Leopard 2 Tank Documentary

[@marklee1194]

The music at 1:01 just makes the Leopard II even more awesome.

[@jth6868]

Track title is Rocks Away, Composed by Tim Souster www.dewolfemusic.com/search.php?id=16764805&code=lc1yjL

[@karjohden]

I`ve driven this tank when i did the military service in sweden. Its fucking amazing.. thats all i can say... Just the gyro that keeps the canon fixed on its target is awsome.. if the tank bounces too much, you can just hold the trigger, and when the system is stabil enought it fires it self, as long as you hold the trigger... just amazing.. What a machine..

[@Proximax9]

I was a leopard 2a4 gunner (finnish defence forces) and we bought our leopards from german. They were used, but in fairly good shape. They had all the systems, rangefinder and the gunner main sight was the standard 12x EMES which there is supposed to be. I cant think of anything which could've been changed from the tank... everything was in place :P

[@SilentCoyote]

Remember when the Russian Federation took a still image from this at 8:22 and overlaid the HUD from a lancet and claimed they destroyed a Leopard 2 in Ukraine? Pepperidge Farm Remembers.

[@juanpablochaconvargas6919]

here for the same XD

[@EAFSQ9]

Who makes these films? They seem to be closely attributed with videos produced for SAAB Bofors / BAE Bofors.

[@Chrinik]

I´ve sat in a Leopard2 A6 while in basic training in Munster, and it is quite a beast, and i was impressed how small it looks when you are further away, but when you stand ontop of it, it´s friggin huge. Oh and the mobility part, the official HP of the engine is listed with 1500...but with a little tweaking, they can press the engine too unknown heights... 90mph on a highway is much for an MBT. And the A6 finaly got a generator powering the turret while the motor is off...mandatory

[@TankNutJohn89]

@ajazaad: Sorry, thats WRONG! The Leopard 2 use's the 120mm Smoothboregun Length 55 from Rheinmetall. I think you mean Krauss Maffei Wegmann with Kruass. They've designed the Leopard 2. The M1A2 use's the 120mm Smoothboregun Length 44 from General Dynamic's. It's basically the same Gun ( licensed ) build in the US.

[@mkms685]

0:49 Kurt Knispel, is that you?? 😂

[@kollinhwang]

Anyone else from the H.Feels company?

[@Konstatsai]

thanks for uploading

[@agt155]

@creshal Not all rounds are fin stabilised. The Challenger 2 has a rifled barrell so that it can fire HESH rounds. Also the Challenger 2 uses 3 part ammo which is much lighter than single piece, and can be loaded faster.

[@Talon3000]

That tank driving underwater is so surreal...

[@Proximax9]

leopard 2 has a blast door for ammunition. If the storage room is hit, the roof panels are being ripped off by the pressure and most of the pressure is directed upwards. There is some ammunition in the hull aswell, but it is less likely to take hit than the tower. Besides, all ammunition is placed in the tank the way that if they do explode, the projectile parts are fired towards outer walls.

[@klubchez5224]

Absolutely mouth watering

[@MGBandit75]

I'm falling in love with this tank

[@MarcusDidiusFalco]

This is the Leopard2A2 or 3. This one here misses the Field-Adjustment-Collimator and there is an opening on the left side for ammo. You see it right in the beginning. If I remember correctly, with the A3 this weak point in the side armor was closed. The actual Tank in use is the A6M for the Out-of_Area troops.(M for additional protection from AT.Mines) The other in use are the normal A6 and the A5KWS (Kampwertgesteigert = Combat-Value-Enhanced)

[@51m0n77]

Love the muzak in the background

[@52111centrumcz]

@ibm0026 The Challanger does NOT use a copy of the 120mm smoothbore; it uses a rifled cannon!!! Its the L-30 if I'm not mistaken and the Brits use it because they wished to retain the ability to fire HESH warheads.

[@tonygogap]

A 120mm Smoothbore is the gun on the Abrams, a discarding sabot round is a shell or round. The M1 Abrams has different types of shells too.

