The Leopard 2 Thread

[Glattrohr]

This thread sure was an exhaustive read. 

 

It raised me few questions / conclusions:

 

Regarding the ex- Bundeswehr surplus 2 A4 around the world  - at least three different hull / turret armor combinations can be around:

 

• B/B - Any given vehicle from the first five batches
• B/C - Vehicles up to the fourth batch, which have been turret donors for vehicles from batches six to eight (C [or even D?] tech hulls which were used as basis for 2 A5's ) in the 90's, and have received a later C-tech turret in exchange
• C/C - late fifth batch vehicles

Does this make sense? I am assuming that the B/B vehicles were not upgraded with C-series armour, when bringing them up to 2 A4 specification - do we have any conclusive evidence that would suggest pre-sixth batch 2 A4's receiving armour upgrades?

 

For attention and eye candy, I drop you a single Finnish LEO 2A4 URDAN from Armoured Engineer Co in ARROW 19 FTX, from my personal album.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SH_MM]

On 12/11/2020 at 6:55 PM, Glattrohr said:

Regarding the ex- Bundeswehr surplus 2 A4 around the world  - at least three different hull / turret armor combinations can be around:

 

• B/B - Any given vehicle from the first five batches
• B/C - Vehicles up to the fourth batch, which have been turret donors for vehicles from batches six to eight (C [or even D?] tech hulls which were used as basis for 2 A5's ) in the 90's, and have received a later C-tech turret in exchange
• C/C - late fifth batch vehicles

 

Not enirely. Pretty much all tanks of the last combination (with Type C armor in hull and turret) were upgraded to the Leopard 2A5/2A6 standard. There is at least one still in existence (IIRC kept at the BAAINBw as a reference). Most of the Swiss Panzer 87 were also made using this armor standard, though these are obviously not ex-German.

 

Also there remains the question about the internal armor arrays of the 8th batch tanks, which at least also featured Type D skirt armor. Like the previous ones, they were later converted into Leopard 2A5/2A6 tanks.

 

As far as I can tell, no old Leopard 2 tank with Type B armor was retrofitted with Type C during the upgrade to the Leopard 2A4 standard.

[Glattrohr]

1 minute ago, SH_MM said:

 

Not enirely. Pretty much all tanks of the last combination (with Type C armor in hull and turret) were upgraded to the Leopard 2A5/2A6 standard. There is at least one still in existence (IIRC kept at the BAAINBw as a reference). Most of the Swiss Panzer 87 were also made using this armor standard, though these are obviously not ex-German.

 

Also there remains the question about the internal armor arrays of the 8th batch tanks, which at least also featured Type D skirt armor. Like the previous ones, they were later converted into Leopard 2A5/2A6 tanks.

 

As far as I can tell, no old Leopard 2 tank with Type B armor was retrofitted with Type C during the upgrade to the Leopard 2A4 standard.

Yeah,

 

Thinking in retrospect, that makes sense. Based on my own observations the B/B and B/C is to be found on photo references - if one takes to freedom of assuming every turret without loading hatch weld line is indeed a late fifth batch with Type C armor.

[MoritzPTK]

 

[SH_MM]

Austria is looking to modernize its Leopard 2 tanks. There isn't much budget, so it is likely a smaller modification only:

___

 

Ever thought Rheinmetall's Leopard 2 Revolution looks like it was made out of plastic? Well, it kind of is...

https://www.hintsteiner-group.com/wehrtechnik#step-1

 

Boxes for the armor modules, cover for the SEOSS sight and parts of the RWS are made out of carbon-fibre. The same applies to parts of the KF31 and KF41 Lynx.

 

 

[MoritzPTK]

37 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

Boxes for the armor modules, cover for the SEOSS sight and parts of the RWS are made out of carbon-fibre. The same applies to parts of the KF31 and KF41 Lynx.

 

They were advertising on ESuT pretty heavily for some reason.

 

And as for the Austrian plans for Leopard 2 - The only cheap useful upgrades would be modernizing the optics with something like the Hensoldt products together with a modern armor package. Firepower upgrades would also be nice to see, but looking at the price of a new gun + the corresponding ammunition orders would probably be a dealbreaker for the Austrians.

 

[Wiedzmin]

 

what was idea(i understand that it need ribs for strength) behind Leopard 2 belly bended inward(and weld shut concave areas with additional plates) and not outward like on T-series and use those bended areas as place for torsion bars ?

 

 

 

[SH_MM]

In the past days, there have been a lot of discussions and news regarding the integration of the Trophy active protection system into the Leopard 2 tank. The short version:

