Leo1A5DK with ERA

Picrel has factory-applied package of Nizh and Kontakt-1

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    More like Leopard1A5DKU zr 2024

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      TL Note: Zr. means Obr.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    About damn time, when are they gonna get this shit stuck onto the Abrams (especially the sides)? Maybe these leopards will finally see some more intense combat now.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Kek, model shops will start separately selling ERA bricks by the pound after this war so everyone can upgrade their models to "SMO" spec

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >CV 90 in the garbage bin, where it belongs
        based

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      t. war tourist who never saw an ARAT kit

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        no moron, I am talking about Kontact 1 or whatever the frick. I wish we sent Abrams Reactive Armor Kit

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >t. moron

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        speak for yourself
        >t. no reading comprehension

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We eatin good, scale modeler bros.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The game is changed! This is win! Slavia Ukrainia!

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Kinda sex actually. Wish we got a more complete view of it.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    pathetic

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      ?si=pNgSz52GHkq-AezX&t=53

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >trying to protect against a weapon that is never used in this war
    clown war

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >a weapon that is never used in this war
      the PG-7 probably accounts for most tank kills nowadays considering that's what most AT FPVs carry

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      to protect against a weapon that is never used in this war
      How do you mean? Both sides use plenty of lighter HEAT rounds without tandem warheads. You got Bradley's surviving hits thanks to their bricks. And as thin skinned as Leo 1's are, I'd be shocked if it wasn't better protected than the Bradley.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        these look like NERA not ERA

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          NERA protects against HEAT. Chobham is NERA.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Literally the most ubiquitous damage type. A tank is very much likelier to be hit by HEAT, be it from a drone, handheld rpg or an atgm, than from a KE projectile by other tank.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >kontakt-1 on a leopard 1
    I thought you weren't supposed to put these on unarmored vehicles?! Won't it just blow through the sheet metal hull?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There was extra backing added during ERA installation specifically to address this potential problem

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Leo 1 has enough armor to withstand the explosion, generally you need 20-30mm at least to withstand the explosive force of a K-1 tile. The Leopard 1 has ~80mm on the hull

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the Leopard 1A5 is far more armored than it needs to be to support ERA you dumb frick

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >unarmored
      Jannies should permaban idiots the moment they say something so moronic

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      people really be earing that the leo 1 has thin armor and image soda-can thickness

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It wasn't even that thin in absolute terms, it was just thin by the standards of the time, the thing has about as much armor as a mid-to-late WWII medium tank, it's just that that much armor doesn't hold up to modern weapons

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >, it was just thin by the standards of the time, the thing has about as much armor as a mid-to-late WWII medium tank, it's just that that much armor doesn't hold up to modern weapons
          The thing is that contemporary tanks with armor superior to late WW2 heavy tanks weren't holding up that well to modern weapons either. Tanks like the T-54 and the M-60 had max front armor in excess of 200mm...in an environment where HEAT warheads were frequently gaining 300mm+ penetration on RHA. It arguably wasn't worth it to try to up armor against anti-tank threats at the time with solid steel armor.

          It only looks questionable in hindsight when you start seeing composite armor and ERA that makes surviving direct hits against anti-tank weapons a bit more viable. And where a thin-skinned leo-1 is a bit of a disadvantage when you brick it up compared to an M-60 or T-54 (but not so much it doesn't help some).

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It wasn't even that thin in absolute terms, it was just thin by the standards of the time, the thing has about as much armor as a mid-to-late WWII medium tank, it's just that that much armor doesn't hold up to modern weapons

            people really be earing that the leo 1 has thin armor and image soda-can thickness

            I give to you, the Leopard 1A6 (Or Leopard 1A6A1, cant remember), a side-project for upgrading the Leopard 1 with frontal armor to stop 125mm APFSDS and gayot/PG7.
            Yes it worked, no it never left the prototype stage sadly

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/EUbgSHE.jpeg

            [...]
            [...]
            I give to you, the Leopard 1A6 (Or Leopard 1A6A1, cant remember), a side-project for upgrading the Leopard 1 with frontal armor to stop 125mm APFSDS and gayot/PG7.
            Yes it worked, no it never left the prototype stage sadly

            I'm not questioning the decision-making at the time, I understand why they did it, I'm just saying that the common perception of the Leo's armor being thin comes from comparisons to its contemporaries and not from the physical thickness of the armor, and that it is still quite substantial, unlike that of a BMP or a BTR.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The armor on the Leopard 1 isn't nearly as thin as people think.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It stems from reading that the whole vehicle was proof against 20mm AP allround as a minimum, for some reason that has morphed into "protected only against 20mm AP"

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Wouldn't that be too drafty in the field?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        what if someone hits it from the half where you can see all the crew, wouldnt they die

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Front towards enemy.

          If it is friendly fire, the pain will hurt so much that you want it to be over quick anyway.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      kek, based.

      Leopard 1 turret armor is like 15 mm.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        moron
        See

        https://i.imgur.com/gvryQMk.jpeg

        The armor on the Leopard 1 isn't nearly as thin as people think.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        don't check top turret armor thickness of T-series tanks

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    engine deck thickness of T-72 is only 5mm larger than of Leopard 1 and back of the turret is only 10mm larger.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So it's true they already got 90 of them?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Perhaps

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The danish leo1s in particular are dangerous. They have already tasted slavic blood.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Any additional information and source you can give?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Got the pic off the Btvt blog
      https://t.me/btvt2019/12319

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I forgot Leo1s were in the country.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Allegedly the 44th mechanized has them, but we haven’t seen any in the Kharkiv combat that’s gone on this past week, or the brigades shitty MTLB IFVs. It’s a pretty light brigade equipment wise.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I recall hearing somewhere that they are in use as indirect-fire SPGs. Take that with a big grain of salt though

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          nah, the only loss of Leo 1 was as it engaged in direct fire so there's no reason to assume other are not used the same way. For example only one Challenger was lost and we had no footage of more despite them fighting on frontlines for last 10 months

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    man why are all russians so fricking dumb

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >slap ERA on an existing vehicle with weight constraints with insufficient armor
      Unironically the one good use of ERA. The mass efficiency of ERA is pretty decent and, for an expedient upgrade for an existing vehicle, you don't have the luxury, space or mass budget to design in a proper composite layout etc.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    EPF warheads will dick on ERA and NERA, so what's the point.
    bring back cardboard tanks.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *