I think I remember the chieftain saying something along the lines of "if you shoot first even with the wrong round you are at an advantage. If you miss, the enemy tank is under fire and not thinking straight while you are calmly reloading and adjusting your sight, if you hit, the enemy has been hit with HE and panicking while you are loading another round".
@@kemarisite I've been seeing this (significant emotional event) meme for a while Well the emotional event here is sh1t You just alerted them of your presence
@@IMP-vi6jeMost of the time in combat you have a very limited window to engage before your enemy moves on or spots you. Especially when you’re cruising in a 60+ ton vehicle. It is better to shoot first and fire again than dick around. Better to react with what you have when the time is right than have the right shell too late. By then the target has moved on or you are getting moved on.
@@IMP-vi6je if you're rolling along with an HE round in the tube and you spot an enemy tank you fire what's in the tube then switch to Sabot. You do this because the enemy may have already spotted you and hitting him with an HE shell takes less time than dropping breach and switching to Sabot. An HE round will ruin his aim either by fucking up the enemy's boresight, or just scaring the ever loving shit out of him. You may be able to damage his sights or other aiming equipment as well. If you spot a tank there's a good chance he will spot you if you take the 14-20 seconds to change rounds before firing. There's also safety concerns with the 120mm ammunition. If you try to take it out of the breech without firing there's a chance the combustible case will separate from the stub base and leak propellant into the turret. This is highly undesirable as the last thing you want spilling in the turret when you're about to open fire is propellant.
Friend went deer hunting, kept finding pheasant, but had a slug chambered. Next time first round was bird shot and he came across a buck. Buck got away because he was clearing the bird shot
Most likely a HE shell because they were probably expecting light armored vehicles or were planning a assault on a infantry fortification. Also a HE shell hitting ERA would definitely cause a lot of smoke and dust kick up. Sticking around having lost a good chunk of armor protection would be stupid, so the tankers did exactly the right thing. Better to call in artillery or a AT-UAV while you retreat to get repairs.
you'd expect to see some indication of a blast with the explosives on the ERA going off as well yet nothing like that seems to have happened. Hard to say if the ERA was struck either way a side on hit possibly near the tracks and the Russia tank just eats it no problem
@@jorgefloyd6989 Ain't no way some average sized ERA module (even if the included elements were Relikt) eats up and disperses enough energy from a modern LRP to allow the thin side armor of the turret to stop it.
@@jorgefloyd6989 if the reactive armor did its job, its no longer there to protect the tank so yeah a significant portion of the armor protection is now missing. Thats the downside of era. It may be compact and light but its not permanent
This is what it means to know a lot about tanks, you notice every single detail and possibility out there, thats why people watch you and listen to you.
I heard a story once of an Abrams in Iraq rolling through a city when they rounded a corner and spotted an armoured vehicle with a massive gun pointed right at them. Naturally, they blasted the HE round they had loaded into its face and skedaddled back round the corner. When no more fire comes at them, they eventually decide to check what the hell it was. It was a WW2-vintage Wespe. Or, more accurately by that point, two halfs of a WW2-vintage Wespe.
That's impossible. To my knowledge no Wespe were ever exported to Iraq or Iran(if it's a previously captured Iranian vehicle from the Iran-Iraq War). What's more likely is the vehicle they encounter was a misidentified Akatsiya that has a broadly similar profile to a Wespe
To be fair for the T72 crew, getting hit by a 120mm HE is a very big significant emotional event Retreat to ensure their survival was a good choice And it was a T72 I don't think you'd be so confident using that thing against other tanks but idk Edit: Well the comments made pretty good point so I would say the T72 is a capable one, not the one I would want to send against a Leo, probably something like a T90M would have better chance of victory
To be fair, Getting hit by a 120/125mm HE no matter in what Tank you are is a significant Emotional event. Massive shell shock. Also The T-72 is a capable vehicle, it's comparable to the Leopard 2, so questioning why someone tries to use a T-72 against an enemy tank you should also question why is someone using the Leopard 2 against enemy tanks as well.
