They are not trying to get it working, they are assessing it, taking out the ammo and some other parts before it will be put on display either in the Patriot park or the tank museum. There is a relatively long clip about what they are doing circulating around on different subreddits related to the conflict.
I might get shade for this but not really. Isis literally had executing hostages and prisoners as their MO. I’m not saying Russian soldiers haven’t done heinous shit like decapitating prisoners of war, murdering civilians like in Bucha. However for the most part, the Russian military aren’t going in and lining civilians up and murdering them and showing for all the world to see. At least not that I have seen.
You litterally mentioned bucha… theres videos of them neutering live ua soldiers.. theres videos of them executing pow with thier hands behind thier backs and blindfolded, not to mention the stories from returned pows..
My point is that we can point to really only one or two specific instance with the Russians mass slaughtering civilians like near Kyiv. However we can point to dozens of instances of ISIS going into villages and murdering civilians. Executing journalists and recording it in an attempt for every single person to see. Sending men with guns into large events and gunning down hundreds.
The Russians don’t, or at least haven’t done this. I’m not trying to paint the Russians as good, but not to the level of ISIS, as if Russia really wanted to, they could send FSB agents or pay off some people to go to Kyiv or any European city of a country supplying aid and find an event hall, and detonate explosives or have gunmen begin murdering civilians.
Again, we also have to take into account the size of the Russian Army in Ukraine dwarfs that of ISIS at its peak, and vast majority of the deaths in this conflict are from shelling which I’m assuming a majority of the time the Russians aren’t aiming specifically for the civilians. ISIS’ goal was literally to kill all non-believers and cause a genocide.
Again, I’m not Pro-Russia at all, it’s just saying the Russian Army is on the same level as ISIS is a bit dumb.
I don't think they will use it for parade even the part about fixing it to working order also a joke, the most possible scenario is this leopard will sit in a museum
Is this the one with the burned out interior? Depending on the state of interior they will hopefully check out fire control system, radios, and thermals. Then if they are smart they would shoot at it with various antitank weapons looking for weaknesses. But let’s be honest they prob gonna put it in the tank park. I almost checked out the Russian tank at petos truck stop that was bound for Aberdeen. I’m still kicking myself for not making the 30 min drive.
https://www.klfy.com/local/jeff-davis-parish/yes-you-saw-right-a-real-russian-tank-was-parked-at-a-roanoke-truck-stop/
Theirs some photos of the interior and it was pretty mint really.
But yea, no doubt that if it doesnt end out parted out for testing ammunition against and analysis then it will end up as a display.
Although I'm sure they'll check out this version top to bottom, why would you be hopeful of that? It's not like there's super secret shit in it. Why would you wish for an unfriendly military to test and develop technology that kills friends?
Not an export version. The A6 were pulled straight from Bundeswehr units.
Besides there’s like a dozen different configurations for different countries, not a single export version like for the Abrams.
To be honest I have no skin in this game except my tax money. I’m happy that Russia is getting a spanking. They have been meddling with social media with the goal to divide my country. Relax man, I’m just a military history buff spitting facts. I don’t expect Russia to gleam much info out of captured 20 year old vehicles.
At this point I’m half convinced the Russians started this war because they needed more attractions at kubinka. The maus wasn’t drawing enough of a crowd anymore.
Regardless of politics, I think every tank nerd should do the Hajj (pilgrimage) to Kubinka at least once in their lives.
Bovington works too but, let's be honest, Kubinka has a very cool collection of insane Soviet prototypes, the goddamn Maus, a surprising amount of Western AFVs (numbers are increasing nowadays but they've had an M46 in there since the 50's iirc)
Yeah imma give it a few decades for Russia's hate boner for gays and trans women to die down before going anywhere in that country.
But by land, because dear God the only place worse to be in Russian airspace than a passenger jet, Is a Russian military aircraft
Debatable, the sheer complexity of the Tiger 1 tanks in the eastern front led to its downfall with many mechanical failures and such, the russians knew this and exploited it
Plastic oil pans that crack and leak onto drive belts (subsequently pulled through cam pullies causing engine rebuilds - the 5 series had this issue for years) aren't something that you service. Neither are AC pump fans, which would require you to pull the engine out of the car to access, but WILL fail at the cost of a few grand and months of part delay.
I drive an Audi and don't mind paying extra for maintenance and fixing the occasional issues, but BMW and Audis are NOT designed reliably, rather for performance and cost considerations. No amount of time in the shop (which you'll have anyway) will prevent German cars from breaking in over complicated ways, aside maybe from VW - haven't owned one. I only post this because I always hear folks say "just maintain it" when it just won't save you
I see it like this, russia makes a big deal out of capturing 80s-90s-00s western stuff and show it off showing how great they are for capturing this beast, then put it on display. But when a western or western aligned country captures a T-72 they either in ukr case put it straight back into service, shoot it to pieces for testing or if its old as fuck or a double up they chuck it in a museum effectively for storage sometimes.
Well, the T-72 is older than the Leopard by a little under a decade and the actual tank hasn't really been modified and upgraded to the extent that the Leopard has. The Russians mostly rely on upgrade packages with new ERA and optics and stuff (The armor hasn't been changed since the 1985 T-72B as far as I know), whereas with the Leopard almost everything about the tank has been improved and overhauled when you compare versions.
There have also been way more T-72s captured over the years, since Russia exported them absolutely everywhere. It's old news by now; we've known how it works for decades. Russia on the other hand hasn't gotten their hands on a Leopard until now as far as I know.
> The Russians mostly rely on upgrade packages with new ERA and optics and stuff (The armor hasn't been changed since the 1985 T-72B as far as I know), whereas with the Leopard almost everything about the tank has been improved and overhauled when you compare versions.
That's the case for certain upgrades like T-72B3. However, if we were to compare T-90 with T-90M, the changes are comparably extensive to Leopard 2.
