At the research institute in Kubinka, a Leopard 2A6 was fired upon. This can be inferred from the footage in the Krasnaya Zvezda article “A Scientific Approach Strengthens the Armor of Russian Tanks” for the current month.What was the catch? Earlier, in the GABTU digest they wrote: “The tank’s resistance to projectiles and shaped-charge (cumulative) rounds, according to a preliminary computational-analytical assessment (JSC UKBTM), is comparable to that of the T-72B developed in 1985.”But apparently they did not really believe this very much, and besides, not firing at a modern Western tank when you have one available is completely absurd; therefore, in 2026 they recommended: “to carry out a full-scale experiment to assess the projectile resistance of the Leopard 2A6 tank.”
>>65586652what was the result?
>>65586830Obviously that it was in fact equal or slightly inferior to a T-54.
>>65586652>is comparable to that of the T-72B developed in 1985...does ANYBODY actually believe that?
>>65586652>is comparable to that of the T-72B developed in 1985Looking at the turret with no wedge designed to defeat kinetic projectiles, yeah. The base turret was designed around that time and it was meant to defeat primarily HEAT rounds.
Leopard 2 has 7 roadwheels, T-72 has 6. Clearly the German vehicle is superior.
>>65586830The shocking realization that the Leopard 2A6 has marginally better armor than the T-14 Armata.Possibly related to the fact that the armor on the T-14 is made of chicken wire, old newspapers, and wallpaper paste. Unlike previous Soviet/russian tanks that have armor made of solid explodium.Keep in mind that research is still ongoing, we don't know the full story yet.Stay tuned, more detail will emerge soon.
>>65586925I was meant to reply to you.>>65586918I believe it. In just raw armor. But 2A6 blows it outta water with FCS and other systems.
>>65586830Information on intel slava z