Another youtube channel has geolocated the incident and has confirmed that it took place. They also had suspicions of a doctored video but then got enough evidence to suggest the incident was highly likely. The Leopard fired from a distance of around 2.2km, hence why it was on 2 drones. They slowed the video down and can just about make out a shell coming in horizontally, suggesting a tank shell, rather than artillery. All other conclusions are the same a Red's. HE shell and a damaged but mobile tank.
Man, watch the beginning of the video 00:05 . Leo 2A6 fires a projectile and hits something few hundred meters in front of itself. Split of a second later and it cuts to different angle. 2nd part of the video is completely different crossroads where Russian T-72 tank gets hit by artillery shell.
Suchomimus was able to successfully geolocate it, and the location of the Leo and Russian tanks lines up. I do believe however that the shot we see the Leo fire isn't the one that hit the Russian tank. In the clip of the Leo, as the camera zooms out at the end and just before it cuts to the Russian tanks, you can see a cloud of smoke just to the right of the crossroads where the round had impacted. What I think happened, is that the Leo was engaging infantry at the crossroads, then saw the Russian tanks at a distance as they moved into the gap. The crew probably then quickly fired whatever round they already had loaded in order to scare off the Russian tanks.
@@TheFIFABoysagreed. I used to watch him when the war first just started , he had really nice clips and straight to the point vids but then he quickly became a Ukrainian bot
I imagine the Leopard was moving forwards to shoot at a Russian position and suddenly they had 2x enemy tanks moving across their front. They reacted well. I imagine they then backed the hell up and loaded APFDS for good measure. There is plenty of videos of crews abandoning their perfectly serviceable vehicles when hit with something less considerable than a 120mm HE round so kudos to both tank crews.
Tank-on-tank engagements are pretty rare in general; tanks are breakthrough vehicles that are designed to punch through fortifications and possibly engage other tanks that get in the way, which would explain why most of the shells on board are HE rounds. A tank's deadliest rival on the battlefield isn't another tank, but rather anti-tank infantry. The battle of Prokhorovka was one of the few exceptions to this rule, and it was a colossal waste of armored vehicles that could have been otherwise put to better tactical use.
@@alexeishayya-shirokov3603Nah this is another fake rule people created after this war. MBTs are made to fight other MBTs (or tanks in general) not to support infantry (Western tanks didn't even use HE, only started using now). And tank x tank engagements are not that rare, since they are used against eachother all the time. Examples? WW2 (which most tanks were destroyed by other tanks, not by artillery or infantry weapons like people started to say after this war), Gulf War, and other battles like Prokhorovka. Tank x tank combat isn't that rare, rare is to capture this in footage.
@@igormsh14bidevisualizacoes45 I actually read that before this war. There's a very prominent military historian on UA-cam called The Imperator Knight (TIK History) who discusses the matter at length if you're interested.
@@igormsh14bidevisualizacoes45 its cause ww2 was when tanks were made in crazy numbers edit: modern manpats didnt exist back then in ww2 and atgm were nonexistent, now you can put atgm on literally everything including a gaz tigr
The Norwegian Leopard 2A4's (that Ukraine has received some of) also have a longer storage bins at the back of the turret, simply for storing tents and winter gear, that partially cover the radiator fans like on the A6. I think it might be one of those based on the location of the commander's independent periscope located in front of and slightly to the right of the commander's hatch, rather than behind and to the left as on the A6. But it's hard to say for certain as the footage is very grainy.
I don't see the curved "offramp" roads in the video of the Leopard firing. If you look at the very end of the Leopard video after the crossroads, there is a single road, no curved side roads. I agree I think it is two videos spliced together.
Also, there is a gap in the trees along the left side that isn't present in the Leopard video. I that one, the trees are solid all the way to the crossroad intersection on the bottom side of the road.
