course not. Leopards are free.
  21. Eug
    +2
    4 July 2023 06: 43
    Seemingly "invisible", but really the most important means and methods of ENSURING direct combat operations are gaining more and more influence. This is what distinguished the Wehrmacht from the spacecraft in the early years of the Great Patriotic War.
  22. +1
    4 July 2023 06: 54
    Quote: Eduard Perov
    Again twenty-five ... they are again trying to convince us of the technical superiority of German tanks ... the author seems to be on the payroll of the German tank industry.

    In at least one sentence from the published text, find the very belief that the Germans are superior. They get wet, largely due to misuse, and that's a good thing. Let them wet more. You just don’t need to treat them in such a way that since the Ukrainians and Turks have failed in this regard, the more advanced armies of the world can repeat the same somersault. Only the short-sighted can underestimate the enemy.

    The ford at Belogorovka will not let you lie)
  23. +1
    4 July 2023 07: 04
    Thank you, Edward, for an interesting article.
    I think that miracles were exposed with the Leopards, as in Woland's variety show.
    Tanks, which became the main striking force of the ground forces in World War II, by inertia continued to design and build to solve two problems:
    1. Steep tank battles and oncoming battles, such as on the Kursk Bulge
    2. Deep raids behind enemy lines, such as the Belorussian and Vistula-Oder operations.
    At the same time, mobility and range at one gas station, flatness of an anti-tank projectile and rate of fire were of the greatest importance. According to the residual principle - manufacturability and security.
    If for a cruiser tank all of the above is more or less correct, then for an infantry tank it is fundamentally wrong. A breakthrough requires a moderate ballistic weapon with a powerful high-explosive projectile, all-round protection against infantry anti-tank weapons, as well as an automatic cannon for spherical shelling of the upper hemisphere and a short-range flamethrower system.
    It would seem that these requirements are not feasible, but there are historical examples of their application. The 152-mm howitzer and 150-mm cannon were in service with the KV-2 and E-100 (in the project). Additional turret with anti-aircraft machine gun - M48,
    melee anti-personnel mortar - on Tigers and self-propelled guns after 1943
    Of course, armament does not solve the problem of tank invulnerability on the battlefield. And here it is necessary to break the stereotype of the size of the tank in width. Additional tracks (and a four-track course suggests itself!) And hinged protection elements must be transported separately. Separate transportation of the tower is also possible, if necessary due to weight and size restrictions. The final assembly of the vehicle must be carried out before combat use by specialists of the repair and restoration service.
    Of course, the mass of such a vehicle can easily exceed 100 tons, but only the feeling of being protected from enemy fire by the crew will allow them to successfully solve the task, and not endlessly seek shelter and think about the upcoming evacuation from the vehicle due to the inevitability of being hit by anti-tank weapons.
    As for mine-fighting equipment, it is advisable to use unmanned engineering vehicles, created on the basis of obsolete tanks that are in long-term storage, along with remote means.
  24. 0
    4 July 2023 07: 18
    In justification of the manufacturers of Western armored vehicles, only one thing can be said:
    It wasn't about bobbin car, but in the one who was sitting in the cab.
  25. 0
    4 July 2023 08: 35
    It turns out that there is no bad technique, there is only wrong application. Leo 2 is a tank of a classic layout, and if you shoot him only in the face and cover from all sides and from top to bottom, then he will not tank badly ... like any other tank.
    It turns out that in modern war Leo2 is ordinary mediocrity, what could make it really difficult to defeat a machine? - a different layout with less weight and a smaller dimension, mandatory remote sensing, mandatory perfect KAZ, improved mine protection including a trawl on each tank, a cape to reduce thermal visibility ... that's right, offhand.
    In fact, the T-64 of the latest modifications, the T-72 of the latest and the T-90, all the more so, are better than the Leo2, so the number and dozens of Leo1A5, which will soon be handed over to the ukrams, are important here, they will play a much larger role in numbers, and they will be amazed absolutely same.
  26. +1
    4 July 2023 08: 46
    Mankind has not yet come up with absolutely "non-combustible" tanks. All tanks are on fire.
  27. -1
    4 July 2023 08: 49
    As I understand it, the author tried to rehabilitate the leoperds and blame all their problems on the poor Selyuks and flying grenades. In my understanding, a modern tank that can be praised is an absolute disregard for mines, the ability to shoot down UAVs and birds ...
  28. -2
    4 July 2023 09: 03
    A strange article. I mean, almost the entire population of the Russian Federation played tanks, or plays and is well aware of the different projections of the tank. Or are there women here? They just don't play tanks. What is the article about? About the obvious? Or is the site editor a woman? ... In my opinion, I logically came to THIS thought?
  29. -2
    4 July 2023 09: 15
    Quote: Eduard Perov
    Leopards showed that the German school of tank building was not as cool as they were told. When the car turned out to be unbalanced, with a powerful forehead and the thinnest sides and a roof made of "foil".

