Comments by "" (@tomk3732) on "Ukraine Veteran: Why Leopard 1 is better than Leopard 2 for Ukraine" video.

  1. Nothing can be added to Leo 1 armor to make it defend against modern ATGM - it simply is so paper thin.
    2
  2. Pretty much any AT weapons that infantry has today would got through Leo 1 like knife through hot butter.
    2
  3. Actually no - they compared the Leo 1 to T-72 and this is why Leo 1 was made obsolete. They did rather famous tests on the tanks & went with Leo 2 - Leo 1 was moved out of front lines as it could not hold against even export level T-72.
    2
  4. Nope. With the best available there is no chance to penetrate front of T-72BM3 / T80BVM. Unless you hit drivers hatch etc.
    2
  5.  @iatsd  If we count "the other spots" than M1 Abrams is weak and can be penetrated by late WWII tanks... When talking about penetration you look at turret cheeks or at the hull - otherwise tank protection discussions become a bit ... meaningless. So yeah, no chance. Also no chance penetrating M1 A2 or above from the front.
    2
  6. Leo 1 is similar to T-55s / T-62s used by Russia. It is a second line tank. It would be a death trap in attack role - specially against determined enemy. In any tank on tank action vs. regular Russian armor it is hopeless. Certainly better than nothing - but not a miracle weapon - just last resort weapon. They will not turn the tide of the war that Russia is now clearly winning.
    2
  7. For years Canada tried to sell them for next to nothing and no one wanted to buy them.
    1
  8. Maybe if they can be fixed - more junk for Soviet armor to remove.
    1
  9. Any version of Leo 1 is hopeless vs. modern T-72. They cannot penetrate from the front but round from T-72 can kill two Leo 1s when they are parked just right - from the front. T-72 - even old versions fire on the move at a standard tank target is around 80% from 2km. Newer versions is better. T-72 mobility is better as well for newer versions. Sensors are better etc. etc. etc. T-72 BM3 can withstand most frontal hits from Leo 1 from point blank range - i.e. 100m. There is a reason why Leo 1 was removed from service. Darts velocity decreases only marginally between 100m and 2000m - for most darts we are talking about < 10%.
    1
  10. Nah, the depression is not an issue for majority of UA terrain. Zero advantage.
    1
  11. Correct - what they are doing is called "cope" - they know they cannot give Ukraine more Leo 2 tanks so they are saying some old junk from 1960s is ... better than new stuff. They cope by saying Leo 1 has advantages - same as Mercedes from 1960s has advantages over one from 2020. I mean some Mercedes cars from 1980s made it past 2 million km (!) But who would rather have old car than new one???? It is just cope. Even in city fight Russian Wagner used latest T-90M - why they did not use upgraded T-62M? Come on, both have same reverse speed :)
    1
  12.  @potator9327  Leo 1 A5 is not that much lighter than Leo 2. Leo 1 A5 is 43t and Leo 2 A4 is 55t.
    1