http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v414/h18w777/62277_400_320.jpg
So finally the big cat is going to prove herself in battle.
Leopard 2A6M CAN revealed
- Thread starter DavidDCM
- Start date
What a pity that the cage armour spoils the lines of the Leopard. It reminds me of the anti torpedo nets that spoiled the lines of WW1 battleships and cruisers. Oh well, I guess if I was a crew member I would definitely prefer the extra protection to good looks.
It will be interesting to see how they fare in combat, albeit that they will not be facing other tanks.
Cheers
In the end they could have tried to paint the cage in green or paint the tank in desert camo.
This mixture is defenitely ugly!
BTW, I see three antennas. What is the task of the third antenna? Battlefield Management System? Do the Canucks even use SEM80/90 radios?
Sharing dirty pics during boring missions?
This mixture is defenitely ugly!
BTW, I see three antennas. What is the task of the third antenna? Battlefield Management System? Do the Canucks even use SEM80/90 radios?
Sharing dirty pics during boring missions?
Surely they do not plan on placing them into combat without painting. Anyways it sure looks like there is a concern with flank and rear hits from handheld shaped charged Anti tank rounds based on the setup/configuration.In the end they could have tried to paint the cage in green or paint the tank in desert camo.
This mixture is defenitely ugly!
BTW, I see three antennas. What is the task of the third antenna? Battlefield Management System? Do the Canucks even use SEM80/90 radios?
Sharing dirty pics during boring missions?
Last edited:
I never thought that we would see them without cages.
In the end a Leopard IIA6M has an evolved protection against mines and IEDs but the side and rear armor is as vulnerable as with every other Leo II version.
My thought was just that when you paint such a nice poster for a presentation one would also paint the cage (Or tank).
Bad marketing.
I cannot see if they fitted the heavy side skirts or the older, lighter ones.
I also wonder why I see no gunshield for the loaders GPMG.
But on the other hand I don't even see a loaders MG, so maybe they fit it later.
Sad to say that we have so few Canucks here, maybe we could get additional infos.
I got to hear some infos about how they operate their tanks from Munster (Were they trained on the new Leos) but nothin about equipment changes compared to the original Leo IIA6M.
In the end a Leopard IIA6M has an evolved protection against mines and IEDs but the side and rear armor is as vulnerable as with every other Leo II version.
My thought was just that when you paint such a nice poster for a presentation one would also paint the cage (Or tank).
Bad marketing.
I cannot see if they fitted the heavy side skirts or the older, lighter ones.
I also wonder why I see no gunshield for the loaders GPMG.
But on the other hand I don't even see a loaders MG, so maybe they fit it later.
Sad to say that we have so few Canucks here, maybe we could get additional infos.
I got to hear some infos about how they operate their tanks from Munster (Were they trained on the new Leos) but nothin about equipment changes compared to the original Leo IIA6M.
to think the LEO 1 were going to replaced by the Stricker MGS and now this being replaced by LEO 2
Jup, the Canadians have made big steps with their armed forces since government changed.
I would have been sorry to see their tank forces silently fade away.
The comrades I know and who had the opportunity to go to Shilo had nothing but praise for them.
I would have been sorry to see their tank forces silently fade away.
The comrades I know and who had the opportunity to go to Shilo had nothing but praise for them.
Some other pics.
When one considers that the OMF in A-stan had nothing which could penetrate a normal Leo IIA6M frontally the Canadians are really on the safe side. They added some additional frontal hull armor.
Do they think the OMF get a hold of some modern ATGMs?
http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/1545/leopard2a6mcancanadianamv2.jpg
http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/5387/leopard2a6mcancanadianaqb2.jpg
I really wonder if we get them back like they are now after 2 years (If we ever get them back...).
When one considers that the OMF in A-stan had nothing which could penetrate a normal Leo IIA6M frontally the Canadians are really on the safe side. They added some additional frontal hull armor.