    Do not rank yourself among those stupid people who literally screamed a few years ago that Soviet / Russian tanks in the same parameters are a nightmare and horror. Any tank, be it Soviet/Russian or German made, can mess things up if used correctly. That's all it was written, and keep your thoughts to yourself.

    Theorizing is of course interesting, but now we have the practical result of the combat use of leopard tanks.
    And we have an analysis of this combat use.
  30. +1
    4 July 2023 09: 32
    Why write so much? It’s easier to read the Textbook of a sergeant of motorized rifle troops, everything is written there about combined arms combat. About the means of destruction of various targets and the order of use.
  31. +1
    4 July 2023 12: 08
    Do not soak say: and whose tanks are burning there, on Russian soil, German?
  32. +2
    4 July 2023 12: 20
    From the article we can conclude this;
    Leopard 2 - in itself, a good tank. But it is not intended for the conditions of modern warfare.
  33. +1
    4 July 2023 13: 08
    I thought the author would give some kind of comparison. Like, there are so many shots like a lancet or an ATGM flies into Ukrainian T-64s and with such and such a probability the tanks exploded. And this is how it is with leoperds and therefore they are stronger. And this is how t-64s drive over mines, and this is how leoperds, have you seen that the Germans are better? And this is how they shoot at the NWO. And then some kind of nonsense that the leoperdams were not allowed to show themselves. So it seems they should have shown better than the old Soviet tanks, and not burn out so that there is no video with their successful use, either in the rear or on fire.
  34. 0
    4 July 2023 13: 27
    The all-angle KAZ will perfectly cope with the UAV. So the problem is in many ways just the same in the tank. It doesn't match the times. And the theses voiced by the author can justify heavy cavalry. For a raid on the rear, that's it. Shot from a machine gun? So you've been using it wrong.
  35. 0
    4 July 2023 13: 40
    Apparently some disappointment in Leo is pushing the APU to use Contact 1.
  36. -1
    4 July 2023 13: 40
    Well ... Deutsches had to think before sending their tanks to our land, and even with familiar symbols.
    As a result, this is a desirable trophy for everyone in general.
    Was it really not clear in advance that they would shoot at a German tank with a cross from all available weapons, from PMa to Tulip. Well, let them say a special thank you to Leps :).
    There is a homely truth in this - to build a tank for 5-6 million bucks, and roll it out for 10k.
  37. 0
    4 July 2023 14: 13
    Quote: Eduard Perov
    You just don’t have to treat them in such a way that since the Ukrainians and Turks have failed in this regard, the more advanced armies of the world can repeat the same somersault.

    One may ask when these "more advanced armies" last fought with an enemy who has the full range of weapons? By the way, what are the "more advanced armies"?
    It's just that we practically see a live clash in which absolutely all types of weapons take part, with the exception of atomic weapons.
    This has never been seen. Therefore, how the Americans or the Germans would show themselves there, advancing on the prepared defense, is absolutely unknown. It is quite possible that their tanks and armored personnel carriers would have been torn on mines in the same way, and our density of combat formations would have been three times greater.
    I’ll just repeat that the German school of tank building turned out to be not so cool, and if ours had been given the opportunity to design a car in such a weight, then it would have turned out to be much more balanced.
  38. BAI
    -1
    4 July 2023 14: 33
    The Germans have a good tank school. They don't have hopeless tanks
  39. 0
    4 July 2023 14: 54
    As in the old joke about a brothel - it doesn't matter what kind of beds there are, but what matters is who "works" on them.
    In 1941, there were outstanding T-34s and KVs for that time, but illiterate generals and untrained crews drove them into battle.
    As a result, the Germans on the miserable "ones", "twos", "35s", "38s" and "troikas" drove our people to Moscow.
    In 1944-45, the situation became a mirror image: the Germans retreated all the way to Berlin on much more sophisticated Panthers, Tigers and Ferdinands - Guderian was fired, and German tank aces burned down near Kursk and in Belarus.
    So now the Ukrainians.
    They are driven on the offensive by former piano players, sellers of stolen and repainted dogs, and those who rode higher on the Maidan. And in the "leopards" there are sellers of stolen mobile phones and dog hairdressers.
    Why does a fool need a glass penis?
    1. 0
      5 July 2023 19: 48
      In 1941, there were outstanding T-34s and KVs for that time, but illiterate generals and untrained crews drove them into battle.
      As a result, the Germans on the miserable "ones", "twos", "35s", "38s" and "troikas" drove our people to Moscow.