Suchomimus has done some geolocation work that suggests this is likely a genuine clip from two different perspectives (ie two different spotter drones). He does do a lot of geolocating so I’m inclined to trust his conclusion. He does follow the general opinion that these are T80’s, but I’m equally inclined to take RedEffect’s opinion on the Russian tanks. And yes, this is a victorious engagement for the L2. Two Russian tanks retreated from being engaged by one Ukrainian one, with one likely suffering damage to external fittings requiring repairs. It meant that whatever operation the Ukraine units were on could continue as planned while the Russian one could not. Definition of a Mission Kill in my mind.
I’m impressed after nearly 2 years of Russia basically dominating every single armor engagement that happens, Ukraine gets solid win. Molodets, krepkiy vrag.
@@vloplobHe must be counting the now Ukrainian operated Russian tanks that were “donated” in the first week of the war, killing other Russian tanks currently. All are Russian kills, yes?
it make sense that Leo original plan was to attack manned trenches/fortification, spotted those T72 and decided to shoot frst rather than risking being the receiving end of it 😂
Yeah, we see very few tank battles in this war. Tanks are mainly used as forward mobile artillery and to screen IFV's and dismounted infantry. If Ukraine gets past the mined entrenched positions and into open maneuver warfare then we'll see tank battles.
Could it be that the round, whether it be a HE or armor piercing, hit the ERA on tue Russian tank and that's why there was such a big explosion? Either way, i think it was extremely wise for the tanks to retreat immediately. They didn't know if anything on the tank was damaged or if the crew was fine. I once read that in german tanks during ww2, the germans after taking a hit had to individually sound off to see if everyone was alright and that would take time. They could retreat and call in an artillery or drone strike.
It can be a STRV 122 as well, there the back of the turret also covers the fans. Granted, the length of the barrel is a bit shorter on the 122, so this is probobly a 2A6.
It does quite a lot. Of course Ukrainians might over-exposure them in their footage to promote sending further units, but They are used regularily often as an unit with best sensors in area to complement drone spotting and infantry support
You don't see many videos of Leopards doing stuff because NATO asks Ukraine to keep them classified for a while untill they feel its safe to release them. This is why we are only seeing this video from June/July in September a few months later. I'm sure over the next few months we will see much more footage of Leopards, with it being good and bad.
Looks very much cut to look like it's a tank vs tank. The shot would most likely go hit the trees instead of the road. Also the second part looks like a simple 90° turn. But the first part is a 4 way intersection.
they are two different engagements. you can see the explosion from the leopard shot on the other side of the crossroad. at 0:06 and again at 1:51 they hit nothing but bushes.
So seeing your comment made me think "good point" so I had a quick look- From what I found, the Fins have sent 3 leo2 to ukraine for mineclearing and training duties, rather than frontline combat. Based on that I doubt this is a finnish leopard.
Watch in slow motion 1:03 You can see a screen similar to HEAT 0:06 can be seen An explosion occurs in front of the leopard And I don’t think Ukraine didn’t prioritize changing shells when it discovered Russian tanks in advance.
yeah, it is so stupid to say that tank should shoot as fast as possible. maybe in game. this is nonsense. tank should be invisible as long as it possible untill is in good distance and position to destroy target. and to use right ammunition is not even arguable...
@@non9886 In this situation, changing shells isn't ideal. Its slow and you might get discovered earlier on If this is abrahams, its fine since it can take few punches from a russian tank (see: operation desert storm) But this is leo, we dont know yet if it can take a hit.
@@AnimaRandom You ignored a question If the Ukrainian drone was in that location, they had at least a minute to prepare or more. I can understand that if you happen to be in this situation, firing is the best option. But when you have drones for reconnaissance, it's weird for a leopard to use HE for attack.
@@AnimaRandomyeah it can take short steel apfsds from the sides and fron but it prob wont take long DU and long tungsten sabots from the sides, maybe the front
@@5yo5kov i hate it so much that most modern tanks start with HEAT when stock, when pretty much every modern tank has a ton of ERA to counter exactly that.