Do they think the OMF get a hold of some modern ATGMs?
http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/1545/leopard2a6mcancanadianamv2.jpg
http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/5387/leopard2a6mcancanadianaqb2.jpg
I really wonder if we get them back like they are now after 2 years (If we ever get them back...).
Nice pictures
Do you know actually where they added the additional armor, was this done prior to Canada recieving them. Maybe they are concerned that some of the more potent Anti tank munitions can be more easily available in that regoin.
The additional hull armor was added after the canadians made clear what they wanted on the A6Ms they leased.
So they got their additional hull armor, cages, new radio system (looks like they want to send a nice amount of additional data with those tanks) and air condition.
I have no idea what they changed inside the tank (except the writings) but I would wonder if they changed anything else than the radios (maybe an additional battlefield management system).
I do not even know if Canada purchased the 120mm HEs. Should be best choice for A-stan.
I would also think that they changed the MGs from MG3s to C6s but on the pictures one doesn't even sees the loaders MG.
Maybe additional situational awareness provided by the TCs TI is rated higher than the loaders MG which naturally decreases visibility for the TCs optics.
So they got their additional hull armor, cages, new radio system (looks like they want to send a nice amount of additional data with those tanks) and air condition.
I have no idea what they changed inside the tank (except the writings) but I would wonder if they changed anything else than the radios (maybe an additional battlefield management system).
I do not even know if Canada purchased the 120mm HEs. Should be best choice for A-stan.
I would also think that they changed the MGs from MG3s to C6s but on the pictures one doesn't even sees the loaders MG.
Maybe additional situational awareness provided by the TCs TI is rated higher than the loaders MG which naturally decreases visibility for the TCs optics.
And there are the Canucks training on the ranges in Munster (Germany).
http://www.army.dnd.ca/lf/English/Video/07-526HiRes.wmv
Good luck with the cat boys. May it bring you save home from A-stan when it is deployed.
http://www.army.dnd.ca/lf/English/Video/07-526HiRes.wmv
Good luck with the cat boys. May it bring you save home from A-stan when it is deployed.
My brother just got back from the Stan (one of many names for the place). One of the main problems for the tankers over there was the heat. Using the Leo1 was a heath hazard during the day because of the internal heat build-up that would happen. Some of the internal temperatures could get as hot as 50+.
This was a problem for the military as it would limit the length of time the Leo1 could be used before they had to shut them down and give the tankers a break, and thus taking away the usefulness of it during combat missions.
With these new Leo's, A/C was an option that was going to be exercised (from the last I heard). The larger gun will give the Talib. a run for their money...actually it won't even run their money, they stand no chance. For the most part they use HE rounds (I think), as there is no other tanks that pose a threat and thus there is no need for armoured piercing rounds.
This was a problem for the military as it would limit the length of time the Leo1 could be used before they had to shut them down and give the tankers a break, and thus taking away the usefulness of it during combat missions.
With these new Leo's, A/C was an option that was going to be exercised (from the last I heard). The larger gun will give the Talib. a run for their money...actually it won't even run their money, they stand no chance. For the most part they use HE rounds (I think), as there is no other tanks that pose a threat and thus there is no need for armoured piercing rounds.
Do any of our correspondents, the German ones in particular, know how many Leo 2's could conceivably still be sold to match the Government's stated draw-down of German Tracked Armoured Forces?
I'm just wondering IF we haven't reached the end of the line in such second-hand sales?
Regards,
BUG
I'm just wondering IF we haven't reached the end of the line in such second-hand sales?
Regards,
BUG
@Buglerbilly
If I recall right round about 900 Leo II (all A4) remain in stock in Germany. I am not sure about how many of them are for sale and how many are for our own reserve.
If nobody has better numbers I do some digging by myself.
And there are also surplus Leopard IIA4 available from the Netherlands, Switzerland and Sweden (In the case of the Netherlands they even sold some of their used A6s).
So the end is not reached.
@Manfred
The elevation is from -9° to +20°.
