An Analysis of Western Tanks in Ukraine

[@warographics643]

Petition to rename the Leopard the Leonard to correct my embarrassing mistake? Sign here: rb.gy/uvqkbi

[@alexgrossman7358]

😊

[@ericwood3709]

Just.. how? How do you make that mistake? Also, is there a McCoy variant? 😅

[@jameshartman6177]

Leonard strikes fear into the hearts of his enemies.

[@bricekoirokpi9954]

​@@jameshartman6177😂

[@ericwood3709]

@@jameshartman6177 "Damn it, Jim! I'm a doctor, not a main battle tank!"

[@InkandFish555]

Supermarket shelf stacker here. There is no game changer. Even the most high tech grocery restocker is easily disabled by a cheap FPV drone.

[@mrmac7449]

Fookin clown! LOVE IT… 🎉😂😂😊

[@mrmac7449]

@inkandfish555 😂😂😂😂😂 which aisle do you cover freezer section or the tinned goods??? 🎉❤

[@Eric0225]

I can confirm, my colleague; an experienced shell stocker who's worked at our supermarket (Hoogvliet) for 3 years, was blown up by an FPV drone sent by Jumbo during work, there are no game changers.

[@Astelch]

crazy how the javelin was the game changer to take down tanks early in the war and then drones came into play making it super low cost and extremely effective

[@dickdastardly5534]

Its not a petty sight seeing a complete brown out on the toilet tissue aisle - I served in the Tesco regiment as a young man, it was hell out there💩all gave some, some gave all💩

[@BrianJensen-ym5gk]

Ah yes, the Leonard 2 tank, backed up by the Sheldon IFV, the Wolowitzer-2000 and defended by the Koothrapali air defence system.......

[@nathanmintz8185]

This wins the Internet today

[@meilinchan7314]

Wololowitzer: coming soon to an Age of Empires mod near you....

[@createdforthemoment6740]

This combined arms package is called the "Big Bang Theorum".

[@tonyowen7493]

To get into any of these vehicles you just have to knock and say 'penny' 3 times

[@HiveQu33n]

Sheldon would be a recovery vehicle lmao

[@lindybeige]

The 'Leonard'? I think you'll find that it's proper military designation is the 'Nimoy'.

[@rialobran]

🤣😂🤣😂Brilliant, almost as good as your channel

[@tylerandrews4375]

Lindybeige on a Simon whistler channel, the internet is a smaller place then I sometimes think.

[@qasimmir7117]

Should’ve known that a new video about ‘TANKS!’ would attract the Beige.

[@josezamora2290]

BIG FAN LINDY!!!

[@davidsimpson2923]

So what do we call a kill shot by the Nimoy?

[@biglebowski5737]

Former ballet dancer here. No tank is a "game changer" if it's not used correctly. Infantry support, artillery support, air superiority.These are what makes a tank a game changer.

[@JesseJoyce-cj2xg]

Leonard and Leopard, sometimes both used in the very same sentence. Now you’re just taunting us.

[@BakingBadOBX]

I caught that too. He just said Leopard 3 words ago and then he said Leonard. wtf!?!?!?!

[@resileaf9501]

Have you considered that sometimes you just make a verbal mistake and don't notice it?

[@QoStoOds]

​@@resileaf9501I'm of the opinion it's to farm viewer interaction in the comment section. Which helps with the algo.

[@resileaf9501]

@@QoStoOds It feels rather conspirational thinking to claim that it's a purposeful typo.

[@DjDolHaus86]

@@resileaf9501 I dated someone who worked in social media optimisation services. Intentional typos/verbal errors were definitely a utilised method of boosting interaction at least 3 years ago, nothing gets more interaction than irritating pedants

[@Robert_Douglass]

The Leonard tank is purportedly a superior product to the Taylor tank fielded by Nancy Germany during World War 2.

[@Lord_Foxy13]

I laughed way to hard at "Nancy Germany" Take my like good Sir, Madame or Other

[@hughjass1044]

At least they're not the dreaded Bob Semple tanks.

[@daszieher]

​@@Lord_Foxy13cell, Ernst Röhm was a Nancyboy😂

[@hermannschmidt9788]

I think the German tanks were called Tina and Pamela 😂

[@usonumabeach300]

Tyler tanks

[@williambrasky3891]

The Leonard 2 is definitely a better name. It’s Leonard 2 now.

[@metalheadami123]

😂😂

[@aq5426]

Seconded!

[@BrouDog]

😂

[@seanmurphy7011]

Just not Leonard Part 6

[@KillaAkuma]

I thought I was crazy.. How tf did Simon not realise this massive gaffe lol.

[@EAdrien92]

Former praetorian here, without support from legionaries in testudo formation and strategically placed caltrops any ballista or artillery platform is doomed to be overrun by the barbarian hordes and will fail to become a game changer.

[@mikeblack8984]

Good answer 👍

[@gmac2327]

Thank you for your service.

[@Haffschlappe]

Klingon here, Russia rules the world!

[@jamesbarlow6725]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/rGGWnKmXat9-mpI

[@Freedom7-x6o]

@@Haffschlappe Russia is romulaani

[@andreslinares9507]

Former clone commander of an armored unit here. There isn't such a thing as a game changer in war. Even the best AT-TE unit needs support from troopers, turbo laser artillery, starfighters and some well positioned orbital bombardment. Even a 1000 Jedi knights would struggle against a trillion clankers. See what happened at the Battle of Geonosis before we arrived.

[@Abdul_alHashtag]

The question is not "which tanks are better". The question is "how to use and modify this vehicle class to make it useful again on a battlefield that is dominated by drones". Cheap and expandable drones are the most important thing that popped up since the last major conflict...

[@Warren_Peace]

As well as the return of the "King of Battle", the humble artillery.... And of course, the improved glide bombs.

