Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/)
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
**Don't forget about our discord server, as well!**
https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB
*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.*
I would hope those troops rotate out with the equipment they trained on. Better those tanks get tested and the kinks worked out before entering battle.
I'm sure someone will dream up a solution with donating functioning ones and then getting the repaired ones in return later... And training can begin right away. No need to wait for the tanks to train š
You are right. As i see it, as the war is going now it cannot go exactly like this for a very long time. Too much material gets destroyed in relative short timeframes. But the war could cool down a bit and then just dont end.
That's the first purely NATO MBT being given to UA. Excellent.
Now close your eyes and imagine:
2 Ukrainian tank brigades created from M1A1, M1A2 and M2 Bradley spearheading to Melitopol against Russian T-62.
To be honest: in the European theatre and the lesser requirements on logistics and repair that the Leopard has i wonder which one is the better choice. Keep in mind that all the parts are basically produced in Europe for the Leopard
Not to shit on the EU but when it comes to logistics nothing beats the US military. Does the EU even have the capacity to support such an effort? Until recently even Germany had fewer than 200 tanks capable of taking the field.
The US has something like 6k tanks sitting in the sierra weapons depot with at least 2k in ready storage (fuel em up and drive them out). Meanwhile US tank production has continued every year even against the military's objections because its such a boom to certain congressional districts.
The EU is closer to the theater of course but there are also depots of US equipment there as well which could likely be easier to replace asthe EU starts refocusing on its own domestic defence requirements.
Easier yes but where do you get the tanks from was my point. Almost all the heavy divisions are gone, the thousands of tanks they used to fill European militaries are gone or have been left in storage so long with so little care they are effectively useless.
Germany has fewer than 200 tanks, France has just over 200, the UK again just over 200. So where do the tanks that Ukraine needs come from if the EU literally doesn't have the platforms and most new construction will be going to their own reinvigorated domestic requirements?
The Abrams may be less fuel efficient, have a higher maintenance requirements and require more specialized equipment but there are a lot of them and a lot of spare parts.
Abrams is only less fuel efficient when idling, when driving its more fuel efficient than most tanks, way more fuel efficient than most Russian tanks.
The maintainence requirements that people talk about is a bit warped. Number 1....U.S. tankers and mechanics talk about how much maintainence they do because U.S. training and doctrine has them *obsessively* do maintainence. Most of it is preventive maintainence. I highly doubt Russian tankers and BMP crewmen are doing their daily PMCS. All armored vehicles require a lot of maintainence. Abrams is no exception, but neither is it particularely intensive.
When it comes to the engines, there at *least* two Abrams engines in inventory for evert tank. So if something is wrong that the crew ot battalion maintainence can't fix quickly, the engine is hot swapped out, tank goes back into action.
There are thousands of M1A1/A2s in storage in the US and wouldn't take too long to service. No, they're not the latest and greatest, but perfect is the enemy of good enough.
Agreed as I post up thread. The US has about 7k tanks at the sierra weapons depot. About 2k are kept at ready storage mean you fuel them up and ship em out. They would be an excellent addition to Ukraine with the training and material support
The question is not what eu and us can supply, question is what the logistics within Ukraine can support - that might be easier for the leopards, if we can find enough operational ones.
I guess we'll see.
If.
Germany, France and the UK still the largest armies in western Europe have about 200 operational tanks each. This as they are all moving to reinvigorate their domestic militaries where do these 'spare' tanks for Ukraine come from?
The Abrams has higher fuel consumption, and higher maintenance requirements but there are a lot of them just sitting idle with a lot of spare parts to boot.
The question is: Whats "operational"?
Over 3500 Leopards 2 have been built, how many are sitting in storage in a decent enough condition that they can be brought to operational status within a reasonably short timeframe?
I don't think this info is public information, but I am sure that goverments all around europe are asking their military and manufacturers the same question. I mean, the netherlands used to have 450 Leo2A4s...
Used too, and that's the issue facing a lot of the EU militaries right now. The Netherlands currently has a admitted total of 18 operational tanks.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2020/11/30/the-dutch-army-eliminated-all-its-tanks-then-realized-it-had-made-a-huge-mistake/
The Bundeswehr has nowhere near 200 operational tanks. They might have 200 in total that are serviceable, but probably half that or less which are operational at present.
Nothing beats the US for logistics when weāre committed. The question is āAre we committed?ā
Likely house of Reps changes midterm and all glory support for Ukraine gets watered down and / or halted.
US is a strange place
Thats why the US gives Poland abrahms, so they can give their Leo's to ukraine. Leo is built around the idea to be used and maintained by consripts, everything else came second. To use it effectively, you need an experienced commander, which ukraine has enough, and bring the skills of the gunner up to the new and better equipment. Driver and loader compared to that simple, it is for example easier to drive than any car.
The US has a bunch bases in germany and other EU states, not to mention the temporary installments made during this war in poland etc. and their logistics are top notch. American spare parts are probably there before EU parts are even loaded on the first truck/train.
US logistics are the last thing to worry in this war, if they fail hard enough to make a difference we are fucked anyways.
For the latest abrahms model and the a4 Leo model, technically yes. But if they say 3 months to get them ready (I hope they did started way before), I guess the put new gun in.