      Read the memoirs of Poppel, who irritated Zhukov very much because of the description of the tank battle near Dubno. This is when Commissar Poppel better commanded his part of the 8th mechanized corps than his commander Ryabyshev, Zhukov's protégé.
  40. +2
    4 July 2023 16: 34
    I understand the author
    a tank is not allowed for mines, it’s impossible for aviation, it’s impossible for drones, it’s possible for anti-tank weapons, but only those that don’t take it in the forehead
    in short, a tank can only be used against lightly armed infantry, and here it will show itself in all its glory :)
  41. +1
    4 July 2023 17: 00
    All I understood from the article is that the Russian army is dishonestly fighting against leopards. It is necessary, as in the Second World War, that the infantrymen rush at the tanks from the trenches with Molotov cocktails - then the tanks would show their power.
  42. +5
    4 July 2023 19: 06
    I liked the article and didn't.
    On the one hand, of course, it is correct that the author rejects hatred moods. The Leopard 2 is certainly a formidable fighting machine that can do a lot if used correctly. But on the other hand, the author, speaking about the reputation of the Leopard, in my IMHO is still wrong.
    The reputation of these machines still turned out to be very tarnished in Ukraine.
    Let's start with a simple one - reputation is not a thing in itself. Reputation is created not in a spherical vacuum, but in certain circles, in society. And let's see what happened to Leo's reputation and where.
    Ukraine. There is nothing to say here - the reputation was even very wet. Both among the population (the sect of "witnesses of Saint Bayraktar and his comrade-in-arms Javelin" quietly migrated to admirers of the "sacred Leo"), and among politicians of various levels, who may not be so earnest, but still believed in "Aryan superiority". But generally speaking, a certain disappointment is also observed in the Armed Forces of Ukraine among the tankers - although news from afar is rarely correct, there were remarks on the topic that the Leopard turned out to be much more fastidious in service than expected from him, and the fighting qualities are not so high as to unconditionally compensate this shortcoming.
    Russia? I have been following the holivars between lovers of the Western and those who extol the Russian, or those who are trying to impartially evaluate both for more than a dozen years. And here's the deal...
    When American planes brought down our MiG-29s in the sky, this was postulated by many as the superiority of Western technology over ours. Yes, they tried to explain to them that neither Iraqi nor Yugoslav pilots were equal to Western ones (it’s not funny at all about Iraq, but in Yugoslavia, after the collapse of the USSR, the raid fell enormously), that on the 29th they were shot down in conditions of total Western air superiority, in first of all - informational, when the USA and Europe have dozens of AWACS, intelligence officers, etc. and so on. and Yugoslav takes off, relying only on himself. But the fact is that when your planes were regularly shot down in conflicts, when your tanks burned in the same Chechnya, but foreign ones did not, this, for all its illogicality, created an aura of invincibility for Western technology. Propaganda, in its purest form, yes. But she works. Because it’s one thing to verbally explain that if a Yugoslav had been at the helm of the F-16, the result would have been absolutely the same, that’s good, but the statistics and photos of downed MiGs as a propaganda tool are much stronger.
    And here is the spectacle of blown up, pierced by light cumulative warheads (and what else could be on the Lancet), and so on and so forth. Leopards. it just removes the halo of invincibility, which, to be honest, has been absorbed into the brains of many compatriots interested in the topic. The wounded Leo gave a very decent healing effect for a significant part of our fellow citizens. In this regard, their reputation has also been dampened in the Russian Federation.
    Yes, and in the West, among ordinary inhabitants - the same, for the same reasons.
    And among the pros... Well, among our pros, Leo's reputation is probably the least damaged - so our warriors meet the Leopards with all possible respect. That is, fucking them with everything that is at hand. And this is definitely the right approach...
  43. +1
    4 July 2023 23: 14
    That is OK.
    We will wait - when the enemy is supplied with the appropriate equipment and we will start heroically as we are told to GRIND it!
    Is it possible to grind him less heroically, however? Or does religion not allow us?
  44. 0
    5 July 2023 02: 02
    But finally branding "Leopard 2" is not worth it. He, like any tank, can be a very formidable weapon in the hands of the enemy,