[@jeffbenton6183]

​@@Warren_PeaceProbably a bigger danger than FPV drones because they can take advantage of higher volumes of fire (though drones directing such assets can make them even more dangerous).

[@jeffbenton6183]

Active Protection Systems might be reasonably effective against FPV drones. Outside of Israel, nations have been under-investing in them as of late.

[@pclayton5063]

You can buy a hell of a lot of drones for the cost of one tank. Tanks are probably at the end of being useful and game changers.

[@jacksmith-vs4ct]

@@pclayton5063 I think tanks will always have a place but its not going to be as dramatic as it once was. I hear the Ukrainians actually are loving the bradleys as they are fast relatively well protected well armed against things like bmps and other equivalent russian vehicles and can even knock out tanks on occasion though I for sure wouldn't want to be in one around any tanks but its great for infantry support and its hard to knock out for infantry except at long range it also has fair protection from drones much better than russian equivalents also if knocked out the crew tends to survive which is simply not the case with russian vehicles the russian soldiers themselves will admit that. I think exosuits will be the new thing soon I know the US has been messing with them for over a decade mechs sadly will probably never be a thing though they just aren't practical in real life though I'm sure someone will try lol. really what is needed are better drone counter measures particularly for small ones

[@guss77]

Former armor corps soldier here - the mishmash of gun calibers, track types and support vehicles is a nightmare. I'm fairly certain that all these vehicle abandonments could have been reversed with good combat support infrastructure - a tank brigade is useless for more than one sortie if you don't have the equipment, man power and training to recover a tank that ran into problems.

[@robertbarlow6715]

I was a 10 year 63 E 20.

[@tubetorpedo]

That has been very obvious problem from the start. There is reason why modern armies are uniformed, from literal uniforms to uniform vehicles, guns, weapon systems etc. because it's much more efficient and convenient that things work together and are compatible as much as possible. E.g. if you lose a vehicle/it needs maintenance, the next one will be as similar as possible so you e.g. do not suddenly under stress (e.g. in war) forget how things operate, where are important switches and levers etc. Having army build around mixed bag of everything; this weapon system is from here, this weapon system is over there and this is 5 years old, this is 30 years old etc. it is a logistic nightmare and also nightmare to operate and build logistics and maintenance around it.

[@Jawzzy]

The support was there at the start, but Russian artillery doesn't sleep.

[@arnoldvezbon6131]

@@Jawzzy These guys don't understand the Russians are not the goat headers US lost to recently.

[@The_Hero_Is_Back]

But the Soviets lost to that bunch of goat herders as well.

[@frodehorgen2519]

Norwegian here, If Norway say it is pledged it is already inn Ukraine hands. Norway don't announce any support before it is already sent, this is because of potential sabotage.

[@Rydonattelo]

What is your view on how much Norway should be involved in Ukraine?

[@frodehorgen2519]

@@Rydonattelo a lot more, but nato general secretary is Norwegian so I believe he pushes our politicians hard on this.

[@samryan180]

Why doesn't Norway spend more money? They have trillions that could free Ukraine and make the world better

[@londonberry2180]

​@@samryan180you obviously don't know how wealth works. Just because they have trillions doesn't mean it's all in cash. Most of it is in investments and bonds.

[@TzunSu]

@@londonberry2180 It's public information, the vast majority could be liquidized cheaply inside a week. It's a very hot debate in Norway.

[@LeastActionJackson]

"I'm Simon Whistler?" "Dammit, who put that on the teleprompter? You all know he only reads exactly what he sees!"

[@BakingBadOBX]

thats a good one. now try it in all caps

[@pottyputter05]

Leonard

[@blakeedmondson4383]

came sprinting to the comments to leave this same comment. Happy to see it is the top comment. Im no longer worried for our future.

[@Robert_Douglass]

Just imagine him reading this, then -- "The Leonard tank was purportedly a superior product to the Pamela and Tyler tanks fielded by Nancy Germany during World War II."

[@caerdwyn7467]

Must have been that Leonard fellow.

[@alexyt4689]

Simon: puts out 1.5 hour long video presenting the comprehensive history of tanks. Also Simon: Leonard.

[@Nick-rs5if]

I thought I heard it wrong the first few times. 😂

[@Rom3_29]

Abraham and Leonard went to bar…

[@angusmatheson8906]

It's 20 minutes long

[@lightuk8958]

@@angusmatheson8906he is talking about a different video

[@No.1_ZIL-130_Fan]

He doesn't put together anything, he just sells his voice and face to whoever and ends up saying a bunch of nonsense. Really, it is a mark of poor quality if you see this guy presenting the subject.

[@joyfulanomaly3984]

Was a cavalry/armor officer in combat. This is the normal civilian thought process. Lazy thinking. Success requires the whole spectrum. Good equipment, well trained Soldiers, great doctrine, outstanding logistical support (including maintenance!), and superb leadership at tactical, operational, and strategic levels. Nothing is easy. Or simple.

[@Warriors_Interactive_VR]

I agree and it must be a joint effort utilising assets to work together in order to maximise attrition and good knowledge of what assets are at hand and how to utalise there ability to have superiority on the battlefield.

[@The_Oracle]

Too complex to think about for a politician.

[@Warriors_Interactive_VR]

@The_Oracle so is every day life stuff that is included in there job description

[@johnmoreno9636]

Actually, one commentator made a good observation on attritional wars. Throughout major wars, including WW1 & WW2, the initial troops were the very well trained ones. As they become casaulties, the question becomes how well trained are the follow-on draftees? Both Ukraine and Russia lost their highly trained troops in the first year. In WW2 it took the draftee Allied Armies to the end of 1943 to become proficient. This was part of the reason for America to attack in North Africa before tackling the Atlantic Wall. So the big question for NATO is: how good are NATO reserves?

[@Mortablunt]

Loving the change in tone from a year ago, where there were published expectations of superior western game, change your weapons, the tanks in particular leading to capture of Crimea within just three weeks. But I can tell you, I knew this would never happen because I play a lot of Pokémon so I understand type matchups. Just as electric, Pokémon dominate water types in the game, in real life, the Russian type dominates the Nazi type!

[@never2late_mtb349]

If you add turtle armour to a Leanard, does it become the Leonardo variant? Just add twin katana weapon systems to the rear decks.

[@matthewspears3786]

You only lightly mentioned logistics, but that is a *huge* factor. When you have many different kinds of tanks from many countries, it becomes much harder to maintain, repair, and train crews to use them effectively. If you need to drag a damaged tank from Eastern Ukraine all the way to Poland or Germany to repair it, it's likely not going to happen. Tanks also have to be used in coordination with the entire military such as with air support and artillery. This is why no "wonder weapon" makes much difference by itself. I highly recommend former NATO officer Jacques Baud's analysis of the Russian Art of War for more detail on the combat zone.

[@mikelittle5250]

the biggest challenge in the closet...this isn't our "home-field"

[@DADADRTR]

Logistics, the difference between a 'BANG!' & a 'click'.

[@bobbah676]

Soldiers win battles, Logistics win wars.

[@lqr824]

Actually I think it's happening to all of them. I don't know of any damaged tanks that are simply being left in Ukraine.

[@Brassblitz]

The affirmative disregard for pronuncification made me think I was watching Task & Purpose

[@victors4333]

Lo blo!

[@amarured]

🤣oh come onnn hahaha

[@noreply-7069]

"Pronuncification". Is this part of the joke? His pronunciation* is indeed horrible, so is Simon's.

[@notcompletelynormal]

@@noreply-7069 Slow your roll, Funk & Wagnalls. You’re ruining the joke and the mood. Sometimes it’s okay to just not comment, if you have nothing good to add. I mean, I get it, I used to do the grammar nazi thing. But I have since reformed, realizing it rarely does any good except make people feel dumb, make people dislike you, make people less happy and derail the conversation away from anything useful. I do make an exception for comments directed at actual Nazis and other hate group members.

[@noreply-7069]

@@notcompletelynormal It's good in my opinion to try to help others correct their mistakes, especially when they are mentioning someone else's themselves. Also what a sacred task you are doing by commenting to "hate group members", it's such an important job for humanity. Thank you for your service!

[@Zapatabone]

Former Ihop manager here. There is no "game changer" if its not used correctly, there's always going to be people doing weird stuff in the bathroom.

[@papparocket]

I read a recent analysis that the overall impact of western tanks to the success of the Ukrainian offensive efforts in particular is and will continue to be very limited. The greatest factor that limits their ability to make a significant impact is their weight. These 70-75 tonne monsters are simply too heavy to cross most bridges in Ukraine, since most Ukrainian bridges are limited to about 60 tonnes. This, however, doesn't present an issue for Russia since the T-72, T-80 and T-90 are all around 45-46 tonnes. Another issue is that in most of Ukraine the ground in the spring is far too soft for any tank to operate on anything but prepared roads. But as the mud starts to dry out it becomes firm enough to take a T-72 long before a Challenger 2 or Abrams dare try to cross a field lest they sink up to their turrets in the muck. The result is that Russian knows exactly which bridges western tanks can cross and thus knows where to station their observation drone in order to target them with long range drones, artillery, guided rockets and missiles. And by destroying those few bridges that can carry the weight of a western MBT, they can cut off the Ukrainian western tanks from being able to advance to the line of engagement, or even cut off their escape routes and trap them as Russia advances. And then in the spring offenses, the Russians are able to leave the highly predictable routes of prepared roadways and into the fields much earlier than Ukraine's western MBTs can. I wonder if that isn't why earlier this year we saw a lot of 25-30 tonne Bradley IFVs being used in ways where it would seem better to have deployed an MBT. It may have been that all of the western MBT were still highly restricted in their movements and that the Bradleys were the only western vehicle that could cross the bridges and not sink in the mud.

[@gnomeachu8045]

its not world of tanks its always better to sit still and wait not go after random bridges in the off chance they have to cross them

[@N4CR]

Ground weight is a far bigger factor than the bridges. Bridges is one part, you can build temporary ones. Not being able to even drive at all a tank for some months while your enemy can? We saw that happen multiple times and is one reason why Russia maintains momentum and advantage more and more.

[@Volodymyr_SVD]

"a significant impact is their weight." Nope. It's their quantity. Sorry bro. But 60 of tanks in such big war is just NOT ENOUGH. Just so you understand - RU forced lost from 80 to 150 tanks during seige of Avdeevka only.

[@gnomeachu8045]

@@N4CR give me a link to prove the momentum (preferable not any state controlled media)

[@ravioli_champ]

@@gnomeachu8045bro wat

[@esbenm6544]

Tanks, like all weapon systems, are designed to work as part of a combined arms operation. If you take out factors that were assumed to be part of the calculation, like air support or engineering support vehicles, you need to recalculate the entire formula.

[@Ryan-lk4pu]

This is my thinking, too. As far as i understand NATO doctrine, apart from overwhelming air supremacy, it relies on medium sized formation (like at least a company) to be incredibly mobile, supported by infantry (in IFV's) to scoot around and cause havoc. The tactics Ukraine have to use, of one/two tank lumbering across a field towards and enemy trench isn't what they're designed for.

[@arnoldvezbon6131]

This does not sound like a good doctrine to have your whole fighting capability rely on assumptions.

[@lewistrickett9094]

Are you calling the Leopard Lennard??

[@TH-qh6jz]

Are you falling for all the ”misspeaks” simon does to make you comment?

[@DocBroketsky]

Yes.😊

[@Sergiblacklist]

​@@TH-qh6jz Yes they are 😂 every single comment is about it 😂 Simon sure has it dialed in for the ammosexuals

[@chrisyoung9653]

@@TH-qh6jz well apparently it has worked on you too since you have also now commented lol.

