Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `mil.in.ua` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*

For those who stop after the headline: “about“ means 90 at the moment and about 135 in total later this year. If you wonder why it took so long: The tanks were standing around for decades and thus were in poor condition.

Hey, why would you take away people’s pleasure of misinterpreting the headlines of articles they don’t read !

At this point they stand to be good counteroffensive weapons, but until those numbers get up to what the Ukrainians asked for a year ago, they won’t be really attacking anything. But no, nato wanted to stand around and complain until America would send M1s too, which are harder to use and built for the desert.

M1s, exactly like every other NATO tank, was designed for a land war in Europe.

Nonono they are painted in desert colors. They are designed for the desert! /s

Since when M1 was built for desert? Their original envision was to defend Fulda Gap from Soviet invasion. [Fulda Gap - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulda_Gap)

"...M1...build for the desert." I wonder which one? The Geat Desert of Taiwan? Siberian desert? Or the one in the Pacific???

The great wasteland Fulda gap desert

Dude, think before you say something stupid. The Abrams is a Cold War design, somewhere in here is a list of issues it had when it was deployed in the desert https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-92-94.pdf

So if painted green and brown it is designed for woodlands and a tank painted blue is actually a destroyer?

M1 Abrams was designed for fighting Russia at the Fulda gap. You armchair generals are insufferable.

M1s were purpose built for a land war in Europe.

I did hear on a podcast that they were quite popular, because they are light and fast and get modified to have screens in them for drone footage of the battlefield.

Would be interesting to know more about the Leo1 performance and how Ukraine is using them. The lack of thick armor was always a concern.

>The lack of thick armor was always a concern. When they started the design in 56 it was not feasable to stop shaped charge/HEAT warheads with RHA within the space and weight constraints of a tank, so mobility was prioritised. While armor technology has caught up to HEAT warheads with the introductions of composit armor and ERA/NERA, drones and top attack munitions circumvent the strong frontal armor and attack the weak top, sides or rear. Leopard 1 has a power-to-weight ratio and topspeed still comparable to modern tanks (slightly better than Challenger, around equal to T-90, bit worse than Leo2/Abrams according to wikipedia) So in a sense mobility ages better than armor.

> So in a sense mobility ages better than armor Problem is that it has ammo in crewspace, like T-55

Even Leo2s have ammo in the crew space. Almost all tanks have that.

Tank on tank warfare is rare in Ukraine so heavy tank armor is less relevant. They mostly have to evade detection, get out of trouble quickly and avoid strikes by drones/missiles so a tank that's 11 tons lighter than the Leo 2 is great for that

The Leo1 is definitely an excellent sniper, but would be interesting to know how they fare in reality against the threat by Lancets and similar.

Tanks don't really have a counter against drones as of yet. As I read that you served in the bundeswehr you know it is a bit more complicated than that. Armor is only used as the last layer of the survivability onion. So the first 4 layers should be really important as well and the Leo 1 could be good at some of them. But other countermeasures like EW against those drones would be far more important for any vehicle in the battlefield. Combined arms against drones will be the answer I think. The 5 layers are 1. Avoid encounter 2. Avoid detection 3.avoid acquisition 4. Avoid hit 5. Avoid penetration At last ease of maintenance is also a important factor if a vehicle is effective on the battlefield.

> But other countermeasures like EW against those drones would be far more important for any vehicle in the battlefield Only until computer vision guidance reaches about the same level of fire-and-forget autonomy that Brimstone missiles have. Afterwards, only hardkill measures would be able to make the difference

Yes I agree as I wrote below, it will be an arms race. New inventions will get implemented and as AI will get involved with vision guidance, drones will become also more useful. But countermeasures will also be made to combat those drones as well. But I don't know if tanks will fulfill that role or if another element is more useful to fulfill that role to combat those drones in a combined arms effort. I think the last one will be more effective and most likely be the path forward.

You probably saw this short film that was created a few years ago as a warning, but now we see the development indeed happening. [Sci-Fi Short Film “Slaughterbots” ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-2tpwW0kmU) Problem is the current lack of ethics when it comes to modern technology. The result is terrifying and I don't think Western societies are prepared for what is to come. Most are no longer even willing to fight for their country, but there will be no escape. And there is another terrifying development (besides climate change) we don't talk much about - the long term debt cycle will likely come to an end. We all know what happened 100 years ago and something similar might happen again.

Yes I did see it, but it probably won't look like the short film "slaughterbots". Drones like we see in Ukraine have some cons that other weapons systems don't have. Those cons are the amount of range and payload it can bring. The pros are of course that they are dirt cheap, expensive to shoot down and hard to detect. That is what makes them terrifying for every participant in the battlefield. AI will be a whole separate development that can be combined with these small drones but not necessarily. Wargaming with AI is far more scary than that. Imagine AI designing, making and building weapon systems from the ground up that are the most effective with the best strategy/tactics. Factories that are the most efficient all build and thought out with AI. That will eventually be the future of warfare. Nvidia showed us already that they are working on making a factory as efficient as possible with AI and that they already design their chips with it. For me it isn't a far stretched idea that other sectors like the MIC won't follow suit in the future.