[@OlderG0ds]

"The latest version of Chobham armour is used on the Challenger 2 (called Dorchester armour), and (though the composition most probably differs) the M1 Abrams series of tanks, which according to official sources is currently protected by silicon carbide tiles. Though it is often claimed to be otherwise, the Leopard 2 in fact does not use Chobham armour, but pure perforated armour, avoiding the very large procurement, maintenance and replacement costs of those ceramic armor systems."

[@62kenny78]

This is one of the early Leopard 2 - there are several improvements made, the actual version is the 2 A6 - which means it is the 6. update made.

[@Baseshocks]

@kuyaTanY on top of what Khristophoros said, the Leo 2 uses standard engine parts that are commonly used... the cost of maintenance for the Leo 2 is far less then the M1A2.

[@TankNutJohn89]

@Vykuk123: The XM1111 System is in development, the MRM-KE is in commissioning since 2004. It was sucessfully used in Afghanistan. Okay, i've understand, the Challenger 2 is your favourite Tank, however. It hasn't killed so much tanks as the Abrams, it has lower electronics, older Cannon, lower High Speed, higher Cost, less Units ( 300 Challenger 2 - 7500 Abrams )

[@johorridoh]

Canadian army has Leopard C2. It´s based on the Leopard 1A3 . Since the year 2000 improved by A5 towers. 20 Leopard 2A6M were borrowed from the Bundeswehr for two years. M stands for Mineprotection and is regarded the best protected Battletank in the world today ; )

[@wenyicvs]

What a piece of engineering? I'm in love.

[@Proximax9]

rheinmetall L44 isnt a machine gun, it's the main antitank cannon (120 mm smoothbore) used both in abrams and leopard 2

[@Ariana321]

Only thing that could really improve this tank would be to give it the same "Dorchester" armor as the Challenger 2. Get that on there, and not only will you have a masterpiece of a tank, but you'll have a damn near indestructible masterpiece at that.

[@realbadcorps]

Later versions upgrade the armour, the Leopard 2 was first put in service in 1979 about the same time as the M1 Abrams. At that time, Chobam was the cutting edge but newer model Leopard 2s have more modern armour.

[@Proximax9]

to puncru: most of the technology in tanks is at least 10 years old, because of the time taken to adjust them for the battle conditions. If you looks at Leopard 2 for exaple, it was made 20 years ago and most of the systems are still used in modern tanks today.

[@Proximax9]

I didn't quite understand your question. Abrams indeed has gas engine, leopard 2 has diesel engine. However, they both have about the same power output... and diesel if of course better in battle field, as it isnt as flammable as gas...

[@cf80to01]

The first Leo 2's entered service with Germany in 79/80. It has been significantly updated since into the Leo 2A6M.

[@leventekocsis9103]

Leo 2A7V*

[@cannasnagler]

L55 has a longer barrel not a bigger round/kaliber (55*120mm), which means increased velocity which gives longer range (+1500m) and increased penetration (+25%). These numbers where floating around - have no idea if they are correct :-)

[@iskenuz]

Composite armor plays by different rules than rolled homogenous steel. It functions best when hit directly, thanks to the ceramics fracture patterns.

[@Proximax9]

I was a gunner for Leopard 2a4 in finnish armed forces... that's why I like the leopard so much :P I'd love to get to try abrams too, so I could say which one really is better... I have a feeling though that they don't have that much difference in performance...

[@m16a4ish]

This tank is pretty bad ass, on paper. It has performed exceptionally well, in practice. It has a very high kill rate, in simulations. It's armor can withstand anything, from controlled explosions to controlled "enemy" fire. It has extensive "combat" experience, patrolling the streets of kosovo and the "very dangerous" anti-taliban north in afghanistan. Oh, I forgot. It also survived a very, very, very scary uncontrolled explosion from a tiny ied. Wow, what a tank.

[@Proximax9]

The ammo storage is indeed a bit of a weakness, but usually you can't even see the hull of the tank in combat, only the turret... Besides, does it matter whether the hit comes through the driver or the ammo storage, it kills everyone in the tank either way :P Oh and the "windows" are actually periscopes, so they are not really a weakness...

