>german tanks in ww2
>Armor so thick the tank is more likely to destroy its own transmission
>German tanks now
>Armor so shit a soviet shitbox from 1970s can one shot you
Why?
>german tanks in ww2. >Armor so thick the tank is more likely to destroy its own transmission. >German tanks now
shitting out glass cannon is the new meta
Last MBT built like a glass cannon was in the 50s and 60s with the leopard 1 and AMX-30
The leopard 2 has significantly more armor than the leopard 1
The 90s swedish trials gave an estimate of 400-600mm of turret protection on the leopard 2, which equated to near immunity to any soviet shell made before the 1990s and at least 50% protection from DM33, a NATO round from 1987
cool, but consider the following:
>meta
have a nice day immediately
You will have a hard time making a tank that can shrug off modern munitions and also be able to move
Because germans got raped hard st the end of ww2, most of the germans born after the war were soviet mongol rapebabies. Turns out genes matter alot.
>Remains one of the most developed nations in the world
You're not helping your case, anon
one of the most developed nations in the world
Not for long. Those in power that want us to eat bugs are starting the deindustrialization of gernany.
The entire developed world went to delocalization anon that's not even a political issue, it just makes you more money and is far from being a German thing.
>most of the germans born after the war were soviet mongol rapebabies
Not really since Germany then conducted the biggest abortion campaign in human history.
>most of the germans born after the war
>russkis barely got to Berlin
>most civilians fled
>commies focused on cities
>resulting occupation is in the most sparsely populated third of the country
You can really tell how much impotent butthurt us necessary to keep that meme alive.
German stole your imaginary gf
Danish Leo1s drove blindly right into a Serb ambush in Tusla, including RPGs, artillery pieces and three T-55s. Killed anywhere between 3-150 Serbs, destroyed multiple artillery pieces and bunkers and an ammo dump and the T-55s fled. In return one vehicle was lightly damaged. Over the past 30 years more and more people have criticized the commanding officer who made a book about it for how much of a fricking clusterfrick it was, but Serbs got so onesidedly shredded that nobody really cares.
Tl;dr: Even under the most oppertune circumstances against western armour, slavshit still sucks.
https://thestrategybridge.org/the-bridge/2017/9/20/trigger-happy-autonomous-and-disobedient-nordbat-2-and-mission-command-in-bosnia
Fricking based how have I not seen this before in all my years on this shithole
The book he wrote isn't in english, RIP
Nordbat.
Instead of doing pushy shit like sitting on sidelines and maintaining a non existant peace.
They made the peace and then maintained it with force if necessary.
Because nordic peacekeepers are built diferent.
Non westerners think we're soft and all that bullshit, but they don't get that our standing soldiers are literally the most motivated and trigger happy individuals itching for being able to put in practice what they know.
In 1999 a few serbs though they could scare a bunch of green german soldiers and the Leopard 2 they had. Big mistake:
Exactly this, in the early 90s German sסldiers from barracks in Southern Germany illegally drove to the Balkans during the weekends and holidays to take part in the fighting to gain combat experience. Allegedly the biggest German unit there was commanded by a former East German officer
>sסldiers
Shalom
that sounds like bullshit
>tank coax dumping into civvie car
that looks unironically like a war crime?
the "civvie car" were a bunch of armed serbs trying to bully the civilians and german soldiers there. It didn't work. You can see their weapons being removed at the end of the video.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prizren_incident_(1999)
700 Germans KFOR with tanks vs a Zastava Skala and some serbs.
NATO is all about lies and idiocies. Pure homosexualry, German went from Waffen SS to KFOR morons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_Skala
oh the terror of the skala and those evil serbs and those poor albanians and those virtuous NATO homosexuals.
Enjoy your incoming nuclear bombardment by the way.
