googlydoogly

I don't know about you, but I don't consider an IED attack, tank-vs-tank....or am I missing something here?

True, but all of that are just your assumptions, based on combat by Abrams. So that doesn't really hold well with your theory that the Leopard is a well-proven in combat.


So these alleged combat with Leopards are open to the public, right? I'm sure that A LOT of people would love to read about this. There are a lot of fans of the Leopard tanks who for years, were waiting for combat validation of their beloved tank.

And there are plenty of publications who would love to do another book about the Leopard tank series. Heck, even Krauss-Maffei would positively LOVE this, considering what a boost it will be in sales, if they can finally show the Leopard's merit in real combat, and not just scenarios.

And yet....nothing. Not. One. Single. Canadian. Tanker. Ever said anything about these so-called engagements until you.

So let me get this straight.....you basically based all of your arguments from hearsay???? So basically, you know a guy, who knew a guy, who knew a guy, who knew a guy, who was in a Leopard that killed a Serb T-55?

Is that it? You don't even know which country those Leopards belonged to? Oookay......

Sorry, I really don't have much to add. I thought you knew what you're talking about. This quote, should have alerted me that you're nothing but a Leopard fanboy and in most likelyhood, made up everything you uttered here today:

Darksheer

going against my better judgement ill reply in public here

try going to any canadian search engine website and typing in "canadian leopards in combat"
there is your proof

for my lack of recall of incidents 14 years ago
please tell me who made the car you saw at a street light 14 years ago
also tell me its color and if it had enoguh air in its tires it wasnt a very pressing issue to me as everything was painted white and we all had blue helmets on so excuse me for not remembering who the hell i was talking to 14 odd years ago

EDIT after searching for under 30 seconds i found what i was looking for
the leopards were danish since im sure your going to say im telling more stories here so ill give you the link to the haaglunds website that has the info including a photo of a white leopard tank and wow there is even mention of them firing thier main guns and actually shooting things so I guess we have proof of more than a machine gun on a leopard being fired altho there is no mention of the tank they wasted. they also engaged the serbians like you said. So I guess i was wrong about them not being serbs and you were correct

that alone makes me wonder since you seemed fixated on the serbs perhaps you knew about this all along if so why did you not say anything ?

In the end the only person around here who cannot find operational combat information on the leopard series of tank is you
[link=http://www.haaland.info/denmark/tank/]danish leopard link [/link]

Since you have said nothing but personal attacks change my posts you quote what i have said on every level. are you even trying to back your comments up or are you just a pro american abrams fanboi who cant bear that something might be as good as yours ?
While your at it how can i be the fanboi
By definition a fanboi is someone who argues the merits of one object over another with zero regard for fact or proof a good example of this is the war between xbox and playstation 3 owners
I have never once attacked your precious M1 the only negative thing i ever stated about it was it has a very high fuel consumption which you yourself also state and a vunerable supply chain which is a known fact I used the M1 as a ref point as so much of the leopard 2 was incoperated into the M1


your suddenly tank on tank comments are a 180 from before
i never said tank on tank
you did
i said it engaged armor and destroyed a tank

your argument changes with every post i make
i clarify my statements and you change your tune

i will state my post again
the leopard has seen combat FACT
the leopard has used its main gun to engage enemy targets and hit them FACT
the leopard has been attacked by a IED and other weapons and survived FACT!


your comment about the leopard being a unproven tank/weapons system are FALSE

end of story
you are demanding proof or none of this happened my proof is above
I ask you the same thing prove to me it didnt happen but this time please show me the information that everything i stated never happened
dont change my posts when you quote them nor put words in my mouth trying to make it look like i said things i never did

[link=http://www.cdfai.org/bergenarticles/Canadian%20tank%20squadrons%20success%20in%20Afgha nistan%20goes%20untold.pdf]Link1[/link]
[link=http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=canadian+leopards+in+combat+&fr=ush-ca-news]Canadian search engine[/link]

Here is a direct canadian military website which explains in detail what the leopards have been up too including the combat engagements what they got hit with and what they engaged
again i found all this info in less than a minute
[link=http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_10/iss_4/CAJ_vol10.4_03_e.pdf]Canadian military website[/link]
so it appears that im not the only one talking about it I guess the entire Canadian military is talking
so much for your top secret theory

Here is a quote from the above public document
"A common misconception is that the tank is primarily an anti-armour platform. This
is false, especially in the environment in which we currently find ourselves fighting."
your stating that tank on tank means everything but here we have a officer in the armored corps stating the opposite
I am more inclined to take the word of someone actually commands one of these things

while we are on the topic of credentials what are yours ?
have you served ?
are you serving ?
any combat experiance ?
any experiance with either the M1 or the Leopards ?