[@TankNutJohn89]

@Leathlord: i can hear you have no idea. I've already said, that the M256 120mm Length 44 Smoothbore Gun of the Abrams is the same Gun, like the German, but from General Dynamics. It's a license build. The Performance of the M256 is the same like from the german L/44. The L/55 was adopted because the Abrams was used to have the 105mm Gun. Now it has a 120mm Gun, the turret can't take a longer 120mm. The Turret of the Leopard is longer & higher than Abrams' Turret.

[@davepriddy9263]

Great video and tank.

[@Proximax9]

I got out from army 9 months ago, so I remember those things quite clearly :) From what I have seen from pictures and video files, I've noticed the gunner's controls and other stuff is pretty much the same, just positioned differently... It would still be awesome to test abrams's gunner controls :D

[@OnkelWurstbrot]

@ViciousCritique Hmmmm, than maybe you could explain to me why I, as a former gunner of the loe2, had a kill death ratio of 10 to 1 in the manuvers against the abrams?

[@warhawk9566]

correct me if im wrong but the leo seems to have a shorter cannon than the abrams but it also smes like the germans were able to do this without sacrificing shell velocity. if so that could means the germans finally made a tank that can both kill other tanks and support infantry

[@Proximax9]

there are couple of mistakes in this video... (I dont know which version this tank is in this video, but the 2A4 has a laser range finder up to 4000 meters, not 4000 yards. Also, the tank gunner doesnt use infrared, but thermal camera... other than that I think the video is correct :)

[@Proximax9]

danthebold: what's the effective firing range abrams has? I'm a finnish leopard 2a4 gunner, and I'm kinda interested about abrams... I just wish I could someday get to try abrams too :)

[@warhawk9566]

i know they have the same sized gun and same caliber but what i mean is it looked like they moved the barrel back into the turret more, like the barrel is the same length but not as much of it is on the outside.

[@Proximax9]

yeah... well the only thing our leo2a4 was missing was the wind sensor, but I heard they dropped that out anyway so it doesnt even belong in the 2a4 model. (not sure tho)

[@Cougar545x39]

@m16a4ish Do you think a hit in battle is more destructive due to the "wow, battle feeling"-factor than the same hit in a test?

[@Frostyshard]

One of my great grandfathers was in German Infantry in WW2 and another of my great grandfathers was in the American Merchant Marines. in WW2 and even he was of German blood. I take pride in my German heritage regardless of what side they fought for.

[@Kreisliga1000]

@TheCFarmy the leopard can stay for hours underwater and the tower will be requiered, you can it disguise. the motor and the hole tank is fully functional underwater. you can wait with 6 tanks in a river or a lake underwater between the reed and strike from the back when the enemy is surprised. the idea was, that you can cross a river without a bridge.

[@TankNutJohn89]

@Vykuk123: The MRM-KE is already in use, it has killed an driving T-72 at a Range of 8.600m.

[@dennis71106]

Hi. I`m a a german commander of 4 leo2 a5 tanks.In fact, our young men who do their country duty (sry, my english is not that good) in our battalion win nearly all shootings against the abrams.Our weapon technology in tanks always had to be the best one since the 2nd world war.Just because we must have been the first wall against a soviet landstrike.I think germany tank technology is maybe the best worldwide.Maybe thats the only weapon-technology-field, in addition to uboats.Greetings!

[@Rabidus289]

you dont want to start mounting a tube in the middle of combat, i'd imagine it's more likely to be used for transport. for instance, crossing a river when bridges have been knocked out etc.

[@Guardsmen248]

an amazing tank!

[@HingerlAlois]

A lot of countries have Leopard 2s, Germany (nowadays only something like 400 active, a lot were scrapped or sold after Cold War), Austria, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey.

[@jenkster09]

I'm a big M1A2 fan so it goes without saying I still like the Abrams. Witht that being said I am very impressed with the Leo2, nice looking also. :p Kudos to german engineering1 nice going fellas!

[@WarDaddyUSA]

agreed. beautiful tank. but im American so ill take my proven Abrams. now I would love to see the army adopt a couple hundred of these bad boys. if not the Leo, we definitely need the puma IFV.