Notice how the humans in this thread type cooly, calmly, and in a collected manner. The Serb monkey, on the other hand, lashes out in anger, blindly slamming the keys on his keyboard in hopes of churning out enough buzzwords that he can get a drop of attention before the janitor bans him for spewing autistic drivel. Do you even own a gun you didn't steal, SerbBlack person?
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, serbBlack person.
serbfriend, you seem to have some puccian sperm stuck to your lower lip
Source is Laabs: Staatsfeinde in Uniform
The original article/doctoral thesis mentioned isn't published yet, I went looking for it
I rather question where they got the equipment, unless local Bundeswehr units gave them equipment. I could believe them traveling there to fight, but I don't see how they got equipped to fight. Early 1990s were a different kind of beast
Based.
I understand why they didn't just put an HE round in there, but I wish they would have.
Based and vikingpilled.
Also frick serbs.
>them digits
>that post
The prophecy!
to be honest, they were S*rbs
>Leo 2
>Armor so shit a soviet shitbox from 1970s can one shot you
According to who?
Shootbat was best bat.
>Armor so shit a soviet shitbox from 1970s can one shot you
may I see it?
I need a link before I can get properly demoralized
The logic was that the majority of shells they were going to face were going to rekt them anyway. So there was little to no point putting heavy armour on them. Them being faster was considered the better of the survivability options. I doubt even Abrams or Challenger 2's with DU armour could shrug off modern shells either.
>So there was little to no point putting heavy armour on them.
That was the Leo1,the Leo2 is as heavy as the M1 Abrams.
M1A1s did have an opportunity to get shot by their own silver bullets in 1991
They lost more tanks to friendly fire than enemy fire
They proved incredibly hard against their own rounds, often requiring several rounds to be successfully scuttled
While ammo has gotten better since the 90s, armor has too
SEP used a reformulated DU armor with additional protection and SEP3 added noticeably thicker hull and turret armor
Exact amount is classified but its assumed that its own rounds at 2km was the benchmark
Dennis just stop, War Thunder is not a simulation.
I think the meta is to be fast and get good optics to spot your enemy first, whoever shoots first gets the kill tbh
Ya. As everyone else has said and knows, its smart to focus on not getting shot over surviving getting shot.
integrated survivability onion mf do you read it?
>T-90SM
>48 tonnes
>Leopard 2a7
>66.5 tonnes
Slav tanks can get away with lighter weight by having one less crew member and fiat tier internal space (less volume = less armor needed) That said the T-90 still has garbage armor as proven in Ukraine.
>german tanks now
That one in your pic is over 40 years old by now.
The new production 2A7 or whatever they call it this week is probably equipped with better armor
so shit
Literally has an invulnerable turret against all possible Russian guns.
Position it hull down towards the front in some open field and it's indestructible.
>Armor so shit a soviet shitbox from 1970s can one shot you
Do the Russians even have any shitboxes from the 70s left?
I get you're baiting and this doesn't apply to Leo 2s, but for anyone who wants the origin of the story: By the end of WW2 HEAT warheads had effectively unlimited penetration against steel. Like almost 1000mm of pen was easy. So some tank designers though it'd make more sense to abandon armor and just focus on guns and mobility. Leo 1s, AMX30, S-Tank I guess, etc. Then after the 1960s things like ERA and composite armor were invented and the trend swung back to big heavily armored tanks, just not solid steel armor this time.
>Like almost 1000mm of pen was easy
not until the fricking 80's (unless your warhead was literally person sized (AGM-65))
AGM-65 warhead doesnt penetrate that much because it's liner is made out of aluminium, which maxes out at 2-3x Charge diameters while copper is more like 5-8 depending on the standoff
it does around 1800 RHA despite of it
simply because it's a frickhuge bomb sized warhead
>S-Tank I guess
S-tank was actually armored, just using extreme angles instead of thickness
benchmark was 105mm APDS and it worked as advertised with its own 105mm rounds bouncing off its steeply angled front
115mm APFSDS would have gone through, but merkava-style it would have had its fragments stopped by the engine itself and the ~40mm steel firewall, ensuring the crew survives even if the tank is irrecoverable
even in the face of HEAT, the M60A1, chieftain, and T-62 continues to have 300+mm of LOS armor within a frontal arc to stop enemy APDS or early APFSDS and could stop some HEAT
you mixed it up. L2A4 can oneshot T-72, L2A6 can oneshot T-90. It was specifically designed for that purpose
Can L2A7 oneshot the T-14?