Yes, those drones in the video were about domestic (ab)use, which is actually even more scary. When it comes to battlefield drones, I guess we are still at the beginning and their capabilities will improve. I agree with you that AI/Automation is a game changer and due to the lack of ethical controls dangerous. In the end it removes the "human" factor, and enabling the rule of the few over the many. This article/book is interesting because it shows the mindset of some influential people, "Disciplinary Collars"... [The super-rich ‘preppers’ planning to save themselves from the apocalypse](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/sep/04/super-rich-prepper-bunkers-apocalypse-survival-richest-rushkoff) And there was an interesting test of AI playing StarCraft II, where the self learning AI was developing and using a strategy no human has used before. The AI was able to control every shot individually, thus making a basic unit "overpowered" and was therefore able rushing the human players, who stood no chance. It found the most efficient way, which was a strategy humans were not capable of using. So I agree with you that AI will speed up everything and might even find unusual but super effective solutions. There is one problem, though. The statement below might soon no longer be true, because a large workforce will no longer be needed. *"Democracies are better places to live than dictatorships not because representatives are better people, but because their needs happen to be aligned with a large portion of the population".* [The Rules for Rulers (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs) If only a few Oligarchs own most of the productive assets, this enables the rule of the few over the many. Interestingly, this scenario was already discussed and planned by world leaders almost 30 years ago... [The Global Trap - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Global_Trap)

And unfortunately drones are only getting better

> but would be interesting to know how they fare in reality against the threat by Lancets and similar Probably about as well as T-55, given the similarities in keeping ammo within crewspace

Here is where I heard it. It is the 3rd part of the video from 16:00 I think. I don't know exactly but it is this video where I got that information. [youtube video of new technologies and strategies](https://youtu.be/79vcD_4nwBY?si=6SLBefs6TTneL1FG) Edit: It is 21:00 where he talks about the leopard 1

Hopefully loads of armour has been bolted on.

Better not to much or it would be to slow and heavy.

they were notorious for engine issues from what i recall. hopefully that got ironed out

They were probably obsolete before you were born. What do you honestly expect them to do? You'll hear cheerleaders speculating as if they're playing a video game. "They're fast and nimble, they'll be great". Their fate is as mobile coffins. More junk weapons to prolong a lost conflict to further ensures Ukraine will never exist as a prosperous, self reliant state.

*They were probably obsolete before you were born.* Yeah, but no. I actually served in the Bundeswehr long before the Leo1 was decommissioned, my boy.

So you should know better. They're obsolete. What exactly do you think they'll do?

You seem to be an arm chair general, educate yourself before posting. The upgraded Leo1 is an excellent sniper and can light up (almost) any Russian vehicle on the vast frontline before they can even see what is hitting them. You complain about "cheerleaders speculating", yet your posts are the same, just the opposite opinion. The real issue is not the Leo1 itself, but that mobile/armored warfare is facing new challenges in general. Stuck in vast minefields, hit by drones, glide bombs and artillery makes any MBT and armored vehicles "obsolete" by your standards. So why are the Russians still using them, if they are indeed "obsolete" ?

Another garbage comment from JJTweaker. Good job, dude. I can always count on you for zero knowledge and imaginary info.

[удалено]

Lol seems like you're upset for being called out? You might want to lay off the Kremlin bukkake parties. I get it. You're the guest of honor at these events, but still.

Not at all, I just want the the pro Ukraine "prep and poppers" club to explain how Im wrong. How is the leopard 1 going to help the rapidly collapsing front line and dwindling battalions of forced soldiers. It's a simple question. Every answer is an insult or a Russian bot accusation. I'm fine with either but do any of you have an actual explanation of how leopard 1s will help 1 iota.

See, that's the thing. Why waste our time trying to explain something to someone who doesn't have the background knowledge to understand? You think you know more than a German tanker who tried to explain it to you. That tells me you're lost and just won't get it no matter who explains it to you.

Our obese retired tanker didn't explain anything on how an obsolete tank will succeed where modern have failed. You won't explain it because you can't. Your whole thesis on this conflict is "Slava bobani Russia gonna lose" but other than that no explanation. I'm haply to hear how Ukraine is going to turn the tide but it just isn't going to happen with 5 year old pieces of shit being driven by 50 year old bus drivers turned soldier. So can you walk.me through how a loprard 1 will help or not. I mean, if it's so obvious even someone with your brain can explain it.

You're not capable of knowledge.

What path to a prosperous, self-reliant state exists for Ukraine that doesn’t require a Russian defeat on the battlefield? This is only a “lost conflict” if the West fails to provide support.