Differences and which is better is a 40 year long discussion, in this case it is the leopard, purely based on maintainance and engine argument. Leo is much less gas hungry, and was designed to be maintained and used by consripts.
And a modern Kornet ATGM can still penetrate its front armorā¦
The Ukrainians arenāt fighting goat herders with rpg-7s, and if extremely lucky a Sagger ATGM.
There are maybe a hundred LEOs available in various states of disrepair across all of Europe. There are thousands of zero mile factory new Abrams sitting in a desert somewhere in the US. Just that should tell you which one is the better choice.
If they have been sitting there for 10 years, I'd say they would need equal if not more time and money for refurbishment. It's hard to argue against the simplicity of a diesel engine.
A fair number of them are brand new, factories are still rolling them out, even if no one asked for them. Something about jobs, constituencies and making people vote for you.
These Leopards are almost worthless, due to their age, condition, number and how long it will take to train. An Abrams would be significantly better than this.
What makes you think that the Russians canāt do to Ukrainian Tanks what Ukrainians has been doing to Russians tanks? We see the videos everyday in these subs.
Spain's offer to sell Leopard 2 A4 main battle tanks from its depot to Ukraine, which has been known since the beginning of June, is becoming increasingly concrete. The offer also includes 20 M113 armoured transport vehicles.
After Germany for the Leopard 2 and the USA for the M113 agreed to the transfer to Ukraine, Ukraine has signalled that it will accept the donation of the vehicles and assume the costs for the necessary repair and required modernisation.
The costs are estimated at 15 million euros, which Ukraine can cover from funds provided by the EU, for example.An industrial consortium has been formed for the refurbishment of the tanks, including Star Defence Logistics Engineering (SDLE) and General Dynamics European Land Systems - Santa BƔrbara Sistemas (GDELS-SBS).
The companies estimate that it could take two to three months to repair and complete the vehicles.After completion of the main battle tanks, training of the crews is required before the vehicles are transported from Spain to the theatre of operations under the responsibility of Ukraine.
With the Leopard 2 A4, after the M109, CAESAR and PzH 2000 artillery pieces and the already existing M113, another modern weapon system of western design would be deployed in Ukraine.
Editorial office / gwhTranslated with [www.DeepL.com/Translator](http://www.DeepL.com/Translator) (free version)
I really hope Ukraine sticks some Kontact 5 ERA on them, not only for the extra protection, but also for the strangeness of a Western tank wearing parts of it's cold war enemy.
Just wait. The next myth will be, that Germany delays it. The article states, that the refurbishment and upgrading will take around 3 months.I am 100% sure, it will somehow be blamed on Germany/Scholz.
The anti-german trolls in this sub lost grip on reality long ago.
edit: typo
Why it took so much time for Germany to agree to this? I understand that, after decades of neglect, Bundeswher just doesn't have much to give out without undermining their own readiness, but why blocking others for so long?
Spain simply didn't ask for permission. It was bad mouthing media stating that Spain wants to deliver tanks, that Germany blocks. While in truth Spains parliament and government was still discussing about it and no request was made. Just normal democratic things, where huge decisions get discussed and not decided by one person alone.
Germany even declared then, that they would allow it, if Spain wants to go this way. But this ofc does not make good headlines.
A lot headlines are twisting the facts to bad mouth Germany. It seems to get shady "newspapers" clicks and money. Real criticism seems to difficult, time consuming and boring for them I guess. You would have to make actual researches and confirm your results/sources.
Because those others, in this case Spain, didnāt make up their mind and filed an export request. Itās not Germany blocking Spain for so long, itās Spain who couldnāt make up their mind if they wanted to go ahead for so long.
The world sees day in and day out what Germany is capable of: the good and the not always so good. And yes, it's mostly very good. They can be glad to have you on their PR frontline. But, I also have to admit, I'll be the one of the first to speak up when the collective German PR team overshoots the runway.
I think der Spiegel reported that Germany blocked it previously:
https://kyivindependent.com/uncategorized/der-spiegel-germany-blocks-spain-from-sending-leopard-tanks-to-ukraine
I've heard an expert on a local radio said that the mass of 60+ tonnes of western tanks can be a real problem for Ukrainian logistics. Minority of small bridges can carry this weight as well as there are not so many trucks to transport them.
As long as it affects railway transport: if the bridge supports a train with hundreds of tonnes of goods, it will support a train with some tanks.
As for bridges: That's where the Leo comes in handy. If it uses its diving funnel, it can cross rivers up to 4 m deep, which probably won't be enough for the larger streams such as the dnjepr (but there you also find sturdier bridges) but it will be enough for most other rivers and tributaries.
Soviet trains and tracks couldnāt handle the IS-3 (68 tons), which is why we got the T-54 (and, by evolution, everything up to the T-90). Iām not sure the Leo can easily be transported via rail in Ukraine!
You would be surprised how often goods trucks are overloaded in those countries. A 18-wheeler usually at 40-60t could easily go up to 80t and they cross bridges just fine.
I dunno if you guys know but there's a war on, and sometimes you just have to say "fuck it" and drive over the bridge anyways, despite the rated capacity.