Yes.
does the T-14 exist outside of parades?
if so, probably
>Can L2A7 oneshot the T-14?
That's like asking if you could kill Gandalf with a 9mm, we may never know because Gandalf isnt fricking real.
Can a L2A7 oneshot a unicorn?
Nobody has actual data on DM73/83, so we will have to wait. L/55A1 will not see action in Ukraine, unfortunately. But we may be able to extrapolate rough performance data of the new combination from L/55 - DM53/63.
Technically unknown. Performance of the L/55 agianst parade floats was never tested.
that's because germs were moronic and didn't understand the concept of sloped armor to both maximise defense and minimise steel and fuel consumption. ironically the only thing the ruskies did right.
so shit a soviet shitbox from 1970s can one shot you
If every babushka with RPG can pierce your armor anyway, why not make a tracked technical with big long range cannon instead?
The Real answer is the the Leo is designed as a see first shoot first tank, the idea is that it's armor protection is a secondary concerns because if it's following doctrine it will never get hit by other tanks, It will take a shot or two and then withdraw, ideally scoring kills in the process, then later re-engage from another position. America builds ultra heavy tanks that have speed, gun AND armor because we have infinite gasoline cheats on that Germany lacks.
They do not have a 100% secure oil supply and their logistical capability is just not the same as ours, so they design a slightly compromised vehicle that uses a lot less fuel while providing 95% the capability of the M1. And if things ever get really Messy the plan is for the M1s to go up front and the Leos to support them from concealment. Doctrine-speaking the Leo is a defensive tank that is not designed to advance into enemy positions itself, it hangs back hundreds of meters to kilometers behind the actual fighting and takes accurate shots at enemy vehicles from extreme range and then re-positions, acting like a Designated Marksman. It's really more of Tank Destroyer than a tank, since it was designed to fight a vastly numerically superior Soviet tank army. The was never any idea of the Leo taking an offensive footing into the Warsaw pact, its job was to hold long enough for the rest of Nato to Spin up and arrive. Heavy armor would make it less mobile and thus less able to fight a delaying retreat.
The UK doesn't have that either but they built the chally off of similar doctrine to the US, but previous tanks were not always heavy such as centurion.
I don't think the issue was even logistics, running lighter tanks at high speed using speed doctrine isn't really less fuel intensive than slower tanks at medium speed.
The issue was more that they did not at the time forsee heavy city fighting, but long range open plain style warfare where tanks were basically less fire support platforms and more for killing hoards of advancing Russian tanks against a defensive position, and outmanoeuvring others with both that speed and range.
Basically it has less to do with logistics and more to do with the environment they expected to fight in at the time.
Reminder that Leos had better armor than challies in every single test when they actually still competed for contracts.
The frick you evne on about. Leopard 1 was designed with speed and firepower as a focus because it was developed in that post-war timeframe when you had second-generation HEAT warheads render rolled steel armor futile and composite armor packages weren't a thing yet.
Leopard 2 is essentially the M1s estranged brother via the MBT-70 program, and every bit in the same weight and armor category.
>a soviet shitbox from 1970s can one shot you
I doubt it since they won't be able to see and target the Leo before the Leo sees and insta shoots them. Also they are sending in soviet shitboxes from the 50s now so...
most German tanks were competent but not outstanding - Tiger was wunderwaffe - costly and difficult to manufacture - many claim that if simpler, cheaper design would be produced in its place it would be a net benefit to the war effort...
Leo poo
I mean 2
Typo