• The purchase and integration of Trophy has been approved by the German parliament (as the contract has a volume above €25 million, approval was required). The price of the systems (including spares, training equipment, dummy rounds, etc.) is supposedly €40 million, total cost (including integration into the tanks) is more than €100 million. Trophy is purchased for 18 tanks (one testbed and 17 tanks).
• Rumors say that the system weighs more than 3,5 tonnes, which seems quite plausible given the weight increase of the M1A2 SEP v2 Abrams when fitted with Trophy.
• Trophy has passed a number of German tests including performance in cold environments, resistance to shock and vibrations, and safety tests. Firing trials are still to be made.
• Also it has been stated, that Germany has no access to the source code and algorithms used by Trophy, which is deemed as bad. German companies are required to disclose the source code of their systems (not only APS, but in general) and to meet certain ISO norms (with certification). Trophy is purchased as a "black box".
• Trophy will not be integrated into the Leopard 2A7(V) tank, but instead into the Leopard 2A7A1 tank. These are based on the Leopard 2A6A3 turret with newly-made hulls, as the old Leopard 2A6 hulls are unfit for Trophy (e.g. they lack an APU and thus have very limited electrical energy, but it seems that there might be other modifications required). There seem to be two options here: either the Leopard 2A6A3 was chosen in order to free the Leopard 2A7V tanks for the VJTF 2023 or Trophy requires so many/deep changes, that the Leopard 2A7V hull would not be suited for Trophy (which would mean no future purchases of Trophy for Germany). One side effect is that Germany will have 17 more Leopard 2A7 tanks.
• No Leopard 2 tank with Trophy will be ready for the VJTF 2023, i.e. the only reason why Trophy was purchased at all. Delays in the program will result in a delivery between 2024 and 2025. Instead of 17 Leopard 2 tanks with Trophy, Germany will send 30 Leopard 2A7V tanks for its participation to the VJTF 2023.
• There are apparently voices in Germany arguing (following the issues with Trophy) that the government should declare (active) protection systems a "national key technology", which would lead to more money being invested into homegrown systems and national solutions being prefered to foreign offers.

https://soldat-und-technik.de/2021/01/mobilitaet/25410/entscheidung-fuer-trophy-bleiben-abstandsaktive-schutzsysteme-nationale-schluesseltechnologie/

https://soldat-und-technik.de/2021/01/mobilitaet/25620/abstandsaktives-schutzsystem-trophy-fuer-leopard-2-erst-ab-2024/

 

 

It seems that Trophy really isn't suited for fast integration into further platforms.

[N-L-M]

I also strongly suspect Trophy as a system was tailored to the Merk, and integration anywhere else is an afterthought inherently limited by (likely sensible, in the context) design choices made at the time.

But it is reliable and in active service, which is more than can be said for any other hardkill APS (with the exception of Zaslon on Turkish M60Ts, I suppose).

 

Delays in such programs are common, and the long timelines for fielding any APS seem to suggest it is not as easy a technical problem to solve as one might think.

 

[Gun Ready]

The Netherlands Army decided just these days to perform a CV9035NL upgrade including IRON FIST APS from Elbit and Rafael SPIKE-LR ATGM. The number of vehicles is much higher with 122 each, so it seem that this is a more mature decision instead of 17 Leopards!

Https//www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/netherlands-awards-contract-to-upgrade-cv9035nl-fleet

 

 

 

 

 

[N-L-M]

The CV90 upgrade is already in the CV90 thread. I would point out that as of now, Iron fist has not been fielded on any vehicle, only selected for service on a few. This inherently means a lower level of system maturity, as it hasn't had the decade Trophy has to shake out any bugs.

[T-90S]

I have a question. What is the difference between Leopard 2A6 and 2A6A3 and 2A6M? And is there Leo 2A6A1 and 2A6A2?

[123]

1

[Molota_477]

 

Does anyone know which document or patent this picture comes from?

[TWMSR]

Someone do. It is DE102013101423.
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/84/45/e5/ab7a967a9f8dd9/DE102013101423B4.pdf

 

 

[Zadlo]

On 1/30/2021 at 12:37 PM, N-L-M said:

I also strongly suspect Trophy as a system was tailored to the Merk, and integration anywhere else is an afterthought inherently limited by (likely sensible, in the context) design choices made at the time.

 

That's the same problem as with Iron Vision.

[N-L-M]

Well, seeing as Iron Vision doesn't appear to have been fielded yet, I think that's a bit premature to say.

[Serge]

Just for consistency

https://defence-blog.com/news/army/germany-to-add-israeli-active-protection-system-to-is-leopard-2-tanks.html

 

[Gun Ready]

This photo misses the Trophy launchers at left and right.

[2805662]

14 hours ago, Gun Ready said:

This photo misses the Trophy launchers at left and right.

I don’t think that’s accidental. 

[Laser Shark]

KMW has established a new website to promote the Leopard 2A7NO for Norway.

[Rico]

No problem with promoted information but am I the only one not liking that trashy looking red/white webside? Doesn't look very professional to me.

[David Moyes]

What is this?


 

[Mork]

Kinda looks like the ADGUS system for the Puma just smaller.

https://esut.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Puma-AGDUS-2-e1580801903653.jpg

what ever that's supposed to mean, maybe coaxialreplacement.

[Laser Shark]

On 3/31/2021 at 3:39 PM, Laser Shark said:

KMW has established a new website to promote the Leopard 2A7NO for Norway.

 

I have to correct myself here. As it turns out this website was actually created by “Kavaleriklubben”, an association of former and currently serving Norwegian cavalry personnel, and it’s only now that the website is being transferred over to KMW. I guess we can expect the quality of website to improve in the future referring back to @Rico’s complaints.

 

Also, as predicted, there are now projects with the goal of extending the life of both the Leo 1 based ARVs and AEVs (Project 1043), as well as acquiring additional support vehicles on Leo 2 hull (SUP LTP M-15). Interestingly, the latter project also mentions an assault breacher vehicle ("gjennombrytingspanservogn" in the Norwegian version of this document). The Norwegian Army had plans of acquiring such vehicles back in the 90s, initially taking the form of a turretless Leo 1 with a new  superstructure, a mine plough and a MICLIC launcher, but unfortunately it never got past the drawing board. If a MICLIC launcher can be fitted to the Wisent 2 Mine Clearance variant, it would probably satisfy the requirements, I think.