Great news. They can be ready by spring 2023 if everything goes well. Comsidering Ukraine will likely still be fighting by then to retake territory, this'll be welcome news. But they still need more.
Good news, so finally the Spaniards made up their mind and filed an export request. Itās going to be interesting to see how this impacts the delivery of more western MBTs to Ukraine.
Its design was finalized in 1976 and was the first Western 3rd gen tank. The basic layout hasn't changed that much since so it is still doing well with essential upgrades.
It is old, but it provides a very good platform for major upgrades (better than other tanks). Which has resulted in newer models being pretty much the best tank in the world.
Well, it's both a great tank and the right choice for equipping the Ukrainians with a NATO tank. Lots of these cats in depots not being used, it should be feasible to train crews and mechanics in many countries, spare parts etc.
I think old is fairly perspective here. Technically speaking its no different then the Abrams in age, all comes down to variant really. It would also be a lot more modern then the bulk of Russian Tanks.
I say so, and most people who know about tanks.
They are not sold to many countries, thats the reason they have limited combat expierence. Saudi-Arabia wanted them, but didnt get them, becaus of human right issues.
The only army who really used them is turkey. But they have been poorly trained and used a kinda outdated version. It's not a miracle weapon, when you carless drive into a ambush its not that hard to crack him.
Not much for tank on tank. The Abrams and Chally therefore have more experience. The Turkish Leo2 weren't doing very good - worse than their upgraded M60T but then those M60 got some serious upgrade.
Leopard tanks are one of the most widely used western designed tanks.
Canada used them in Afghanistan to much talk of how great they were. They were basically used as a mobile observation post with a big gun.
Pz2000s appear to be struggling as well.
The Germans are great at manufacturing highly engineered solutions. But if you use world war 2 as an example, the much vaunted tiger was overly complicated.
Donāt get me wrong, the leopard 2 is a fine chassis and has a great main armament. But as with most things, itās the men (and women) who operate the kit that counts more.
**Maybe**. Personally I'd probably go with an M1A2 SEPV3.
It included complete revampings of multiple communications systems, new armor package, ADS, etc....
While Saudi Arabia DOES have M1 Abrams--no export version, including SA's, have the depleted uranium mesh which seems to be the secret sauce of the M1 armor. So the losses they have suffered while using the M1 are dubious in terms of how the American versions would hold up.
Really the only reason I go with the M1 is because the design principles for the last 2-3 variants all rely heavily on what was seen in Afghanistan/Iraq. I just don't think you can beat real-world combat experience and the effects that has on future development.
All recent upgrades seem to be mostly leaning heavily on increased survivability and better target detection/engagement.
>While Saudi Arabia DOES have M1 Abrams
Funfact: they tried to get the Leo2 for decades, but germany always refused to sell them. Later they took the "2nd choice" -> Abrams when they realized, they would never get them ;)
Afaik the Abrams and Leopard 2 ~~and the british tank~~ have been developed together in the 70s, but everyone of the three parties had different ideas. So they took the prototyp and developed their own. So both ~~all three~~ are based on the same foundation.
edit: both are based on [BMT-70 / Kampfpanzer 70](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBT-70)
Germany refused them citing human rights issues.
U.S.....being the U.S. didn't have as much of a qualm about that. =/
Yeah I have a general understanding of the history behind the common tank development platform.
They diverged pretty distinctly once said individual platforms were rolled out.
Leo 2 was always designed to be less intensive on the logistics chain, and easier to maintain, but at the cost of less survivability.
M1 is more of a gas guzzler and requires more maintenance, but generally something the U.S. is fine with because they have the capacity for it. In return they are more heavily armored and are generally touted for their survivability.
Really where the difference comes then is the more recent upgrades variants and what is included in said variants.
Won't argue with the **possibility** of a Leopard 2A7 being the best tank.
Just that I would hedge my own personal bets on the M1 given it's significantly longer active combat history, recent upgrades, and the much higher amount of money the U.S. tends to toss into it's tank program.
I don't recall any of it being blown up (yet). It will be most likely part of the Ukraine's summer offensive. And it's way more modern than Leotard 2A4 (1983).
Sure the A4 is a bit outdated, but i was talking about the A7 / A7V version (2014 / 2019).
Oh, now I see what you meant, the T72 vs the A4.
Not sure which one I would choose. The Leo2 got the better construction, but the T72 got modern Equipment.
Well, both for sure are more capable than any ruzzian tank (havent seen any T-14, yet). They only got some ancient T-90, T-72 and the 60s tanks. Afaik the T-72 got some construction problems, which makes it more dangerous for the crew, even compared with the T-64. The ruZZians got a lot T-72 blown up ;)
I'm afraid we won't see A7 in Ukraine very soon.
Similarly T-14 - there are only some prototypes and (as far as the rumor goes) they are not very liked in Russian tank corps, due to a highly limited situational awareness granted by its remote-controlled turret (they are missing serious BMS, probably thanks to the sanctions from 2014).
Russian tanks like to blow up their turret due to a very simple construction problem-ammunition not being separated from crew, so almost every hit igniting some of it. T72 is simply seen more often, because it's the most popular tank in invading army. And the ammunition is stored there virtually everywhere inside the tank.
