Comments by "" (@obsidianjane4413) on "Leopard 1s for Ukraine: Still useful?" video.

Leo Is have very thin armor. Pretty much anything with 23mm and up firing modern APDS can kill it frontally. And its easy meat for RPGs, ATGM, and AT cluster munitions. Its basically a light tank at best, and really just a light infantry support gun mostly, something that infantry can deal with their own heavy weapons. Then there is the retraining, maintenance, and logistical headaches listed from above. And it will take months to years to get them actually in Ukraine.
160
@admontblanc None of your post is accurate.
15
@norbertscheibner8334 Leo IIs and M-1s are actually no better. Which is why they are currently obsolete in their current configurations against the proliferation of top attack ATGMs. They would be being destroyed as equally as T-xx tanks in the current Ukrainian environment. The Israelis learned this in '08, which is why the latest marks of Merkava and Magach carry very thick top armor.
7
@ClassicCase Its too bad they aren't using stock T72s or T-34s. Leo Is are as bad a choice as M-60s or anyone else's hand-me-downs. At this point, even Leo IIs or M-1s would be more of a liability than an asset. They won't be ready in time for this war and they won't be useful in the next one.
6
@WAJK2030 Leo 1A5 mantle is 200mm, the rest of it is less than 100. There are autocannon rounds that exceed that. But believe whatever you want.
5
@Laura-S196 M-1s are vastly more capable than Leo 1s. The problem remains, and is even worse, by the fact that those tanks are mostly in the US or prepositioned on the other side of the planet, and so once again, it would take months if not years to get them fielded where they will do any good.
5
@maquettemusic1623 Nothing in your post is accurate. The Leo i was designed to be a generic MBT, but in an era when the proliferation of HEAT shells and ATGMs had made armor ineffective. It was designed to be fast to be able to maneuver, not be a long range sniper. Otherwise they would have given it a 120mm gun. No, different models much less entirely different nations is not a "tank just a tank". Operating an AFV is not like driving a car. This war will be over before the paperwork for the transfer is finished, much less any training, or pushing of every. single. nut. and bolt. of supply and support for them. Stick to music.
4
@alanshackelford6450 That was from the rear where the armor is thin. Results would be much different if it from from the front and the crews weren't clueless.
3
@_blitzterceptor_8648 I don't think a Leo can do 400 m/sec.
2
@1chish No be but Israelis might lend them some.
2
@noahway13 Tanks do more than just "blow up the enemy". Modern warfare takes combined arms to be effective, all those layers of military force, you mentioned. Otherwise you get a face plant like Russia's. The "Switchblade" is pretty much an anti-personnel drone. Likewise, humans are increasingly being taken out of the loop and all sorts of autonomous weapons are in the wings. The only reason why they haven't yet is because humans are cheap and generals are conservative.
1
@view1st They have already been trying to negotiate. Various world leaders have tried to mediate a ceasefire. However, the Russians have no interest in it as long as they think they can win and Ukraine isn't going to accept the absurd terms they demand. Imagine if you were in a gun fight in your own house with robbers and they will only leave if you agree to give them your kitchen. The Minsk agreements were appeasement and led directly to the full war that is happening today. Putin assumed the West would again do nothing in response. No, your opinion is wrong, providing arms is not an act of war.
1
@view1st You have condescending delusions. Or you are just a Russian shill.
1
@demonprinces17 Not if it has Trophy bolted on.
1
@paullakowski2509 Maybe you should have googled that before you showed how little you know?
1
@paullakowski2509 That is also wrong.
1
@TeurastajaNexus I did not write that. Try again.
1
@kurtislabelle8332 Which comment subject/sub thread are you referring to here?
1
@kurtislabelle8332 It still isn't. Ukraine doesn't need to add yet another supply and support line for a tank with limited capabilities. Not when it can get the Russians to "donate" hundreds that they already have the logistics to support.
1
@John Grigg At some point Ukraine is going to need to standardize on a type and not be a hodgepodge, live-action museum of cold war armor.
1
@HCforLife1 If you had ever been a soldier you would know that you don't have a choice, you do whatever you are told to do even if it doesn't make sense. The question here was should they expend the limited training and logistics resources of a small number of Leopard tanks vs. something else, T-XXs, Challengers, Leo2s, etc. more capable. Not Leos or nothing.
1
The Leo I is definitely an old tank.
1