Thanks for all your support guys 😋Please make sure to subscribe to support our work, we're working hard to upload more videos! If you have feedback or ideas, leave them here! Much appreciated!
M1 is going electric, instant startup and "very quiet" the batteries will be fast charge like filling a diesel with fuel but instead you have more ways than 1 to fill er up
@@vet137 A tank going electric is way too dangerous for the crew, electrical fires and inextinguishable batteries will make the M1 useless if a mere fire breaks out.
What on earth are you trying to tell us? The real story: The M1 Abrams is equipped with a Rhein-Metall 120mm smoothbore canon. It's a German design, it could have been build in the US under a German licence. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_Rh-120?wprov=sfla1
@@donkiel9988 what i am telling is that the gun existed long before the abrams in the leopard 1. US just saw the gun and bought it. It is a german gun from a german manufacturer, building a gun for a german tank. so please do not say the leopard copied the abrams gun. That is just wrong.
A good main battle tank is of little use if the tank crews in the group, in the platoon and in the company do not harmonize tactically. An international comparison shows what makes a good crew. The Strong Europe Tank Challenge in Grafenwöhr is an indicator of training.
7:07 I started my tour of duty as the driver of a Danish Artillery-Observer team in Afghanistan in 2008 a couple of days after this tanker had been killed and spoke to the mechanics/investigators who were going over the tank he had died in. The reason he died was because there was an emergency quick-releasable escape hatch directly under the drivers seat (in case the vehicle was tipped over on the roof) and the IED they hit went off just underneath that. It had pushed the hatch up and the driver with it, a few milliseconds after that his head made contact with the roof and broke his neck and split his skull open because he didn't wear the hard shell part of the crewman helmet he was supposed to (not sure if this was just an excuse to put blame on the driver, I'm thinking he would probably not have survived anyway). The floor-hatch on these vehicles was later fixed/removed to prevent this from happening again. Still...pretty shitty luck to die a couple of days before your replacements came to relieve you.
Just imagine, Challengers, Abrams, & Leopards on the battlefield all acting as a single unit. Along with foot soldiers & Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, there will be no stopping us.
They have had alot of combat thru the years which has given it alot of uprades thru the years, the Leopard 2a7v are some of the best and most hi-tech tanks in the world.
In addition to what you said about the "wrong use" of the tanks, german military doctrin ties tanks and Panzergrenadiers tightly together in a combined force. One never goes without the other. These tanks were originally not made to sustain long ongoing insurgencies, but as a spearhead or "elastic" defense line against another major army forces. For the middle eastern environments something like the new Puma IFV would fare much better, but at a high price tag. In the end it does not matter really if you employ the best vehicle if your general approach to the fight is not sustainable. A german armored forces general said recently that they are indeed capable engaging in urban warfare. But you have to train for that scenario and stick to the combined combat tactics otherwise high losses are guaranteed.
What IFV are you talking about? HS 30 2.0? - Regardless to the last "performance" of this Hotchkiss imitation, 18 out of 18 is a real "good" result, something like the Lynx KF31/KF41 + Lynx 120 will do a better job. Not anyone could afford a "Goldrandlösung" and buying a "Goldrandlösung" and you can't afford A LOT of spare parts and ammunition after is not the best idea. Even worse, if you couldn't afford enough spare parts and ammunition for your existing equipment before you buy a "Goldrandlösung". Get two with proofed parts off the shelf, a lot of spare parts and ammunition for the price of one. This will do a better job. By the way, when talking about war we do not talk about high-tech weapons, we talk about logistics and well-trained personal first.
@@wernerruf7761 I said, Puma would be better than a MBT, but expensive for that specific example. There is no contradiction. I used the Puma as example because the german Leopard was in the focus. And no, i talked specifically about material and tactics. This is a simple comment and not meant to be a book about warfare... 😁
The wedge-shaped additional armour is not to "deflect" projectiles but to "catch" them. The idea of it is that the penetrator would get an angle of attack forced upon by the wedge armour plates thus hitting the main armour behind the wedges (wich are mostly filled by plain air) at an unfavourable angle and getting eroded by the main armour more effectivley.