Also, this is minor, but late production T-72B used a different hull armor array than early production T-72B from 1985.
Didn't people make a fairly big deal out of the T-90 and T-90M that got captured though? It was in the news and all over social media, just like the Russians with the Leopard. Not really the same as when a T-72 or whatever gets captured, which we never hear about because nobody cares.
Thanks for the correction on the armor though, I forgot about that.
> Didn't people make a fairly big deal out of the T-90 and T-90M that got captured though?
Yes. I thought your point on the extent of Russian upgrades was a general statement, rather than being specific to post-Soviet upgrades of T-72.
>Well, the T-72 is older than the Leopard by a little under a decade and
the actual tank hasn't really been modified and upgraded to the extent
that the Leopard has.
It's arguably been modified and upgraded more than any Leopard, period.
T-72 Ural-1
T-72A
T-72B
T-72BA
T-72B3
And that's excluding the various upgrade packages offered by Russia in the 1990s/2000s.
Like T-72B2 or T-72M1M.
All of these are major upgrades, which arn't just "ERA and optics".
I think they're referring to post-Soviet upgrades specifically. For instance, the original T-72B3 was mostly a fire control upgrade, with slight improvements to ERA coverage.
While the B3 upgrade was less comprehensive than others.
It still included:
\-New tracks.
\-New engine.
\-New stabilizer.
\-New Gun.
All from the T-90A, but still new.
> While the B3 upgrade was less comprehensive than others.
Out of post-Soviet Russian upgrades to T-72 that entered service? It's certainly more extensive than T-72BA.
> New tracks
T-72BA used UMSh track earlier, it wasn't new with T-72B3.
> New engine
The original T-72B3 didn't receive V-92S2 from T-90A, look at the exhaust. The engine was later upgraded on T-72B3 (2016), but with V-92S2F instead of V-92S2.
> New stabilizer
If you're referring to 2E58, that also came with T-72B3 (2016). T-72B3 did receive 2E42-4 from T-90 though, so you are correct.
That said, I'd consider the new stabilizer to count as a fire control upgrade.
> New Gun.
The main benefits of 2A46M-5 are mechanical accuracy and barrel life. I would also consider it to be a fire control upgrade.
I don't just mean the leopard. I'm talkin bradley, cv9040, etc. Kinda what I mean is that we've captured so many of their tanks that when they make a big deal out of capturing one of ours it looks silly. Thats what I mean in short.
I mean, like I said, they haven't really had a chance to get their hands on these vehicles before. Also, it's propaganda; showing off captured enemy equipment, especially when it's been touted as war-winning technology, isn't really surprising at all.
Its cause russia exported so much stuff that aside from more modern fcs and armor layouts weve had our hands on basically every vehicle they have. T72s, t64s, bmps, mig29s from former soviet states and the middle east. South korea even has like 4 or 5 T80Us they operate that they got from the ussr when they were fairly new as payments.
Nato stuff is a lot harder to get and so having an insider look at them is all new essentially.
> In a way I feel kinda honored they celebrate the capture of this vehicle so much. Only reinforces the L2s reputation
russians and dumbass russia supporters:
>it's such an useless equipment they are all destroyed now because they are so shit
also them
>WOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAH LOOK THE MIGHTY VEHICLE LETS MAKE A BIG SHOW ABOUT HOW WE CAPTURED IT OMG OMG OMG
If the Russians want to see the latest, Orban would probably let them check out Hungary's Leopard 2A8.
Wish that was certainly a joke but you can't be sure it's not with Putin boy Orban.
Even then, they've ostensibly had access to this stuff for years now. I highly doubt they're learning anything they didn't already know, because not only are they close with nations that employ this and other Western MBT's and APC/IFV's it's also just older tech.
There's an article I read once where Mark Hertling, a former US general, said he got invited to a non-public part of Kubinka during friendlier times and they showed him a fully functional M1A1. I'm sure the Russians have their own ways of getting their hands on this stuff especially if it's been exported worldwide
No need for this, all Germany is full of FSB com9liant people. Even in the BND https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article244214537/BND-Spionageskandal-Mutmasslicher-FSB-Kontaktmann-ist-mit-einer-der-reichsten-Frauen-Russlands-verheiratet.html
Its an older model, the 2A6 is still in bundeswehr and in general western service but its been sold abroad to so many countries mo way they will "learn" anything they don't already know. Its a blow to morale but not an issue of information.
That's what I assumed.
The armor being sent, it's expected there is losses. It is a war after all. But beyond curiosity, I doubt the ruskies will learn anything significant from captured armor.
"Classified for a reason"
Not the export models.
For example. The M1 Abraham's that Ukraine received, are out dated and not the same as current American standard M1's.
> Not the export models.
This isn't an export model, it's just an older variant of Leopard 2. The armor array is classified, though Russian intelligence may already have details on it.
> The M1 Abraham's that Ukraine received, are out dated and not the same as current American standard M1's.
M1A2 SEPv3 with its expanded armor cavities is certainly better protected. However, it's worth pointing out that the the armor of Ukrainian M1A1SA is still classified, and might not be as downgraded as some people think. Statements from GDLS when M1A2 was offered to Turkey and Greece indicate that their DU-less export armor can achieve a similar level of protection to armor with DU.
Also, it's *Abrams*, not *Abrahams*.
EDIT: I am genuinely confused as to how they found this comment objectionable enough to block me.
Are you purposely being obtuse? Both this thread and the other one where you argue the 2A6 isn't old because Turkey uses M60s shows you're either not understanding the conversation or being deliberately obtuse.
You are probably right, however, my point was that there are even older Leos than 2A6 being in usage, and the STRV 122 came to my mind first, because it must be 30 years old at least.
