Ukraine Veteran: Why Leopard 1 is better than Leopard 2 for Ukraine

Ukraine is soon to receive 110 Leopard 1 (likely the variant 1A5). A German combat engineer fighting with the Legion in Ukraine explains why he thinks that the Leopard 1 is preferable over the Leopard 2 due to various reasons that are often missed. Additionally, we also look at some basic features of the Leopard 1.

DISCLAIMER D: I was invited by the Deutsche Panzermuseum in 2018, 2019 & 2020.
DISCLAIMER A: I was invited by the Tank Museum at Bovington in 2017, 2018 & 2019.

»» GET OUR BOOKS ««

»» SUPPORT MHV ««

»» MERCHANDISE ««

»» SOURCES ««

Hilmes, Rolf: Kampfpanzer Leopard 1: Entwicklung, Serie, Komponenten. 1. Auflage, Motorbuch Verlag: Stuttgart, Germany, 2019.

Lobitz, Frank: Kampfpanzer LEOPARD 1 in der Bundeswehr - Frühe Jahre. Tankograd Publishing: Erlangen, Germany, 2006.

Lobitz, Frank: Kampfpanzer LEOPARD 1 in der Bundeswehr - Späte Jahre. Tankograd Publishing: Erlangen, Germany, 2006.

Hilmes, Rolf: Meilensteine der Panzerentwicklung Panzerkonzepte und Baugruppentechnologie. Motorbuch Verlag: Stuttgart, Germany, 2020.


00:00 Intro
00:22 News & Recent History (2022-2023)
01:22 Why the Leopard 1 is preferable to the Leopard 2
01:35 Main Battle Tank Focus wrong
02:38 Weapon Priorities for Ukraine
03:14 Older vs Newer tanks
04:03 Cost
05:30 Weight (tactics & logistics)
06:60 Leopard 1: Firepower
08:26 Leopard 1: Armor Protection
09:19 Leopard 1: Mobility
10:39 Leopard 1: Ergonomics
12:01 Summary

#leopard1,#leopardukraine,#leopard2

[lavrentivs]

As a side note and to help people avoid confusion, the danish designated Leopard 1A5 are not regular Leopard 1A5, but Leopard 1A3 (with upgrades).

[CausticLemons]

I love that you include the original wording and not just your translation. I think it really adds to the authenticity and integrity of this channel.

[agffans]

Just to correct some of the confusion that seem to be, then the first 80 Leopard 1A5 that are being donated to Ukraine this year is the Danish 1A5 DK and 1A5 DK1 versions. Denmark purchased 110 German Leopard 1A3 and 1A4 in 1991 that then were upgraded to Leopard 1A5 DK standard, to be ready for service in 1993, and the changes and add-ons for the Danish version of the Leopard 1A5 were not done in Germany but upgraded to 1A5 DK by Falck-Schmidt Defense Systems in Denmark in 1991 to 1993.

So the 1A5 DK is not quite the same version but different than the German Leopards 1A5 in some aspects.

They were upgraded and equipped with a new Leopard 2A4 fire control computer, a laser range finder and the Leopard 2A4 stabilized thermal sight, night vision. The commanders forward periscope and panoramic sight were extended and the gun received a thermal sleeve and a muzzle reference collimator at the end of the barrel among other things.



36 of these Leopards that were participating in the UNPROFOR/SFOR operation in Bosnia (look up Operation Bøllebank) were further upgraded by Falck-Schmidt to Leopard 1A5 DK-1 in 1994-95, with air-condition, new fire-suppression system, Honda generator, GPS, RAMTA mine ploughs, roof mounted "fast fittings" for close defence work and a rear mounted turret ammunition rack.


Unlike the German 1A5, the two Danish 1A5 DK versions have a welded turret, so welded plates of rolled steel, much harder and stronger than casted steel with same thickness, but more complicated and slower to produce and more expensive than casting. The Leopard 1A5 DK have a 6x faster maximum reverse speed in comparison a Russian T-72, just like the Leopard 2A4 upgrade features will come in handy I'm sure. The Leopard 1A5 DK also has a turret which was designed to accept the newer 120 mm gun barrel from the Leopard 2A4, but this option was not originally added, but could be done now.


The Leopard 1A5 DK and 1A5 DK-1 were all out-phased in 2005 and in 2010 they were handed over to German company FFG in Flensburg who keep, upgrade and sell older tanks and armored personnel carriers from both the Danish and German military, and who are responsible for their battle ready maintenance-upgrade, before they are handed over to the Ukrainians.

[henryquecabral]

About weight in Leopard 1: Brazil has been trying several programs to get new and modern MBTs, but all so far have failed because the Brazilian infrastructure, specially in the frontiers, is quite poor. Thus every MBT trial the Brazilian army had ended up failing in weight, as a country with roughly the size of the European continent the Brazilian army takes great afford in mobility and logistics, cause it can't be everywhere at once, so it needs to move quickly through the country's bridges, barges, roads, forests etc... So Brazil has been modernizing its Leo 1 ever since, this last modernization program (undergoing on thermals, comms, electric turret) will be last one. Then Brazil will move to a medium MBT, like the CV90120-T. It will be interesting to see Ukraine dealing with the problem the brazilian army has been fearing for so long

[schuhsuppe]

Leopard 1s fighting T-62s. Just like in the good old days

[valoroustv]

This is a very well done video on these tanks! I specifically enjoyed how you went in depth on the importance of the weight of these beasts and how that factored into the decision to send one tank to Ukraine over another. Keep up the great work!

