Would 70mm at an angle of 60° really be that terrible for WWII standards?
equivalent of 140mm, so no50 at 50° is a bit weak though
>>62913587>50 at 50° is a bit weak thoughI think the expectation is generally that terrain would make it nearly impossible to hit that or require such a steep angle from above (since tank guns tend to be located about 2m above ground) that the 50° would realistically turn into a lot more.
>>62913535The most important part of armored combat is getting hit as little as possible while engaged. A Leo I has comparable armor to most sherman variants, and better armor than a T-34 if we're talking raw numbers. They'd all be able to penetrate each other's armor pretty easily.
>>62913535Anon in that post is retarded, Leo is practically equivalent to Panther in armor. Composite armor is also primarily intended to counter APFSDS and HEAT, while they would absolutely stop a ww2 anti-tank gun, their mass efficiency is likely lower than you might expect they would be ridiculously hard to repair for tech of the time. Much better off with plain steel.
the true wunderwaffen wouldn't be the tank itself but the MTU powerpack that's running the thing
The Leo 1 was pretty much the Sherman of the Cold War.
>>62913808There's several decades worth of material improvements in that thing. Der Reich would've struggled to maintain it
The Soviets have rated the Leopard 1 as the best NATO tank of its era. (The Bongs also rated the Leopard 1 better than the Chieftain)Like it was the only tank in the West which actually understood maneuver warfare. Not just because of its remarkable kinetic but also of its small logistical footprint
>>62913808>the true wunderwaffen wouldn't be the tank itself but the MTU powerpack that's running the thingI have often dreamed of bringing the powerpack back to WWII engineers to let them marvel at its simplicity and efficiency.Porsche would be both happy and sad in equal measure since it's not a hybrid electric one though.
>>62913905>(The Bongs also rated the Leopard 1 better than the Chieftain)The Chieftain was a complete shitshow so that's no surprise. I've always wondered why warriortard didn't become chieftaintard.
>>62913535What's the box thing sitting on top of the barrel?
>>62913944Infrared spotlight for use with early NVGs.
>>62913844>There's several decades worth of material improvements in that thing. Der Reich would've struggled to maintain itNot really. Development started like a decade after WWII ended and it doesn't require any advanced electronics. Mechanics and engineers of the time were miracle workers compared to the ones we have today who can do a lot more with computers while also being kinda crippled by their dependency on it.
>>62913535>tank vs tankStop being retarded for the sake of it. This thing would mainly face artillery and mines just like every other WW2 tank, and it would get equally raped by them.
>>62914002WWII artillery was too inaccurate to do anything against a moving tank formation and mines don't do much over vast areas without a lot of time to prepare which generally was simply not the case in WWII as the fronts moved a lot.You're not as intelligent as you think you are.
>>62914002https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JEmCeZ4faE
It would have mobility of a light tank, armor of a medium tank, and firepower of a superheavy papershit tank.
>>62914034>>62914002the primary use of artillery against tank formations would be to pin down their infantry support or force the crews to button up, reducing their situational awareness and visibility
>>62914400So what you're saying is we should also introduce the Marder to WWII?
>>62914400I think they had panzergrenadier units for that reason in particular.
>>62914062What a cutie
>>62913954You went full retard there. Metallurgy had advanced significantly since WWII, especially WWII Germany. A full decade is a long time you know, and this was cutting edge stuff for the time, so you're talking about WWII Germany trying to pull of cutting edge metallurgy for the late 1950s/early 60s in the 1940s. You're saying they could've thrown together a metallurgical plant and refined procedures to cast these cutting edge alloys in the 1930s because there's a lot of lead time involved. You fucking mongoloid. And I'd like to see you tell the engineers of the period what engineers of today can do and ask them if they'd consider themselves miracle workers.
>>62914727>You went full retard thereNo, but you did, the powerpack was feasible. Not necessarily the exact same one or one just as good, but the concept itself definitely was.Maybe you should stop being such an arrogant cunt, learn to read and then read up on how to format posts properly on imageboards, nigger.