[@Proximax9]

well... it doesnt really pour inside the tank, if the hit is delivered with kinetic penetrator as you probably meant, the fragments will do the job just as well... if it's a HEAT round (explosive round) then the pressure does the thing more effectively. There isnt really burning happening there as much as fragments and pressure... :)

[@Banananaish]

@shadowdancerRFW and the sound of the Leo is bad ass!

[@icecremer]

@USparatroopersurgeon To be perfectly honest, American tanks were also named after consecutive numbers, in fact, most tanks are, they just get nicknames, and most American tanks during WW2 got their names from the British, like the M4 Sherman or the M3 Lee. The British was naming American built tanks after famous American Civil war generals. The russians also gave nicknames to their tanks, Like the KV and IS tanks.

[@ex59neo53]

Leopard 2 and Leclerc are really the most impressive tanks . (Jagdpanther is still my favourite all-time design :p)

[@icantafford]

@m16a4ish The A5/6 variants support armour superior to that of the M1(and all it's variants) despite being lighter. The L55 cannon in the A6 and "+" variants is more powerful than the M1A1/2's L44. The speed and power are near identical. And the Leopard 2's engine is a million times better in a combat situation because it's engine is deisel. The gasoline engine in the M1 is a logistics nightmare, it is a gas guzzler and damn near needs a fleet of soft fuel trucks following it (ideal targets)

[@mattmatt115]

good news... this tank will now finally be battle tested, after everybody thought they would be designed to rot away not being used. canada has recieved the first of its leopard 2 A6M CAN (can unofficaly being the term for the slat armor package) and they are going straight to afhanistan

[@MarcusDidiusFalco]

When I was i the Army we had a little "shootout" against two squads of M1. Both sides had their Training-Equipment mounted. (For Leo2 it'S called AGDUS - a kind of MILES for Tanks) We fought 7 Duells an won 5 Times...

[@kuyaTanY]

what is the stronger in terms of fire power ? the m1a2 or the leopard 2 ?

[@thenoobfactor]

Probably not. A hybrid sabot/HEAT wouldn't be effective as you would either need to make the warhead too small for the shaped charge to be useful, or the shell too large to have the velocity needed.

[@adrienperie6119]

Something not many people know, is that the barrel life on the Leopard 2 main gun can be as low as 50 rounds, and 150 to 200 on average.

[@joekabira3986]

Adrien Perié L44 or L55?

[@Proximax9]

there is a modification made of Challenger 2, which has a new Rheinmetall L55 cannon (same as in Leo 2a6) and a new engine, which has 1500 hp (same as in leopard) briging the both tanks quite close to each other in performance :)

[@Meminem]

¡Que buen documental!

[@MeeGra123]

@megamushroom07 Oh ^^ Ok i didnt notice that but isnt the new leo provided with the newest technologies? I dont know much about the russian tanks but in any comparison with other tanks ive seen the leo won...

[@52111centrumcz]

@tntsundance T-90 comes close, not quite there but good enough. Also the chinese have a T-99 or something like that; It has simmilar range/sighting systems as the western types (even though there are limited numbers of them)

[@mitchcoleman2533]

what ranks are the crew men who occupy the leopard2?

[@muldroonz]

is the stearing done by lever

[@skwarelabs]

Hayup tlga. The best mbt for me. Love the name, design, capabilities and very destructive fire power.

[@52111centrumcz]

@USparatroopersurgeon Actually the Russian numbers on the Ts are supposed to be the years the first time the design was finalized and accepted by passing the military acceptance trials.

[@egalecat6187]

I hope for next leopard project has this specs. Armament: 15cm gun Armor: light but more dense material but cheap enough(depends) Speed and range: (depends) although it's going to be big. and probably not consider as MBT but as tank destroyer (TD)

[@DzinkyDzink]

light dense are contradictory..

[@joekabira3986]

Egale Cat the next Leopard series will most likely be armed with the Rheinmetall 130mm cannon, and would probably look like the Leopard 2 Evolution. It won't be a major upgrade unless it needs to be.