    Yes, there’s Edik to be wiser ... Leo himself is heavy for the Krajina mud, uncomfortable, like rain, he doesn’t drive or gets stuck, his armor is so-so, especially on the side. Yes, and it is difficult for Ukrainians, especially raguli, they can hardly be trusted with anything other than a pitchfork. Breaks often...
    And in the hands of the enemy and the fork of power! One hit 4 holes...
  45. 0
    5 July 2023 09: 16
    But finally branding "Leopard 2" is not worth it. He, like any tank, can turn out to be a very formidable weapon in the hands of the enemy, who has everything in order both with the rest of the weapons and equipment, and with smart heads in headquarters. And to judge him by Turkish and Ukrainian examples is such a thing, not very far-sighted.
    Author Mr. Obvious? What other criterion should be present to evaluate the capabilities of this product? As for me, the most important criterion is price-quality, the second is manufacturability, the third is ergonomics (the ability to quickly learn and use the product). So, according to these criteria, Leopard is a bunch of expensive, promoted GUANO!
  46. 0
    5 July 2023 11: 33
    ... high rates of mobility and operational mobility;


    Two questions to the author E. Perov:
    1) What are the indicators of mobility expressed in?

    2) What is operational mobility? Is there one at the strategic and/or tactical levels? If so, what is the difference from operational?
    1. 0
      19 August 2023 23: 55
      Well, this is intuitive: strategic is about transferring by transport (railway, sea, air), here is the size and weight; operational - these are marching capabilities (primarily the power reserve); tactical - on the battlefield, acceleration (including in reverse), braking, turning with accurate and fast control of these.
      Usually they say mobility, "mobility" is a tracing paper.
  47. 0
    5 July 2023 11: 55
    Quote: kot423
    And the fact that the left is heavier than the same breakthrough and was created essentially for riding on asphalt and sand

    Do you think German engineers are fools?
    Who stupidly writes about weight, gets stuck in the mud, etc., study, compare the performance characteristics of the Soviet school of tank building and the German one.
    Specific pressure on the ground of the tank 2A6 = 11.8 psi (0.83 kg / cm²) specific pressure on the ground of the tank t-90С = 0,97 kg / cm². That is, the Leopard tank, despite its weight, exerts less pressure on the ground than the T-90S or the hung T-72B3, respectively, there is less chance of getting stuck in the mud + it has very good mobility.
    And yes, there is no ideal tank, any school of tank building will have pluses and minuses.
  48. 0
    5 July 2023 14: 23
    Quote from Bingo
    The turret blew through both sides. And the sides of the tower are thicker. And the Lancet for warheads is an analogue of mine-82ki, approximately.


    The lancet has a cumulative warhead. Comparison with mines is not correct.
  49. 0
    5 July 2023 14: 26
    Quote: Order
    Who stupidly writes about weight, gets stuck in the mud, etc., study, compare the performance characteristics of the Soviet school of tank building and the German one.
    Specific pressure on the ground of the tank 2A6 = 11.8 psi (0.83 kg / cm²) specific pressure on the ground of the tank t-90С = 0,97 kg / cm².


    Permeability depends not only on the specific pressure, but also on the specific power (number of hp per unit weight), and the final one (taking into account losses during transmission to the chassis).
    1. +1
      5 July 2023 14: 51
      Quote: Illanatol
      from specific power

      The Leopard 2A6 has a diesel engine with a capacity of 1500 horsepower and ~27hp / t and the T90C with a modified engine at 1130hp this value is ~ 23hp / t.
      By the way, about mobility in my comment, it was written by me.
      The argument about the weight of the Leopard is honestly annoying, as if the German engineers did not take into account the distribution of weight on the ground surface, specific pressure and power.
      But about the T-90M with a new turret, here there are already questions, the answers to which I did not find on the net, but I think that not everything is perfect there in HP / t and specific pressure on the ground.
      1. 0
        5 July 2023 17: 30
        Quote: Order
        Leopard 2A6 has a diesel engine with a capacity of 1500 horsepower and ~ 27hp / t