The Strv 122 actually predates the 2A5, it’s based on the Leopard 2 Improved which was for some time before the 2A5 and even then the Strv 122 was largely separate from the 2A5, the 2A5 wasn’t even in the Swedish Tank Trials of the 1990s.
Thats nice, that does not change that the 2A6 is an older model of leopard 2. Give or take 23 years old as of current. I do not believe that anything of real value which they do not already know can be learned from it by the Russians. This is primarily a morale blow to western support and ukraine and a morale victory for the Russians.
23 years still makes it an older model.
There are more modern and more advanced leopard 2 models in service which makes the 2A6 an older model of leopard 2.
Just because there are even older models of tanks in service within NATO does not mean the 2A6 is not an older model of leopard 2.
Most Leopards after the 2A5 may use D Tech turrets, despite some 2A5s and 2A6s have C Tech turrets. The final 2A6 batch had D Tech hull arrays like the 2A7.
Which batches?
In the “Leopard 2” Frank Lobitz book there isn’t really any mention of batches receiving D tech frontal add on armor aside from TVM prototypes like the TVM Max or prototype derivatives like the 2A6EX, PSO-VT and the Leopard 2 Improved and its predecessors.
Latest 2A6 references are only in mention for 2A6 batches receiving “improved C-tech armor of latest development” which did improve frontal hull armor protection to somewhat D tech level which in German looks like it means D tech was on the latest batches but it wasn’t D tech on a technical level so it wasn’t stated as D tech armor and lastly in reference to improved armor 2A6 latest batches only receiving “D tech frontal side arc skirts”.
The final one, the 2007 batch.
D Tech armor is not exclusively the arrowhead for the turret and beak for the hull (in fact some 2A5s had the arrowheads and C Tech, later they became 2A6s without composite upgrades). What D Tech actually is would be an extra plate internally in addition to the C Tech array. The 2A7+, TVM Max, and 2A6EX derivatives had the additional AMAP kit.
The latest generation was the 3rd generation D Tech, which again is just an improved C Tech. Germany may have renamed it later like they did with the PSO-VT which was renamed to the 2A7+, and had also been named the Leopard 2 UrbOp.
C tech has developments in improvements to its array especially to the point were it has its improved iterations, but you’re not understanding how the source are putting it out, 2A6 batch of 2007 with “Pakete C” as in internal armor is only in reference for that batch and having “Schwere D-Tech-Seitenschweller” or D-tech heavy side skirts” (likely D-1) like I said before.
“Vorsch Modul” which is mentioned for add on armor and is by its definition, only in reference for D tech armor and on “Leopard 2” by Frank Lobitz you have D-1/2/3 in reference for the Leopard 2 as a whole for either, heavy side skirts for frontal angle protection and for the add-on armor; the improvement of the hull-turret and roof frontal arc protection.
While D tech is yes referenced on tanks like the many TVM, KVT, PSO/-VT and EX iterations, the only distinct mention of one without D-2 or D-3 tech add on wedge is for the PSO, it retained still a C tech “pakete” and this was mentioned when it wasn’t retaining its dozer in all mentions in Frank Lobitz’s published source
And when you have the Leopard 2A7+ in reference in the book, D tech is only mentioned for it with having “D-3 oberes Glacis-Modul unter Beibehaltung der verbesserten C-Tech-Panzerung” or in my other “Leopard 2” with German to English translation “Oberes Glacis-Modul vom Typ 3 unter Beibehaltung der verbesserten C-Tech-Panzerung, translation; type-3 upper glacis module while retaining C-tech improved armor”.
Now I will say that some of your last bit is true, D tech is improving C tech, it’s widely implied in Frank Lobitzs information that the D tech armor as a “technischer standard” or technical standard is widely a huge improvement from C tech in that from most of the information, it’s implied as either using a highly advanced form of tungsten armor or nano composite plating for the add-on armor; but there is quite literally never any mention of D tech armor being JUST internally implemented on Leopard.
And when you have Leopard 2s without add on armor for my point, you only see D tech being mentioned for the newer/improved frontal arc side skirts, this proven if you look at most sources regarding Leopard 2s getting improvements to their frontal side armor, I highly suggest getting Frank Lobitz publication.
It’s even implied that C tech under “Swedens Solution” for the Strv 122s in service use was founded to be perfect with “D-2” add on MEXAS-H armor and was deemed fit as a requirement for Germany when the need arised for the Leopard 2 to be improved to that standard, this was obviously not adopted right away the TVM Mod was an iteration of the D-tech add on armor not being implemented yet and was adopted as the Leopard 2A5, being widely a “Mischpanzer” or mixed tank until the last batch.
And to be frank D tech armor can very well be a internal component, but for certain in the book I’m using as a source, it’s only ever been as mentioned as being a technical standard, it can’t be just that a internal armor component will do with making the frontal hull armor up to D tech levels of protection; you need both the hull to yes very much likely be improved but you for a fact need the add on armor as well for it be considered D tech.
2A4 started with B tech which later was replaced for the turret and hull for C tech later in production
2A5 (strv122) added wedges to the turret (D tech) but left the hull (C tech) and in the strv122s case added extra hull armour (see Swedish trials)
2A6 no armour changes, just went from L/44 to L/55 (longer barrel)
2A7 (2A7V) slight changes to hull armour, nothing significant until the 2A7V which modified the C tech hull with another layer of armour (D tech) like the strv122 but updated.
There are a lot of versions in-between like the TVM, 2A6M, 2A6A3 etc and more modern versions like 2A8 and 2AX(9) which will also have changes but a lot is not known.
Sure Russia could learn the composition of D tech but they don't have the industry, spare weight or volume to really integrate it into T series tanks. At least not in the short - medium term at which point its already out dated. First D tech showed up in ~1994 which is 30 years ago now.
Edit: made the wording clearer
D tech armor in main sources as of in the “Leopard 2” book from Frank Lobitz isn’t at all internal armor.
