Military Review

Finland will receive 100 tanks Leopard 2A6NL

39
With a difference of several days, two events occurred that could have a significant impact on the defense of Finland. On January 16, the Ministry of Defense of this state approved the acquisition plan. tanks from the Netherlands. A few days later, representatives of Finland and the Netherlands signed an agreement. According to this document, until the end of the decade, the Finnish military will receive 100 Leopard 2A6NL tanks, for which they will have to pay a little less than 200 million euros.


In recent years, various countries in Europe have regularly reduced the number of their armored forces. Finland, in turn, over the past 10-12 years has significantly updated the tank units. The new contract is also intended to increase the combat capability of both the tank forces and the defense forces as a whole.

The subject of the Finnish-Dutch agreement is the German-made 100 tanks Leopard 2A6NL. The armored vehicles in question were decommissioned a few years ago and are currently in storage. The first batch of tanks will be transferred to Finland in 2015 year. Last used combat vehicles will go to Finnish troops only in 2019. The fulfillment of the signed contract will lead to a fundamental change in the combat potential of the Finnish armored forces. Finland currently has 91 tanks Leopard 2A4, 126 tanks T-72, and also 70 obsolete T-55М. The launch of hundreds of new Leopard 2A6NL tanks will affect the combat capability of the troops accordingly.

Finland will receive 100 tanks Leopard 2A6NL
Tank Leopard 2A4 of the army of Finland



T-72M1 of the army of Finland



T-55M army of Finland


In fact, Finland is now the only European country that is increasing the number of its armored forces. Other states either do not buy new equipment at all, or do it simultaneously with the decommissioning of existing machines. At the same time, the Finnish military have what is called the Napoleonic plans: by the end of the decade the total number of Leopards will more than double.

As already mentioned, Finnish tankers are now exploiting the 91 main battle tank Leopard 2A4. These armored vehicles were purchased from Germany and delivered during the past decade. As in the case of the current contract, at the beginning of the two thousandth the Finnish military did not acquire new equipment. Bought tanks for some time served in the armed forces of Germany. In total, the Germans gave the Finns 139 tanks Leopard 2A4. Hundreds of vehicles entered the Finnish Defense Forces as line tanks. To date, nine tanks have been decommissioned. The six tanks purchased were converted into Leopard 2L bridge laying machines, the same number of armored vehicles became Leopard 2R barrage machines. The remaining 27 tanks were used as a source of spare parts for the rest of the equipment.

It is already known that the former German tanks Leopard 2A4 will remain in service with the Finnish army. Thus, for some time the Finnish military will simultaneously use two modifications of the Leopard tanks. This should affect both the capabilities of the respective units and the complexity and cost of operating the fleet of armored vehicles.

The tanks planned for the transfer of Finland have an interesting “biography”. The Netherlands became the first overseas customer for Leopard 2 tanks. In the late seventies, a contract was signed, and in the first half of the eighties, the Federal Republic of Germany built and transferred to the customer 445 combat vehicles, modified in accordance with the requirements of the military department of the Netherlands. By 1993, all German-made tanks were upgraded to version 2A4NL, after which they began to be reduced. Almost 250 machines of the 2A4NL modification were sold to Austria (114 units), Canada (80 units) and Norway (52 units). In the late nineties and the beginning of the two thousandth, two upgrades were carried out. First, 188 tanks were upgraded to version 2A5NL, and then 180 of them - to 2A6NL. Several dozen cars of the last modification were sold to Canada, Portugal and Germany.


Tank Leopard 2A6NL in the composition of the ground forces of the Netherlands


Finally, in the spring of 2011, the Dutch Ministry of Defense decided to completely abandon the tanks. Remained in service with the 73 tank Leopard 2A6NL written off and sent to storage. These and other armored vehicles, decommissioned, were supposed to be sold to third countries or disposed of. The first buyer of decommissioned Dutch tanks was Germany, which last year received 20 of such vehicles. Currently, they are being repaired and converted into a modification of 2A7 +. In the future they will serve in the German armed forces. A hundred Leopard 2A6NL tanks intended to acquire Indonesia, but this contract was not signed due to some political differences.