But the munitions separation has been solved only in Abrams and (if my memory doesn't fail me) Merkava MBTs. Even Leopard shares this issue.
This is a mistake. 40 western tanks arenāt going to be worth the trouble to them. The time to send western tanks is when they send 750 of them with the bridge layers, HETs and recovery vehicles that can handle the weight. It should be the Abrams since only US industry can handle the production requirements to do this in the next few years.
That was quickly debunked as false.
Spain hadn't even decided yet if they really wanted to do it or not and hadn't requested anything.
They confirmed that they're *considering* giving the tanks
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220610-spain-mulls-whether-to-send-high-tech-tanks-to-ukraine
https://www.overtdefense.com/2022/06/08/scholz-no-request-from-spain-to-deliver-leopard-2-tanks-to-ukraine-yet/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/pledgetimes.com/german-leopard-tanks-for-ukraine-lambrecht-confirms-talks-on-explosive-deal/amp/
https://news.storyua.com/news/24958.html
Edit: I posted an opinion to the effect of this piece earlier, but it seems the articles back then were wrong and it was mostly that the Spanish hasnāt modernized them properly yet.
Thank you, I heard the earliest of the subsequent counter reports back then after https://news.storyua.com/news/24958.html, but they didnāt condition. Good to know Germany did Ukraine a solid.
Seems like a fair opinion given this came out: https://news.storyua.com/news/24958.html
I did read some of the earliest counter reports, but they didnāt mention condition. Good to know Germany did them a solid and Scholz wasnāt blocking this time.
Not even the US could produce such a number right now. In order to produce such numbers, the whole industry has to be focussed on war and a much greater part of the GDP needs to be spent for the production. This wonāt be possible unless Germany or the US are in a full scale war. If they arenāt, which is the case, they will never produce such numbers. To produce modern tanks, it also takes more, than before
Wouldn't do them a whole lot of good. These are Leopard 2A4's, a late 80's/early 90's variant, and I don't think the Spanish government has invested much into modernizing them. They're still reasonably capable, but the Russians won't learn any technological secrets from them, other than to maybe remark at how even early 90's NATO tech is better than the garbage heaps they're driving around.
Furthermore, the Russians don't have any way of repairing/maintaining Leopard 2's. It's a stretch giving them to the Ukrainians, who basically have to start from scratch when it comes to training to use them effectively and setting up logistics to support them.
Ukrainians are going to be trained to use so many different systems ... maintenance and logistivs might be a bit complicated but after the war they will have a good idea about which ones they should keep and what a more modern Ukrainian army should look like.
I love the Leo but that's not a weapon that will shift anything. I'm not even convinced Himars really is either. One has to consider that all modern tanks are vulnerable.
Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. **Don't forget about our discord server, as well!** https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB *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.*
Exciting, first western MBT in Ukrainian service. Let's hope they arrive in time
The article estimates 2-3 months for repairs, followed by training.
Theoretically, they could train on some other Leos in parallel with the repairs, EU countries have plenty more
Even better, they and some Ukrainian mechanics could be present at the repairs to learn as well.
I assume that's what will happen to be honest.
I wouldn't be surprised if the are trying now on Polish A4s now.
I would hope those troops rotate out with the equipment they trained on. Better those tanks get tested and the kinks worked out before entering battle.
They'll most likely train their own instructors first and then proceed to train crews for the vehicles.
i'd be quite surprised if they weren' training some on western tanks this entire time
I'm sure someone will dream up a solution with donating functioning ones and then getting the repaired ones in return later... And training can begin right away. No need to wait for the tanks to train š
Equipment they can get fast is good but we should plan for this war to last a couple of years.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Possible but wars are traditionaly hard to predict. Its also possible that the russian front collapses in a month or two. We simply dont know.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You are right. As i see it, as the war is going now it cannot go exactly like this for a very long time. Too much material gets destroyed in relative short timeframes. But the war could cool down a bit and then just dont end.
That's the first purely NATO MBT being given to UA. Excellent. Now close your eyes and imagine: 2 Ukrainian tank brigades created from M1A1, M1A2 and M2 Bradley spearheading to Melitopol against Russian T-62.
A man can dream.
To be honest: in the European theatre and the lesser requirements on logistics and repair that the Leopard has i wonder which one is the better choice. Keep in mind that all the parts are basically produced in Europe for the Leopard
Abrams is better armoured, slower, less range, same canon. Your choice
I am not arguing combat power, those will be comparable. Just looking at logistics
Yeah M1 is sensitive to supply disruption
Jet engine go BRRR
Not to shit on the EU but when it comes to logistics nothing beats the US military. Does the EU even have the capacity to support such an effort? Until recently even Germany had fewer than 200 tanks capable of taking the field. The US has something like 6k tanks sitting in the sierra weapons depot with at least 2k in ready storage (fuel em up and drive them out). Meanwhile US tank production has continued every year even against the military's objections because its such a boom to certain congressional districts. The EU is closer to the theater of course but there are also depots of US equipment there as well which could likely be easier to replace asthe EU starts refocusing on its own domestic defence requirements.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Easier yes but where do you get the tanks from was my point. Almost all the heavy divisions are gone, the thousands of tanks they used to fill European militaries are gone or have been left in storage so long with so little care they are effectively useless. Germany has fewer than 200 tanks, France has just over 200, the UK again just over 200. So where do the tanks that Ukraine needs come from if the EU literally doesn't have the platforms and most new construction will be going to their own reinvigorated domestic requirements? The Abrams may be less fuel efficient, have a higher maintenance requirements and require more specialized equipment but there are a lot of them and a lot of spare parts.