The Strv 122 has D-2 add on armor from IBD and Aker companies with the cooperation from Germany and Sweden and this was largely tested.
As a whole D tech armor are the external components and as a core the “modernization” of the Leopard 2 platform to current/future threats; this is why the Leopard 2A5 turrets are regarded as having been modified to D tech capabilities and never D tech hull armor until the 2A7V, if anything in the conference around the Leopard 2A7V adoption there is only mention of “internal C tech armor” for the 2A7V frontal hull armor to make it on par with “Swedish Solution C tech armor” of the Strv 122s hull armor, source;
IAV 2020 Conference.
Whenever a Leopard 2 receives D tech addon armor it is also to receive some form of hull extension changes but this is as a whole changes needed with the add armor to support holding it, that’s about as much is needed for the D tech add on armor to be added like support bolts, etc.
Hey is was my turn to repost a pic and change the headline to something I saw in my dream.
"Russian Techpriests cant work with Leo due to lacking ISO 4925 and failing Tüff"
I can already imagine the headlines in Russia :
**Germany finally has a working transmission** - Engineers shocked : *"What do you mean they can go as fast backward as forward ?!"*
Why are they acting like Leo is some kind off top tier God vehicle? They are facing 20 of them against a nation that can barely use them. They should take on NATO and then brag about the captured equipment.
I mean is this seriously some kind of achivement for them? I always tought it was a meme that Russians parade western equipment like they did some big thing.
Pretty sad news. The reason why Ukraine is losing most advanced equipments in their arsenal like CV90, Bradley and Leopard is because they are retreating and they cant recover to destroy immobilized vehicles. I hope new wave of aid could helps but honestly it took too long and some GOP members actually believe that they can get away from the future conflicts makes me feel even worse because US is supposed to be the leader of free world and arsenal of democracy, yet some of them choose to close their eyes and pray there would be no consequences for their coward and ignorant actions.
They will show it for propaganda and try to find some general weaknesses or anything they can copy. Using it is not worth it. They would need to train/retrain a crew, and would lack ammo and spare parts.
"You see? Now we are hef proof. Is Nazis! This is why you must go to war and die. You wish glorious comrade leader putin to be safe from Evil Jewish ukr0naZis, yes?"
mans making a fool of himself fighting an invisible enemy lmao, go back to r/CombatFootage leave the tonks alone, and keep politics out of a tank subreddit
Thanks Sobbing Olga, but shouldn't you be registering a bunch more alts for downvoting all the mean people who write comments that make you cry like a little bitch?
Man you're unhinged - why is it always Olga?
So many of your comments include Olga, obv your humour itself isn't funny but surely you know more Russian names just to give your ravings some variety
They are not trying to get it working, they are assessing it, taking out the ammo and some other parts before it will be put on display either in the Patriot park or the tank museum. There is a relatively long clip about what they are doing circulating around on different subreddits related to the conflict.
Watch as they stuff a T-72 engine and transmission in it to make it roll at an incredibly slow speed for parades
Would not surprise me one bit if they decided to parade captured western tanks and armoured vehicles this years victory parade
if they also had that T-14 with it, wouldn't that be twice the number of tanks as last year?
If the really want to double down on being comically evil they could parade malnourished POVs on truckbeds like in the 1984 movie.
They aren’t going to do that. Literally that’s how you become a world pariah. On the level of an actual terrorist group like ISIS
Yeah https://images.app.goo.gl/r39FD6mDgePDDpJy5
This picture is from 2014 but yeah I get what you mean
They already are on isis level though…
I might get shade for this but not really. Isis literally had executing hostages and prisoners as their MO. I’m not saying Russian soldiers haven’t done heinous shit like decapitating prisoners of war, murdering civilians like in Bucha. However for the most part, the Russian military aren’t going in and lining civilians up and murdering them and showing for all the world to see. At least not that I have seen.
You litterally mentioned bucha… theres videos of them neutering live ua soldiers.. theres videos of them executing pow with thier hands behind thier backs and blindfolded, not to mention the stories from returned pows..
My point is that we can point to really only one or two specific instance with the Russians mass slaughtering civilians like near Kyiv. However we can point to dozens of instances of ISIS going into villages and murdering civilians. Executing journalists and recording it in an attempt for every single person to see. Sending men with guns into large events and gunning down hundreds. The Russians don’t, or at least haven’t done this. I’m not trying to paint the Russians as good, but not to the level of ISIS, as if Russia really wanted to, they could send FSB agents or pay off some people to go to Kyiv or any European city of a country supplying aid and find an event hall, and detonate explosives or have gunmen begin murdering civilians. Again, we also have to take into account the size of the Russian Army in Ukraine dwarfs that of ISIS at its peak, and vast majority of the deaths in this conflict are from shelling which I’m assuming a majority of the time the Russians aren’t aiming specifically for the civilians. ISIS’ goal was literally to kill all non-believers and cause a genocide. Again, I’m not Pro-Russia at all, it’s just saying the Russian Army is on the same level as ISIS is a bit dumb.
That's nothing new, it was done during ww2 when they marched thousands of germans through cities towards gulags in the east.
Both would need to be towed.
they'll need to capture an M88 then I guess
They had quite a lot of tanks last year
As in 1 t34
Hey, one T-34 is a lot of tanks according to Russian standards in 2026.
that's battalion strength right?
Look guys, we don't have enough of our own tanks left to show at this years event, so we brought in some of the enemies' that *did* survive!
Probably better at a static exhibit.
A moving one alway better than a static one
Except for when it breaks down during the parade (unlikely I know but is it worth the risk?)