For Finland, purchasing second-hand tanks is a bargain. Each of the 100 armored vehicles will cost the Finnish military about 2 million euros. According to the official website of the Finnish Ministry of Defense, the new tank Leopard 2A6 would have cost the treasury about 10 million. Thus, even taking into account the additional costs of repairs and a partially developed resource of equipment, the ratio of the transaction value and its consequences for the defense forces still remains at a sufficiently high level. In addition, the possibility of upgrading existing tanks Leopard 2A4. Upgrading each car to the level of 2A6 would have cost 5 million euros. Modernization would be twice cheaper than buying new tanks, but in this case, the most profitable investment of money would be to purchase equipment from the Netherlands.

The contract for the supply of decommissioned Dutch tanks is beneficial for both parties. With its help, Finland can save large sums on upgrading its fleet of armored vehicles, and the Netherlands can get rid of unnecessary decommissioned vehicles. Loses only Germany, has not received an order for the production of new tanks.


On the materials of the sites:
http://www.armyrecognition.com/
http://www.puolustusvoimat.fi/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
http://armstrade.org/
http://lenta.ru/
Author:
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. mirag2
    mirag2 22 January 2014 08: 51
    0
    Yes-ah ... A sickly upgrade.
    Only 300 tanks, about a hundred normal, almost fresh, and even a hundred of the same, 30%.
  2. alekseinew
    alekseinew 22 January 2014 10: 00
    +1
    from whom they conceived to defend laughing
  3. samoletil18
    samoletil18 22 January 2014 10: 32
    +1
    Previously, tanks were bought in the USSR.
  4. Megatron
    Megatron 22 January 2014 10: 44
    0
    Why do they even need tanks ??
    1. white_f
      white_f 22 January 2014 10: 59
      +9
      What do you mean why? Nearby is the evil Zoviet soldier.
      1. Samaritan
        Samaritan 22 January 2014 20: 02
        +3
        Yeah, 60% of GDP and 75% of energy resources depend on Russia.
        In nearby Russia, rubles are already accepted everywhere, And in schools bordering Russia they are going to introduce the Russian language !!! An evil soldier for them is Natka laughing
        1. bif
          bif 22 January 2014 23: 55
          0
          Quote: Samaritan
          In neighboring Russia, rubles are already accepted everywhere,

          Well, not everywhere, but in large shops of border cities - Yes, but the course is wild, just thieves.
      2. bif
        bif 23 January 2014 00: 29
        +1
        Quote: white_f
        What do you mean why?

        Now Finland is the only country in Europe that "by itself" is not a member of any military coalition, moreover, it does not even want to join NATO. Considering the Russian Federation as an enemy has long ceased (well, maybe, except for strategists from the basements of the Ministry of Defense and ardent nationalists), tk. Finland's economy is so integrated and dependent on the North-West of the Russian Federation that it cannot withstand the severance of trade and economic ties. And any self-sufficient country should have a normal army.
    2. bulvas
      bulvas 22 January 2014 11: 44
      +5
      Quote: Megatron
      Why do they even need tanks ??


      ... and suddenly the cards will die so that Karelia will become easy prey ...
  5. leks
    leks 22 January 2014 10: 55
    0
    Not a bad deal, for the Finns, 200 lyamas for 100 tanks, and as for whom to defend against, you yourself know everything, or just in Russian, just for any fireman)))
  6. Black
    Black 22 January 2014 11: 00
    0
    Quote: Megatron
    Why do they even need tanks ??


