Pardus

No, it's sad how you guys clearly are swallowing up Putin's propoganda and lies of "denazification" (esp. when he's the one actively hiring Nazis to fight for him. Read: WAGNER GROUP), and are justifying the invasion of a democratic state and the murder of innocents, and for what? So you can create a new puppet state? Thank god the western world is looking at Russia with disgust.
 
Even more sad, if you as a Russian suddenly become wiser and realize how wrong this war is, and then decide you want to demonstrate against it, you'll be arrested (and likely physically mistreated). That's the price you pay for living in a dictatorship where there is no freedom of press or speech.   
 
Only thing I can think of which beats this is when a few (thankfully very few) people living in the west, enjoying all the freedom that comes with that, out of sheer ignorance start supporting this war. That is truly mindblowing.

NATO imperialist expansion?? Sure, if you consider trying to spread democracy, freedom of press & speech, and protect people from criminal states imperialistic.
 
I think you're forgetting NATO is a defense pact, created precisely in response to piranha states like the one Putin is ruling with an iron fist. 
 
Hence little Putin's reckless actions are only incentivizing MORE states to join NATO, such as Sweden & Finland = The exact thing the little maniac claims he wants to avoid, and has already threatened nuclear war over.

These previous western endeavours were ill thought out and costly mistakes, even if they got rid of some truly despicable people in the process (and whose faith was way less than they deserved). This move by Russia, however, could easily turn out to be an even greater mistake than all of them put together.

There's a clear cut difference between bringing down dictatorships and terrorist states, versus invading a democratic country.
 
But I guess your forum emblem explains it all. The Cold War is over, the genocidal Soviet Union fell, trying to bring it back is the definition of insanity and backwards thinking. 
 

You're so goddamn far off the mark is astonishing. Tell me, when did Ukraine, a democratic country, attack another country with chemical weapons? When did they commit crimes against humanity? When did they become a country controlled by terrorist groups? Things Iraq, Syria & Afghanistan were seperately guilty off.
 
Exactly what is it you consider an acceptable form of government type? Do you wish for people to be systematically oppressed by their government? 
 
Dictatorships & terrorist states are a thing all nations should strive to erradicate, not leave to grow and potentially spill over into other countries via aggressive actions. 

I can't believe the people on this forum right now... sad sight.

RH guy, when asked, stated that A1 got new primer, that meet more strict requirements on electromagnetic radiation hazards.

Brand new video on the Danish Leopard 2A7's:
 

Brand new video on the Danish Leopard 2A7's:
 

Brand new video on the Danish Leopard 2A7's:
 

Brand new video I'm sure you will all enjoy:
 

Next part part of poor quality photos:

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

Part two:

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

"MV 2200 m/s" ?? 
 
(2:28 min)
 

"MV 2200 m/s" ?? 
 
(2:28 min)
 

In my opinion @SH_MM was never a KMW employee because he is a Deisenroth and Rheinmetall fan and he believes that KMW has no protection development knowledge. For me he is an old fool telling old stories with little actual background. Guess he is a pensioned BWB or BMVg clerk, more than 70 years old and playing the "protection knowledge" supervisor for this community. Sorry for this rigorous statement!

@SH_MM
 
 
No, I've made it abundantly clear from the beginning that 45mm is more likely in my opinion. I never once claimed it to be fact, and neither did I simply scuff & brush away anything you said as ridiculous the way you have done it to me.
 
 
On the contrary I have an argument, which is that based on the logic that if immunity to 20mm DM43 was demanded above 700mm height then 30mm of armour wouldn't be enough. That's the main argument from my side.
 
If you have a report that says otherwise, heck even that side armour was decreased then I don't understand why you haven't posted it by now.
 
 
"Just as you don't have a clue what you are talking about" - What a way to start a sentence, you for sure aren't emotionally invested in this conversation at all  
 
1) Never claimed that 12mm perforated steel + 30mm base armour is insufficient vs 14.5mm AP (a 12mm perforated steel rubber plate obviously doesn't provide as much protection as a monolithic steel plate though), what I've said is that there's a noticable portion of the Leopard 2's side hull which isn't covered by skirts and hence would likely be vulnerable to even 14.5mm AP if just 30mm thick.
2) Immunity to 20mm APCR was what I remembered as the requirement, you claim it is at 100m above 700mm height (you "informed" me no less, fancy stuff, we'll get back to that), which I completely accepted, but it's a pointless detail to make as it doesn't impact the argument I was making: i.e. 30mm of armour ultra high hardness, high hardness or regular RHA isn't going to be sufficient to guarantee immunity against 20mm DM43 based on the flat penetration figures I've seen for this round. It might just cut it vs 14.5mm if its UHHS, not sure.
3) I didn't "decide" that penetration performance of WW2 20mm APCR matters as reference, I mentioned it to illustrate that performance of modern 20mm APCR certainly wouldn't be worse than this.
4) Slat armour is supposed to break up HEAT warheads, so yes ofcourse it should also work against some ATGMs, it depends entirely on warhead type and hit location. Against a top attack only ATGM system side mounted slat armour obviously doesn't really matter.
 