        Since when does 1500 divided by 62 equal 27?
        1. 0
          5 July 2023 18: 55
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          divide by 62 will be

          What is the ~ sign for? Depends on the modification, but this value is still better than that of the Soviet T-90S tanks, etc.
          Whom I took the information from the German site, and not the Russian one, so the information can drastically differ.
          But trust is more caused not by Ura patriotic sites, but by foreign ones.
          Whom did you yourself notice about the final power, but now you changed your shoes in the air and forgot it.
          Let me remind you that the Leopard has an automatic transmission that realizes power better than final drives.
          Therefore, I propose to finish, “Hooray, it will get stuck in the mud because it is heavy and in general for asphalt roads”, on the note NO, the Leopard will not get stuck in the mud (except for completely swamps, peat, etc.) and has better patency in numbers than Soviet tanks.
          And yes, the 2A6 has a problem with the weight distribution, which is closer to the front due to additional armor, but this did not greatly affect the tank's patency.
          (Power/weight 2A6: 24.1 PS/t (17.7 kW/t) - (23.7hp/tonne)
          1. 0
            6 July 2023 03: 35
            Quote: Order
            What is the ~ sign for?

            This is a question for you, because approximately 27 is 26 or 28, but not 24 ...

            Quote: Order
            It depends on the modification, but this value is still better than that of the Soviet T-90S tanks, etc.
            Yes? Then why write a specific modification of 2A6? In which the value is generally equal to the T-90s, "approximately".

            Quote: Order
            Whom did you yourself notice about the final power, but now you changed your shoes in the air and forgot it.
            What place is this? In the same place where 27 is approximately equal to 24? laughing You are confusing me with someone else...

            Quote: Order
            Therefore, I propose to finish, “Hooray, it will get stuck in the mud because it is heavy and in general for asphalt roads”, on the note NO, the Leopard will not get stuck in the mud (except for completely swamps, peat, etc.) and has better patency in numbers than Soviet tanks.
            Exactly, according to the numbers, however, a larger base also implies a greater length of the tracks, and these are losses for self-movement and turns, which eliminates the advantage of the planetarium (automatic transmission and planetarka are not the same), and the greater length of the bottom, and this is a larger area of ​​​​contact with the ground , in case of linkage of caterpillars.
            But in general, of course, there is no euphoria about the "sluggish" leopard, I agree here. But "horror horror" is also not visible ...
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. 0
                6 July 2023 10: 49
                Quote: Order
                Stop writing nonsense, go to the official website of the Bundeswehr and write what you write here.

                Sure, what was I hoping for? Will a person who confuses 27 and 24 understand that "self-movement" is the official term in relation to power losses ...
                1. 0
                  7 July 2023 11: 04
                  Quote: Vladimir_2U
                  Will a person who confuses 27 and 24 understand,

                  There is no confusion, initially there was an error that 27 is for 2A4 for 2A6 - 24.
                  And you rush from one extreme to another, then power affects your cross-country ability, then the length of the caterpillar, etc., the specific pressure on the ground still affects the cross-country ability, and it is better for the Leopard than for Soviet MBTs.
                  MTLB also has a long base, and what prevents it?
                  In principle, in Germany, these tanks ride on exercises in a similar liquid as in Russia and do not experience problems with maneuvering.
                  A huge drawback of the Leopard is its huge 30 mm sides, even the Americans realized a long time ago and strengthened them on their Abrams.
  50. 0
    5 July 2023 14: 34
    Quote: Eduard Perov
    Ours skillfully shoot, and "theirs" do not have full-fledged means for combined arms combat.


    What kind of funds do "theirs" not have? No artillery? Yes, there seems to be, supposedly better than ours. No ATGMs? And the vaunted Jewels? No SAM? There is also. Oh yes, they are tight with aviation. But local "experts" foam out that we also have little aviation and no notorious "air supremacy". So what's the problem?