    To whom? Matti, Erkki, Pentti also think .... Finland as a state? - For prestige (or it was Schaub !!), but there are still tankers ... but as tankers without tanks ???
  7. Roman 1977
    Roman 1977 22 January 2014 11: 30
    +7
    The first Finnish tanks were 34 French Renault FT-17s received after the end of the First World War. In 1933, Finland purchased Vickers tankettes of the 1933 model and one Vickers 6 tons. In 1938, Finland began building tank forces. 34 Vickers 6 tons have been ordered in the UK. But before the start of the Second World War, only 28 vehicles were delivered, and 6 Landsverk-182 armored vehicles were also purchased from Sweden. In 1943-1944. from Germany were delivered from 14 to 20 PzKpfw IV Ausf.J and 59 StuG III Ausf.G In addition, the Finns commissioned 7 trophy T-34-85 (captured 9). In Sweden, 6 ZSU "Landsverk" were purchased. In addition, on the basis of 18 Soviet captured BT-7s (a total of 20 captured), the Finnish BT-42 self-propelled guns were created, armed with an English 114-mm field howitzer of the 1909-1917 model. Until the 60s, the Finnish army was content with captured Soviet and German vehicles, for example, the T-28 (in total 7 vehicles were captured) the Finns wrote off only in 1951; KV-1 (2 vehicles captured) in 1955; BA-20 (captured 22 vehicles) in 1957, and 7 T-34-76 (captured 4, 3 purchased from the Germans) and T-26 (captured 114) in 1961, and StuG III in 1966, and decommissioned self-propelled guns turned into pillboxes.
    After the war, the Finns bought 466 American half-tracked M3 armored personnel carriers in 1947-1949, of which only 213 entered the army. The first tanks of post-war Finland were 43 T-54s, purchased in the USSR in 1959-1961, which received the name Nikita from the Finns, 10 ZSU-57-2 were also purchased (another 10 were bought in 1992-1993 in Hungary at spare parts for tests of the planned modifications), and in 1963 12 PT-76s (decommissioned in 2007) Also in the early 60s, 41 British tanks "Comet" were bought. In the second half of the 60s, the USSR was sold to Finland 74 T- 55, and the Finns, together with the Swedes, modernized them into the T-55M.The last company of Finnish T-55Ms was withdrawn from service in the first months of 2002. Also from Soviet technology, Finland acquired 1963 BTR-15PK in 50, another 45 were purchased in 1966-1968 (a few more were bought in the early 90s from the arsenals of the former NNA GDR); in 1971-1975 113 BTR-60PB; in 1984-1991 220 MT-LB + more 3 in the MT-LBu version of the former NNA GDR in 1992; 40 BMP-1, of which 5 BMP-1K in 1981-1982 and another 110 in 1992-1994 from the arsenals of the former NNA GDR ( almost all have now been removed from service, except for a few converted into fire control machines). In 1988-1990 infantry fighting vehicles BMP-2 entered service in small quantities. The main batch of these machines is 84 units. - was delivered in 1992 (still in service).
    Since 1984, Finland has bought from the USSR 54 T-72M1 and 9 T-71M1K, which the Finns called "moon rovers", after the absorption of the GDR in 1990, the Finns bought another 78 T-72M1 and 21 T-72M1K1 of the former NNA. Thus, the Finns got a total of 162 "lunar rovers", paying for each German "seventy-second" slightly more than 1/2 of the cost of the car previously purchased in the USSR. The flip side of the deal with Germany was trade preferences for the Germans and a firm promise of the Finnish side to continue buying used military equipment in Germany. Soviet and Gedeer T-72s became the main tanks of two Finnish tank brigades (each with 6 tank companies) and remained so until 2006, when, in connection with the purchase of second-hand Leopard-2 from Germany, they went either for sale, or - for scrap. According to the test results, out of 150 Leopard-2s offered for sale, the Finns selected 124, with the condition - to drop the price by a quarter, to carry out pre-sale repairs of cars before the A4 modification, to convert 10 Leo into tanks-bridges and 10 more - into barrage vehicles ... Also in Sweden in 2006, 120 CV9030 BMPs were purchased.
  8. 31231
    31231 22 January 2014 12: 05
    0
    Guys, who is a tanker, do not tell me when the tank has been canned for more than 10 years, gums (oil seals, pipes) are drying up and cracking?
    1. Rider
      Rider 22 January 2014 15: 29
      +2
      I'm not a tanker, but I’ll say as a machine operator.
      depending on the conditions of conservation.
      if it’s deep, with hermetic sealing of the aggregates, it may well work out for some time (but not for long); if it’s just under the fence, then it’s rubbish.
      there, not only the rubber products shrink, but the hydraulic system is kakosyvatsya, there will be problems with the gearbox dvigun reducers, etc.

      they (this rubbish "from conservation") are called so - pods.

      it’s another matter that equipment removed from conservation always passes MOT, especially if it is sold to another state, they can become more generous in overhaul.
      1. neri73-r
        neri73-r 22 January 2014 17: 28
        +4
        depending on the conditions of conservation.