>>62914727>muh metallurgyMost of the challenges came from engineering, not metallurgy and metallurgy advanced because some very different challenges presented themselves. To name just one, final drives never needed to be as durable even just before WWII. Germans were aware of how to theoretically build better ones even before the Panther went into production, but knew they didn't have the machinery to make them in large numbers (the Sherman's was a different but great solution in its own way and that too was a solution based on engineering, not a brute-force metallurgical approach).> And I'd like to see you tell the engineers of the period what engineers of today can do and ask them if they'd consider themselves miracle workers.It doesn't matter what they considered themselves as, engineers TODAY consider them to be miracle workers because if you ever read a book any engineer back then wrote about their process their problem-solving skills were fucking insane compared to today because of how much is automated nowadays. Can we do more now? Yes. Could a modern engineer do anything close to what they did back then? Absolutely not. Could a good engineer from back then do amazing things today after learning the tools we have now? Absolutely.Kill yourself.
>>62914727>And I'd like to see you tell the engineers of the period what engineers of today can do and ask them if they'd consider themselves miracle workers.>newnigger tourist casually disrespecting JMBDisgusting.
>>62914727>Metallurgy had advanced significantly since WWII, especially WWII GermanyTranslation: West Germany got American metallurgy handed to them so they could rebuild, and the resource shortages caused by being at war with most of the world stopped.
>>62913535Leo1 would be the Panther if it were more reliable in practice; a good all-around tank to have for the period, but nothing war-winning, at least if we're talking about the early models without the fancy thermals which were the real game-changer.
>>62914727Reason WWII Germany had a tough time with metal quality wasn't out of stupidity, but because they flat out didn't have access to the right metals to make proper alloys.
>>62914841>West Germany got American metallurgy handed to them so they could rebuildGermany was one of the world leaders in chemistry and metallurgy, anon. Don't be a retard.
>>62914844>a good all-around tank to have for the period, but nothing war-winningI actually disagree, a Wehrmacht with Leo1s in 1939 would've overrun France so badly the Brits would've lost their "expeditionary force" (read: pretty much everything they had at the time and the core of their later army). Barbarossa would've also been quite a lot more successful because before Stalin made up lies about slavs being subhumans and Hitler wanted to genocide them all they weren't really ready to die for communism so millions just surrendered when surrounded, which Leos would've been great at.You don't need to actually kill all your enemies in war, you just need to get them to stop fighting and aside from the maneuver element of the equation, Leo1s also would've been a terrible blow to the Red Army's self-esteem and morale as they would've been pretty much invincible during barbarossa.
>design philosophy is "modern weapons can penetrate anything anyway, so armor is pointless">this means the tank wouldn't have worked in WW2 because... it could be penetrated by gunshuh?
whats the mileage on an MTU compared to panther and/or tiger (II)
>>62914886>a Wehrmacht with Leo1s in 1939 would've overrun France so badly the Brits would've lost their "expeditionary force"This sounds like an oversimplification. To have even greater strategic mobility during the invasion of France, they would have needed better logistics, better radios, and also more modern APCsRemember, the Ghost Division were already so far ahead of both the enemy troops AND their own, that Hitler ordered them to stop like 5 times. Rommel only didn't get court-martialed for dropping out of radio contact because he was successful
>>62913832how so
>>62914929>inferior tank only designed to be cheap and produced by the tens of thousands>lackluster gun>armor might as well be nonexistent
>>62914929the leopard tank is germanwhich rhymes with sherman
>>62914926A much more mobile force ready in the 30s would've necessarily led to much more mobile accompanying forces and improved logistics to keep up with them.Good enough for the Leo1s to go all out? Maybe, maybe not, but Guderian was in logistics in the 30s and pushed for radios in every tank exactly because he saw the tanks in motion. With so much more potential on display, there'd have been more developments similar to it.
>>62914768Negro read what I was talking about, Germany would not have been able to maintain the MTU powerpack in Leo 1s, that's literally what this argument about you dumb faggot. They could've worked the concept, sure, but not the fucking powerpack on the Leo 1, if parts broke they could've only made lesser replacements.>>62914850I thought that was implied by "WWII Germany">>62914797If you're talking about software engineers, maybe, this talking point is absolutely retarded though, we're becoming hyperspecialized engineers, no one person doesn't fucking design a whole ass vehicle, people today not being able to do that isn't a sign of them being worse. And fuck off with "muh problem solving skills" this shit gets repeated by non-engineers, kids these days have their head stuck in their numbers yes, but you whack that out of them and they're just fine.>muh metallurgyyes muh metallurgy you faggot, you need both, it wasn't just an "engineering problem" and you're retarded to consider metallurgy not an intrinsic part of engineering. Fatigue was not well understood until the 50s for fucks sakes. And metallurgy isn't just about the parts themselves, tooling saw a lot of improvements at the time due to improved metallurgy which allowed for the mass production of more complex parts. Casting the turbines for torque converters etc. also required metallurgy to perfect. The US was unquestionably leading in the field and it took us until 1948 to get the Patton's transmission to be "reliable" by the standard of the day. Fuck off.