[@stevemartin7464]

apparently so. Lol

[@mrguiltyfool]

Canadian museum volunteer here. Ukrainians rejected all the Canadian leo 1 donations since it is unmaintainable due to being a Frankenstein

[@merlinbooper6756]

The Leonard tank... Nimoy class, to boldly go where no tank has tanked before.

[@andyknolls8735]

best comment by far 😂😂😂😂

[@y.shaked5152]

I think Simon lost a bet and was forced to call the Leopard the Leonard.

[@andyronayne7947]

I think it’s because he can’t enunciate Grumman correctly and always says GREWman

[@TrineDaely]

Or is the subject of a bet between writers. Revenge from the basement.

[@No.1_ZIL-130_Fan]

He just blindly reads whatever he's given

[@marshwalker7217]

I think the writer behind the teleprompter lost a fight with autocorrect and nobody bothered to fix it/ran out of time to reshoot. That said, I'd think a channel with this name would at least make sure they're getting the name of the tank right....

[@SnowmanTF2]

I was expecting Leonard 2 to be a one off mistake, but I loved it more and more every time it got repeated.

[@rougecoquin7296]

"Recoverable" implies that it can also be recovered by the opposing side.

[@tuurderom2017]

The difference is that Russia doesn’t have the experience or parts to properly put it back together again

[@dirtysniper3434]

@tuurderom2017 why would they want to put it back togther again for equpiment they already have captured models for. Anything being captured now is going to be used in weapons tests

[@randalftheblack2572]

Useless to either side if they don't have the logistical equipment and personnel in place to make it operational again.

[@banzeyegaming2234]

@@tuurderom2017 they also, don’t have Ukrainian farmers on their side.

[@willietorben560]

@@tuurderom2017 But China has the tools and labs to properly disassemble it down to the armor laminates.

[@3613jeremy]

The only game changer throughout this whole war has been with drones and the guys that are modifying them after the famous remark of hold my beer

[@Vedioviswritingservice]

I think the FAB series of bombs has made a pretty impact.

[@comhaltacht315]

Is he saying Leonard instead of Leopard?

[@Kilrohg]

Yes

[@human4116]

comment bait

[@JK-dv3qe]

he was handed the wrong script from his overlords

[@Leader1138]

Only sometimes!

[@mike4402]

Im guessing the p is cut off at the bottom from whatever he is reading making it look like an n

[@NightingaleSunset]

Leonard 2 is my favorite tank of all time.

[@JK-dv3qe]

it is a secret 'Wünderwaffe' version of the Leopard 2 (the Germans have asked the ukies not to deploy it near the frontlines because it is embarrassing when it gets blown up and it may hurt weapons sales to other customers)

[@tobyCornish]

You might be thinking of the Leonard 6

[@ruelitocayamanda8162]

Leonard Skinnard is my favorite southern rock band.

[@davidezanuttini45]

It’d be more accurate to say “how western old tanks are doing” since bot USA and rest of nato aren’t mainly giving military gear currently in use

[@Slithe99]

All Leonards aside, I could listen to Simon read off tank stats all day long.

[@silvanelf1]

I thought the presenter was named Leonard.

[@TheNefastor]

Meh, at this point his voice is as cringe as an AI voice. Takes stuff put out by other channels, puts his weird voice on it, cashes in.

[@ryanwinter3203]

It's all fun and games until the Leonard Cohen shows up on the battlefield

[@dchiznit209]

I wonder if the Ukrainians are saying hallelujah

[@fluffthesergal7640]

Peepoopfart expert here. Ding dong'd the wangalang! Leonado da Cringey a la marde with hip hop notes on the lawn. Windy wayward walruses victorious.

[@MashMonster69]

And if you don't think windy wayward walruses will be victorious you have never smelled their farts.

[@ChadNiebuhr]

The Leonard 2 is an iconic tank ✨

[@Ji66a]

It’s more that Tanks in general aren’t the same game changers they used to be. When a $700 drone can fly in and blow up a 5 Million dollar tank, there is a major problem. Between drones and ATGMS, it’s very different than WW2 and the Korean War.

[@philwithcheese]

The only reason Russian drones are working is because Ukraine is using drones from the same manufacturers so jamming would impact drones from both sides.

[@JJ-dt9lo]

$700? I heard it costs $500

[@robertp457]

@@philwithcheeseUkraine is making their own drones, too. Also they cost around $1000 and the batteries and payload are not part of that cost.

[@Vandelberger]

Tanks were only game changers in the past when supported by airpower, infantry and artillery. Drones can't take territory and can be denied coverage with appropriate electronic warfare. They are a new component but war will force adaptations.

[@Ji66a]

@@JJ-dt9lo there isn’t one type of drone being used. They are being sourced from many different places. There are $500 drones, $1000 drones etc. Also the amount purchased comes into play also.

[@duaneaikins4621]

Former Welsh archer here. The longbow was a game changer.

[@nary-a-care9368]

I wonder how proud Leonard would be to know his tanks are still holding the line against tyranny to this day

[@patrickmunneke8348]

Tyranny😂😂😂

[@saiyanofsteel]

@@patrickmunneke8348Yeah man. Putin is an autocrat posing as a president.

[@Daan030]

@@patrickmunneke8348I’ve lived in Russia and can tell it’s extremely corrupt from top to bottom

[@kingfish2703]

1:05 the leopard 1 didnt end service in 1965, it STARTED its service with the bundeswehr in 1965! (it ended in 2003!)

[@kanacksinbtrs6183]

he said entered

[@kingfish2703]

@@kanacksinbtrs6183 no he didnt. He clearly said "ended". Even the subtitles are saying ended

[@joeyhayes3137]

@@kingfish2703slowed it down to 0.5, he definitely said,”entered,” but he is British so the accent makes it difficult to hear the “R” in “entered.” This is why it sounds like he said “ended”

[@kingfish2703]

@@joeyhayes3137 Even on 0.25 hes saying ended. Idk how you can hear anything else. Plus even if that difficult to hear R was true , thers still an E missing. The difference between "ter" and "d" is pretty huge and again, even the subtitles agree with me on this.

[@sendi_sen]

I heard “entered” and learnt English through various International Schools prior to migrating to Australia. As for the captions, they’re automated and likely trained on mostly American accents.

[@getnohappy]

The lesson here is that a tank designed for combined arms operations, however individually tough, won't be invincible. Should have been transferring F-16s at the same time.

[@whiskey4o4]

The amount of ground to cover between trenches (no man's land) would have you spotted 3 miles out. Before you're even able to get in a tactical position. Ukraine is all open fields, and farm land. Stealth and speed would be more beneficial than brawn and power. When clearing trenches.

[@Techno_Idioto]

@@whiskey4o4 Which is why they should have more IFVs with ATGMs. Faster, can deal with armour and infantry, and carries your buddies back when you're rotating off.

[@mckcieply3720]

The number of tanks sent by Poland could be highly misleading. Since the start of the war, there have been many rumors of mysteriously missing tanks from warehouses. As much as 200 mentioned here and there, could be old Soviet equipment, could be something else. We'll never know.

[@rogerdelillo2394]

Family Vacationer here ....a fleet of Wagon Queen Family Trucksters were taken out by a simple cousin named Eddie pumping out his waste tank into a storm drain next to the parking lot of said fleet.

[@mgw2908]

Gold (former telephone handset sanitizer here)

[@wicked-w7l]

funny how they mention the Leo 2A4's age, meanwhile the M1A1 is 39 years old, 9 years older than the Leo.

[@Rick_Zune]

The M1A1 and the M1A1-SA which was sent are two different variants, the later is from the 2010s so 14 years old at the most, half that of the newest Leopards that were sent...

[@Bulkshit]

The M1A1 is STILL world class. Who else but the USA would put a gas turbine in a tank!!! After how many decades since it's design and, the B-52 is still world class! And to think, the B-52 was designed with..... SLIDE RULES!!! If I'm not mistaken, the sale of AM General by Chrysler saved there ass.

[@kronk9418]

This guy seemed a bit biased against the Abrams. Barely any coverage compared to the European counterparts, considering the amount of action the Abrams has seen in Ukraine compared to the challenger.

[@tims1407]

Another great example that the most important feature for a tank is its air support

[@willietorben560]

Ukrainians would probably disagree and name a capability for precise indirect infantry-support fire with HE instead. This is as close to an "airforceless" war as one can realistically get; CAS is almost entirely absent and the VVS rarely crosses the borders of Russia proper these days. Even the Crimea squadrons are focusing more on ersatz ELINT/AEW than on attacking ground targets.

[@Mr_Beaubles]

Drinking game: drink every time factboy says Leonard instead of Leapord.

[@YanBaoQin]

Nooo, I'll die

[@yootchoobe]

Plus an extra drink if you misspell leopard as leapord 😏😆

[@ashleychiwenga4934]

I like this game I'm gonna rewatch it and drink some whiskey while laughing

[@warweasel2832]

Only if you pay for my liver transplant

[@mho...]

who the shell would say "Leapord" anyways?!

[@cheetah2003-z5w]

Without data on how much damage these tanks did, there is really no way to come to any conclusions.

[@Volodymyr_SVD]

First of all quantity of those tanks is not enough to make any conlusions.

[@taiwi]

@@Volodymyr_SVD second point. Some of them simply did not have time to inflict any damage as these were wiped out prior they have even reached combat line....

[@RomanKoval-ju6ht]

They did near 0 ZERO damage

[@geronimo5537]

more like the title should be: an analysis of 80s/90s western tanks doing against 50s through 90s tanks in Ukraine.

[@joebenson528]

The western AFVs sent to Ukr are the same ones in service (modernized versions of original vehicles that were not cannibalized for parts). And age is irrelevant as long as a $500 quadcopter drone can destroy it.

[@voidtempering8700]

Most of the western tanks deployed didn't even exist in the 90s(ie. Leopard 2a6, M1a1 SA).

[@schweinhund7966]

“We don’t know.” Amazing integrity! Sadly this is a rare trait in many aspects of journalism, social media and mainstream media!

[@williampowell2078]

One notable piece of missing data here if we're comparing.... How many Ruzzian and Soviet era tanks were lost in the same period?

[@Zapatabone]

Former Gamestop employee here. There is no "game changer" if its not used correctly, im always going to flirty with the gamer girls no matter how ugly they might be

[@faris7021]

Its the Leonard 2 from the acclaimed Big Bonk Series

[@aaronsteer2677]

2:48 That is why I love this channel. Not afraid to say when they don't know and dont try to peddle a narrative.

[@The_Flamekeepers]

Dude, Simon, how many youtube channels do you have?

[@jeffp5162]

In my humble opinion, the Challenger struck a mine which immobilised it, most likely by the loss of a track or tracks. Once immobilised, the crew had no choice but to abandoned it whereupon it was used as target practice. The Challenger is much more vulnerable when its crew hatches are open.

[@marcusgarvie4758]

Heard it got repaired, from a Ukrainian telegram site. And yes they said the same. Track damage from mine

[@RoofLight00]

Still beats out of date Russian crap by miles.

[@Max_Da_G]

@@RoofLight00 LMAO Soviet-era tanks get through places where POS Chally just sinks lol

[@Sparks923]

Challengers are No1, and there's soon to be a MK3. They're epic.

[@MickR0sco]

Possibly. It looks a lot worse than I imagine it is. It looks like the external fuel is on fire more than anything

[@alaskan_bigfoot9090]

Its pretty funny how people feel the need to argue over how a tank is destroyed when they have literally no context to work with other than what they are told, we wont ever know how that challenger got destroyed but honestly it doesent matter. I do like to see though that none of the western made tanks have lost their turrets or have had ammo detonations that destroyed the whole tank, the point is that the crew can actually survive and the troops can walk away and it appears that is the case in most of these.

[@davidtuer5825]

Yes, I was also looking to see if those tanks had been de-turreted.

[@vanjamenadzer]

But there is a video of UA pulling out burned remains of crew from Abrams indicating ammo cook off.

[@willietorben560]

@@vanjamenadzer And it is hard to believe *all* the Leo2 crews got out safely either.

[@vanjamenadzer]

@@willietorben560 100% not all of them but the fact still is, without blow out panels, crew has worse chance to survive in case ammunition detonates.

[@kmalone06]

Leonard? Insightful episode, well done.

[@timzocker2018]

I'm reasonably certain that the Leo 1 shown as destroyed was a Leo 1A3, not an A5. the A5, as far as I know had a round, cast turret while I remember the A3 standing out to me for having this long and edgy turret (which is because it's welded, btw.)

[@unklezam7873]

You are wrong. Those are danish 1A5s. Google them and you´ll see.

[@alexpayne2662]

When hit, being able to disembark and return to base to get inside a new tank, allows you to absorb the lessons learned, and keep the same tankers in the fights - who will become even better tankers as a result. Beats violently exploding with a turret toss 30 meters or more into the atmosphere.

[@DonVetto-vx9dd]

Except that you don't have enough tanks to apply those lessons to.

[@dirtysniper3434]

@alexpayne2662 you act like having burnout panels somehow translates to the crew is immortal. If a goober with an ATGM or a APFSDS or HEAT penetrates the fighting cabin the crew is still going to die.

[@alexpayne2662]

@@dirtysniper3434 lol bozo cry about it, they aren't guaranteed survival and you know I didnt say that, so trying to make it seem like I did makes your worthless comment even more pathetic

[@-Zevin-]

@@dirtysniper3434 Not only that but it's incredibly common for crew to be double tapped if they disembark in combat. Often there is surveillance drones watching, who then inform other drones to strike the crew fleeing on foot.

[@willietorben560]

@@-Zevin- Well China pays real good mone~~~ehhhh gives you lots of golfcarts for recovered Western tanks. So yeah. Softkill the tank, hardkill the crew. It's not like Ukraine has much equipment that can get 60 tons of heavy metal with thrown traks unstuck. The usual Soviet-era recovery equipment is for tanks of 50 tons max. Russia had to design novel recovery vehicles for Armata, and they can handle Leo2/Challenger/M1. And it's not like they are needed for recovering Armatas.

[@Its.all.a.game.m8]

Who’s Lenard?

[@BenderTheBoiler]

Simon has to be the hardest working dude on youtube, I had no idea he had a war channel, too.

[@fr3sht1lld3ff]

Tanks for the video 😊

[@arnonym5430]

😅😅😅😅😅

[@King0fTheStoneAge]

Dude, can you speak normally please - rather than playing up your English accent. I’ve lived in England all my life and nobody speaks like this, even if they are “upper class”. It makes it hard to watch your full video, as I’m cringing all the way through it. I like the content, so would be happy to watch more if you spoke like you do when you’re not recording KZbin videos. Thanks,

[@jayhafe]

4:31 Every time Simon calls a Leopard tank a “Leonard” DRINK!

[@vernongoodey5096]

Quite impressive that they have only lost 1 Challenger out of 14. So the crews must have been well trained in UK on how to get the best out of them! Didn’t the crew survive as well so the design worked well! Will be even better as Russia is now having to bring 1950s tanks onto the frontline

[@thomassmith4999]

2 have been lost. I'm not sure why not many people noticed the second. But then again probably not everyone has a special interest of finding tank videos on telegram 20 hours a day like me

[@gamerjaqi7873]

Yeah British tankies are training them well

[@ddshiranui]

Although it should be kept in mind that it also matters a lot where and how often the tanks are actually used, i.e. what risks they faced how often. I've heard that Ukraine at first kept the Challengers in the second line as their heavier weight considerably affects cross-country mobility, and then there were reports that Ukraine didn't deploy them at all for several months in mid 2023 -- though an article on Business Insider later suggested they were just rotated out and now back in as the Ukrainians retroactively added some more protection to fix weak spots on the glacis. They seem to be more confident about putting the Challenger into heavier line of fire now, but with this of course there also comes a higher risk of losing them.

[@vernongoodey5096]

@@ddshiranui yes I was wondering if they had been withdrawn after the 1st lose, thanks for reply

[@PortugueseNationalist1941]

Ukraine command removed them from frontline service . They lost 2 somewhere near avdivka .

[@StephMcAlea]

Simon said "Leonard" 6 times. New game.

[@CanadianDerwood]

I got 8

[@krisfrederick5001]

Tank you for the update. Slava Ukraine

[@JK-dv3qe]

[@robertp457]

@@JK-dv3qetiny country is holding its own against a massive military. Russia’s performance is funny.

[@patrickmunneke8348]

Game over😂😂😂

[@kylekyle5438]

@robertp457 Russia performance is funny facing the largest country in Europe with one of the biggest militaries in Europe prior to 2022 that is receiving help from 40ish countries with tens of thousands of weapons systems, logistics, global intelligence, planning and training? FYI Russia broke through fortifications that Ukraine built up for 8 years. The fact is NATO was in Afghanistan for 20 years fighting an enemy with almost no weapons and no outside support but could never conquer all of Afghanistan, we are talking about dozens of countries. Imagine if Russia, China, Iran, India, North Korea, South Africa, ect gave billions in weapons to the Taliban such as drones, ATGMs, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, air defense, radars, jammers, mines, small arms, night vision, artillery, MLRS, tanks, ect. Now imagine the Taliban also got training, help with logistics and targeting information. Imagine how much worse NATO would have suffered. It’s always easy fighting no bodies….. Or Imagine if a single NATO country would have to fight in a country like Ukraine with lots of thick forests, dense cities, underground factories, fortifications, millions of mines, thousands of rivers, lakes and marshes making it almost possible to quickly breakthrough plus mud, fog and snow making it even more difficult. Now imagine if this lone NATO country had to face dozens of other countries.