    I don't think it's a lack of technical equipment. There are many examples in History when the technically inferior side was still able to maintain successful databases. As well as examples of how a fully equipped side merged even, formally, a weaker enemy.
  51. 0
    5 July 2023 16: 25
    None of the NATO equipment will help at all...” it only tires the assistants))
  52. 0
    5 July 2023 16: 30
    I am not a specialist or even a military man (I am a teacher). It seems to me that the mistake of the West, and specifically the Germans, is that they released their tank into battle conditions that were not originally planned for a specific tank. After all, every piece of equipment in the post-war period (and even during the war) was created taking into account the tactics of combined arms combat with the use of all types of troops and equipment in combination. Any change in the situation (destruction or delay of a unit) led to the need for a complete change in tactics or even failure. In the exercises of the Soviet army, the ability to arrive at the specified position on time was put in first place. Or they set an example and worked out non-standard solutions when the situation suddenly changed. I'm not sure that's always the case. So, the Leopard, designed for combined arms combat according to Western tactics, found itself in “paramilitary” conditions from the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Of course, the situation is a failure for him. The valor of our soldiers and the command of the troops lies in the fact that they did not take a step, but competently and without delay took advantage of the created situation and turned it to their advantage. Here is an example of the Germans in World War II: as soon as they had problems with infantry escort of tanks and the stamina of our infantry during tank attacks, close-in defense systems (grenade launchers) were invented and created with tanks. But it still didn’t help, since it was a weapon to solve the problems of 1941-42, when our infantry let tanks in and destroyed them with bottles and grenades due to the lack or small number of anti-tank artillery. Since 1943 the situation has changed. Special artillery, anti-tank specialists, and tanks against tanks with appropriate weapons appeared. And grenade launchers were no longer in great demand, but for the German military economy it was an additional extra burden. The author, in my opinion, is generally right. But it’s not worth attributing the West’s calculations to the “super capabilities” of its technology and its debunking by our military.
  53. 0
    5 July 2023 17: 04
    “Therefore, the only thing that can be noticed here is not the highest fire safety and insufficient isolation of the ammunition racks from the habitable compartments of the tank.”
    That's putting it mildly! Leo's ammunition rack, which is not covered by anything from the inside, occupies the entire right front part of the hull. The driver touches her shoulders. Abrams' carrier sits between two hefty fuel tanks.
    1. 0
      20 August 2023 00: 01
      The front tanks on the Abrams are separated by armored partitions.
  54. The comment was deleted.
  55. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      5 July 2023 20: 55
      And we must remember, a third of the border KV and T-34s got trophies at storage bases due to excessive secrecy, they did not have time to train the crews and the command of the lower and middle levels (politics .... be it not okay)
  56. The comment was deleted.
    1. -1
      5 July 2023 19: 54
      Maybe that’s why the Armata didn’t go into large production, and the best modern tank is our Terminator...

      So the chief designer of the Terminator, Yakovlev, says that Armata will lose in battle to the Terminator. And the Terminator can fight against infantry, unlike the Armata anti-tank


      Yakovlev's theses
      -Ural engineers deliberately complicated the military’s task in order to create the Combat Vehicle of the Future.
      -The “frame” was made to fight helicopters and tanks from an ambush, and not to shoot grenade launchers;
      -in a hypothetical collision, the “Frame” will destroy the “Armata”, and the “Armata” will not be able to destroy the “Frame”;
      - a private design bureau can make a tank better than the Armata;
      -there is an urgent need for a flying BMD and BMPT based on an ekranoplan with an air cushion;
      -The main scourge of the Russian military industry is monopolism.
      1. 0
        5 July 2023 20: 50
        Well, here are the three-tower tanks again .. AH! ekranoplanes of the battlefield ...
  57. The comment was deleted.
  58. 0
    5 July 2023 20: 48
    Quote: Order
    But trust is more caused not by Ura patriotic sites, but by foreign ones.

