Leopard C1 (105mm IWS): Punching Above Your Weight Class (i)

[Would you like to see this in-game?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

Leopard C1 (105mm Improved Weapons System)

Hello again! welcome to the first in my suggestions for the various vehicles equipped with the Experimental Royal Ordinance 105mm Improved Weapons System (IWS for short), these were a series of vehicles that were used to test the IWS gun,originally designed for the RO2004 Light Tank as well as to upgun other existing 105mm equipped tanks, unfortunately never progressing past the Prototype stage, I would like to shed light on these forgotten tanks, starting with the most well known; The Leopard C1.

History

Spoiler

Development of the IWS began in the late 1980s as a private venture by Royal Ordinance in response to an anticipated need for an enhanced variant of the L7 gun, featured on almost all western tanks at the time. The Idea of the IWS was to be capable of being retrofitted to all 105mm tanks with relative ease, all whilst maintaining a power increase akin to the more modern 120mm Smoothbore guns beginning to come into service at the time without the need for Depleted Uranium shells and the implications that come with them. It had to fit into all existing L7 or M68 mountings whilst not presenting a considerable increase in Recoil or other factors.

The Result was an impressive feat, with the guns new shell, the T-2-series APFSDS shell, was made of a tungsten-nickel-iron alloy capable of penetrating up to 540mm of RHA at ranges of around 2000m (for reference that is equivalent to the British 120mm L27A1 shell found on the Challengers) all whilst retaining the calibre and being able to fit into all ammunition storage systems for the 105x617mm rounds the L7 was designed for. despite these impressive performances, there were some issues, such as the fact that there was so much recoil energy from the gun that the crew had to be buttoned down to fire, not ideal for a gun that was meant to present no large increase in Recoil. Due to these factors and the fact that, at the time, most of NATO and the West was far more favourable of the newer designed 120mm Tanks, such as the Leopard 2, M1A1, Challenger and others the gun never saw success, other than being fitted to the RO2004 light tank, however that never progressed past a separated hull and turret.

Now after that, lets get onto the specifics of the Leopard C1 this was to be fitted to, this tank was borrowed from the Canadian Army for testing, believe it or not, this was actually the second leopard to be fitted with the IWS (of 3), the first being a Series 0 leopard currently at Bovington Tank Museum, but that’s a story for another suggestion. Now back to the C1, it was fitted in either 1989 or 1990, and was used for Firing Trials in the UK, there are also unconfirmed reports of another C1 being modified in Canada in 1993, however there is no evidence to support Canada Evaluating the gun, nor is the source particularly Reliable.

The Most likely timeline would be that the Tank was borrowed from Canada in order to fit the Gun and for its Initial firing trials (independent of canadian involvement) and then removed before being returned to the Canadians following testing, It could have been tested by the canadians at a later date, but as for this specific conversion it is highly unlikely the canadians had much involvement in the testing.

Images

Spoiler

image

An Image showing the C1 fitted with the IWS, note the distinct Muzzle break

image

Another image showing the full tank

image

The full excerpt the picture above is from

image
image
image

Various Information on the APFSDS Round itself

Specs/Armament

Spoiler

General Characteristics

Length : 9.54 m
Width : 3.25 m
Height : 2.64 m
Weight : 42.400 kg
Armour : 25 - 70 mm
Engine : V10-cylinder MTU MB 838 Ca M500, 37.4 L, liquid cooled.
Horsepower : 830 hp at 2.200 rpm.
Transmission : 4-speed ZF Hydromedia 4 HP 250 gearbox with torque converter.
Electrical system : 24 volt, negative ground.
Fuel type : Multi-fuel.
Fuel capacity : 980 liter (215 gallons).
Range : 600 km (373 miles).
Crew : 4.

Armament

Main Gun

  • 1 x Royal Ordinance 105mm IWS (T-2 (540mm@2000m) + all other standard 105×617mmR shells)

Secondary Armaments

  • 1 x Coaxial 7.62 mm FN MAG (C6) machine gun

  • 1 x Roof Mounted 7.62 mm FN MAG (C6) machine gun

Place in game

Spoiler

Personally I feel this would be an interesting vehicle for High tier Britain, given that it provides a pretty significant upgrade over the standard L7 we have in game, and would offer british players a high penetration light tank, with a shell performing similarly to the L27 found on the Challengers. I think it would be a good candidate for either Tech Tree, premium, or event, given that it offers a significant upgrade in firepower over most other light tanks and would be able to hold its own even at quite high BRs like 11.0 or higher.