Thank you very much. There are the best analyzes ever found to come across you tube. I appreciate the deep knowledge of the subject. Thanks. Tom 49/44/29 // 13/22/57 a tankman
Your vehicle is hit. if the impact (whether direct or indirect) caused enough trouble so that you have to retreat, then you have lost the engagement. Better to call it there and assess the damage (maybe even save the vehicle in the process) than risk being hit with another possibly deadlier round.
I find it very intriguing how the tanks didn't shoot back, or how that leopard was just alone, but there is always the possibility that more armor was down the road but it only shows the leo. But if so i wonder why they would just have a single tank engage enemies, because Russia usually has tanks in pairs of two or three. But also if we could get any updates on the T-90M's in ukraine right now that would be very informative.
it's a composite of two videos. The cameraman could have turned the drone's camera towards the hit, but instead you're shown a montage. Whose tanks? What's the hit from? What's the leopard got to do with it? Kringe.
There was a Bradley behind the Leopard, so my guess would be the Leopard A6 was the spearhead for a column (which would make total sense, have your heaviest armor in front).
@@denisdenisov7623classic vatnik take. “Leopard tanks are inferior to Russian wunderwaffle” “wait, what do you mean 1 Leo humiliated 2 Russian tanks by itself? FAKE!” “Ukraine gay Nazis are inferior. They will never destroy superior Russian supersoldaten.” “Wait, what do you mean they’re in Sevastopol? Fake soros funded globohomo conspiracy!”
@@denisdenisov7623 You actually want to pretend that someone doctored vision to create a video in which a Russian tank was hit but not destroyed? And you want to pretend a drone camera can tilt to show a second tank 2 to 3kms away, and produce useable vision. That's very silly, Denis.
Its two footages . Look at the cloud left im the picture when big explosion was visible, they swing the drone abit and you see a second smokecloud and that is not at 1,5km
The reactive armor did it's job and defended the Russian tank and the crew from destruction. The Russians are putting reactive armor on their tanks for a reason. Yes it's not a 100% protection, but it's not useless either. Better than just a base armor. Tanks without either an active protection or reactive armor are just sitting ducks in today's battlefield.
The only reason why they survived is because they were shooting HEAT shells and not KE rounds. If it was a KE i can assure you those t 80s wouldnt have survived.
@@saucyinnit8799 Doesn't matter. 125mm HE won't destroy a tank (maybe if it hits the roof from a good angle? maybeee?) it will mainly damage external modules like optics and stuff.
Are we even sure that the footage of the leo 2 and Russian tanks are the same engagement? I mean the leo 2 fires and we can see the explosion just down the road cross the junction. That leo 2 can only see down the road in front so has a very narrow firing ark. I think these are two completely different events.
@@LewisB3217not seen anything about this.... even if true both bits of footage could be released same time in a similar area and both bits of footage geo located in similar area. Just because its geo located doesn't mean that this it's the same engagement. They could be weeks apart. Confirmation would be seeing the all tanks in the same footage. By the looks of this the footage is taken by two separate drones as well. If this is the same engagement then thoes shots must be taken as 1 or 2km otherwise we should easily have footage of all the tanks in the same clip from the same drone, however we dont...or well at least not yet. So yes something smacked that Russian tank.... but was it a Leo 2.... dont know.
2:45 "If a tank is damaged and has to retreat that means it lost." lol, where were you when all the leopards were getting immolated and only like 2 dudes climbed out and ran away and all the wehrbs were crying muh survivability it actually won!!!!
Because it's about tank vs tank battle he is speaking in this video. Did those destroyed leopard you speak about got destroyed by another tanks? Then no the question of who won a tank battle can only be said in an tank battle not in an tank vs helicopter battle where most of the tanks can't do shit about the helicopter.
It's standard practice for tanks to have an HE round loaded when driving around the battlefield. When sighting another tank tactic dictates to shoot what you have loaded and then to load sabot
If you have a reason to expect tank engagements sabot is the best plan. Infantry can be dealt with by co-axial as well if you run into them. HEDP might be sufficient round if you don't know exactly what you can expect to encounter.