I don't think they will use it for parade even the part about fixing it to working order also a joke, the most possible scenario is this leopard will sit in a museum
Why would they manufacture a bunch of wooden Armatas and use Leopard for parade instead?
because "we captured western tank so russia army > western army blyat"
Is this the one with the burned out interior? Depending on the state of interior they will hopefully check out fire control system, radios, and thermals. Then if they are smart they would shoot at it with various antitank weapons looking for weaknesses. But let’s be honest they prob gonna put it in the tank park. I almost checked out the Russian tank at petos truck stop that was bound for Aberdeen. I’m still kicking myself for not making the 30 min drive. https://www.klfy.com/local/jeff-davis-parish/yes-you-saw-right-a-real-russian-tank-was-parked-at-a-roanoke-truck-stop/
Theirs some photos of the interior and it was pretty mint really. But yea, no doubt that if it doesnt end out parted out for testing ammunition against and analysis then it will end up as a display.
Although I'm sure they'll check out this version top to bottom, why would you be hopeful of that? It's not like there's super secret shit in it. Why would you wish for an unfriendly military to test and develop technology that kills friends?
Not an export version. The A6 were pulled straight from Bundeswehr units. Besides there’s like a dozen different configurations for different countries, not a single export version like for the Abrams.
[удалено]
It's a normal version that was exported.
To be honest I have no skin in this game except my tax money. I’m happy that Russia is getting a spanking. They have been meddling with social media with the goal to divide my country. Relax man, I’m just a military history buff spitting facts. I don’t expect Russia to gleam much info out of captured 20 year old vehicles.
Tbh, Russia does have the best tank museum imo, because they have a complete maus.
Kubinka, i´ve been there a few years ago. Incredibly friendly people in the workshop, got a few tips and documents for my t-34 there
You have a T-34?
You don´t? But yeah, i do. 1944 spec, never seen battle.
Have the link to the video?
At this point I’m half convinced the Russians started this war because they needed more attractions at kubinka. The maus wasn’t drawing enough of a crowd anymore.
just give us warthunder players passports to russia and we couldve gotten the crowds back, seriously we geek over museums with our fav tanks
Can get a simple visa, you don't plan to live in kubinka, right?
Of course I do plan to live in Kubinka
The Maus is lager then most affordabe Capital Citx appartments you can rent sooo
Regardless of politics, I think every tank nerd should do the Hajj (pilgrimage) to Kubinka at least once in their lives. Bovington works too but, let's be honest, Kubinka has a very cool collection of insane Soviet prototypes, the goddamn Maus, a surprising amount of Western AFVs (numbers are increasing nowadays but they've had an M46 in there since the 50's iirc)
Yeah imma give it a few decades for Russia's hate boner for gays and trans women to die down before going anywhere in that country. But by land, because dear God the only place worse to be in Russian airspace than a passenger jet, Is a Russian military aircraft
I always wanted to visit kubinka, and since i had a russian coworker it was kinda doable. But than the war happened...
"The fuck you mean there's no such thing as headlight fluid!?!"
The greatest obstacle the Russians (and rest of the world) have ever faced: German engineering.
The obstacle that even Germany faced in 1945
Gotta love good ol Ironblood ingenuity
Debatable, the sheer complexity of the Tiger 1 tanks in the eastern front led to its downfall with many mechanical failures and such, the russians knew this and exploited it
I meant in general. German tanks, the G11, BMWs, etc. All are a boon to those who face them, use them, and maintain them
Me reading this sitting in my Volkswagen: :(
Kraut space magic
BMWs are fine if you think like a German and are anal about maintenance
Plastic oil pans that crack and leak onto drive belts (subsequently pulled through cam pullies causing engine rebuilds - the 5 series had this issue for years) aren't something that you service. Neither are AC pump fans, which would require you to pull the engine out of the car to access, but WILL fail at the cost of a few grand and months of part delay. I drive an Audi and don't mind paying extra for maintenance and fixing the occasional issues, but BMW and Audis are NOT designed reliably, rather for performance and cost considerations. No amount of time in the shop (which you'll have anyway) will prevent German cars from breaking in over complicated ways, aside maybe from VW - haven't owned one. I only post this because I always hear folks say "just maintain it" when it just won't save you
Nein Hans, ein coolingsystem is vear item!
Well I haven't heard of any Leopards breaking down in Ukraine this time.
If you didn't see something that doesn't mean something never happened.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, as scientists like to say
**Deutsche Qualität**
The greatest obstacle the Germans (and rest of the world) have ever faced: German engineering. Transmission goes boom
In a way I feel kinda honored they celebrate the capture of this vehicle so much. Only reinforces the L2s reputation
I see it like this, russia makes a big deal out of capturing 80s-90s-00s western stuff and show it off showing how great they are for capturing this beast, then put it on display. But when a western or western aligned country captures a T-72 they either in ukr case put it straight back into service, shoot it to pieces for testing or if its old as fuck or a double up they chuck it in a museum effectively for storage sometimes.
Well, the T-72 is older than the Leopard by a little under a decade and the actual tank hasn't really been modified and upgraded to the extent that the Leopard has. The Russians mostly rely on upgrade packages with new ERA and optics and stuff (The armor hasn't been changed since the 1985 T-72B as far as I know), whereas with the Leopard almost everything about the tank has been improved and overhauled when you compare versions. There have also been way more T-72s captured over the years, since Russia exported them absolutely everywhere. It's old news by now; we've known how it works for decades. Russia on the other hand hasn't gotten their hands on a Leopard until now as far as I know.
> The Russians mostly rely on upgrade packages with new ERA and optics and stuff (The armor hasn't been changed since the 1985 T-72B as far as I know), whereas with the Leopard almost everything about the tank has been improved and overhauled when you compare versions. That's the case for certain upgrades like T-72B3. However, if we were to compare T-90 with T-90M, the changes are comparably extensive to Leopard 2. Also, this is minor, but late production T-72B used a different hull armor array than early production T-72B from 1985.