[@DzinkyDzink]

Challenger 2 ATDU That's debatble. The Soviets tested a 152mm gun in the late 80's. The results are way beyond what the most advanced 120/125mm can achieve: 2000 m/s APDSFS heavier round with better precision on top of it or a HEAT round of much higher firepower: compareable to 152mm ATGM's. Even the HE FRAG - the most common shell is much more powerfull.

[@joekabira3986]

Nick Dzink I understand that the Russian Armata tank program is a huge step forward for Russia, but until there's the need for such a comprehensive redesign for NATOs standard caliber, which has been slated to change from 120 to 130 mm, there might not be the need to create a completely new Leopard 3 unless the Bundeswehr specifically requires companies such as Rheinmetall to design a new tank. However, should that happen, I'd expect it to look like a giant PL-01.

[@egalecat6187]

So we wait until the day Laser tanks comes in. :]

[@Proximax9]

targeting on a specific part on a tank is very difficult, taking advantage of such a small area in combat is not very easy. Even if the ammonition would explode, the rounds are placed in the way that the warheads are fired away from the crew... of course the tank shells would fly backwards and break some equipment or knock down the crew... but still :P I give credit to abrams about this, they have all their ammonition in the rear of the turret.

[@agt155]

@creshal No it doesn't. A smoothbore was tested but they stuck with the rifled gun.

[@raedenjay]

doesn't the leopard A6 have a new and improved turret and mine protection?

[@redreaper-xe6so]

still the size of an IED and the chance of killing a vehicle plays in. The Leo2 has a lot of other issues, too. Like compare even ultramodern versions of Leo2 versus, for instance, TUSK II, which can reliably take even the heaviest antitank missiles to the side, not just front. Or how while leo2 has some containment of explosion, the Abrams has full turret containment + full hull containment.

[@DukeCount1992]

How old are these videos ?? 80's ?

[@Tarik360]

@KillamriX98 Of course, doesn't all tanks do that?

[@Hjalie]

It can only pierce the armour on the top of the turret. But the newest Leopard 2 tanks have extra armour for more protection against anti-tank missiles and 30 mm projectiles.

[@coerdelion13]

This is considered by many the best tank in the world!

[@WarDaddyUSA]

but it has never had a tank on tank engagement or a tank kill. sure on paper it looks good. but the combat history is nothing compared to the Abrams.. not knocking the Leo. it looks good with excellent protection and a great gun. I love the Leo. not the best tho. top 3 tank for sure

[@AustinMontreal]

It went... underwater...that's epic.

[@HingerlAlois]

The Leopard 2 is used in Austria, Chile, Canada, Denmark, Finnland, Greece, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Swiss, Turkey and of course germany. All in all 3480 Leopard 2 tanks were manufactured.

[@stopthatimmediately]

what is the conduct of fire in german? wie sagt man auf deutsch "identified," "sabot up," "on the way," etc

[@P47RICK]

The Leclerc has the best autoloader which is pretty cool too.

[@Kreisliga1000]

the underwater function is a good idea, i think. the leopard 1 cold diving, too. you can't shoot underwater, that's clear. it's simply the diving function. you need no bridges, no little ships or ferries. you can stay underwater and undetected.

[@OR3NG]

@savethesonnenblume actually leo2a7 is the latest version

[@malo1996]

@canuckleful What version do you mean?

[@BensonChu36]

on a scale of 1 to 10, how better is the Leo 2 vs the american M1A1 abrams

[@ushockey08]

As an American, if could choose to serve on any tank other than the Abrams, it'd be this fine machine.

[@DakkogiRauru23]

So awesome that it looks like a modernized tiger

[@SukhoiSu37Terminator]

There were 98,000 T-54/55 tanks produced.There were 88,000 or so T-34 tanks produced.Where do you get your numbers?

[@1SaG]

Interesting stuff.. looks more like a promotional video than a documentary to me though.. :D

[@AstralDoor]

@AstralDoor Though pretty much the whole thing is still the 2a6, there's supposed to be some small difference. Either way i think the swedes tank 122 version is cooler =P

[@ss33988]

@KillamriX98 Submerine: "WTF was that?" "Oh nothing... just a tank firing at us"

[@sniper1724]

what speed can it do on rough ground?

