You must log in or register to comment.
Can we stop the bullshit narratives? Yes, those are light vehicles compared to modern MBTs. No, them being at risk when immobilized by a mine and then coming under artillery fire is not an issue of Leopard-1s. Neither is getting hit by ATGMs.
That’s the reality of every tank and vehicle in a war zone. And not one some smart Ukrainians will fix with their ingenious engineering skills. That’s just another bullshit fairy tale of how Ukrainians can improve crap the West delivered them. And I don’t understand their need to push such narratives constantly.
Well, you can, but first you should learn more about these tanks: https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/11/19/ukraines-leopard-1-tanks-roll-toward-the-front-line-but-without-extra-armor/
If you care to read a purely Ukrainian weapon expert, David Axe, in the purely Ukrainian Forbes magazine :-)
Thanks, I probably know more about these tanks than you, if second hand media reports are your source.
Doesn’t change the facts. Leopard-1s cannot be considered MBTs by modern standards. They are mobile guns at best but given their fire control actually really good at that job.
But on the other hand no modern MBT is actually immune to being immobilized by a mine and then destroyed by artillery fire either.
Yet that’s exactly that this article is about: How Ukrainians “added reactive armor to Leopard-1s really in need of extra armor just in time…”… to then describe exactly the “immobilized and shot by artillery”-scenario that is now allegedly solved by reactive armor. Spoiler: No, this solves nothing, that’s coping. No amount of extra armor will make Leopard-1 into modern battle tanks. Use them in a supportive role as a precise gun on range (and as it’s rifled it is actually more capable in regards to long range precision than modern smooth-bore cannons). Believing otherwise will just get you killed.
