>

Russia: "We have a hypersonic cruise missile that can destroy the decadent west without warning. Don't test us. No, you can't see it. No, it didn't blow up, that's just propaganda."
The US: "Want to see our new hybrid turbojet/ramjet switch modes in a windtunnel?" EDIT: volume warning
Oh tank of the lake, what is your wisdom? >

You can't declare yourself Emperor just because a watery tart lobs a tank at you! >

We are the tanks who say… nee ! >

"First, you must find....another shrubbery!" >

How many is a company? >

According to German media it's a company. 14 tanks. >

Same as Poland then. Poland will send their 30-40 year old 2A4s instead of their modernized ones tho (the german ones are 2A6s, which is the version build in the 2000s). >

The A6 have the newer L/55 gun..
Massive firepower upgrade + new optics >

"Normally, if it's old but it works wonderfully, you tend to keep the same model.
This does not include weaponry. You always want to shoot the shiny new gun when the opportunity presents itself." >

Hey, tank guys: I'm tech, but not up on military. What's the significance of the Leopards? >

If you want to get the best tanks that are available, you either buy the American M1 or the German Leopard 2. How good they are now exactly depends on the exact versions but they are generally the best of the best of a certain age bracket of tanks.
With a few nations sending stuff, Ukraine is getting 30 M1s and around 45-50 Leopard 2s or so. Some of those are the older Leopard 2A4 standard, which was up to date in the late 80s and some are the newer A6 standard from the late 90s/early 2000s.
The big thing is that heavy tanks like these are indispensable offensive weapons. If Ukraine uses them well, they have the capability to go on serious offensives and retake territory much more effectively than before. >

You add the British Challenger and the French Leclerc and you got the big four >

German media outlets are reporting that the US might send Abrams aswell (along with MTBs from other nations). If so Scholz got what he wanted. >

So you're telling me that since Russia won't be holding their own tank biathlon this year that Ukraine will be holding them instead with the Challengers, Leopards, and Abrams all competing? >

Yeah will be interesting against the "t-72" team. Micheal bay will be happy. Vs. the t-90 will be a rare sight probably. >


t-90 will be a rare sight probably

Never a better opportunity for real world trials... >

The T-90 has been in service since 1992. It's just a next gen T-72, including the abysmal 4 km/h back up speed that's proven to be so completely lethal.
If the maybe 20 T-14s that exist are actually combat ready, then that'd be a neat thing to capture without a fight when it throws a track. >

In Russia tank only go Forward, no Back. >

Russia must really be holding on to order 227 >

NOT ONE STEP BACK, err TREAD
-Stalin I think >

Potato, po-vodka, same difference >

Well that about seals the deal for russia being totally fucked. Yeah it's "just" 14 tanks but that's not the big news, it's that this opens the flooddams for everyone. Just like how everyone was trepid to even send artillery at the start whilst now everyone is sending tons of it, this basically leaves very few things of the table for Ukraine.
And modern tanks vs non-modern tanks is a nightmare for the non-modern, more so than any other field of equipment bar airplanes >

Artillery quickly went from a few pieces to a goddamn competition. >

Everyone in the arms business wants to real-world test their wares. >

Except Russia for some reason.