"COMBAT PROVEN " mean quite simply
it has been in a combat situation and performed as it was designed/intended

Finally ill go with your logic

the leopard 2 has not had a tank on tank engagement correct
my point ... who cares
the leopard can shoot its main gun at targets moving and stationary and hit them... Correct
the leopard has the same main gun as the M1 abrams correct
since the gun is not mounted on a M1 all data pertaining to its capabilites is void

it appears to myself and people i have shown this thread too that you are coming across as a fanboi
at this time i suggest we end this discussion and go with the following

you are correct about everything you stated
i was wrong about everything I stated I should change jobs and tell stories since im so good at making things up
the M1 abrams is the best tank in the world
the leopard 2 is a unproven hunk of trash

rivetcounter

This is another one of them boring threads saying that if it's not American then it's crap
No modern tank Challenger, Leopard or the indestructible M1 has come up against anything newer than a T72, none of the T72's that have been engaged have the Russian armour packs none of them have the better Russian guns or the first grade Russian ammunition and last of all none of the tanks engaged have come across a first grade crew so the argument is like comparing a Tiger/Panther with a Stuart and an untrained crew.

If the M1 is so good why are there so many knocked out? why can the average rag head immobilise an M1 with a blanket over the air intakes and if you want to argue then the Challenger must be far better than the M1 as only 2 have been knocked out, now don't start with all the bull**** saying Challenger hasn't seen combat.

Isn't the M1 Gun made by the Germans? and it's still not as good as the Challenger's Charm gun

Chally2

I’ve seen this kind of discussion so many times and most of the ground has been covered, no pun intended. The fact is that all three major Western tanks, the Leopard, the Challenger and M1 variants have been designed to do a specific job that there nations defence analysts expected them to have to do. Most MBTs are less than effective in an urban environment, hence the retro- fitting of urban warfare packages to each of the tanks in question (and many others).

Is any tank perfect for every task that may face it? I haven’t seen one yet. The battlefield will continue to evolve and the only way to meet such a threat is to design a unit that can be adapted to meet future threats. All three allied platforms under discussion have that capability and with co-operation between all parties, shared technology will keep these tanks in business for several decades.

I’m a Challenger fan (had you guessed?) and in my opinion its major faults can be placed at the feet of the government bean counters who refuse to allow it to reach its full potential, not in the basic design of the tank itself. If the bean counters have their way, instead of the pitiful 300 odd Challengers we now have, we will end up with half a dozen. If this nonsense continues I can see the RAF using micro- lights, the RN using fishing trawlers and the mainstay of the army will be a soapbox cart with a 12 bore/ guage on the front.[]

philipat

Try [link=http://www.afv-model.com]www.afv-model.com[/link] for Leopard 2 parts. I think they even have some parts to let you convert it to a Leopard 1.

Darksheer

i got all my parts for my M41 off them fantastic quality and pretty reasonable cost they have parts for all the tamiya leopards
including the gepard

someone makes the bar armor the Canadian leopards carry least i think they do i saw a picture of a tamiya leopard 2 with the armor on it it might have been a scratch job i dont know

I do have friends on them right now so if you want pictures of the Bar armor i can get them to bash off some pictures and mail them to me

philipat

Sweet...I was looking at some of there stuff for my M41. What specific parts did you use? Also, do you know if the M113 tracks (with the rubber pads) will work on the M41?

Darksheer

there are 2 companies that have metal tracks for the M41 you can get the normal set from matotoys.com and I have seen a fancy set on ebay and on another website that has actual rubber blocks set into the tracks which looks fantastic but is a little costly

philipat

Yea, I saw the metal tracks with rubber pads set in them on Tankzone's webpage. Tankzone is over-priced and seems to only be a clearinghouse for other manufacturer's stuff. For instance, I was very impressed to find their metal M2, but then I found that it's actually made by afv-model. So, now I need to find the manufacturer for those tracks. They'll still probably be expensive, just not as expensive (I hope).