[@littlegrabbiZZ9PZA]

The gas slippage is strong enough to blow any mud out of the way of the projectile. Accurracy is affected, but the projectile won't stick.

[@realbadcorps]

Leopard 2 is the logical successor to the Leo 1 with a larger 120mm gun and Chobam style armour, it evolved from talks with America in the 1970s aimed at jointly producing a new NATO tank but these eventually floundered so the Germans went ahead with their own design. The Rheinmetall 120mm smoothbore gun developed for the Leopard 2 is extremely accurate it can kill enemy tanks at ranges of up to 4000 yards by day or night. The gun, which is also fitted in the American M1A1, fires fin stabilised ammunition. Two types of anti-tank rounds are available, APDS and HEAT or high explosive anti-tank. The cartridge cases are semi-combustible to reduce clutter in the fighting compartment. The gun sights are fully stablised. On the left an unstablised view, on the right the gunner's view. A thermal image intensifier picks up the infrared signature of a target vehicle so the gunner can lock on in all weather conditions, in daylight or darkness. If there is a failure in the main integrated firing system the gunner has an auxiliary sight. A panoramic periscope in the turret roof gives the commander all round vision. He can also override the gunner and can himself lock onto and engage a target. The integrated fire control computer automatically processes all necessary data. This includes range, type of ammunition selected, cant angle of own vehicle, movement of target, and movement of own vehicle. The gun can fire with equal accuracy whether the tank is moving or stationary. Auxiliary armament includes a coaxial 7.62mm machine gun for use against enemy infantry, there is also an anti-aircraft machine gun on the turret roof. For protection against both solid armour piercing and hollow charge rounds, Leopard 2's upper hull and turret feature layered the ceramic armour developed by the British Fighting Vehicle Research and Development Establishment at Chobam. The tank's floorplates are specially shaped to diminish the effect of mine explosions. Leopard 2's exceptional mobility is generated by its 1500 horsepower turbocharged diesel engine which gives the 55-ton vehicle an exceptionally high power to weight ratio. Turret mounted smoke grenade dischargers allow it to escape if attacked in an unfavorable position. Filters to protect the crew from nuclear, biological, and chemical contamination can be changed from outside the tank. Leopard 2 is thus a very elusive target to hit and difficult to destroy, while itself being able to deliver devastating firepower. For speed, it can accelerate from a standing start to 32 kilometers or 20 miles per hour in 6 seconds. Leo 2 has a top speed of 72 kilometers or 45 miles per hour. Braking distance from top speed is only 35 meters or 38 yards. Essentially the lower hull and running gear are virtually unchanged from the Leopard 1, the hydro-pneumatic suspension gives infinitely variable steering. The tank can turn on its own axis in a mere 5 seconds. Leopard 2 can easily cross a 10-foot trench, it can also climb anti-tank obstacles over 3 feet high. Even sets of road obstacles do not interrupt the smooth ride. Like the Leopard 1, Leo 2 can quickly fitted with deep wading equipment allowing it to cross rivers up to 13 feet deep. The commander directs the driver from his conning tower while the vehicle is submerged. The driver has exceptionally good visibility through wide vision blocks. Ease of maintenance is a major feature of both Leo 1 and 2. With the help of a Bergepanzer's crane the entire engine pack can be changed in the field in only 15 minutes. With some 1800 tanks in German army service alone and others built for Belgium and in Switzerland, Leopard 2 is one of the most important vehicles in the NATO armoury. Its exceptional firepower, mobility, and cross-country performance will certainly enable it to give a good account of itself if ever called upon to do so.

[@painfullybadnoob]

thank you sir.

[@Benz2533]

I see the Leopard tank perform. outstanding. T-90 is also another stronge tank. another outstanding. I guess that the winner is up to the ability of the driver and cammander. Who ever get the better army win.

[@Proximax9]

what's the difference in them? they look just the same, and our tank squad got their training rounds from USA (I'm a finnish leopard 2a4 gunner)

[@cristian.social]

i love this tank It has the most powerful canon in the world the Rheimental L55.