Looking at the video from the ground there seems to be a road branching off to the left exactly where the tank is shot, while from the top view the cloud smoke has only trees in that same place. I feel like those are two seperate pieces of footage simply chained together because the place looked similar. This war has the worst media manipulation we've ever seen. And it's done by both sides. So, I don't blindly believe an ounce of what either side claims.
Nah you would be fine. It all comes down to who gets the initiative, you just gotta flank or ambush it so having previous information of its location would be essential. The one who hits first usually wins.
The engagement was geo located to be N->S (reported by Suchomimus). So the tank that was hit appears to have been tagged by either an Anti-Tank Mine or shoulder-fired ordinance coming from the T-72/80's left side. _(perhaps lured into a trap, by the Leo?)_ I speculate this based on the West->East dust 'jet' that you can see, _as well as_ the small smoke/dust cloud that is visible off to the left in the field, after the drone camera wobbles and pans left just after the tank is hit. Not saying I'm right, but, that definitely caught my attention and figured it with bringing up.
Absolutely agree. That's just two Videos cut together. But why is the question?I think it's main purpose is just for propaganda to get more and more of those advanced tanks into the country.
My version of events: 1.) Leo 2 entered the position, thought he would meet infantry and light equipment, or was preparing to fire against fortifications; upon encountering a tank, he immediately entered the battle. T72\T80 having received a high-explosive hit, they thought that they had come under artillery fire and immediately retreated. 2.) Since there is no single frame, it is possible that this is generally a fake or an edit, Ukrainians are often noticed doing this.
@@Leander00 So, you claim this is the same crossroads in 1st and 2nd part of the video? And dont tell me it was 2.2 km away cause at 00:05 Leo clearly hits something few hundred meters in front of itself.
So that T-72 would’ve been crippled if the Leopard 2A6 crew loaded a Sabot round before hand. So I guess we could assume that the reason why they loaded an HE round was because their original mission could’ve been to engage Russian fortifications and lightly armored IFVs and APCs, since from what I read that is what HE rounds are mainly used for, and everybody knows that Sabot rounds are used for tank on tank engagements. All in all these engagements are rare during this war like how a few months back when we all saw the T-80 engage an armored column with drone and artillery support. Honestly it was smart for those T-72s to retreat especially the one that got hit. And this is one of Ukraine’s few tank on tank victories in this war so far, or are there any other victories?
@@Mal101M yeah that’s true, and to my knowledge it was only T-64s that engaged Russian tanks seen in videos from last year with Russian T-72s emerging as victorious, but I am just pointing out that Oplots were Ukraine’s most modern tank before the arrival of Leopard 2s and Challenger 2s, right?
@@alexalbrecht5768 So he's a Russian propagandist for bringing up a valid point? Suchomimus is a proud partisan and he doesn't even try to hide it. Why would anyone trust him? I'm not arguing that he couldn't do a proper analysis on some event and cement its validity with evidence and bulletproof logic, but taking his words at face value without checking every single step in his proofs is moronic.
as it was being said on the channel of Torsten Heinrich the HE shell most likely destroyed the russian tanks fog projector setting it off completely in an instant which is why there was such an impressive cloud
so the vehicle isnt lost when its internal electronics are likely fucked? this T-72 likely has to be sent back and undergo heavy repairs, it wont see the frontline for a few weeks. thats a loss, enough of these and the enemy still ends up with a lack of firepower no? its like saying injuring a soldier isnt a loss but it is, every man less at the front has to be replaced somehow or you eventually simply lose.
The position has been geolocated to be east of Balka Uspenivs'ka, the positions there would line up with the claimed engagement distance of 2,28 km. At these ranges, a High Explosive projectile is actually a really good option as well
@@lodickasvlajeckou @mikes989 A direct from a 120 mm HE grenade will most likely damage or destroy optics and is likely to blast the track segments apart. If any hatches are open or improperly shut the crewmembers will have shattered eardrums, concussions and in severe cases internal bleeding. If HE is what you have loaded, just slinging it is a pretty good bet.
