Lets talk about the state of Germany

Machinery of War Discussion
1846

The turret relies on the wedge breaking apart the rod and changing its direction, whereas the hull is just a lot of passive material (the add-on is basically just solid).

Technically speaking, the turret’s protection levels would vary depending on the projectile that’s being shot at it, since shorter and thicker rods would be less affected in theory than longer and thinner rods, but never go below the raw protection value provided by the thickness of the armoir (which in this case is roughly ~750mm - 800mm from both the turret and the wedge).

The wedge could actually be compared to the heavy ERA’s on Russian tanks - > thinner rods (more affected). Thicker rods - > less affected (which is why in simulation DM53 can defeat T-90A at 3km’s, but M829A2 fails at 500 meters if I remember correctly).

1847

besides that the problem of the KF-51… same as with the KF41 it never was introduced into the germany army… we have to hope either gajin gets lenient or another country besides hungary wants to introduce it and we get the export version.
As it stands currently once we reach 2A8 /KF51 generations it will be the sweden all over again with italy being the better german once again

1848

Sure, but the turret is like 880mm LOS and the hull is not iirc, even with the add-on?

I cant see how the hull would have equivalent protection to something that not only has outright thicker composite, but also has the wedge

1849

That’s not a problem. Unless KF-51 enters service in another country and that country is in WT (which is the case KF-41). Otherwise, KF-51 is a German tank, with the same situation as the L2K, Rad, Begleit and many more.

1850

Turret is ~860mm LoS, the hull (without add-on) is ~710 - 720mm LoS, add-on is ~240mm LoS if I remember correctly, total being slightly more than ~900mm LoS.

1851

Ah, my bad, I had the LOS wrong then I suppose. Thought the hull was like low 600mm’s LOS at most not counting add-on

1852

I told you so.
7V was the only option as everything else is side-grades & a new BR for ground may be coming regardless.

1853

Hungary wants to buy the KF51, help the rest of the development and produce it in their factory. Besides me not knowing how they wanna pay form them since they just bought the Leo 2A7HU, that is the current situation.
The other realy intrested party if i am not one is ukraine because rheinmetall pretty much build great relationship with them over the current situation

1 Like
1854

2A6
2A6M
2A6M+
2A6A1 (command tank)
2A6(M)A2
2A6(M)A3
2A6EX Demo 1/Demo 2
PSO-VT
2A7+
2A7+ UrbOps
2A7
2A7V
VT-ETB
VT-ETB II
2A7A1
2A8
KF-51
Plus some other variants that I haven’t mentioned here because they are technically 2A5s/2A4s.

6 Likes
1855

what made the original 2a7+ worse then the german introduced 2a7 ?

1856

It wasn’t worse, it was much better. The PSO-VT (2A7 prototype) was too expensive for the Bundeswehr and included things that weren’t seen as necessary. So it got downgraded and that resulted in the 2A7 and even that only got produced when tanks needed to be overhauled anyways (when Canada returned 2A6NLs instead of their 2A6Ms).

1857

ahh, because in the list you put the 2a7+ versions before the 2a7

2 Likes
1858

Oh, I ordered them by variant because my judgement of their ingame capabilities would definitely differ from others.

1 Like
1859

ahh ok,

might have missed that one, but it mostly is just the 2a7+ switchero either way if i am not wrong

1860

Interesting, thanks. I suppose there may be tweaks to the list, but it’s a good overview.

The distance between 2A6 and 2A7V is enormous (perhaps some variants of 2A4 and 2A5 could further increase the gap).

Doesn’t 2A7+ refer to a set of options/upgrades available for the 2A7 according to the requirements of different armies?

1861

And the BR difference is 0.3. ;)

1862

Basicaly yeah, it stands for the modularity of all possible leopard upgrade options, that being said the german tested version only had the L/55 gun among other things

1 Like
1863

I’m looking at the characteristics of the 2A7V and it’s impossible for it to fit without it being completely BROKEN.

1864

You mean its characteristics that are seen on SEP 2 & T-90M?
Armor, good round, and gen 2+ thermals…
The good round & good gen thermals are already seen on M1A2, 2A6, etc.

1865

another tank that we might be able to add is the Leopard MBT Technologieträger (advanced technology demonstrator)

Dont think that exact version is in service anywhere
image

@Toxindragon or what do you think?

3 Likes