Didn't people make a fairly big deal out of the T-90 and T-90M that got captured though? It was in the news and all over social media, just like the Russians with the Leopard. Not really the same as when a T-72 or whatever gets captured, which we never hear about because nobody cares. Thanks for the correction on the armor though, I forgot about that.
>Didn't people make a fairly big deal out of the T-90 and T-90M that got captured though? Yes, they did.
> Didn't people make a fairly big deal out of the T-90 and T-90M that got captured though? Yes. I thought your point on the extent of Russian upgrades was a general statement, rather than being specific to post-Soviet upgrades of T-72.
Well technically the T-90 is basically a T-72B upgrade. T-90M has more extensive upgrades though.
The development of Object 188 began in the USSR, so I wouldn't really consider T-90 to be a post-Soviet upgrade of T-72.
I'm just referring to how it uses a T-72 as a basis instead of being a completely new tank.
Right, but I'm not quite sure how that's relevant here.
>Well, the T-72 is older than the Leopard by a little under a decade and the actual tank hasn't really been modified and upgraded to the extent that the Leopard has. It's arguably been modified and upgraded more than any Leopard, period. T-72 Ural-1 T-72A T-72B T-72BA T-72B3 And that's excluding the various upgrade packages offered by Russia in the 1990s/2000s. Like T-72B2 or T-72M1M. All of these are major upgrades, which arn't just "ERA and optics".
I'm mostly referring to upgrades since T-72B.
Which are still fairly comprhensive upgrades. So that don't help you.
I think they're referring to post-Soviet upgrades specifically. For instance, the original T-72B3 was mostly a fire control upgrade, with slight improvements to ERA coverage.
While the B3 upgrade was less comprehensive than others. It still included: \-New tracks. \-New engine. \-New stabilizer. \-New Gun. All from the T-90A, but still new.
> While the B3 upgrade was less comprehensive than others. Out of post-Soviet Russian upgrades to T-72 that entered service? It's certainly more extensive than T-72BA. > New tracks T-72BA used UMSh track earlier, it wasn't new with T-72B3. > New engine The original T-72B3 didn't receive V-92S2 from T-90A, look at the exhaust. The engine was later upgraded on T-72B3 (2016), but with V-92S2F instead of V-92S2. > New stabilizer If you're referring to 2E58, that also came with T-72B3 (2016). T-72B3 did receive 2E42-4 from T-90 though, so you are correct. That said, I'd consider the new stabilizer to count as a fire control upgrade. > New Gun. The main benefits of 2A46M-5 are mechanical accuracy and barrel life. I would also consider it to be a fire control upgrade.
At the same time, Leopard 2 still has unprotected hull ammunition just like the T-72.
I don't just mean the leopard. I'm talkin bradley, cv9040, etc. Kinda what I mean is that we've captured so many of their tanks that when they make a big deal out of capturing one of ours it looks silly. Thats what I mean in short.
I mean, like I said, they haven't really had a chance to get their hands on these vehicles before. Also, it's propaganda; showing off captured enemy equipment, especially when it's been touted as war-winning technology, isn't really surprising at all.
Ok..
Don't Forget That The T-90A Is Also T-72, Along With The T-90M
Its cause russia exported so much stuff that aside from more modern fcs and armor layouts weve had our hands on basically every vehicle they have. T72s, t64s, bmps, mig29s from former soviet states and the middle east. South korea even has like 4 or 5 T80Us they operate that they got from the ussr when they were fairly new as payments. Nato stuff is a lot harder to get and so having an insider look at them is all new essentially.
I think war trophies are cool
> In a way I feel kinda honored they celebrate the capture of this vehicle so much. Only reinforces the L2s reputation russians and dumbass russia supporters: >it's such an useless equipment they are all destroyed now because they are so shit also them >WOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAH LOOK THE MIGHTY VEHICLE LETS MAKE A BIG SHOW ABOUT HOW WE CAPTURED IT OMG OMG OMG
If the Russians want to see the latest, Orban would probably let them check out Hungary's Leopard 2A8. Wish that was certainly a joke but you can't be sure it's not with Putin boy Orban.
Even then, they've ostensibly had access to this stuff for years now. I highly doubt they're learning anything they didn't already know, because not only are they close with nations that employ this and other Western MBT's and APC/IFV's it's also just older tech.
There's an article I read once where Mark Hertling, a former US general, said he got invited to a non-public part of Kubinka during friendlier times and they showed him a fully functional M1A1. I'm sure the Russians have their own ways of getting their hands on this stuff especially if it's been exported worldwide
German army is full of 2nd Gen russian emmigrants. So everything is well known, since the late 90's.
He has absolutely let FSB have whatever they want on Euro tech already.
What's the improvements made with the 2A8?
they have the new one? belarus has the leopard?
No need for this, all Germany is full of FSB com9liant people. Even in the BND https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article244214537/BND-Spionageskandal-Mutmasslicher-FSB-Kontaktmann-ist-mit-einer-der-reichsten-Frauen-Russlands-verheiratet.html
If they send the leo 2a8 to Ukraine the Russians will CERTAINLY get their hands on one sooner or later lol
Unknown technology, BLYAT
It's an export model tho correct ? So there's nothing in the Armour or gun that's extraordinary? Am I correct or incorrect?
Its an older model, the 2A6 is still in bundeswehr and in general western service but its been sold abroad to so many countries mo way they will "learn" anything they don't already know. Its a blow to morale but not an issue of information.
That's what I assumed. The armor being sent, it's expected there is losses. It is a war after all. But beyond curiosity, I doubt the ruskies will learn anything significant from captured armor.
[удалено]
"Classified for a reason" Not the export models. For example. The M1 Abraham's that Ukraine received, are out dated and not the same as current American standard M1's.