Correct, the effect is to cause the long rod penetrator to start to tumble, and to therefore break up by striking 'sideways' on the main armour element. The space between the outer armour and the main armour also reduces the effectiveness of HEAT rounds by causing the explosively formed penetrating jet to occur effectively too early, dissipating most of its energy before hitting the main armour, and of HESH rounds by allowing the spalling to form off the inner side of the outer armour, to then be caught by the main armour.
"Leopard 2 - instructions for destruction" For tankers and anti-tankers - armor schemes of the German feline. The upper number is the equivalent of armor from kinetic projectiles, the lower one is from HEAT munitions. It is advised to hit: The front: the hull, preferably in the glacis: the driver sits on the right side, on the left is the compartment with the main ammo. Tanks in practice may not fill this compartment with shells - hit the center. Turret - around the gun mantlet with a tandem warhead. Do not aim at the sides of the turret, there is a composite armor of 1200 mm equivalent. On the sides: the front of the hull under the frontal part of the turret, under the turret ring, in the hull under the rear of the turret - the driver / crew, engine are affected. The turret - under the hatches of the crew, in the rear compartment - there is an ammo rack. Attention! The tank is equipped with knock-out panels of the ammo compartment - a hit does not guarantee the destruction of the crew and complete incapacitation. ATGMs "Metis-M" and "Kornet" can penetrate the front, the sides - by any shape charge warheads (for RPG-7, use PG-7VS shots and better)!!
Germany has proven for years that it is unbeatable when it comes to engineering whether it is trucks, cars, or military hardware. It will be interesting to see if the German government agrees to the use of the Leopard 2 in the current conflict with Russia. Ironic that it is the 80th anniversary of the battle of Kursk in July, for a positive outcome I still think the use of aerial power will also be required no matter now good your tanks are.
@ Michael Melling certainly not joking. Do a survey asking what would prefer to own,a Mercedes BMW, Audi or Mazda, Toyato or Nissan. At least 80% would pick the Merc or BMW. Cannot even name a good Japanese truck. The Swedes with Volvo or Scania are second best with trucks. Japanese even use foreign jets in their airforce. WW2 Japanese tanks were a joke if you do your research whereas the Tiger and Panther were miles ahead. Ships are main Japanese strengths along with electronic products and motorcycles.
Soldiers in the ground are terrified of this modern technology. Unfortunately soldiers have javalin and other technology to destroy the tank over turret hatch 🐣
I’ve always liked the Leopard tank , on exercise in northern W/ Germany and at gun camps we did plenty of coordinated tactics with our Hussars tank battalion and others ie ; Americans , German ,British and a few more and I must admit ( being ARMY ) we were impressed with all of the tanks especially the LEOPARD , now all that’s needed is to put a ribbon on a few dozen tanks and send them to UKRAINE , a great place to test them out wouldn’t you say , I mean if we do go to war ( God forbid ) we’ll be fighting the Russians , so why not practise and eliminate a few thousand now .
@@minimax9452 I wouldn't bet on that, if I were you. If the Americans send M1 Abrams, we will send Leopard's. I'm pretty sure about that. Look what happened after the French decided to send AMX 10s. So Marders and Bradleys are on their way. 2 weeks ago, that would have been regarded as wishfull thinking.
@@donkiel9988 I am also sure the German Untertanengeist is still alive. When the americans want us to do something we do it if it is in the interest of our country or not. They already profit from this war. some love the so dearly - they can even blow up a german pipeline - no problem.
A tank will always be a big threat in any battlefield... just imagine you re in a fight and your oponent bring one or two tanks and with infantery they advance to your position! ... even if you have portable anti tank devices...modern tanks could spot you very far away.. tanks have alot devices to detect you !
I would love to be a tanker crew member on this German engineering marvel. The WWII Panzer kicked ass! Btw... diesel is the best way to go. Crazy to go with the gas turbine.
When it comes right down to it tanks, battle ship, air craft carriers all of them are obsolete. China has shown a missile that can take out a carrier that is on the move. Future wars will be fought with lasers, Viruses, chemicals, from space, with drones and so forth. The firs army to successfully integrates all of that will be the winner. Not Russia, that is for sure. It relies on WWI tactics.