        You wrote it right! There are storage categories. from 1st to 3rd are normal cars, especially categories 1 and 2, 4-5 are storage on the ground, that is, spare parts. There is a mandatory ongoing service, including changing all fluids, starting the engines, etc ..... everything is scheduled! Take, load the ammunition and into the battle (b / c is stored separately). Again, it all depends on how these routine maintenance was carried out !!!!!!!!
      2. bulanash
        bulanash 23 January 2014 03: 31
        0


        ISU 152 brought after decades of standing in the open air without any conservation
        1. wanderer_032
          wanderer_032 23 January 2014 10: 06
          0
          The old woman is alive! At such moments, it’s breathtaking, to see the ISU-152 on the go is a rare success. Thank you for the video.
          good
        2. Rider
          Rider 23 January 2014 14: 13
          0
          make and ride back and forth, and exploitation is a big difference
      3. bulanash
        bulanash 23 January 2014 03: 31
        0


        ISU 152 brought after decades of standing in the open air without any conservation
      4. Alex_NW
        Alex_NW 25 June 2015 18: 07
        0
        Write any "podzaborny Trash"
    2. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris 22 January 2014 18: 12
      0
      In fact, the service life of rubber (and it does not matter whether it worked or just lay in a warehouse) is 6 years, after which its performance is not guaranteed.
  9. mountain
    mountain 22 January 2014 12: 35
    +1
    not weak Suomi, picked up the baton.
    1. bask
      bask 22 January 2014 13: 10
      +1
      Quote: mountain
      not weak Suomi, picked up the baton.

      But why did the Germans start such a massive sale of Leo. 2?
      What are they going to replace them with.
      BMP-modular platform ,,, Puma ,, is not accepted for service.
      Only Boxser BTRs accepted.
      The USA, England, Germany, that refuse MBT?
      And so Leo. 2 proved its effectiveness in Afghanistan.

      1. Professor
        Professor 22 January 2014 14: 52
        +7
        Quote: bask
        And so Leo. 2 proved its effectiveness in Afghanistan.

        As a block post worth 10 lyam?
        1. barbiturate
          barbiturate 22 January 2014 18: 55
          +4
          Well, why not, or does he need to make bold tank attacks in the mountains to prove his effectiveness? From this point of view, there are no modern efficient tanks at all. If you try to build a modern block post, equip it, link the weapon with good optics and electronics, equip it with communications and make it immune to enemy fire, the amount will come out very decent, and there’s also an engine and also German Leo, especially against the background other western tanks, it is distinguished by good reliability, but isn’t it effective?) So, as a block post and a means of support, it’s quite self-sufficient, and what army of the state now uses tanks differently?
        2. bask
          bask 22 January 2014 20: 42
          +1
          Quote: Professor
          As a block post worth 10 lyam?

          Why only in the form of roadblocks?
          And ,, green ,, storm with adobe walls, should also MBT.
          You yourself posted yesterday that without MBT, there is nothing to do in a city battle.
          Soviet T-62s were also used as mobile roadblocks.


          1. Professor
            Professor 22 January 2014 21: 18
            +1
            Quote: barbiturate
            If you try to build a modern block post, equip it, link the weapon with good optics and electronics, equip it with communications and make it immune to enemy fire, the amount will come out very decent, and there’s also an engine and also German Leo, especially against the background other western tanks, is distinguished by good reliability, but is it not effective?)

            Let's figure it out together? Concrete blocks with sandbags that were not dragged over three nine lands. A thermal imager, optics on a retractable mast, a heavy machine gun, a mortar, a radio station, a couple of ATGMs ... It doesn’t reach a million euros, and Leo has 10 euro in Germany, in Afghanistan it’s gold.
            During my life I had to visit a block of posts a couple of times, without a tank.

            Quote: bask
            And ,, green ,, storm with adobe walls, should also MBT.

            Bulldozer with remote control for green. yes

            Quote: bask
            You yourself posted yesterday that without MBT, there is nothing to do in a city battle.

            I don’t remember something like that. You apparently confuse me with someone.
            1. bask
              bask 22 January 2014 21: 47
              0
              Quote: Professor

              I don’t remember something like that. You apparently confuse me with someone.


              Proff, you won’t confuse you in the least. fellow
              But perhaps you really did mean the heavy engineering equipment of the D-9 bulldozer.
              But Canadians and the Marine Corps do not agree with you.
              Canadians use not only their Leoo.2, but also the modernized Leo..1A5.
              1. Professor
                Professor 22 January 2014 22: 05
                0
                Quote: bask
                Proff, you won’t confuse you in the least.