[@igotthis33]

@@robertp457Yeah because it’s not a 1v1 like you make it out to be. Without any aid from any other country, this was would’ve been over by now. Instead we insist on sending more young men to die

[@bwilliams463]

I think the overhanging question is whether tanks themselves are game-changers in this war. Fast IFVs like the Bradley have proven quite capable of taking on Russian tanks, and the proliferation of modern infantry-launched guided anti-tank munitions, among other advanced technology and tactics, is making tank duels a thing of the past, which may push tanks back into more of a mobile artillery role in modern warfare.

[@Grayfox988]

When a tank sits on its belly it means a total loss. It means that heat completely softened the torsion bars in the suspension, meaning the interior burnt down.

[@felixarmbruster1711]

Russia displayed one Leopard 2 and one Abrams in Moskow during the victory parade. They would have shown more if they could.

[@СКИван-р8е]

What is the point of showing more than one unit of captured equipment? Do you really think it makes sense to drag every broken piece of hardware to Moscow? You have one gyrus in your brain, and that one is straight😂

[@willietorben560]

@@СКИван-р8е "Do you really think it makes sense to drag every broken piece of hardware to Moscow?" Wrong question. Correct question is: Does Putin really think it makes sense to drag every broken piece of hardware to Moscow? Seeing how he rolls, I am leaning towards "yes, ofc. This guy can't resist an opportunity to flaunt what few successes his ragtag bands can scrape up. Worse braggard than Trump if anything." Provided that "broken" means "still presentable". A lot of the recovered Western gear probably goes straight to some weapons research lab to be dissected, or is shipped to China in exchange for some crucial electronics and other components formerly sourced from Germany and France.

[@kamui004]

12:50 We all know the truth. Putin sneezed in his office and that Challenger 2 tank went up in flames, not even Chuck Norris is capable of such a feat!

[@jmacd8817]

The tanks are performing like tanks. The one thing they excel at is allowing the crew to survive. This is a HUGE benefit.

[@FierceSleepingDog]

Former war hawk here. The only game changer here is a peace deal. I'm tired of the death and spending on this stupid proxy war. Cut a deal and rebuild.

[@willietorben560]

Rebuild what exactly? The Russian Armed Forces? Nah. Stupid idea. This was tried with the Minsk Accords, and these are precisely what enabled the full-blown invasion.

[@Muschelschubs3r]

Proxy war? Rubbish. Come right out and say you want to throw Ukraine under the bus, Trumpster. Of COURSE it is all about the money for you. Deplorable.

[@NancyJohnson-kq2rf]

I agree. The training on how to utilize and deploy the equipment is what most matters.

[@Alec.40]

Thanks guys

[@mr.r1178]

Thanks guys

[@MrBMEBS25]

Thanks guys​@@mr.r1178

[@miguellopes2452]

Tanks guys

[@Matty-kelly]

Tanks guys

[@Artimec2185]

Fanks guys

[@darcybowyer5743]

Current camping store manager here, a real game changer is a good swag.

[@funtictoc1660]

Tanks matter so little right now. Has anyone noticed that tanks have practically disappeared from the frontlines? That's because drones rule everything. Your quote from Gordon Davis is 1.5 years old (Jan 2023), I can bet he would not sign under those words now, winter? logistics? nothing matters if a xx million USD tank can be destryed by few drones, that cost a just some thousands USD , entire analysis just ends there.

[@hachimaru295]

Just like battleships had their day ruined when planes with torpedoes came along so have tanks now cheap knockout drones rule the skies

[@madkabal]

I've also noticed the battles lines haven't moved in 2 years. And the last time they did, tanks were the spearhead. The problem is protection, not the pocession.

[@DiGiDaWgZs]

The western arms manufacturers are going into paroxysms of joy. The aim will be simple effective A.P.S. and Ukraine will be the test ground. Tanks will have a resurgence against drones eventually.

[@ArchOfficial]

Well, tanks have mostly disappeared from the frontlines after Ukrainian artillery destroyed several thousand Russian ones. You can also destroy a tank with a couple dollar incendiary charge, so I guess tanks have been obsolete before they came out.

[@madkabal]

@ArchOfficial 1. No they haven't. 2. You don't know what that means,but you keep saying it.

[@kingfish2703]

those assesements about the tanks are utterly crazy. Praising Abrams or Challengers for their superior armour etc to the russian tanks (most of them are old T-72 Tanks) and then complain about leopard 2 A4s is crazy because theyre on par with most of the russian tanks currently in use in Ukraine. If anything it proves that Russian/Soviet tanks are better than believed.

[@kronk9418]

Cope more.

[@kingfish2703]

@@kronk9418 ?

[@willietorben560]

@@kronk9418 Ukraine relies on Soviet tanks too. And increasingly, they do it more than the Ruzzians do. Because the latter increasingly would rely on MT-LB and golf carts, if these could be relied upon.

[@kingfish2703]

@@willietorben560 what...?

[@KingslayaJ]

The challenger 2 is the coolest looking MBT, I love the way it looks!

[@CybranM]

You know this video is well researched when they cant get the correct name for the most well known modern European tank lol

[@buddystewart2020]

What I've heard from numerous analysist and Ukraine military is, the crew survivability of these vehicles is the most important part. Even stories of Bradly's you've seen get knocked out, most of the time, the crews survive. No tanks are going to have a good time when they hit an anti-tank mine, or take a direct hit from artillery or an ATM. If you have your hatch open and a drone flys in and detonates, you're going to have a bad day.

