>

Genuine question… so roughly how much territory can one of these tanks influence or I guess provide pressure to? Is 20 tanks really that significant? I’m trying to wrap my head around how much influence 1 of these tanks can provide.
Canada has, or at least had, 80 or so.  They were being used as target practice starting a few years ago.  If any of them dodged that fate I hope we can send them too. >

CanadianForces on IG posted a few pics today of Leopard 2s being delivered to Ukraine. The comments section is absolutely wild. Being Canadian used to stand for something, including protecting the little guy. It would seem that many have forgotten. >

Was rough man I tried to reason with a couple of them, but shocking how brainwashed they were. Especially when i mentioned how Russia constantly invades our airspace. >

It’s either fight this weakened version of Russia or let them assimilate Ukraine into Russia and we’ve got a bigger, more capable adversary. This is the lesser of two evils if you assume all wars are evil and if you understand the world is full of shades of gray you recognize this is the moral thing to do. >

You know this is kind of getting into the domino theory but on the other hand russians are openly talking about attacking Poland and Moldova next... >

The theory is fact, that is how empires start. How Rome a city became greatest European empire >

Do you remember the recent history of the "domino theory", like from the last century? :) >

How effective are Leopard 1 tanks going to be on the battlefield? What do they match up with favorably, and where are they outclassed? >

Leopard 1 has pretty weak armor, but a decent gun and fire control system. They're pretty nimble too.
In a close-in brawl the Leopard 1 is outclassed by the T-72, but put some distance between them and the odds even out more. Despite its age the 105 mm gun is more than adequate for dealing with T-72's and T-62's, as proven during Desert Storm.
The Leopard 1, like most western tanks, is ideal for taking pot-shots at tanks approaching from a distance while hiding behind the top of a hill (in this picture being demonstrated by a French Leclerc tank.).
Soviet tanks are much worse at this as they can't point their guns nearly as low. >

My goodness, that tank is positioned like a prone infantryman >

Add to that modern gun stabilizer ms that allows shit like This and tanks get fucking scary. For those that do not want to click a link it's a leopard 2 driving with a beer glass full of beer on the end of its barrel doi g probably 20mph and you can see the hull rising and dropping like 3ft but it doesn't spill a drop. >

That's mind-boggling in two ways. Your gun can be perfectly stable while you're tumbling around inside, and it's tech from 1986?! I guess it's all just mechanical?
Any idea if modern tanks have anything like aim-assist? Can they track targets and accommodate for trajectories? >

Basically. I know the abrams can hit a moving target while its moving at the same time. Also trajectories dont matter as much with tank shells as the do with artillery. Tanks fire relatively flat to hit there target. Artillery lobs the shells high in the air so they drop on the enemy from above  so they do have to worry about the shells trajectory but not nearly as much as arty. >

Click here to read this article for free.
From Bloomberg News reporter Arne Delfs:
Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands will supply Ukraine with 178 older generation Leopard 1 battle tanks, according to people familiar with the decision.
The joint initiative is the latest shipment of heavy military equipment for the government in Kyiv ahead of an expected intensification of fighting with invading Russian forces in coming weeks.
German public broadcaster ZDF quoted Defense Minister Boris Pistorius as saying that the government in Berlin had “agreed to supply a large contingent of Leopard A1s with a group of various European countries.
”The delivery would be made in stages, with “about 20, 25” to arrive by the European summer and more than 100 by early next year, ZDF quoted Pistorius as saying during a visit to Kyiv. >


The delivery would be made in stages, with “about 20, 25” to arrive by the European summer and more than 100 by early next year

I am afraid this will be too late for this war… >

Ukraine stopped Russia's advances with anti-tank missiles and artillery. They needs tanks to go on the offensive and take back the land they lost, but they don't need them while they're just defending.
What they do need, and urgently, is anti-air missiles to replace the ones they're using, and longer range missiles. >

I'm not sure Leopard 1 is that effective? >

if they put the Leopard 1's in the back, all the more experienced UA T-series tanks can be moved to the front. 
Like when the UK committed 1 company of Challengers, it means UA has 15 tanks for base defense and can move 15 tanks up to cover ground. >

Very easy to say from the safety of your home. Much harder to actually utilize in the field of battle. Especially when you consider the fact vast majority of Ukrainians are drafted. >

There's a fucking huge difference between being drafted for WW II and getting drafted for Vietnam. 
These people are fighting for their own land, lives & liberty and benefit from having a leader who inspires them to press on. The fact they were "drafted" is meaningless in this context.... >


The fact they were "drafted" is meaningless in this context....