@@dukeofwar1003 The fact that I commented on the accuracy and you reply on effects is one thing but you Just cannot argue that HE shells have good accuracy
Was the large explosion maybe caused by the Russian tank's ERA modules? That would mean the round fired possibly wasn't a HE round. Maybe a sabot round passed through the russian tank's trurret or something like that.
@@huntergatherer7796 Indeed it did. Maybe I am totally wrong, but I could imagine a tank driving away after a sabot passed through its turret and probably killed the turret crew members. It sounds possible to me that the driver and the propulsion system can survive such an event as long as the ammo does not cook off.
@@huntergatherer7796 The driver is very much separated. The driver is the only crew member who is not in the turret and in a forward position. That being said the driver could also be dead and not being able to hold the clutch pedal down makes the tank move forward.
another well editted video by the Ukrainian side, but nvm :D They were obliged to prepare something after the videos with burning Leopards and Challenger.
oh you mean like the vid of the Leopards getting hit which turned out to be a harvester? or the Lancet videos of "destructions" of Leopards which is just the lancet hitting the smoke system?
@@KingSpittusFactus I am talking about prooved videos of destroyed Leopard and Challenger, nothing more or less ;) No idea neither what hit them, nor when, just videos of destroyed tanks :)
This looks like an edited video. The Leopard fires directly down a tree lined road, but there is no intersection near where the tank was 'hit'. Second, the explosion is up and out and ejects a lot of earth, so it appears to be a mine. If just the edge of the track caught it, a mine may not immobilize a MBT.
@@LewisB3217 Reading comprehension isn't a thing, these days, huh? And in fact, single mine hits have failed to disable Ukrainian T72s, which is why Russia started double laying them. Had you been paying any attention, youd know there have been numerous news segments specifically on Russia 'stacking' mines, because single mines weren't doing the job.
Right after the Leopard shot you can see the dirt kick up just past the intersection, I wonder if the round hit the ground there. Makes me skeptical of this video
@@LewisB3217 Not saying its fake at all, its just a speculation and observation. I just dont believe the shot that was recorded of the Leo firing was the shot that hit the tank in the second video from the drone. I could be wrong and I probably am but who really knows I was not there.
While it is possible that video is doctored, and events took place in different time, positions of tanks have been geolocated and tanks were aprox. 1.5 km from eachother
If you are hit and you can retreat. Do it. Russian tanks already blown leopard on video before. They have nothing to prove. Also there is no context behind this video. You dont know the situation, could be ambush, could be that russian tank was already damaged or shelled.
Mix of two different cameras. Yup, grass is green on both, just as trees... and, yes, that can be the same event, but from two different drones. Let's say, about 25% chances for that. So, that is one old song from the band called "Imagination", and song is: "Just an illusion". Most likely.
Huge win for Leo 2. It survived an engagement without destroying or even heavily damaging the opponent. Damn. People in the West really have high expectations for their gear in Ukraine. Can't blame them tho, all things considered :D
With one shot, it damaged one of your tanks, and, made two of your tanks run-away. Russians are silly, deceitful, and cowardly. Always have been; always will be. 😏
@@johnharrison674520 million slavics and millions of Russians died during the war against Nazi germany. Those people amounted to more than anything you ever will. You have a very sad life.
@@cordellmohawk8408 It wasnt destroyed bc it moved. Sometimes damages are beyond repairs and the tanks needs to be written off by army engineers and will go for scrap.
@@saucyinnit8799Not weird at all if it's a long range engagement which would prohibit seeing both tanks in frame, let alone both the shot and the hit on target at once from a single drone above the Leo 2A6. Can't capture both in frame at the same time with just one drone.
@@sietuuba it doesn't need to capture both tanks in a single frame, as far as i'm aware it can just zoom in or hover to the Russian tanks and then just exchange viewing the Russian tanks and the Leopard 2.