The stats for the Rheinmetall 120mm HE are:
- Muzzle velocity: ca. 950m/s for L/44 and 1.100m/s for L/55 (Leo IIA6M has L/55)
- Effective range fo fragmentation: over 80m
- Maximum range: 5.000m (But the Leo II FCS is blocked at ranges over 4.000m)
- 3kg of explosives and 9kg of fragments.
It can be time fuzed by the FCS of the Leo and so be used against targets in the open, behind cover or against lighter vehicles.
Very nice and more capable than the Swedish 120mm HE which is in fact a 120mm mortar warhead on a new propellant charge.
When I recall how hot it became in the tank from 20°C and sunshine onwards I don't want to sit in a tank without ac in A-stan summer.
So there is the fifths Leo II user which uses a better version of the tank than our own ones...
If I recall right round about 900 Leo II (all A4) remain in stock in Germany. I am not sure about how many of them are for sale and how many are for our own reserve.
If nobody has better numbers I do some digging by myself.
And there are also surplus Leopard IIA4 available from the Netherlands, Switzerland and Sweden (In the case of the Netherlands they even sold some of their used A6s).
So the end is not reached.
@Manfred
The elevation is from -9° to +20°.
The stats for the Rheinmetall 120mm HE are:
- Muzzle velocity: ca. 950m/s for L/44 and 1.100m/s for L/55 (Leo IIA6M has L/55)
- Effective range fo fragmentation: over 80m
- Maximum range: 5.000m (But the Leo II FCS is blocked at ranges over 4.000m)
- 3kg of explosives and 9kg of fragments.
It can be time fuzed by the FCS of the Leo and so be used against targets in the open, behind cover or against lighter vehicles.
Very nice and more capable than the Swedish 120mm HE which is in fact a 120mm mortar warhead on a new propellant charge.
When I recall how hot it became in the tank from 20°C and sunshine onwards I don't want to sit in a tank without ac in A-stan summer.
So there is the fifths Leo II user which uses a better version of the tank than our own ones...
kizilsungur
New Member
Leopard 2 A5 and A6s are the best tanks ever!
Second, digging up the numbers again...
- Leopard 2, new builds for Germany - ~2,130
- Leopard 2A0 - 380 (batch 1)
- Leopard 2A1 - 750 (batch 2-3)
- Leopard 2A3 - 300 (batch 4)
- Leopard 2A4 - 695 (batch 5-8)
- Leopard 2 exported from German stocks - ~1,300
- Greece 183
- Poland 128
- Singapore 132 (with second batch)
- Finland 124
- Turkey 298
- Sweden 160
- Spain 108
- Chile 123
- Denmark 51
- Leopard 2 leased out - 20 (Canada)
- Leopard 2, active in BW (2007) - ~460
Non-active Leopard 2 remaining in German stocks therefore - ~350 (minus attrition)
However, in reality, it's even lower. The A5 conversion used the chassis of batches 6-8 (A4) and converted turrets of batches 1-3. The same with the Bundeswehr 2A6 (and 2A6M). The leftover chassis' and turrets were recombined, but these units had a comparably high attrition rate due to their age (especially due to their batch 1-3 chassis). These recombinations were considered A4 standard due to their batch 6-8 turret.
I'd say there are, figuring in attrition/scrapping as well - somewhat realistically - maybe 200 remaining Leopard 2 in stocks. An additional 50 will be pulled from active service over the next few years.
edit: Swiss got new builds in 1987, removed.
Last edited:
Thanks for that guys, interesting...........
Regards,
BUG
Regards,
BUG
Ah, damn I am way away from the real numbers...
I really wonder what is thought to be a critical number of stocked Leos for us.
I mean in the end we would also have sold surplus Leos to the Canadians (The dutch offer was better) so the ability to sell more of our stocked Leos is defenitely there.
I really wonder what is thought to be a critical number of stocked Leos for us.
I mean in the end we would also have sold surplus Leos to the Canadians (The dutch offer was better) so the ability to sell more of our stocked Leos is defenitely there.