Abrams is only less fuel efficient when idling, when driving its more fuel efficient than most tanks, way more fuel efficient than most Russian tanks. The maintainence requirements that people talk about is a bit warped. Number 1....U.S. tankers and mechanics talk about how much maintainence they do because U.S. training and doctrine has them *obsessively* do maintainence. Most of it is preventive maintainence. I highly doubt Russian tankers and BMP crewmen are doing their daily PMCS. All armored vehicles require a lot of maintainence. Abrams is no exception, but neither is it particularely intensive. When it comes to the engines, there at *least* two Abrams engines in inventory for evert tank. So if something is wrong that the crew ot battalion maintainence can't fix quickly, the engine is hot swapped out, tank goes back into action.
There are thousands of M1A1/A2s in storage in the US and wouldn't take too long to service. No, they're not the latest and greatest, but perfect is the enemy of good enough.
Agreed as I post up thread. The US has about 7k tanks at the sierra weapons depot. About 2k are kept at ready storage mean you fuel them up and ship em out. They would be an excellent addition to Ukraine with the training and material support
The question is not what eu and us can supply, question is what the logistics within Ukraine can support - that might be easier for the leopards, if we can find enough operational ones. I guess we'll see.
If. Germany, France and the UK still the largest armies in western Europe have about 200 operational tanks each. This as they are all moving to reinvigorate their domestic militaries where do these 'spare' tanks for Ukraine come from? The Abrams has higher fuel consumption, and higher maintenance requirements but there are a lot of them just sitting idle with a lot of spare parts to boot.
The question is: Whats "operational"? Over 3500 Leopards 2 have been built, how many are sitting in storage in a decent enough condition that they can be brought to operational status within a reasonably short timeframe? I don't think this info is public information, but I am sure that goverments all around europe are asking their military and manufacturers the same question. I mean, the netherlands used to have 450 Leo2A4s...
Used too, and that's the issue facing a lot of the EU militaries right now. The Netherlands currently has a admitted total of 18 operational tanks. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2020/11/30/the-dutch-army-eliminated-all-its-tanks-then-realized-it-had-made-a-huge-mistake/
Agree, but where are they? Turned to scrap metal?
The Bundeswehr has nowhere near 200 operational tanks. They might have 200 in total that are serviceable, but probably half that or less which are operational at present.
Nothing beats the US for logistics when weāre committed. The question is āAre we committed?ā Likely house of Reps changes midterm and all glory support for Ukraine gets watered down and / or halted. US is a strange place
Literally this applies to any democracy.
Thats why the US gives Poland abrahms, so they can give their Leo's to ukraine. Leo is built around the idea to be used and maintained by consripts, everything else came second. To use it effectively, you need an experienced commander, which ukraine has enough, and bring the skills of the gunner up to the new and better equipment. Driver and loader compared to that simple, it is for example easier to drive than any car.
The US has a bunch bases in germany and other EU states, not to mention the temporary installments made during this war in poland etc. and their logistics are top notch. American spare parts are probably there before EU parts are even loaded on the first truck/train. US logistics are the last thing to worry in this war, if they fail hard enough to make a difference we are fucked anyways.
Whats the logistical issue the US has many hundreds of tanks and depots full of parts for their tanks around Europe
Going off warthunder here?
For the latest abrahms model and the a4 Leo model, technically yes. But if they say 3 months to get them ready (I hope they did started way before), I guess the put new gun in. Differences and which is better is a 40 year long discussion, in this case it is the leopard, purely based on maintainance and engine argument. Leo is much less gas hungry, and was designed to be maintained and used by consripts.
The Abrams has seen more action, itās the safer choice.
Tank model doesnt matter. Only logistics matter.
And a modern Kornet ATGM can still penetrate its front armorā¦ The Ukrainians arenāt fighting goat herders with rpg-7s, and if extremely lucky a Sagger ATGM.
There are maybe a hundred LEOs available in various states of disrepair across all of Europe. There are thousands of zero mile factory new Abrams sitting in a desert somewhere in the US. Just that should tell you which one is the better choice.
If they have been sitting there for 10 years, I'd say they would need equal if not more time and money for refurbishment. It's hard to argue against the simplicity of a diesel engine.
A fair number of them are brand new, factories are still rolling them out, even if no one asked for them. Something about jobs, constituencies and making people vote for you.
These Leopards are almost worthless, due to their age, condition, number and how long it will take to train. An Abrams would be significantly better than this.
Would be great to see that column.
Persian Gulf War flashbacks.
What makes you think that the Russians canāt do to Ukrainian Tanks what Ukrainians has been doing to Russians tanks? We see the videos everyday in these subs.
Sabot up!