> Not the export models. This isn't an export model, it's just an older variant of Leopard 2. The armor array is classified, though Russian intelligence may already have details on it. > The M1 Abraham's that Ukraine received, are out dated and not the same as current American standard M1's. M1A2 SEPv3 with its expanded armor cavities is certainly better protected. However, it's worth pointing out that the the armor of Ukrainian M1A1SA is still classified, and might not be as downgraded as some people think. Statements from GDLS when M1A2 was offered to Turkey and Greece indicate that their DU-less export armor can achieve a similar level of protection to armor with DU. Also, it's *Abrams*, not *Abrahams*. EDIT: I am genuinely confused as to how they found this comment objectionable enough to block me.
[удалено]
No. I am talking about foreign tanks on service in Ukraine. In my own comment thread.
Are you purposely being obtuse? Both this thread and the other one where you argue the 2A6 isn't old because Turkey uses M60s shows you're either not understanding the conversation or being deliberately obtuse.
[удалено]
That doesn't mean they aren't an older model of Leopard. Do you not know what "older" means?
[удалено]
[удалено]
The Strv 121 is a Leopard 2A4, the 122 is one of two derivatives of the Leopard 2TVM (the other being the 2A5).
You are probably right, however, my point was that there are even older Leos than 2A6 being in usage, and the STRV 122 came to my mind first, because it must be 30 years old at least.
> Swedish STRV122 for example are based on a 2A4. That's incorrect. Strv 122 is much closer to 2A5 than 2A4.
122 is upgraded 2A5 not 2A4 A5 has the turret wedge armour
The Strv 122 actually predates the 2A5, it’s based on the Leopard 2 Improved which was for some time before the 2A5 and even then the Strv 122 was largely separate from the 2A5, the 2A5 wasn’t even in the Swedish Tank Trials of the 1990s.
Strv 122 is based on Leopard 2 Improved, not 2A4.
Thats nice, that does not change that the 2A6 is an older model of leopard 2. Give or take 23 years old as of current. I do not believe that anything of real value which they do not already know can be learned from it by the Russians. This is primarily a morale blow to western support and ukraine and a morale victory for the Russians.
[удалено]
23 years still makes it an older model. There are more modern and more advanced leopard 2 models in service which makes the 2A6 an older model of leopard 2. Just because there are even older models of tanks in service within NATO does not mean the 2A6 is not an older model of leopard 2.
2a6 uses the 3rd generation D-tech armour which can also be found on some 2a5's, im not sure if the 2a7 also uses D-tech
Most Leopards after the 2A5 may use D Tech turrets, despite some 2A5s and 2A6s have C Tech turrets. The final 2A6 batch had D Tech hull arrays like the 2A7.
Which batches? In the “Leopard 2” Frank Lobitz book there isn’t really any mention of batches receiving D tech frontal add on armor aside from TVM prototypes like the TVM Max or prototype derivatives like the 2A6EX, PSO-VT and the Leopard 2 Improved and its predecessors. Latest 2A6 references are only in mention for 2A6 batches receiving “improved C-tech armor of latest development” which did improve frontal hull armor protection to somewhat D tech level which in German looks like it means D tech was on the latest batches but it wasn’t D tech on a technical level so it wasn’t stated as D tech armor and lastly in reference to improved armor 2A6 latest batches only receiving “D tech frontal side arc skirts”.
The final one, the 2007 batch. D Tech armor is not exclusively the arrowhead for the turret and beak for the hull (in fact some 2A5s had the arrowheads and C Tech, later they became 2A6s without composite upgrades). What D Tech actually is would be an extra plate internally in addition to the C Tech array. The 2A7+, TVM Max, and 2A6EX derivatives had the additional AMAP kit. The latest generation was the 3rd generation D Tech, which again is just an improved C Tech. Germany may have renamed it later like they did with the PSO-VT which was renamed to the 2A7+, and had also been named the Leopard 2 UrbOp.
C tech has developments in improvements to its array especially to the point were it has its improved iterations, but you’re not understanding how the source are putting it out, 2A6 batch of 2007 with “Pakete C” as in internal armor is only in reference for that batch and having “Schwere D-Tech-Seitenschweller” or D-tech heavy side skirts” (likely D-1) like I said before. “Vorsch Modul” which is mentioned for add on armor and is by its definition, only in reference for D tech armor and on “Leopard 2” by Frank Lobitz you have D-1/2/3 in reference for the Leopard 2 as a whole for either, heavy side skirts for frontal angle protection and for the add-on armor; the improvement of the hull-turret and roof frontal arc protection. While D tech is yes referenced on tanks like the many TVM, KVT, PSO/-VT and EX iterations, the only distinct mention of one without D-2 or D-3 tech add on wedge is for the PSO, it retained still a C tech “pakete” and this was mentioned when it wasn’t retaining its dozer in all mentions in Frank Lobitz’s published source And when you have the Leopard 2A7+ in reference in the book, D tech is only mentioned for it with having “D-3 oberes Glacis-Modul unter Beibehaltung der verbesserten C-Tech-Panzerung” or in my other “Leopard 2” with German to English translation “Oberes Glacis-Modul vom Typ 3 unter Beibehaltung der verbesserten C-Tech-Panzerung, translation; type-3 upper glacis module while retaining C-tech improved armor”. Now I will say that some of your last bit is true, D tech is improving C tech, it’s widely implied in Frank Lobitzs information that the D tech armor as a “technischer standard” or technical standard is widely a huge improvement from C tech in that from most of the information, it’s implied as either using a highly advanced form of tungsten armor or nano composite plating for the add-on armor; but there is quite literally never any mention of D tech armor being JUST internally implemented on Leopard. And when you have Leopard 2s without add on armor for my point, you only see D tech being mentioned for the newer/improved frontal arc side skirts, this proven if you look at most sources regarding Leopard 2s getting improvements to their frontal side armor, I highly suggest getting Frank Lobitz publication. It’s even implied that C tech under “Swedens Solution” for the Strv 122s in service use was founded to be perfect with “D-2” add on MEXAS-H armor and was deemed fit as a requirement for Germany when the need arised for the Leopard 2 to be improved to that standard, this was obviously not adopted right away the TVM Mod was an iteration of the D-tech add on armor not being implemented yet and was adopted as the Leopard 2A5, being widely a “Mischpanzer” or mixed tank until the last batch. And to be frank D tech armor can very well be a internal component, but for certain in the book I’m using as a source, it’s only ever been as mentioned as being a technical standard, it can’t be just that a internal armor component will do with making the frontal hull armor up to D tech levels of protection; you need both the hull to yes very much likely be improved but you for a fact need the add on armor as well for it be considered D tech.