As a german... I hope we send all our Leopard 2A7s to Ukraine, all we have. Then replace them with KF-51 Panther. I have no doubt that we can go for some years without an own tank force. (Btw. kudos to our Polish neighbors, you are great)
KF-51 is still in development and needs further testing, once finished will have to be put into production which can take years and therefore is unsafe for Germany to go without.
you got that wrong. long ago, the German government has pledged to build a new MBT together with the French. it's ajoint venture with KMW. Germany won't even consider the KF51 from Rheinmetall
@@embreis2257 I know of the joined development programm. But it startet before the Ukraine war and currently it is not more then an Leopard 2 chassis with an Leclerq turret. The KF-51 is far superior in concept.
@@simbadooo9055 Russia is allready incapable to fight an conventional war with NATO. Every Leopard 2A7 we deliver to Ukraine will even prolong the period Russia is incapable. All other threats in Europe.... San Marino, Liechtenstein, Andorra, Vatican City.... could be no significant threat. ;)
@@ninjacuttingonions5861 Most likely due to differences in frequency propagation. I assume the Abrams omits a higher pitched engine sound and thus sound dissipates faster through air. Lower frequencies can travel quite some distance.
@@vanillaexplosion99 German tanks all sound the same, a deep Diesel rumble. I was once told this is deliberately done with the exhaust design because deep sounds can't be located. It's basically the same reason why a stereo sound system only needs one subwoofer. Deep sounds can't be located, you hear them but you can't make out the direction. Higher pitched noises are easy to make out, you can hear them in stereo with your ears and point to the exact direction they come from. So while you might be able to hear a Leopard rumble in the distance you don't even know if it's behind or in front of you, never mind the exact location.
The Leopard 2 is highly mobile and very accurate, the L55 gun is however also giving problems in dense terrain due to its barrel length. All of the Leopard 2 feature no active anti missile system and well known weak spots on their hulls as the Kurds exploited during one of the Turkish offensives in northern Syria. Not having an active anti guided missile system is the biggest draw back of the Leopard 2 among its hull weak spots which have been addressed but not really fixed. However having a manual loader the Leopard 2 and other western tanks can achieve ridiculous rates of burst fire the Russian tanks with their auto loaders can not even hope to match. In a training exercise we managed to get 4 rounds on target in like 16 seconds.
yeah there are a few problems with your statements. 1. rate of fire and manual loaders: a 120mm round weights in between 21 and 30 kilos. 4 rounds in 16 seconds is impressive, but for how long cant the gunner keep it up? and btw T-72B and T-80B Autoloaders do 4 Rounds in 12-14 seconds. 2. The L/55 gun is not much of a problem. Challenger 2 has the same caliber length, T-64, T-72 and T-80 got a gun with similar length too. Nobody got problems. You dont drive your tank into a situation where it will be a problem in the first place, for that you got Infantry and IFV´s etc. 3. The hull ammo storage is only a problem on short range or on open and very flat terrain (like an Highway). If you operate in Terrain the natural uneveness of the terrain, brush and grass etc plus even the curvature of the earth will obscure your lower hull in most situations on long range, on short range you again got another problem at hand (cause something went wrong if you let hostile MBT´s etc get that close in the first place. You can knock out an enemy MBT at 3000m, so do it.) In addition to that, germany developed an inert propellant that only ignites if triggered by the igniter charge, making cookoffs of the ammunition very unlikely. 4.Turkey uses not upgraded Leopard 2A4´s from german or dutch surplus stocks. These entered service in 1985. They were also used incompetently. No infantry cover, no recon, sitting in the open on ridgelines in densely urbanised terrain for hours. That is just an invitation to get whacked with a large caliber ATGM. Similar incompetent use could be observed with Saudi M1A2 in Jemen (about 80 got lost in the last few years), Iraki M1A1 vs ISIS (another 80-120 got lost in combat). 5. No modern western MBT has currently an implemented active protection system. M1A2 sep.v3 is introducing it right now, Leopard 2A7V since 2017, Challenger "3" will get one in 2027, Leclerc has none. NATO just had no requirement to implement an hard kill active protection system in the 2000´s and 2010´s due to the low intensity, asymetric warfare we were in. (same reason why we dont have that much artillery anymore, or severely lack air defense, invested heavily in drones like reaper etc) Germany employs the MUSS active protection system on Puma, wich could also be mounted on Leopard 2.