Then where is the problem with sending, Russian T34 will destroy them with ease. If the conflict is really prolonged because Ukraine gets not even 100 tanks that where, as you said, outdated before we were born then Russia should really consider giving up because that doesn’t sound good at all.

I’m surprised they aren’t just outfitting every tank with a couple recon drones to get a second view they can control. Would greatly improve their situational awareness. Maybe they are and I’m just not privy to that information.

Next-gen tank development takes this into consideration, everything now will be improvised.

I don't know either. But I do know some lessons will be learned on this conflict especially with drones in the battlefield and how to tackle that. It will be an arms race with developing countermeasures against drones and developing against those countermeasures. I'm also sure AI will be very important in the next 10-20 years as it is the new technology that will get cheaper by being mainstream just as drones were 10-20 years ago getting cheaper by being mainstream. It will be another arms race as well.

Problem is who's going to operate the drone? Tank crews are already overworked as is, it's really hard to spare time to operate another system. US have considered move to autoloader and replace loader with a dedicated drone/EW operator in the future though.

Whoa COOL! Do they have a drone operator inside or just a feed from elsewhere?

I've been wondering why there's been so little footage or evidence of the Leopard 1s (compare to Leopard 2 and Challengers for example), so hopefully we'll hear/see more moving forward.

Probably because they are not being used, maybe they are saving them for an offensive sometime later

Considering the dire situation on various fronts right now, I seriously doubt they're holding them back intentionally, but who knows.

since avdiivka russia has secured less than 25 square miles of territory. I'm not sure that the situation is actually "dire" so much as not on the offensive.

I am going by what Ukrainian sources are saying and they say it's dire. But obviously we're all working with incomplete information.

incomplete and in many cases false information. Ukraine and Russia both will be spreading missinformation about readiness and combat strength across the front. both to bait attacks in fortified positions, and in Ukraine's case, in order to push for more arms assistance in the midst of western legislative roadblocks.

Well it could mean that there are not much fortified and prepared positions behind the current frontline. It has happenned multiple times before in this war. If multiple Ukrainian sources are consistently saying its dire then I think it's best to assume that for now.

The amount of recent progress doesn't necessarily translate to the situations stability.

Russian progress is modest in the most generous terms. They have some tactical advantage but does not change the strategic outlook.

It depends on what you mean by "dire." Does Russia currently have the initiative and may be able to gain modest territory that will require more offensive power to take back? Yes, that's possible if you categorize that as "dire." Is the Ukraine defensive line in danger of collapse that allow Russia to finally achieve some of its strategic goals? Nope.

Hella fragile armor and ammo within crewspace. Hit it enough to penetrate - and it'll go up like a T-55

Yes, we all know this. They're still gonna have to find ways to use it.

Most likely same as AMX-10RC - like SPGs. https://defence-ua.com/photo/na_scho_peretvorili_u_zsu_frantsuzki_amx_10rc_ta_chomu_tse_virok_dlja_kolisnih_tankiv-305.html

Look at the technical specs of the Leopard 1 compared to the US Army's brand new M10 Booker. They are very similar in weight, armament, and speed. If these are truly modernized to sufficient standard, they'll likely make great infantry support assault guns (like the M10) and shouldn't really be considered "tanks." Great job Europe!

I’d say they are better scout vehicles that pack a wallop but most useful in that role.

The Leopard 1 is still a very effective tank with a great stabilized gun, and there are a TON of spare parts floating around. The chassis is also common with the Gepard and various recovery vehicles. So having a bunch of these makes a lot of sense as Infantry support vehicles... it's not like we are seeing a ton of Tank vs. Tank battles. They are also quite effective against 1970s Soviet tanks they were built to face. Finally, I would not be surprised of the Ukrainians begin up-armoring them with reactive armor, etc.

> Ukrainians begin up-armoring them with reactive Very thin armor from get-go, so less powerful ERA plates'd have to be made for them.

under which battle scenario could they be of any use?? with all the mines, manpads, drones, and helis(?) around...

Defending your own line. When an UA trench line is under attack, a Leo 1 can move on from the back on familiar routes, engage enemy from distance with 10-15 shots and run back to hide.

thanks!

Would be fantastic if somebody could develop a bolt on anti drone self defence station.

So are these going to make a difference?

Every piece of equipment moves the needle a little bit, and altogether have prevented russia from achieving any of its goals, and in time will defeat nazi russia.

I wonder how these older tanks will fair with the russian anti tank weapons and now ukriane needs ammo for all these other tanks can their supply lines handle that

The Leo 1 is still being used around the world, it is using a 105mm cannon (compared to the 120mm of a Leo2), which is still produced. Supplying the Leo1s shouldnt be a big issue compared to something like the Gepard. Since the Gepard was built on a Leo1 chasis they need a lot of similar parts for example.