                I'm a well-known "fan" of tanks, that's why I was surprised.

                Quote: bask
                But Canadians and the Marine Corps do not agree with you.
                Canadians use not only their Leoo.2, but also the modernized Leo..1A5.

                Canadians? You are smiling at me. Well, how do they know how to fight? And on the other hand, what should they do with their tanks? So they decided to take them to war with them. The same story with the marines. Only the latter refuse tanks, production ceased. After resumed, but the tanks went straight to the warehouse.
                1. bask
                  bask 23 January 2014 00: 12
                  0
                  Quote: Professor
                  Canadians? You are smiling at me. Well, how do they know how to fight?

                  As the United States orders, so will it. The Canadian contingents fought in World War II in the Korean War.
                  In Afghanistan, maybe for MBT, not the most suitable place (mountains and mountains again).
                  But in Iraq, the United States used the Abrams, until the last.
                  Israel, as you know, is also not going to stop issuing the MK4.
                  MK4 famously in the Galans ,,, jumping ,,,. winked

                  клик
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 23 January 2014 08: 52
                    0
                    Quote: bask
                    But in Iraq, the United States used the Abrams, until the last.

                    The American army is not flexible. They act according to "instructions". "According to the regulations", the tanks were assigned to the unit and were taken to Iraq, especially at the beginning of the war. Now there are mostly MRAPs.

                    Quote: bask
                    Israel, as you know, is also not going to stop issuing the MK4.

                    As is known Mk4 production is reduced, and the Mk5 tank in nature will not exist at all. As known. wink
            2. barbiturate
              barbiturate 23 January 2014 17: 02
              0
              Quote: Professor
              Let's figure it out together? Concrete blocks with sandbags that were not dragged over three nine lands. A thermal imager, optics on a retractable mast, a heavy machine gun, a mortar, a radio station, a pair of ATGMs ... it doesn’t reach a million euros, and Leo is 10 euro euro in Germany, he’s generally golden in Afghanistan. they did without a tank.


              I agree, but you still need to take into account the cannon, which is linked to electronics and optics, and a rather long-range and powerful weapon. Well, then, since the tanks are already in service, why not use them? Especially for the Afghan company they bought chtoli? Money is already spent, and so. Moreover, he was obviously dragged there for a reason, but at the request of the people who were fighting there. How to replace it? Something I do not see another weapon system, which was moderately powerful, accurate, protected and constantly at hand 24 hours a day, and at the same time that could be removed at will and surpassed say 1 km to the left or further)
              1. Professor
                Professor 23 January 2014 17: 10
                0
                Quote: barbiturate
                I agree, but you still need to take into account the cannon, which is linked to electronics and optics, and a rather long-range and powerful weapon. Well, then, since the tanks are already in service, why not use them? Especially for the Afghan company they bought chtoli? Money is already spent, and so.

                Well, if they’ve already made and bought it, then do not throw it away or sell it to some Arabs and Dutch, but hell knows where to drag with it. Well, if they dragged it, let’s at least build a post from it. After all, expensive equipment disappears. wink

                Quote: barbiturate
                How to replace it? Something I do not see another weapon system, which was moderately powerful, accurate, protected and constantly at hand 24 hours a day, and at the same time that could be removed at will and surpassed say 1 km to the left or further)

                Duc already replaced in the same Afghan. Here are some examples:


                1. barbiturate
                  barbiturate 23 January 2014 19: 01
                  0
                  Quote: Professor
                  Well, if they’ve already made and bought it, then do not throw it away or sell it to some Arabs and Dutch, but hell knows where to drag with it. Well, if they dragged it, let’s at least build a post from it. After all, expensive equipment disappears.