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 That's a pretty accurate summary, stuffed with lot of expertise! At the end of the day any well maintained tank with a good trained crew and used in the parameters the military doctrine it was built for, will be an efficient weapon. The way Turkey was using their Leopards against the Kurdish fighters, was calling for trouble. Maybe it wasn't the best idea to put a large percentage of the experienced turkish officer corps into prison. Just a guess. Everything happens for a reason.
It seems like German weapons have always been among the best made. Let's face it, they are good at war equipment and supplies. But in today's world everyone is advancing at an alarming rate. I guess they all believe that to enforce peace takes a lot of power, which sounds like a conundrum, but Ukraine would probably be lost by now without weapons from the western nations.
If we were good at military supply our military would have enough ammunition to fight for more than 2 days. The entire supply of the Bundeswehr is a mess thanks to EU law and political incompetence.
@@Fackeldackel How exactly is EU law to blame for the Bundeswehr's problems? Please be specific. I'd like to know, because we're judged to have a competent military in Finland, and we're a EU member, just like Germany.
@@peabase By EU law aquisations have to be publicly offered to every corporation EU wide once they reach a certain size. Then every sent in offer for the contract gets processed and the best offer wins. In many cases it gets way more expensive later, anyway the corporation has the contract. A weird result of this inefficient, slow process is that money, destined for the Bundeswehr, doesn't actually end up being spend. One of the reason why just increasing germanys defense budget wont change much. To my knowledge certain changes in law have been made to bypass the EU law in case of defense projects, but as far as i know there is still no such thing like for example an ammunition flatrate. The Bundeswehr so gar has proven to be unable to make a simple deal with the industry like "these are the ammo types we need over these amount of years, start producing, we buy everything you deliver at this price even if it turns out to be more than we need." Result? Depots are empty and the Bundeswehr trains literally with sticks and stones. It is a joke, germans are bitterly laughing at our own military. Trashing the Bundeswehr has become a national sport over the years.
@@peabase @peabase Germanys defense budget may have been low as far as the GDP % is considered, but in total numbers it was still one if not the largest in the EU. And as i said, the obligation to offer a contract EU wide only matters once a certain amount of cash gets involved. Even before the recent increase germany has been spending more than 10x the amount of finland and about 9x of sweden for example. So no offense, but compared to germany, despite all of the Bundeswehrs weaknesses, Finland is a dwarf. A powerfull dwarf i realy respect, but nevertheless a dwarf. Germany is spending for single projects what Finland spends as its entire defense budget. The sad news, in addition to what i already mentioned, is that germany has a tendency to always want the best of the best of the premium product instead of what has already been tested and confirmed to work in the field. Latest example? The Puma. A extraordinary vehicle if it works. But it is so highly specialized and technologicaly advanced that it is hardly of use in the field. Unlike its predecessor, the Marder. All you need for that old, reliable bucket is a simple mechanik, not someone with a master in engineering (you dont realy need that of course but i think you get the point). So what does this mean? 1) Germany always wants the best of the best, meaning usually the most expensive because we have a tendency to think big and want everything perfect 2) Since most contracts therefore tend to be really expensive they need to be offered publicly and EU wide 3) Add in the lack of personal in the ministry and a general desinterest and disdain in germany politics about anything related to defense and what you end up with is a military without enough ammunition, hardware for repairs and more frustrated soldiers by the day who then start remembering the days when the german military and its soldiers were treated with respect, resulting in stories about Wehrmacht gloryfication among german soldiers. It is a complex mess, one i doubt my country is able to solve alone. Look, i am a supporter of the european union and the european idea. But as long as there is no european army (which i think is absolutely necessary) every state should deal with matters of national security without interference from outside sources like EU law and regulations. Buying tanks is not the same as buying cars.
Why does Ukraine want the Leopard 2? The tank is considered one of the best in the west. German defense contractor Krauss-Maffei Wegmann has built more than 3,500 Leopard 2 tanks since production began in 1978. The tank weighs more than 60 tons, is armed with a 120mm smoothbore gun and can hit targets at a range of up to five kilometers. The Leopard 2 runs on a comparatively more economical engine that burns diesel. What would be the benefit? About 20 nations operate the Leopard 2. This means that several countries could each provide part of their tanks in support of Ukraine - of which there are different types. However, this would make it easier for Ukraine to manage maintenance and crew training. In addition to Germany, nations using the Leopard include Canada, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, Austria, Poland, Spain, Sweden and Turkey. What other western main battle tanks are there? The United States operates thousands of M1 Abrams tanks built by General Dynamics, but they are considered unsuitable for Ukraine as they are powered by gas turbine engines. The Abrams' kerosene consumption is so high that Ukraine has no chance of operating it in the current wartime supply situation.