 
Nope, once again never once said that. I said they were scrapped because failed to meet the requirements that the production version was built for.
 
If the requirement for the 2K & 2AV was for immunity to 20mm DM43 along the entire crew compartment and they fulfilled this requirement, then find me the statement were that is made and we're good. I've read through my own copy of Krapke & Hilmes book and found nothing suggesting this.
 
 
Incorrect, like I've said from the beginning I don't care what thickness the side hull is, and I do care about what is fact, but in case we don't know these facts (which is the case here) then I will concentrate  on what I think is most likely based on the limited information we have. And I can do that without calling anyone with a different opinion clueless or any other derogatory term in the process.
 
You on the other hand seem to only care about having people acknowledge everything you say as fact, and if they don't you will let personal insults rain upon them until they submit to what you deem factual. Which brings me to the obvious question of why you act like this? From where does this sense of authority & entitlement on the subject originate? What's the ethos here? Are you a former KMW employee? Do you work with the Leopard 2 on a daily basis etc? If so then I can understand that you feel you can speak with atleast some elevated authority on the subject (it still doesn't excuse your deplorable habbit of speaking down to people however), but otherwise I don't see how you can expect others to simply abandon their own opinion.
 
 
 
 

LOL, to far too many of us, this stuff is religion.  Points to you for remaining calm under fire.
 
In my view the discussion is hypothetical at best.  The truth lies in the factory drawings and in the formal requirements and the forma test reports.  Without those, all is speculation, interesting tho!

No, never implied that. Difference is I've been talking about the requirements for the production version the whole time, whilst you've been mixing it up with the initial ones. The Leopard 2K & 2AV couldn't meet updated requirements, hence the 2A was born.
 
 
I have Krapke's book thank you very much.
 
"neither failed to meet specifications" & "it was decided to raise the weight limit and incorporate more advanced multi-layered special armor into the tank to meet new requirements for higher levels of protection"
 
I hope you see the conflict 
 
But hey man, like I said I'm not here to discuss religion or politics. I don't care wether the sides are 30mm or 45mm, I've expressed my opinion (45mm) and provided an argument for it, and you yours.  It's a pity some of you couldn't hold a good tone however, must say my respect for you has faded because of it. 
 
A wise man once said:
"Avoid having your ego so close to your position that when your position falls, your ego goes with it."
 
 

That's not a plan drawing showing actual armour thickness Laviduce, hence very bad idea to make guesses based on that. The 10mm sponson armour being a prime example as that would be insane to have as the only cover for your fuel tanks, as that would allow regular smallarms fire to cripple your tank. So I'm sorry but there's no way those guesstimates are accurate.
 
To prove it you can observe pictures of the actual tanks sponsons opened up:

As you can see the plating at the back is more like 20mm thick (with another angled plate in behind where the tools are mounted) rather than a mere 10mm which would be even less than the initial Lochbleche skirts.
 
The section infront of the engine bay covering the NBC system & fuel tanks looks like a continuation of the Leopard 2K sponson protection scheme, with a 12mm + 30mm spaced array, as seen on the NBC hatch:

 
 
Hence it's likely to look like this:

 
The hull side continues up behind the sponsons in the crew area, and features another spaced array used for NERA inserts on later variants, and they also looks quite thick (again not present on the Hilmes cutaway, because it isn't a drawing meant to show armour thickness or layout):

 

The new Danish Leopard 2A7DK's arriving at Oksbøl (Note the addition of further protection to the front hull, upper & lower.):




 
These tanks came fully equipped with:
-  New 3rd Generation ATTICA FLIR imagers for commander & gunner
-  New added front, side & bottom hull armour
-  New 120mm L55A1 gun
-  New APU
-  New digital turret traverse control unit 
-  New displays for gunner & commander 
-  Updated drive train
-  Updated suspension
-  Spectus driver's cameras, front & rear. 
 
 

The new Danish Leopard 2A7DK's arriving at Oksbøl (Note the addition of further protection to the front hull, upper & lower.):




 
These tanks came fully equipped with:
-  New 3rd Generation ATTICA FLIR imagers for commander & gunner
-  New added front, side & bottom hull armour
-  New 120mm L55A1 gun
-  New APU
-  New digital turret traverse control unit 
-  New displays for gunner & commander 
-  Updated drive train
-  Updated suspension
-  Spectus driver's cameras, front & rear.