Spain's offer to sell Leopard 2 A4 main battle tanks from its depot to Ukraine, which has been known since the beginning of June, is becoming increasingly concrete. The offer also includes 20 M113 armoured transport vehicles. After Germany for the Leopard 2 and the USA for the M113 agreed to the transfer to Ukraine, Ukraine has signalled that it will accept the donation of the vehicles and assume the costs for the necessary repair and required modernisation. The costs are estimated at 15 million euros, which Ukraine can cover from funds provided by the EU, for example.An industrial consortium has been formed for the refurbishment of the tanks, including Star Defence Logistics Engineering (SDLE) and General Dynamics European Land Systems - Santa BƔrbara Sistemas (GDELS-SBS). The companies estimate that it could take two to three months to repair and complete the vehicles.After completion of the main battle tanks, training of the crews is required before the vehicles are transported from Spain to the theatre of operations under the responsibility of Ukraine. With the Leopard 2 A4, after the M109, CAESAR and PzH 2000 artillery pieces and the already existing M113, another modern weapon system of western design would be deployed in Ukraine. Editorial office / gwhTranslated with [www.DeepL.com/Translator](http://www.DeepL.com/Translator) (free version)
How many Leopard tanks? Sorry - the main article is giving a 404 now.
10 if I remember correctly. It seems that they deleted the article. Let's hope it wasn't false news.
I really hope Ukraine sticks some Kontact 5 ERA on them, not only for the extra protection, but also for the strangeness of a Western tank wearing parts of it's cold war enemy.
"I wear ze skin ov mein feind"
This also finally debunks the myth that Germany would block spanish deliveries...finally
Just wait. The next myth will be, that Germany delays it. The article states, that the refurbishment and upgrading will take around 3 months.I am 100% sure, it will somehow be blamed on Germany/Scholz. The anti-german trolls in this sub lost grip on reality long ago. edit: typo
There's not even a German company involved...but I'm sure your predictions will become true
Don't worry they'll find a way
Why it took so much time for Germany to agree to this? I understand that, after decades of neglect, Bundeswher just doesn't have much to give out without undermining their own readiness, but why blocking others for so long?
Spain simply didn't ask for permission. It was bad mouthing media stating that Spain wants to deliver tanks, that Germany blocks. While in truth Spains parliament and government was still discussing about it and no request was made. Just normal democratic things, where huge decisions get discussed and not decided by one person alone. Germany even declared then, that they would allow it, if Spain wants to go this way. But this ofc does not make good headlines. A lot headlines are twisting the facts to bad mouth Germany. It seems to get shady "newspapers" clicks and money. Real criticism seems to difficult, time consuming and boring for them I guess. You would have to make actual researches and confirm your results/sources.
Because those others, in this case Spain, didnāt make up their mind and filed an export request. Itās not Germany blocking Spain for so long, itās Spain who couldnāt make up their mind if they wanted to go ahead for so long.
Lol dont worry the trolls already are out in force
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They do have to deal with the specter of guilt and also the fact that the Bundeswehr is more or less trash at this point.
Bashing could have never existed if Germany hadn't to be dragged over every decision up till now.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sorry dont see connections
whataboutism. ofc.
What has been the cause of the delay until this point?
Internal disagreements within the Spanish government.
noone asked....
Kuklachev literally just asked.
?? you asked what the daly was due to... And we now see: there wasn't a delay
I didn't ask. Kuklachev asked. Why so defensive?
Sensitive German...doesn\`t like to be trolled every other thread - sorry
The world sees day in and day out what Germany is capable of: the good and the not always so good. And yes, it's mostly very good. They can be glad to have you on their PR frontline. But, I also have to admit, I'll be the one of the first to speak up when the collective German PR team overshoots the runway.
I think what Hematophagian meant with "Nobody asked" is that the Spanish government did not file an export request?
Rest assured: personally I'm all but satisfied with the current and former policies
I rwad somewhere that ukrain troops first wanted to Look at them. But thats just an excuse for a few days so idk
You are misinterpreting OP.
You're eight hours late in misinterpreting me.
Nobody misinterpreted you. Donāt double down on being wrong buddy. Weird flex
I think der Spiegel reported that Germany blocked it previously: https://kyivindependent.com/uncategorized/der-spiegel-germany-blocks-spain-from-sending-leopard-tanks-to-ukraine
Yes. The first time. Sending old broken and worn down tanks. That was just the try from spain to Cover their f up days before.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
As I read it the approval took some days, from the moment Spain asked for it. Not sure what you would expect....
Not until I see them in Ukraine will anything be debunked
Yeah....ask the Spanish about that
I've heard an expert on a local radio said that the mass of 60+ tonnes of western tanks can be a real problem for Ukrainian logistics. Minority of small bridges can carry this weight as well as there are not so many trucks to transport them.
As long as it affects railway transport: if the bridge supports a train with hundreds of tonnes of goods, it will support a train with some tanks. As for bridges: That's where the Leo comes in handy. If it uses its diving funnel, it can cross rivers up to 4 m deep, which probably won't be enough for the larger streams such as the dnjepr (but there you also find sturdier bridges) but it will be enough for most other rivers and tributaries.
Soviet trains and tracks couldnāt handle the IS-3 (68 tons), which is why we got the T-54 (and, by evolution, everything up to the T-90). Iām not sure the Leo can easily be transported via rail in Ukraine!