    To the author - foreign sites are also very "urapatriatic" sites, because the vast majority of the editors-in-chief will not let others through .. This is now the policy of the West (now since 2008,08,08)
  59. 0
    5 July 2023 22: 13
    Well, ok, let’s say Tarasov didn’t have time to properly train how to use a pyromangal, although on the other hand, the Armed Forces of Ukraine have been fighting for more than a year - there are enough experienced tankers there who have been fired upon and who know the enemy. The Turks are generally one of the strongest NATO armies, constantly in local conflicts.
    Who should use Leo so that he opens up 100%?
    Bundeswehr in one helmet? So they won’t have the required number of planes and artillery (the vaunted Panzerhaubitz 2000 turned out to be very delicate and doesn’t like to shoot a lot). Apparently, the correct use means the full power of NATO (read the USA) when missiles and donkeys loaded with gold carry everything to a depth of 500-1000 km and Leo, finishing off random encirclements from ambushes, rolls into Red Square to the enthusiastic cries of foreign agents.
    But the Leo 2A6 itself is far from a prodigy, especially since it’s not for nothing that the German army is called a beggar - the German Leo-2 equipment is much worse than, say, the Swedish or Greek.
  60. 0
    6 July 2023 00: 08
    And yet: “If cowboy John is so smart, then why is he so dead?!”
  61. 0
    6 July 2023 17: 10
    The author is war, and it doesn’t happen according to the rules
  62. The comment was deleted.
  63. The comment was deleted.
  64. The comment was deleted.
  65. 0
    12 July 2023 07: 16
    An interesting fact is that the Turkish Leopard-2 was destroyed by a mortar. Even the roof of the BMP-2 can withstand an 82mm mortar hit. She caved in, but survived. The witness himself. But even if a 120mm mine landed on Leo and destroyed him, this indicates that the vehicle was practically unprotected from above. The roof of the tower is very thin (saving weight to enhance the frontal projection). As evidenced by photos and videos of the broken roof of Leo-2 in Ukraine.
  66. 0
    13 July 2023 21: 32
    Naturally, the people who know how to make Mercedes, BMWs, Bugattis, Volkswagens and so on will build the best tanks.
    1. 0
      20 August 2023 00: 07
      Fortunately, no.
      These are completely different branches of mechanical engineering.
  67. 0
    8 August 2023 11: 50
    There is only one question for the author of the article, if the article is called Turkey and Ukraine have not yet ruined the reputation of Leopards 2, then what else needs to happen to Leopards 2 in Ukraine for their reputation to finally collapse?
  68. 0
    17 September 2023 09: 09
    Subject delivered:
    L2A4 - min. 40pcs (14 Poland, 10 Spain, 8 Norway, 8 Canada, unknown quantity Finland
    L2A5 - 10 (Sweden)
    L2A6 - 21 (18 Germany, 3 Portugal)

    Of about 71, 3+ (3,5 Finnish engineering vehicle) were destroyed in 6-1 months of use, 12-16 tanks were damaged. The Kurds burned 8-10 Turkish tanks in Syria, for comparison. I see no reason to throw shit at a leopard, quite normal statistics
  69. -1
    17 October 2023 10: 19
    There are no super weapons, only people who know how to use them correctly, taking into account its strengths and weaknesses. Otherwise, the best tank is just a pile of iron. There was a case when a T-70 hit a Panther. It seems like this was discussed here on the resource.
  70. +1
    27 October 2023 11: 49
    Leopard 2 and Abrams were developed for a completely different war, when UAVs were the dreams of science fiction writers. Reconnaissance and real-time guidance on the battlefield were only being discussed. But even then, a blow to the side or roof of a tank with a cumulative charge was fatal for it. Now a tank is heavy a means of supporting infantry, not a breakthrough.
  71. 0
    13 November 2023 06: 54
    As the author correctly pointed out in the article, any tank poses a huge threat in the war with the Papuans. But in a war with an equally valuable enemy and in the absence of air support, this is a big box of matches.
    And I would like to ask the author, in which combat manual is it recommended to fight only in the frontal projection of the tank?
  72. 0
    13 November 2023 19: 11
    The author looks like a lawyer for Rheinmetall Landsysteme
    You can’t attack them head-on, you can’t bypass them, you can’t attack them with drones, you can’t step on minefields...
    What are they for then anyway?
    What is the point of using them? Is it that the crew sometimes survives?
    So you don’t have to fight against them at all and all the tankers will be alive hi
  73. 0
    21 November 2023 06: 53
    What kills me most is when those (currently the Germans) talk about incorrect planning of the operation. I’m sure today the Ukrainians have enough of them, these German and other specialists. However, as planned incorrectly, everything continues.
  74. 0
    21 November 2023 06: 53
    What kills me most is when those (currently the Germans) talk about incorrect planning of the operation. I’m sure today the Ukrainians have enough of them, these German and other specialists. However, as planned incorrectly, everything continues.