@@saucyinnit8799 well, it certainly can, but I would believe the drones are not primarily there to make battlefield journalism, but have a tactical military purpose first and foremost
What russians mean by winning is the psychological side of the story. Soldiers might be more confident in engaging leopard 2 tanks knowing they even got hit and not destroyed
If it hit the front with an HE and the turret was also front that barrel is more than just a little fucked thing most likely won’t fire straight or might even cause a blockage meaning you are replacing more than just a couple of plates on it and tank barrels are not cheap
Hello Red! How do you evaluate the news about the restoration of T-80 production? I view this news with doubt, because... for the whole of Russia - 1 multi-tonnage machine, with a matrix tailored for the T-72.
The real question is why the Leo 2 didn’t follow up with an APFSDS round ? Even a second HE round would have caused some additional damage maybe even destruction, the Leo 2 crew lost a great opportunity
the russian tanks where hidden behind the hot explosion cloud, the leo simply hat no visuals on the t72. takes a moment for the cloud to becom translucent even to ir
If you are on advance and see that the enemy tank crew is panicking, there is a high chance that the enemy could abandon the vehicle at some distance of the fight. There were multiple occasions where Russians fled and abandoned a tank after engagement.
I concur with the notion that you cant hit what you cant see. Load a sabot and wait for the smoke to clear and pop the target if its still there. It wasnt, so thats that.
they probably hit some ERA .... would explain why they can still drive off ....and if they didnt know from what direction the shot came ....than deploying smoke and getting out of there seems to be the right call...... and yes coach-warriors ...a tactical retreat is an actual working strategy and not a sign of cowardice
I think I remember the chieftain saying something along the lines of "if you shoot first even with the wrong round you are at an advantage. If you miss, the enemy tank is under fire and not thinking straight while you are calmly reloading and adjusting your sight, if you hit, the enemy has been hit with HE and panicking while you are loading another round".
Yes. Even being hit with HE or MPAT is going to be a "significant emotional event".
I learnt that from a WW2 tank Veteran's book and used the same tactics playing Panzer Front🙌🏻
IYKYK😄
@@kemarisite
I've been seeing this (significant emotional event) meme for a while
Well the emotional event here is sh1t
You just alerted them of your presence
@@IMP-vi6jeMost of the time in combat you have a very limited window to engage before your enemy moves on or spots you. Especially when you’re cruising in a 60+ ton vehicle. It is better to shoot first and fire again than dick around. Better to react with what you have when the time is right than have the right shell too late. By then the target has moved on or you are getting moved on.
@@IMP-vi6je if you're rolling along with an HE round in the tube and you spot an enemy tank you fire what's in the tube then switch to Sabot. You do this because the enemy may have already spotted you and hitting him with an HE shell takes less time than dropping breach and switching to Sabot. An HE round will ruin his aim either by fucking up the enemy's boresight, or just scaring the ever loving shit out of him. You may be able to damage his sights or other aiming equipment as well. If you spot a tank there's a good chance he will spot you if you take the 14-20 seconds to change rounds before firing. There's also safety concerns with the 120mm ammunition. If you try to take it out of the breech without firing there's a chance the combustible case will separate from the stub base and leak propellant into the turret. This is highly undesirable as the last thing you want spilling in the turret when you're about to open fire is propellant.
Tank on tank battles never happen until you load HE shells.
It is like rain would never happen unless you watered the garden or washed the car.😅
Friend went deer hunting, kept finding pheasant, but had a slug chambered. Next time first round was bird shot and he came across a buck. Buck got away because he was clearing the bird shot
I think in this war they load HE in most case is the standard. MBT vs MBT situations are really rare
probably had a 200% booster too smh
did you mean HEAT shells?
Most likely a HE shell because they were probably expecting light armored vehicles or were planning a assault on a infantry fortification. Also a HE shell hitting ERA would definitely cause a lot of smoke and dust kick up. Sticking around having lost a good chunk of armor protection would be stupid, so the tankers did exactly the right thing. Better to call in artillery or a AT-UAV while you retreat to get repairs.