>>62914938>L7>lacklusterwat
>>62913708>A Leo I has comparable armor to most sherman variants,It has comparable armor to a Panther, which is better than sherman armor.
>>62915136>Negro read what I was talking about, Germany would not have been able to maintain the MTU powerpack in Leo 1s,You have to be the most autistic motherfucker alive to believe anybody here but you was talking about a 1 to 1 copy for no reason, especially considering the very post you initially responded to like an arrogant cunt talked about problem solving with their tools. What the fuck do you think the problem solution is for if not for adaption?The worst thing about autists like you is that you're both unable to think like a normal person and think your retarded twitter gotcha moments are real.
>>62915136>If you're talking about software engineers, maybe, this talking point is absolutely retarded though,Not at all, you really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?>, we're becoming hyperspecialized engineers, no one person doesn't fucking design a whole ass vehicle, people today not being able to do that isn't a sign of them being worse. And fuck off with "muh problem solving skills" this shit gets repeated by non-engineers, kids these days have their head stuck in their numbers yes, but you whack that out of them and they're just fine.Yeah, you really have no idea what you're talking about. nice cope, retard.>yes muh metallurgy you faggot, you need both, it wasn't just an "engineering problem" One can help with the other, but explaining that concept to an 80 IQ subhuman like you would be a waste of time.>you're retarded to consider metallurgy not an intrinsic part of engineeringWho said that? You? I certainly didn't.How about you stop huffing your own farts, go to a therapy and learn to pretend to be a normal human being so you don't die alone?
>>62913708>A Leo I has comparable armor to most sherman variants>70mm (60°)vs>50.8 mm (56°)I guess?
Retards talking about armor as if that's what a Leo 1 brings to the table in its ww2 isekai and not its powerplant, optics, FCS, ergonomics, among other thingsFucking war thunder decreases your IQ by 30 points or something
>>62916202When you're looking for a weakness in a tank to shit on because the thought of it rustled your jimmies you don't think about its futuristic powerplant, optics, FCS or ergonomics, anon.
>>62916202The British L7 gun is the big thing too.
One of the Leopard 1A5 tank crews interviewed by French news AFP in November 2023 indicated they had already seen combat, having been able to hit Russian targets from 3.5–5 km distance and inflict casualties without the Russians being able to strike back
>Upgraded Leo1>could withstand 125mm APFSDS and RPG-7>intended to keep the Leo1 relevant alongside the Leo 2>cancelled as the cold war endedthis is what they took from you
>>62916202This thread is a fucking disaster thanks to warthunder zoomers>woahh tank combat always happens within 100 metersor alternatively>uhhh all warfare is static trench warfare only artillery matters ok?Leo 1s would absolutely dominate in the kind of maneuver warfare that was seen in WW2. Tank on tank combat was a big fucking deal because tanks are the fastest unit capable of responding to a tank offensive, and Leo would naturally outmatch all WW2 tanks. On the AT gun side only the heavier guns would be able to penetrate from the frontal section, so there is no hope of stopping an offense without significant fortifications
>>62914938The Sherman only lacked in tank duels, which rarely ever happened, and that was fixed in the same year D Day happened. It was also very reliable and easy to maintain.The Leopard 1 was the fastest MBT in the world and carried NATO's strongest cannon.German engineers rightfully concluded that steel armor was obsolete because of strong HEAT warheads, so they focused on speed and firepower.While the Soviets fielded composite armor already in the early 60s with the T64, the West finally decided to introduce it in the 70s after trashing many prototypes going back as far as 1955.
>>62917233The Germans designed a tank for mass production with streamlined logistics for their own and other conscription armies. It's interesting that the tank itself was designed around of a NATO requirements catalogue from 1956 which was later ignored by the Americans and British.
>>62917341>It's interesting that the tank itself was designed around of a NATO requirements catalogue from 1956 which was later ignored by the Americans and British.MANYSUCHCASES
>>62913535Good thread timing as flight autist and respected authority just released a similar video on the FW190.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upsS75CtLQA