[herosstratos]

With regard to the reversing speed of the Leopard 1, a distinction must be made between the early production lots using the switch box with gear preselection and the later production lots with the automatic switch box. With the switch box with gear preselection, you can only reverse in the first two gears, with the automatic switch box you can reverse in all four gears.

[tarickw]

the chieftain said something very useful about this: it is about the capabilities a 'thingy' (such as a tank) provides and not necessarily about it's weaknesses

[Ostenjager]

Unpopular opinion: tank silhouette/profile doesn't matter as much as people think it does. Western tanks are all substantially larger than their Com Bloc counterparts, but have decisively defeated those smaller profile designs far more often than not. There are a lot of reasons for this; better optics, training, tactics, etc. but that merely illustrates my point. The size and weight of tanks affects logistics and transportation far more than these factors influence battlefield performance.

[asmodon]

Thanks for the video and your insights!

[VoltaireVoltaire-zqzh]

I largely agree with this analysis; right now, with a very large front, tank duels will remain very rare and the role of the tanks will likely continue to be in fire support and elimination of armored vehicles. The Leo 1 A5 is perfectly suited for the task, and may also be less affected by soft terrain than its later counterparts. Similarly, the French AMX10 RC provided should also be of great help; right now the more the better. If they can be accompanied by a few infantry teams wit good atgms, they should be able to face most combat situations. The situation is very different for planes, where recent technologies provide a massive edge: better electronics, radars and weapon systems that F16 or the like could provide would massively increase the survivability and efficiency of the planes, that need to operate in a SAM-rich hostile environment where Russian fighters can still intervene and intercept Ukrainian planes as soon as they fly at higher altitude, because planes can cover massive areas, contrary to tanks.

[NewDemocraticMan]

As a trained historian, I wanted to commend you and your supporters on the wonderful work you've done on this channel! I'm very impressed with the clarity of information delivery, and the efforts at researching the topics. Extremely professional and impressive, considering the platform! I was especially impressed by your work uncovering the German reports on the Churchill tanks recovered from Dieppe, and the overall reviews of the platform by the German military services. I was curious if you have, or plan to have, a similar review about the M4 Sherman line. Obviously, the tank came in so many forms, and fought on so many fronts, the German forces would be very familiar with the platform. However, with a dizzying array of sub-types and specialty versions, your aforementioned Churchill video made me curious about it.

Regardless of your future projects, I'll continue watching with great interest!

Thanks, and with kindest regards from Canada.

[Wizzbyte]

Thank you for the Video and explanation I hope it will help the decisionmakers

[otdewiljes]

Gun depression is another important factor which adds to the Leo's overall capability package: the Leo 1 has a clear design philosophy, which is to prioritize the ability to crest and get the first shot off on Warsaw Pact-type AFVs from a defensive position. Hence the low armour (for better tactical and strategic positioning), the good gun depression (for cresting), the high profile (to allow the gun depression), the good reverse speed (to pop back down the crest), and the firing systems.

And it is still an MBT, so it can deal with anything not a MBT just as well as any other MBT (but then, so can a T-55, probably), like combined arms support, suppression, assaulting fortified positions and the like.

This capability is very useful to Ukraine, especially given the logistics constraints clearly outlined in this video.

[mwtrolle]

I know you started by saying you would not go in to special variants.
But one thing to mention, the 96 Danish Leopard 1A5DK’s Ukraine are to get is all capable of fitting dozer blades, usually on almost all other Leopard variants and even other types of tanks it’s only one for each platoon that got the fitting for it.
It will be super useful to remove fortifications like dragons teeth and tank ditches.

[Wseldgzer]

Leopard 2 is better suited for breaching operations. It'll plow through trenches and bunkers easily. They're very good at it. So you punch through defenses with that and then come through the breach with Leopard 1's and AFV's.

[charlesmoss]

When Challenger came in the rumour was a lot of max loads were simply shifted to 60 tonnes as the new class exceeded so many previous limits for bridges etc. However I was asked during training if I would prioritise armour over more mobility - Leapard 1 over Challenger and I instantly said armour (within reason) as even then infantry portable tank busting equipment was near ubiquitous and I feel partly vindicated by what we see today.

[mikelong]

Whilst Leo 1 may be marginal in tank combat it has more than enough firepower to engage BMP's, MTLB etc, which are seen in vastly greater numbers than Russian tanks, the 105mm L7 is also just as useful in trench clearing as the Russian guns, and we see a lot of that going on, plus the rate of fire of the 105 L7 is superior to the Russian designed tanks.

lastly you did not cover a major combat advantage the Leo has over it's adversaries, and that is the gun depression, the ability of the Leo to enage from hull down positions or back slopes means it becomes a very small target wheras the limited depression Russian tanks are required to expose the whole vehicle to get the gun down on a target, the Israeli's exploited this advantage in many of thier combats using higher depression turret designs like Centurion and M48, combine that with the Leo's ability to duck quickly with it's reverse speed and it's not a vehicle to be sniffed it!

[Acin]

One more thing you did not mention is the main gun depression -9°
Leo 1 can thus easier fire directly a HE shell into a trench line when supporting storming infantry

[Tricolor]

Great Video

it was a great Tank … he is deep in my heart ❤️
I miss them .., and the super engine sound …

Greeting from a Leo1a5 driver ( 1989 Germany) …