                  Well, yes, if there is a weapon for more serious conflicts, then why not use it here, besides, a tank in defense is an excellent weapon with good reach and excellent accuracy, the reaction time is also minimal and the principle "I see - shoot" is the most effective, it is not from a mortar to hammer in the mountains)

                  Quote: Professor
                  Duc already replaced in the same Afghan. Here are some examples


                  yes, it’s painfully soft targets, these gun mounts, the sudden firing of a light mortar or just a large-caliber sniper, will make holes in it even from light fragments and bullets at the end. In the video, it’s painful for the shooting gallery, it seems, without opposition, calmly drove up and lupanuli somewhere) I agree, ATGM must also have, for long ranges, where the tank takes out not very precisely, but otherwise, I would choose the tank and with the maximum possible protection from ATGM and RPGs of the enemy (screens there, sandbags, dynamic protection and active, if possible) and who will do what to me?)
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 23 January 2014 22: 41
                    0
                    Quote: barbiturate
                    Well, yes, if there is a weapon for more serious conflicts, then why not use it here

                    Assad does just that, Scades on the rebels. The noise is much effect zero.
  10. svoboda1970
    svoboda1970 22 January 2014 14: 01
    +1
    Finland currently has 91 Leopard 2A4 tanks, 126 T-72 tanks, as well as 70 obsolete T-55Ms.


    can bargain thirty four in good condition?
    there’s probably somewhere else ...
  11. gorsten79
    gorsten79 22 January 2014 14: 09
    0
    "The first buyer of the decommissioned Dutch tanks was Germany, which received 20 of these vehicles last year." how many T-5s are being modernized.
    1. stoqn477
      stoqn477 22 January 2014 14: 37
      -1
      You, for the Germans, do not worry. They made an account. wink
  12. Leshka
    Leshka 22 January 2014 15: 46
    +1
    why do they need so many tanks
  13. Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 22 January 2014 17: 40
    +3
    Does it only seem to me alone that the leopards from the first photograph, in some projections (which is on the left), resemble tigers from the times of BB2? smile

    The Finns always bought up bushy and simply outdated equipment. Sobsna, and what else remains for them, with such a budget.
    1. Kars
      Kars 22 January 2014 17: 49
      +1
      Gur Khan: now it's time to shout "guard" and "everything is gone"! Immediately on the border with the Russian Federation, tanks appear, which can only be compared with our T-90MS "Tagil", but this still exists only in a single copy. T-72B3 tanks put into service with units near St. Petersburg is a complete bullshit in comparison with Leo2A6 ... Gentlemen, generals from the Ministry of Defense, how much can you hope for the mythical "Armata"? Why don't we buy new T-90s ???


      http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2014/01/leopard-2a6nl.html
      1. bif
        bif 23 January 2014 00: 08
        0
        Quote: Kars
        Immediately on the border with the Russian Federation, tanks appear, which can only be compared with our T-90MS "Tagil", but this still exists only in a single copy.

        "The tanks will be transferred to Finland in several batches in 2015-2019 ..."
        Before the first Leo appeared in Suomi, a couple more years, during this time, VERY much can happen.
        The T-72B3 tanks put into service with units near St. Petersburg are complete bullshit compared to the Leo2А6.

        The authoritative and well-reasoned opinion of a homegrown sofa expert is immediately felt, but you can’t argue with him.
        1. Kars
          Kars 23 January 2014 00: 31
          +1
          Quote: bif
          home-grown sofa echspert, but you can not argue with him.

          ))))))))))))
          Quote: Kars
          http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2014/01/leopard-2a6nl.html

          not my words. But your description of the author pleased me
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. ran nearby
      ran nearby 22 January 2014 23: 16
      +1
      Here and mine they "Tigers" seemed. :)
  14. Tex
    Tex 22 January 2014 18: 01
    0
    about leo ... och decent machine. worked like all German quality and thought out to the smallest detail. that's why they buy them back, swing them up to 2a7 and shove them again)). and we have everything for a turn, there is a T-80 excellent machine, a deep modernization and operation, no need to draw new letters for the T-72 ...
    1. Crang
      Crang 22 January 2014 21: 38
      +1
      T-72 is better than T-80. No need to draw new letters for the T-80.
    2. Al_lexx
      Al_lexx 23 January 2014 10: 52
      0
      A couple of years ago, I spoke with one of the rather experienced tank commanders (lieutenant colonel). He told me this:
      Serving, of course, is best on a leopard, and fighting on our eighties.

      For what I bought, for what I sold.
      1. Roman 1977
        Roman 1977 23 January 2014 10: 58
        0
        Well, as they say, it has always been like this, read Dmitry Loza "Tankman in a foreign car", who fought on the American Lend-Lease M-4 "Sherman", he directly calls him "the best tank for service in peacetime", while saying that to fight it's still better on the T-34.