[@willietorben560]

Not exactly. According to Ukrainians, crew survivability is the ONLY redeeming quality really. Mobility sucks, recoverability sucks, logistics suck, indirect fire capability sucks, HE capacity sucks oh so hard, ATGM capability is wholly absent, the superior sensors and stabilizers are pointless when you wallow half a mile behind the lighter MBT. Whereas basically everything about the Soviet types (except the sensors maybe) is at least "good enough to get the job done", EXCEPT crew survivability which sucks. Leopard 1 is the exception. It is well liked, now they understand how to use it. The key rules are to never, never, NEVER EVER expose it, and always have a getaway route prepared. You'd be surprised how much the reverse speed is being used: Spot, snipe, do a Parthian shot, and off to the next prepared sniping position before the drones arrive. Wash, rinse, repeat. The Leo 1 in Ukrainian hands is quite exactly Lyudmila Pavlichenko AS A TANK.

[@jetboy770371]

Former army cook and chow runner here. An army fights best on a full stomach.

[@pranays]

As former Airborne I have to agree. That chow tent was always better than rations.

[@williewonka6694]

This is a drone, missle, mine and artillery war. The tank is, for practical purposes, vulnerable, expensive and obsolete.

[@ALLMINDmercenarysupportsystem]

A system is only obsolete if it cannot do it's role or the role doesn't exist, not if it is vulnerable. The best example I'm aware of is the infantryman. As humans, particularly humans not encased in tens of tons of heavy armor, infantry are extremely vulnerable to *everything*, and have been for millenia. And yet, every army uses them, because their role is still extremely important and nothing yet made can replace them.

[@williewonka6694]

@@ALLMINDmercenarysupportsystem Only boots on the ground can hold the land, and Putin cares nothing for a virtually inexhaustible supply of boots.

[@willietorben560]

Soviet tanks in Ukraine are, for practical purposes and to both sides, highly mobile D-30 howitzers with MBT armor, a turret, and better precision-fire capability at the cost of a decrease in effective range. NATO never thought of MBTs as ersatz artillery. USSR did at least from the T-62 onwards integrate a trench-busting indirect fire capability in their MBT designs. The Challenger can, courtesy of HESH, be coopted for this role to some extend, but it's awkward, they're still designed for direct fire. With Leos and Abrams, you're SOL. They rule at killing AFV and suck at pretty much else. But there are very few sizeable tank-on-tank fights in Ukraine anymore, so such one-trick poinies, however superior they are on paper, lack a clear tactical role and are basically the fire brigade held at the ready to plug any gaps that might be forced, or secure flanks like at the Avdiivka evacuation.

[@Zargabaath]

Former farmer here, no single piece of farming equipment is a game changer unless it's supported by former, but still perfectly capable of farming, farming equipment and the knowledge of former farmers.

[@ericksonbusinessservices5323]

I love your videos, but I would love them more if you would include chapter segments in the description.

[@Coolz85]

STOP CALLING IT LEONARD!

[@Haffschlappe]

Leonard is a vulcan tank

[@usov656]

Im leonard, im here to talk about the simon tank, the apex of german engineering.

[@ceooflovingthehomies9294]

Actually the Simon Tank British. It’s also used by the Czech military as well.

[@ryankline1164]

The infamous German accent of Simon.

[@victors4333]

Simon is not a tank, it's a doctrine.

[@stevefreeman3474]

That Chllenger was pummeled unlike any of those other Tanks on show,compared to all the others what a vehicle and i bet the teamaker inside would still make a Brew too.

[@aaron5347]

The Challenger wasn’t knocked out for decades because they never fought a real enemy before the SMO. ANY tank can be knocked out.

[@francoisdeletaille]

I wish there was a gamechanger, as war is a stupid and wicked game, especially, when it's not a game. Maybe to quote Prince Myshkin: Beauty will save the world

[@Jrichards30]

The challenger 2 I expect was scuttled by the crew as the armor isn’t flammable and they have probably been told in no uncertain terms to damage as much of its technology as possible it’s common place to use a thermite grenade inside to start a fire especially if you can coat the outside with some fuel

[@alexdunphy3716]

Not likely. The challenger is old tech compared to the leopards, Abrams and T-90 and some of the upgraded t72b3m which have all had their technology upgraded much more recently than challenger 2, which was never a particularly good design to begin with. High weight for lower protection than it's piers and less horsepower and older fcs and optics. Challengers reputation is all hype from being subject to a bunch of HE RPGs that didnt have much armor penetration capability

[@paulaction9874]

@@alexdunphy3716 Utter rubbish. HE - RPGs don’t exist.

[@alexdunphy3716]

@@paulaction9874 bro just go to the Wikipedia page and look under the section on ammunition. It lists multiple different kinds of non-HEAT warheads for the rpg7

[@pheatton]

We also need to remember that at least for the Abrams, the US stripped all kinds of stuff off of them before exporting them. Not saying those items are game changing either but they are lacking some of the recent equipment they have.

[@machdaddy6451]

Check out the Battle of 73 Easting, to see what the Abrams is capable of, when correctly supported and deployed.

[@Letmeusethis999]

If you can’t see two tanks in that then I’m glad you’re making mid yt vids instead of being on the frontline.

[@stevo728822]

"Truth is the first casualty in war."....love that phrase.

[@zokareldrin8816]

Former baker here. No tank is a "game changer". Updated tech might provide certain advantages, but victory here will require fully utilizing all possible advantages, not just in tank design

[@willem6360]

I'm sorry, but The Netherlands and Denmark have both multiple times collaborated in buying Ukraine supplies, i.e., tanks etc. Gotta mention everyone bro

[@robertlegacy7508]

I heard the Abrams that we sent had different, less sophisticated armor than u.s. abrams

[@jeromesuckie9832]

The real game changer is the drones

[@PrestonGladd]

The "Leonard Moment".....When you realize he is literally only hired to read scripts, and has zero clue what he is actually talking about.