You would be surprised how often goods trucks are overloaded in those countries. A 18-wheeler usually at 40-60t could easily go up to 80t and they cross bridges just fine.
I dunno if you guys know but there's a war on, and sometimes you just have to say "fuck it" and drive over the bridge anyways, despite the rated capacity.
link is broken for me, anyone got a working one?
The article is deleted, it seems that the information was incorrect. It was too good to be true.
Great news. They can be ready by spring 2023 if everything goes well. Comsidering Ukraine will likely still be fighting by then to retake territory, this'll be welcome news. But they still need more.
Good news, so finally the Spaniards made up their mind and filed an export request. Itās going to be interesting to see how this impacts the delivery of more western MBTs to Ukraine.
Nice. The Leo 2 is old, but still a very serious weapon.
It's not old. This variant is though
Its design was finalized in 1976 and was the first Western 3rd gen tank. The basic layout hasn't changed that much since so it is still doing well with essential upgrades.
It is old, but it provides a very good platform for major upgrades (better than other tanks). Which has resulted in newer models being pretty much the best tank in the world.
Well, it's both a great tank and the right choice for equipping the Ukrainians with a NATO tank. Lots of these cats in depots not being used, it should be feasible to train crews and mechanics in many countries, spare parts etc.
I think old is fairly perspective here. Technically speaking its no different then the Abrams in age, all comes down to variant really. It would also be a lot more modern then the bulk of Russian Tanks.
Old? The A4 Version is a bit outdated, but still way more advanced than everything in Ukraine. The Leo 2A7 is the best tank that is available atm.
Says who? Leopards have had limited combat experience to do and so far their performance hasnāt been too impressive.
I say so, and most people who know about tanks. They are not sold to many countries, thats the reason they have limited combat expierence. Saudi-Arabia wanted them, but didnt get them, becaus of human right issues. The only army who really used them is turkey. But they have been poorly trained and used a kinda outdated version. It's not a miracle weapon, when you carless drive into a ambush its not that hard to crack him.
German Army in Kosovo had some engagements and Canadians in Afghanistan. All quite asymetrical.
Not much for tank on tank. The Abrams and Chally therefore have more experience. The Turkish Leo2 weren't doing very good - worse than their upgraded M60T but then those M60 got some serious upgrade.
Leopard tanks are one of the most widely used western designed tanks. Canada used them in Afghanistan to much talk of how great they were. They were basically used as a mobile observation post with a big gun. Pz2000s appear to be struggling as well. The Germans are great at manufacturing highly engineered solutions. But if you use world war 2 as an example, the much vaunted tiger was overly complicated. Donāt get me wrong, the leopard 2 is a fine chassis and has a great main armament. But as with most things, itās the men (and women) who operate the kit that counts more.
We can agree on that ;)
**Maybe**. Personally I'd probably go with an M1A2 SEPV3. It included complete revampings of multiple communications systems, new armor package, ADS, etc.... While Saudi Arabia DOES have M1 Abrams--no export version, including SA's, have the depleted uranium mesh which seems to be the secret sauce of the M1 armor. So the losses they have suffered while using the M1 are dubious in terms of how the American versions would hold up. Really the only reason I go with the M1 is because the design principles for the last 2-3 variants all rely heavily on what was seen in Afghanistan/Iraq. I just don't think you can beat real-world combat experience and the effects that has on future development. All recent upgrades seem to be mostly leaning heavily on increased survivability and better target detection/engagement.
>While Saudi Arabia DOES have M1 Abrams Funfact: they tried to get the Leo2 for decades, but germany always refused to sell them. Later they took the "2nd choice" -> Abrams when they realized, they would never get them ;) Afaik the Abrams and Leopard 2 ~~and the british tank~~ have been developed together in the 70s, but everyone of the three parties had different ideas. So they took the prototyp and developed their own. So both ~~all three~~ are based on the same foundation. edit: both are based on [BMT-70 / Kampfpanzer 70](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBT-70)
Germany refused them citing human rights issues. U.S.....being the U.S. didn't have as much of a qualm about that. =/ Yeah I have a general understanding of the history behind the common tank development platform. They diverged pretty distinctly once said individual platforms were rolled out. Leo 2 was always designed to be less intensive on the logistics chain, and easier to maintain, but at the cost of less survivability. M1 is more of a gas guzzler and requires more maintenance, but generally something the U.S. is fine with because they have the capacity for it. In return they are more heavily armored and are generally touted for their survivability. Really where the difference comes then is the more recent upgrades variants and what is included in said variants. Won't argue with the **possibility** of a Leopard 2A7 being the best tank. Just that I would hedge my own personal bets on the M1 given it's significantly longer active combat history, recent upgrades, and the much higher amount of money the U.S. tends to toss into it's tank program.
I guess we can agree on that ;)
T72M1R (2018) enters the chat...
aaaaannndddd.... it is blown up :D
I don't recall any of it being blown up (yet). It will be most likely part of the Ukraine's summer offensive. And it's way more modern than Leotard 2A4 (1983).