        Soviet tank crews somewhere in the mountains of Austria. 1945 year. (. "Sherman" and T-34-85)
        1. Kars
          Kars 23 January 2014 15: 21
          +1
          Quote: Novel 1977
          M-4 "Sherman", he directly calls it "the best tank for service in peacetime", while saying that it is still better to fight on the T-34


          Can I quote?
          http://flibusta.net/b/92231/read
  15. Nikoha.2010
    Nikoha.2010 22 January 2014 20: 42
    0
    Leopard 2A4 Revolution, so it’s not Al_lexx alone who has the difference in the tower,
    on the top photo "just" Leopard 2
    Link: fttp: //army-neuws.ru/2012/04nemecki-tank-leopard-2a4-revolution/
    1. Al_lexx
      Al_lexx 23 January 2014 10: 56
      0
      Yes, I'm not talking about differences, but just about the similarity. smile
      More precisely, the clearly traced continuity in the development of German tanks.

      Clear pepper, that over the past 10 years, the image of the modern tank has changed a lot, in relation to what we are used to seeing until the end of the 80's.
      1. Nikoha.2010
        Nikoha.2010 23 January 2014 13: 33
        0
        Yes sir! I did not construct the phrase correctly, recently on the site, so I only "enter" the essence of the matter, and the first photo immediately caught on ... good
  16. Legionnaire14
    Legionnaire14 22 January 2014 21: 45
    0
    Whatever you say, but this purchase is complete nonsense. Why the hell are they tanks? It's not funny against us. Since the burden of Brezhnev, we kiss on the gums. Maybe against the Swedes? -This is also their former "older" brother
  17. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 22 January 2014 22: 23
    0
     Finnish Armed Forces will receive Spike ATGM from the Netherlands Armed Forces.
    The Finnish Armed Forces have announced the acquisition of the PSTOHJ 2000M anti-tank missile systems (Finnish designation Spike anti-tank missile systems) from the Netherlands Armed Forces.
    http://armstrade.org/includes/periodics/ne...80/detail.shtml

    Interestingly, the Netherlands is quickly disarming, and Finland is also quickly rearming. Sometimes it seems that this is not related to a real security policy, but to an attempt by politicians to play on the internal moods of voters.
    1. dzvero
      dzvero 22 January 2014 22: 53
      0
      and what the Netherlands tanks? and ptrk? because if they don’t do the weather. and the financiers have a budget .. and budget is a magic word ... :)
      I have a question - what is the Dutch version - a place for smoking weed or an autopilot for a stoned crew?
  18. Jager
    Jager 22 January 2014 22: 46
    0
    Leopard 2 is a great car, everyone agrees. But why does Finland need so many tanks? Neither the locality nor the country's budget are "tank accessible".
    And in the first photo, the handsome men very much resemble "Tigers", I already jerked when I quickly flipped through the page at the beginning.
    I have nothing against the Finns, strange northern guys)))
    1. The comment was deleted.
  19. Nikoha.2010
    Nikoha.2010 22 January 2014 23: 34
    0
    Yes, Leopard 2 has something from the Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiqer ... probably not far off in the Wot hangars laughing
  20. sds555
    sds555 23 January 2014 00: 20
    0
    The United States and some European countries have asked the Ministry of Defense to take part in the tank biathlon championship, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with MEPhI students. “They turned to the Ministry of Defense with a request to take part. We will be glad,” the Russian head of state said.

    Taken from here: http: //warfiles.ru/show-46754-ssha-hotyat-prinyat-uchastie-v-tankov
    om-bia
    tlone.html
    This is already interesting, we will wait!
  21. kplayer
    kplayer 25 January 2014 18: 28
    0
    The Netherlands does not disarm, but merges the excess, this is optimization, it is worth waiting for the discharge of the Finnish T-55 / -72 in speed. The desire to have a modern tank fleet, only amateurs can raise questions, Leopard-2A6 is one of the best tanks, in this case at a reasonable price.
  22. The comment was deleted.
  23. Bene valete
    Bene valete 1 February 2014 19: 51
    0
    Yes, gentlemen, in the 40s they also laughed a lot - parades, songs of all, etc. And in the 41st, it wasn’t laughing ...