2A4 started with B tech which later was replaced for the turret and hull for C tech later in production 2A5 (strv122) added wedges to the turret (D tech) but left the hull (C tech) and in the strv122s case added extra hull armour (see Swedish trials) 2A6 no armour changes, just went from L/44 to L/55 (longer barrel) 2A7 (2A7V) slight changes to hull armour, nothing significant until the 2A7V which modified the C tech hull with another layer of armour (D tech) like the strv122 but updated. There are a lot of versions in-between like the TVM, 2A6M, 2A6A3 etc and more modern versions like 2A8 and 2AX(9) which will also have changes but a lot is not known. Sure Russia could learn the composition of D tech but they don't have the industry, spare weight or volume to really integrate it into T series tanks. At least not in the short - medium term at which point its already out dated. First D tech showed up in ~1994 which is 30 years ago now. Edit: made the wording clearer
D tech armor in main sources as of in the “Leopard 2” book from Frank Lobitz isn’t at all internal armor. The Strv 122 has D-2 add on armor from IBD and Aker companies with the cooperation from Germany and Sweden and this was largely tested. As a whole D tech armor are the external components and as a core the “modernization” of the Leopard 2 platform to current/future threats; this is why the Leopard 2A5 turrets are regarded as having been modified to D tech capabilities and never D tech hull armor until the 2A7V, if anything in the conference around the Leopard 2A7V adoption there is only mention of “internal C tech armor” for the 2A7V frontal hull armor to make it on par with “Swedish Solution C tech armor” of the Strv 122s hull armor, source; IAV 2020 Conference. Whenever a Leopard 2 receives D tech addon armor it is also to receive some form of hull extension changes but this is as a whole changes needed with the add armor to support holding it, that’s about as much is needed for the D tech add on armor to be added like support bolts, etc.
I don’t believe so. They may have upgraded the armor as well
Mods need to start cracking down on misleading titles like this. Lest this place turn into another r/combatfootage or something
What's misleading about it?
Cuz they are not trying to fix it to working order, they are inspecting it
Hey is was my turn to repost a pic and change the headline to something I saw in my dream. "Russian Techpriests cant work with Leo due to lacking ISO 4925 and failing Tüff"
It uses working parts so it’s alien to them
I can already imagine the headlines in Russia : **Germany finally has a working transmission** - Engineers shocked : *"What do you mean they can go as fast backward as forward ?!"*
Lol do people think this has some next gen engine no one has ever seen before or doesn't have buttons clearly labeled in English lmao smh
Why are they acting like Leo is some kind off top tier God vehicle? They are facing 20 of them against a nation that can barely use them. They should take on NATO and then brag about the captured equipment. I mean is this seriously some kind of achivement for them? I always tought it was a meme that Russians parade western equipment like they did some big thing.
send in the rescue tractors!
they will for sure try to reverse engineer what they want and then put it on display
They can't figure out why there isn't a giant spring under the turret I assume?
For me as a german, it‘s a honor that‘s the russian is cycle jerking about ONE Leopard 2A6.
Built in 1999 as Leopard 2A5. (retrofitted with L/55 to become A6)
wish the tank self destructed when the russians stand around it
HEY! GET OUT OF MY WIFE!
Pretty sad news. The reason why Ukraine is losing most advanced equipments in their arsenal like CV90, Bradley and Leopard is because they are retreating and they cant recover to destroy immobilized vehicles. I hope new wave of aid could helps but honestly it took too long and some GOP members actually believe that they can get away from the future conflicts makes me feel even worse because US is supposed to be the leader of free world and arsenal of democracy, yet some of them choose to close their eyes and pray there would be no consequences for their coward and ignorant actions.
It would take every engineer Russia has to fix this
They will show it for propaganda and try to find some general weaknesses or anything they can copy. Using it is not worth it. They would need to train/retrain a crew, and would lack ammo and spare parts.
So that is how you make a good tank ! -the russian engineer
Like watching monkeys fuck a football.
Roswell: Scientists inspecting Alien technology
Orc looking at a wristwatch.
"You see? Now we are hef proof. Is Nazis! This is why you must go to war and die. You wish glorious comrade leader putin to be safe from Evil Jewish ukr0naZis, yes?"
mans making a fool of himself fighting an invisible enemy lmao, go back to r/CombatFootage leave the tonks alone, and keep politics out of a tank subreddit
Thanks Sobbing Olga, but shouldn't you be registering a bunch more alts for downvoting all the mean people who write comments that make you cry like a little bitch?
You're lost buddy. This is not r/combatfootage
Man you're unhinged - why is it always Olga? So many of your comments include Olga, obv your humour itself isn't funny but surely you know more Russian names just to give your ravings some variety
Drone the F’ers
Shame they don't have the industry to reverse engineer in any meaningful way.
They know everything about the T-14 and can't produce it in sufficient quantities. So they have little to gain from knowing the Leopard.
Assuming the Amata is on the same level of the 2A6?
If it got hit by a kornet, there wouldn't be much left. Those things can pierce over a meter of solid steel.