@@labrat2069I'm not a clairvoyant. But anything is possible. If Putin has his back against the wall, he may be making limited use of nuclear weapons. In any case, he won't have any scruples. The Americans had no scruples about using nuclear weapons against a defenseless civilian population.
@@labrat2069 I'm not a clairvoyant. But anything is possible. If Putin has his back against the wall, he may be making limited use of nuclear weapons. In any case, he won't have any scruples. The Americans had no scruples about using nuclear weapons against a defenseless civilian population.
At 2:32 it may be better to say "absorb" instead of "deflect" because on modern tanks the only plates that are actually angled enough to deflect any modern AP rounds are (and only sometimes) the upper front of the hull, the hull side (if shot from the front) and maybe the front turret roof
One of the very best battle tank, a german made. It reminds me of the Tiger tanks and the german Panzers of ww2. Engaged in so many tank battles like the battle of the bulge, a far brilliant german technology. “Panzerlied” military song is dedicated to these remnants of the Tigers and Panzers of Germany.
Both tanks are practically brothers, because at the begining they would be one tanks for all NATO nations. But the program formed by USA and Germany ends with out a results and both nations created their own tanks(Abrams and Leo) from this Cold War program.
It's a powerfull tank but a stupid weak tank. Should've add/change: 1. LWS 2. APS (still no APS till 2A7A1) 3. good ERA esspecially on the upper front plate 4. quick autoloader 5. better thermals 6. better topspeed and same reverse speed 7, 130mm canon* 8. remove natohump 9. better crew placement(1 shot in driver port is 3 crew dead bc human centipede isn't very good placement) 10. bigger first stage ammo rack and no 2nd stage 11. extra roof mounted armor 12. better engine. The MTU MB 873 KA-501 is good but the MTU MT 883 KA-501 is better of some saying giving 1800HP. instead of the MB 873 which has 1500HP 13. time for E package 14. 30mm autocanon 15. AC
DU gets a lot of bad press but in my book, any country smart enough to turn radioactive waste into ammunition, then go off and invade another country where they proceed to make it rain cancer 24/7 really deserves a standing ovation.
Well, all the hip apart, the Abrams turbin is not noisy, actually is so quiet that is called the ' wispering death". And at full speed is as guzzling as the leopard.
Germany needs to step up and send to Ukraine about 250 of these super tanks NOW! So far America has sent between 75% to 80% of all western aid and weapons, etc. It is now America's backyard. Ukraine is doing the heavy lifting, so help them now!
Everybody does what they are best in. Who will carry the rebuilding of the country? It will be Europe mainly that's for sure. MIlitary? That's where the US outshines everyone else obviously.
Why don't you man up Jon and see what you can do in Ukraine versus them Ruskies. By the way whats your wife look like? I'll take care of the chicks while you guys go play GI Joe in a place you most likely can't find on an unlabeled map.
Tanks are only as good as the trained crew..The west has always had some of the best training for crews and support...in the end theres no winner in war..
What I think about the Lepard2? They should be deployed in Ukraine against Russia and get the badge of honor when they help Ukraine win on the battefield.
@@Gaphalor they were picked off by kornet, which has a 5 km engagement range. No combined arms warfare can save you from a tank hunter sniping from 5km distance. Uncle Sam fought only camel jockeys in desert, that's what gave you the idea of invincible tank in a combined arms warfare...
Russian/Sowjet tanks probably. We don't know how western style tanks would perform. It's safe to say, that western tanks would give their crew a higher chance of surviving since the tanks will like not to cook off like the Russian tanks.