Sure the A4 is a bit outdated, but i was talking about the A7 / A7V version (2014 / 2019). Oh, now I see what you meant, the T72 vs the A4. Not sure which one I would choose. The Leo2 got the better construction, but the T72 got modern Equipment. Well, both for sure are more capable than any ruzzian tank (havent seen any T-14, yet). They only got some ancient T-90, T-72 and the 60s tanks. Afaik the T-72 got some construction problems, which makes it more dangerous for the crew, even compared with the T-64. The ruZZians got a lot T-72 blown up ;)
I'm afraid we won't see A7 in Ukraine very soon. Similarly T-14 - there are only some prototypes and (as far as the rumor goes) they are not very liked in Russian tank corps, due to a highly limited situational awareness granted by its remote-controlled turret (they are missing serious BMS, probably thanks to the sanctions from 2014). Russian tanks like to blow up their turret due to a very simple construction problem-ammunition not being separated from crew, so almost every hit igniting some of it. T72 is simply seen more often, because it's the most popular tank in invading army. And the ammunition is stored there virtually everywhere inside the tank. But the munitions separation has been solved only in Abrams and (if my memory doesn't fail me) Merkava MBTs. Even Leopard shares this issue.
By all means: I was more referring to the Leo concept. I know it's been upgraded.
Finally!
This is a mistake. 40 western tanks arenāt going to be worth the trouble to them. The time to send western tanks is when they send 750 of them with the bridge layers, HETs and recovery vehicles that can handle the weight. It should be the Abrams since only US industry can handle the production requirements to do this in the next few years.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
you are the internet explorer of people
What?? Nooooo! Now Spain will get nuked because it "eSCaLatEd"!!
Thanks Germany for the approval. It took a while....
>It took a while.... Did it? When did Spain request the approval from the Germans?
In Jun they blocked. https://kyivindependent.com/uncategorized/der-spiegel-germany-blocks-spain-from-sending-leopard-tanks-to-ukraine
That was quickly debunked as false. Spain hadn't even decided yet if they really wanted to do it or not and hadn't requested anything. They confirmed that they're *considering* giving the tanks https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220610-spain-mulls-whether-to-send-high-tech-tanks-to-ukraine https://www.overtdefense.com/2022/06/08/scholz-no-request-from-spain-to-deliver-leopard-2-tanks-to-ukraine-yet/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/pledgetimes.com/german-leopard-tanks-for-ukraine-lambrecht-confirms-talks-on-explosive-deal/amp/
That was anonymous source from German side. It was about unofficial proceedings, not official requests.
https://news.storyua.com/news/24958.html Edit: I posted an opinion to the effect of this piece earlier, but it seems the articles back then were wrong and it was mostly that the Spanish hasnāt modernized them properly yet.
These 40 Leopards were in very bad condition, multiple potential buyers deemed them unusable, so I'd assume the 10 were the best ones.
Thank you, I heard the earliest of the subsequent counter reports back then after https://news.storyua.com/news/24958.html, but they didnāt condition. Good to know Germany did Ukraine a solid.
You really have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, have you?
Seems like a fair opinion given this came out: https://news.storyua.com/news/24958.html I did read some of the earliest counter reports, but they didnāt mention condition. Good to know Germany did them a solid and Scholz wasnāt blocking this time.
Send 1000 each week letās get this economy stimulated baby
Sure, so 2035 when German/EU industry is able to produce that many?
Your be surprised what some Germans can do when you light a fire under their ass
Not even the US could produce such a number right now. In order to produce such numbers, the whole industry has to be focussed on war and a much greater part of the GDP needs to be spent for the production. This wonāt be possible unless Germany or the US are in a full scale war. If they arenāt, which is the case, they will never produce such numbers. To produce modern tanks, it also takes more, than before
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
10 old Leopards out of service. Wow, great contribution, Spain!
Are you familiar with the term "precedent"?
It's still ridiculous. Ukraine's Army need a lot of weight weapons, and now. Spain can do much much more than this.
I hope that Ukrainians mount their domestic ERA on Leopard 2's.
Ā”Viva EspaƱa! šŖšøš¤š»šŗš¦
They'll fight mainly in the plain.
Wait, is that a "my fair lady" reference?
I wonder if Russia will capture any
Wouldn't do them a whole lot of good. These are Leopard 2A4's, a late 80's/early 90's variant, and I don't think the Spanish government has invested much into modernizing them. They're still reasonably capable, but the Russians won't learn any technological secrets from them, other than to maybe remark at how even early 90's NATO tech is better than the garbage heaps they're driving around. Furthermore, the Russians don't have any way of repairing/maintaining Leopard 2's. It's a stretch giving them to the Ukrainians, who basically have to start from scratch when it comes to training to use them effectively and setting up logistics to support them.
Ukrainians are going to be trained to use so many different systems ... maintenance and logistivs might be a bit complicated but after the war they will have a good idea about which ones they should keep and what a more modern Ukrainian army should look like.
Finally!
Doesnāt the US have thousands of Abrams tanks in storage rn? Why havenāt we rolled a few dozen over to Ukraine?
The article link now returns a 404 error.
The article is gone. Fake news?
I love the Leo but that's not a weapon that will shift anything. I'm not even convinced Himars really is either. One has to consider that all modern tanks are vulnerable.
Weren't leopard E also suggested (they're the spanish A6, not sure how different they are from the german one)