Which AFV parts did you get for your Bulldog and were they a direct swap?

Darksheer

the smoke dischargers
the mide view mirrors
commanders MG
Rear Tail lights
and the front fenders
plus a few little odds and sods
i mainly used the parts from the Leo 1/gepard section

philipat

Those are nice looking parts. The suspension stuff really caught my eye, but I'm not sure that they would work and it would be way too expensive to experiment.

Turbobearcat

Strange to notice but that picture of the Leopard I the rear half and the turret look like the Old Panther...[:-]

zrvpvo8789

Did you know that the U.S. Army quietly sent in a platoon of Abrams in Georgia recently, and it's been destroying Russian armor left and right!!! In fact, an old M1A1 HC Abrams went against the Russian latest Black Eagle battle tank, and the Abrams blew its turret off with a 10,000-km hit with a super-secret, "fell-off-the-books" round!!!

'FACT' , huh?
Did you mean the expiremental mock up called 'Black Eagle' that was once shown on Russian trade show and NEVER been seen again?
Have you ever seen M1 fighting in the mountains (like Georgia) ?
Grow the **** UP you tool.

goldminer7759

It is interesting when old topics come back to life. I have a question that may put part of this in context.
In total numbers how many ABRAMS have been in combat? How many LEOPARDS have been in combat?
From that standpoint you could determine the % of losses for each and more accurately draw a comparison.
Since the U.S. military has fielded larger numbers, a higher number of losses is to be expected. The numbers
by other countries is much lower so the % breakdown would be more informative in my opinion.
Thanks!

YHR

At the end of the day what difference does it make. Until there is an all out War, this speculation does nothing but create peronal conflict. The scope of conflict has changed, and chances are (thank God) we will never see First class battle tank vs First class battle tank. If we do we are in for a whole pile of hurt.

What the world needs now is super robotic convey leads, magnetic field bomb detection and bomb diffusers. Tanks are great things to hang flags from, but they appear to be easy targets for attack aircraft, and any conflict that is going to pit front line battle tanks against one another is going to have an air show to go with it, and my thought is the superiorty in the air war will win the day.

ArmChairGeneral

I agree YHR, tanks are cool but if it came down to combat between advanced nations the average infantry guy has the capability to destroy a tank either directly ( at weapon ) or indirectly ( paint it for remote fire ), I have to wonder if the age of the heavy tank is coming to an end much like the battleship.

Darksheer

my understanding is we have about 120 leo's in theater now including 3 arv's
and to my knowledge we have had 1 disabled due to a ied hit

we have roughly 2500 troops in theater and have had over 140 killed since we rolled in there with the americans after 9/11

if you want exact figures im sure they are out there

rivetcounter

England has lost 2 Challengers since Gulf 1 not bad for 20+ years, 1 was blue on blue and the other IED, there was a case where a Chally lost a track and ended up reversing on 1 track into a hole or ditch, Johnny Taliban used it for target practice with RPG’s and what ever else they could lay there hands on, the crew was still in the tank during this and when the tank was recovered they where unhurt, tracks repaired and some new paint the tank was back in action again within a few days.

The Germans, Dutch and Belgians are all in Afghanistan with Leopards of different models.

Wozwasnt

Not true, one of the crew had a broken wrist after the tank was hit with an Anti Tank Missile.

Panther F

The Challenger would be one I would like to see in 1/16 before an Abrams. But, I may have to settle for a Leopard.


- Jeff

Airwolf572010

Hi all you tankies out there Im a Newbie and have been reading these comments with great interest.
I have just purchased a Leopard for my collection as well as the Abrahams and look forward to receiving them after all your comments..
I currently own 3 Matarro Shermans which have been Highly detailed and look so lifelike its unreal... i also own Henglong tiger 1 Panzer III Panther bulldog and i really enjoy the Hobby..
I propose to take a few pikkies of my collection and would be really pleased if you could have a look at my tanks and see what you can actually do to stock standard items ... Its a beautiful Hobby enjoy people...

Armo

Airwolf572010

Hi Guys just thought I would try and get some pikkies of this collection now lets see how we go