Highly doubt that it would become a rocket like Russian tanks, Western tanks like the Leopard 2 can be hit by a drone missile but the chances of survival are much higher as the ammo is stored in a secure compartment with a blast door that ensures the explosion woudlnt affect the crew
Several points: at first the Russians did not even do anti-air against drones. Once they started doing that, the drone video's went to near zero. Next, the Ukrainians have knocked out loads of Soviet/Russian tanks with rocket launchers such as NLAW (and others). Both of those systems can denote on top of the tank turret. That is where a tank's armor is usually at its thinnest. Making for an easy penetration. However, the real big boom comes from the Soviet/Russian tank itself. They feature autoloaders with the ammunition stored in the turret ring. So what you see when a turret pops is not the destructive power of a single drone or anything like that, you see what happens when the ammo supply of the tank blows up inside the tank. NATO tanks have far different insides, with ammo stored in separate cabins featuring blowout panels, so even if the ammo detonates, it goes boom towards the outside and not the inside.
German Tanks are sold into the whole world BUT the are not manned by German tank cews. This is where the hard point sits. You need these men to make the best tank become the most powerful tank.
Abrams is no world wide for being one of if not the single quietest tanks in the world. It’s one of the benefits of the current gas guzzling engine….ain’t perfect, but it’s quiet and powerful.
No that's propaganda bullshit so unaccurate and unrealistic Brad Pitt was in the first tank German doctrine is always to destroy the first tank the movie should have ended there also every 5 round is a tracer not every round like in the movie and why did the Tiger leave it's Cover and rushed to the enemy when it wasn't even detected yet
As an Iranian Kurd, I hope peace, prosperity, and progress for all the citizens of the Republic of Türkiye , whether Turk, Kurd, Azeri, Lezgin, Greek, Assyrian, Armenian, Arab, etc. and I also hope for the total annihilation of PKK terror organisation and all other terrorists. May god save the Republic of Türkiye!
No one fears tanks any more, all you need it a burnt out building, willing person/s, armed with NLAW's, Javelin or RPG and goodbye tank. Side note; the leopard 2 has no ERA so when that thing get's hit in the side or rear, just like the T-**s series tanks, they'll go pop. Merkava, K2 and M1A's and variants of have much better protection.
Tanks or any other complicated army war machines are only good when they have a competent crew and if a machine is repairable. Also, 155 caliber artillery don't give a sh1t how modern tank is.
Just guessing that the Germans (being smart people) must have learned their lessons from WW2 with their tanks that failed in their campaign in Russia and in Europe. I would tend to guess these next generation tanks are well suited for the European soil and climate.
German Leopard Tanks......is the number one in the 10 Top Most Powerful Tanks in the World! And will be proven in the upcoming Battle this summer between Ukraine and Russia! I could hardly wait!!!
Narrators voice is obnoxious. But anyway.. The insights into this beast from a host of perspectives were intriguing to say the least. So why in the world would Germany have sold these to countries like Turkey but is dragging their feet getting them to Ukraine? Let me guess...Russian oil?
The use of variable tactics is now necessary, even if 300 Leopard 2, Abrams and Challengers arrive in time. They should be held back for "retake" missions. A demarcation line must be set up just to the West of the current Russian forces, with massive ATGM numbers taking out all Russian tanks that cross it. This should have happened at the beginning of the Russian invasion. Get the tanks into Ukraine, widely spaced (in case of Neutron bomb attacks) and just pluck off the Russian tanks if the move West! There cannot be another Battle of Kursk. The Russian tanks need to be patiently decimated. Let Putin waste his industry and the nation's wealth on his outdated tank invasion strategy.
SAD to say when leopard seen actual war Syria leopard turret flew in the sky like bag of chips. Video shows comparison of same ammunition received by both leopard and Abraham tank the m1 have the greater chance of surviving. Canada and Australia are now eying for a new tank.
They used the a4 a cold war model with no infantry and as artillery why can't you people do some research for once no wonder everyone calls this generation stupid the Turkish tanks got also destroyed before the Leopard and Abrams came why becouse the Turks don't know how to use tanks
You have to do a better job in your intonation and sense of when to slightly pause between points/statements. I’m a subscriber when you do. However, at this point, your carrying on like this has me, in frustration, on the brink of spiking my tablet like a football at the 7:35 mark. Breathe grasshopper, breathe.
The world doesn’t. The only Leopard advantage is it is cheap. It was designed for the Cold War with massed armour manoeuvres. As such it is lightly armoured on the sides and relies upon speed - that it can only get on rolling German plains. In a slugging match with other MBTs it’s just another target stuck in the mud.
Abrams lost against the Leopard in the European tank competition and technically you can say it did becouse the Abrams is just a discount Leopard they use the same parts like the gun from Rheinmetall