And also irrelevant to the discussion chain. The question was if Leopards would be effective. The answer is no, not immediately, it would make more sense to use them to fulfill back roles and push alike tanks to the front because they'll be easier to feed and work on. >

I had nothing to add to that convo LOL. >

you're good. I'm not sure where that guy was trying to drive the conversation. >

Dutch media now also confirming Dutch involvement and repeating the 100+ figure. I don't think there are any Leopard 1s left in Dutch storage, but they will likely help out financially like with the Czech T-72 program. 
The joint Dutch-German-Danish announcement has been published here among other places, and it includes the following interesting line:
"Our "Leo 1 A5 Initiative" is open to further partners. So far, Belgium has also shown initial interest to participate."
Perhaps this could indicate the former Belgian vehicles stored and maintained by OIP Land Systems could be in play too, even though there are still some question marks about the price asked by OIP for their services. 
I try to keep track of these rumors and announcements closely as I run /r/MilitaryProcurement, but I didn't see this one from my own government coming! >

Wonder how they will even do or be used, they aren't better than what Russia or Ukraine use currently. >

They aren't better, but they are more. Even being able to match Russia 1-to-1 on rusty cold war relics would be an improvement. >

The tanks aren't being upgraded. It's saying they're the upgraded Leopard 1A5 variants, which came out in the mid 1980s, and the last update for the Leopard 1 that was ever approved. >

There is no modernization for the Leo 1. Leo 1A5 is as advanced as they come.
I suspect it's more so simply an issue with the journalist taking something such as "restored", and assuming it means modernizing. Can't just swap out something like the thermal sights without a major undertaking, such as Turkey's M60TM program. Parts and fittings have to be made specific for the platform in order to fit where the old system was, and that takes a hell of a long time. Took 8 years to upgrade 170 Turkish M60s to the Sabra Mk3 variant, and cost some $700M USD. 
No, it's far more likely they simply mean restore the engines and systems to a working order (as is expected with a depot stored vehicle), and the journalist, notably not a defense journalist, simply is confused. >

It's sounds like you know a thing or 2 about tanks. I only know what I read in the news. And difference news outlets from the Netherlands and Belgium talk about modernizing the tanks. And that only 25 to 35 will be ready this year. 
So maybe not all the tanks in storage are already updated to the 1A5 version. >

It could be as simple as changing the batteries, refurbing the engines, changing the oil and sending them out.  If they’re 1a5 variants, they’re as kitted out as kits get.
Mainstream media isn’t really good at covering these topics so I imagine the tanks mostly just need to be restored as lord p stated above. >

Yes could be. I will do some more research  and post again if I find more clear information. >

Is it really that big of a deal if they are modernized or not? It seems like you really want them to be brand new top of the line, but it doesn’t really matter if they aren’t.. >

OP just makes sure he is giving correct information.
Can't blame someone for that >

“Quantity has a quality all its own.” - Stalin >

Is a Leo 1 of any use?
If I remember correctly they came from a Time when Anti Tank Weapons were ahead of Tank development.
So Militarys at the Time decided that speed and Fire Power were higher in Priority then Protection >

In the role of a (very hard to breach) MBT?
No. 
In the role of fairly mobile moderately protected 105mm gun? I would expect them to he of some use. >

It’s 2023,  pair it with a drone that makes sure there are no enemy tanks with a bigger cock and let the leopards rip >

I hope to see this quoted in history books discussing Ukraines approach to tank warfare. >

Quantity has a quality all its own. >

That's excellent. For those that think them getting the L1's wouldn't be worth it need to realize that they can thread these in with the other units and create issues via quantity in their use. >

Any tanks are better than no tanks. Russia is unable to replace their dwindling supply. >

Damn Ukraine is about to get a huge boost in their tank arsenal. >

The news of tanks is great, but did I hear right that they no longer produce munitions for the Leopard 1?
Hopefully there are large stores of ammo coming with the tanks >

Same gun as the US stryker platform, which will be retired so there will be enough in stock. >

Damn, strykers are already getting retired? >

Only the M1128 Mobile Gun System. Other Stryker platforms are still in service and will be for the foreseeable future. >

Hi Bloomberg. Your Bloomberg post is blocked by Bloomberg. >

178 - 88 is 90. 90 - 2 is also 88. 2 is the number of 88s buried in the number of tanks being sent! Further proof that they are sending these amounts of tanks on purpose as a pro-nazi dog whistle!!1! ^/s >

amazing how suddenly everyone has tanks to spare. as if germany did some house cleaning and found them in the attic. otherwise they could have been in ukraine for at least half a year by now. >

Almost as if Germany is always acting based on consensus with allies and never go at it alone. >

this is true for the modern leopard 2 version. the old leopard 1 tanks this is about weren't part of any public debate in germany and it was inferred that all stockpiles of usable military material was low or depleted.