Sources

Spoiler

Royal Ordnance L7 - Wikipedia
105×617mmR - Wikipedia
Royal Ordnance 105mm Improved Weapon System | Secret Projects Forum
Army Guide
Leopard 1 Family - Danish Army Vehicles Homepage

Janes Ammunition Handbook 2006-2007 (Page 347/348)

9 Likes

Well, that’s one vehicle I can cross off my to-do list!

+1 for sure, I’d love to see this in the UK tree.

iws 2

7 Likes

Dont worry, ive got stuff for the other leos in the making too,

(Thats the Leo1A5 in the pic btw)

1 Like

Nvm, ive just seen the leaf on the side…

Are there any vehicles that mounted it I’m unaware of? Leopard 1 (base model) was fitted with it at Bovington iirc, an M60 was fitted with it, and a Leopard 1A5, but I haven’t seen any images of the latter.

This looks awesome!!

From the original picture it looks like they just made the gun barrel super oddly long

1 Like

From my research there have been 5 vehicles fitted with the IWS

  1. A preseries Leopard 1
  2. Leopard C1
  3. M60
  4. leopard 1A5
  5. RO2004 (as im sure you know)

So far i have images of the Preseries, C1 and M60. I had thought i had an image of the 1A5 until about 10 minutes ago :P

4 Likes

Win some, lose some
It’s happened to me before. Thought I had a picture of USSR carrier aircraft prototype but it was a prototype for a completely different thing

Just means im back to stage one, its also a bummer because its a really clear image i could have used in the suggestion but hey

as they say, it is what it is

1 Like

leopard for you,
leopard for you,
and a leopard for you too

Leopards for everyone!!!

Yes, that indeed seems to be the case.

1 Like

+1 if this is the only way to get one with the other things I’ll tank it.

1 Like

Warrior one of the 105 variants made use of it I’m pretty sure.

3 Likes

Huh neat id never seen that before

I don’t think that’s the IWS, I’m almost 100% sure it’s a variant of the 105mm LRF as seen on the Stingray (also the VFM5, but it has a slightly different looking version).

Stingray-Light-Tank-6

4 Likes

Yeah, no way. We are talking about a round that is around 65mm shorter with 5mm more diameter and going 85m/s slower than. Magically pulling out L27A1 numbers with 230m/s less velocity while L27A1 was in active development simply isn’t happening.

Whenever numbers are given out like this in publications they are almost certainly talking about a 60deg NATO heavy test. Assuming that, we get 270mm@60deg@2km which is around 11mm less than M900 which lines up with the lower velocity.

With all due respect, several Sources support it, the main one i have access to being Janes, However it was also advertised by Royal Ordinance themselves

It was achieved by the gun having an increadibly high pressure in the barrel, so much ao that the Recoil was increadible.

I am no expert on ballistics, but if several reliable sources claim it then im going to assume its true

Ok? the 540mm @2km can be at 60deg without contradicting anything.

Who cares about chamber pressure when the muzzle velocity is given? It’s stated at 1420m/s so the pressure doesn’t matter at all. If what you claim is true then all it means is that its really inefficient converting that chamber pressure to kinetic energy since M900 has a higher velocity it while being a bigger round

So
M900 is

  • 700mm long
  • 23mm diameter
  • going 1505m/s
  • It can pen 562mm@60deg@2km

L27A1 is

  • 660mm long
  • 25mm diameter
  • going 1650m/s
  • It can pen 622mm@60deg@2km

This round is

  • 640mm long
  • 28mm diameter
  • going 1420m/s

So you can either believe that all references to the pen were actually referring to 60deg pen as is the NATO standard literally everywhere else and the round slightly worse than M900 performs slightly worse than M900.

OR you can believe that this round

  • outperforms M900 by 80mm flat pen by being 60mm shorter and 85m/s slower and magically makes up that gap by being 5mm bigger in diameter

  • Is equal to L27A1 despite being 20mm shorter, 230m/s slower and magically makes up that all up by having a 3mm bigger diameter.

This is also being generous and assuming 60deg as the standard as I’ve seen some people say that British tests will often use 70deg as their standard.

2 Likes

If you’re talking about in-game L27A1 then yes. If you’re talking about real life L27A1 then no. Because real life L27A1 is about equal in performance to M829A1. This could mean that M900 is underperforming and that it could be better than the T-2.