Or maybe just maybe the reactive armor did it's job?
you'd expect to see some indication of a blast with the explosives on the ERA going off as well yet nothing like that seems to have happened. Hard to say if the ERA was struck either way a side on hit possibly near the tracks and the Russia tank just eats it no problem
@@jorgefloyd6989 Ain't no way some average sized ERA module (even if the included elements were Relikt) eats up and disperses enough energy from a modern LRP to allow the thin side armor of the turret to stop it.
@@jorgefloyd6989 if the reactive armor did its job, its no longer there to protect the tank so yeah a significant portion of the armor protection is now missing. Thats the downside of era. It may be compact and light but its not permanent
@@koskok2965 Did you see a High Explosion? I saw reactive armor do it job. Hopefully the crew gets interviewed and show the tank.
Honestly getting hit by a 120mm HE shell is a traumatic event, the shockwave from that shell would cause a lot of concussion even inside a tank.
Just imagine the sound inside of the tank. Probably 1-all crew would have developed post-traumatic stress disorder
Did you know from experience war thunder player?
i live watching your army died poor ukraine i tell you something alot and alot of Asia People like me never support your bagger state😁😁😁🤣🤣
But they all survive.
nope... tanks are designed to absorb shock waves... and the fact that the tank was still moving perfectly, proves that the crews were fine
This is what it means to know a lot about tanks, you notice every single detail and possibility out there, thats why people watch you and listen to you.
He's wrong tho; there's only a twitter rumor about HE 120 mm ammo in Ukr... more likely it's a HEAT round and ERA blocks
diesel patches? heree?
@@flouroantimonic4262 nah I cant ever hope to have his swager but I am a diesel patches enjoyer.
@@Silver_Prussian so you r not daddy?😥😥
@@alexanderlarsen6412 he literally clipped in a 3-4 second clip of HE-frag-T ammo in ukraine there bruh
I heard a story once of an Abrams in Iraq rolling through a city when they rounded a corner and spotted an armoured vehicle with a massive gun pointed right at them. Naturally, they blasted the HE round they had loaded into its face and skedaddled back round the corner. When no more fire comes at them, they eventually decide to check what the hell it was.
It was a WW2-vintage Wespe. Or, more accurately by that point, two halfs of a WW2-vintage Wespe.
RIP I hate hearing of WWII Relics getting destroyed in modern battlefields :(
Abrams? With HE?
That's impossible. To my knowledge no Wespe were ever exported to Iraq or Iran(if it's a previously captured Iranian vehicle from the Iran-Iraq War). What's more likely is the vehicle they encounter was a misidentified Akatsiya that has a broadly similar profile to a Wespe
there is footage from early on in the Ukraine war of a russian BTR or similar lighting up a T34-85 on a plinth with autocannon fire.
@@skylargray455also Abrams didn't have HE shells during the Iraq invasion.
To be fair for the T72 crew, getting hit by a 120mm HE is a very big significant emotional event
Retreat to ensure their survival was a good choice
And it was a T72 I don't think you'd be so confident using that thing against other tanks but idk
Edit: Well the comments made pretty good point so I would say the T72 is a capable one, not the one I would want to send against a Leo, probably something like a T90M would have better chance of victory
120mm*
To be fair, Getting hit by a 120/125mm HE no matter in what Tank you are is a significant Emotional event. Massive shell shock. Also The T-72 is a capable vehicle, it's comparable to the Leopard 2, so questioning why someone tries to use a T-72 against an enemy tank you should also question why is someone using the Leopard 2 against enemy tanks as well.
@@saucyinnit8799not just shell shock but bye bye to external instruments
This is the first time a western tank was used aginst an army instead of goatherders
accuracy would be compromised
his wingman should have covered him
Another youtube channel has geolocated the incident and has confirmed that it took place. They also had suspicions of a doctored video but then got enough evidence to suggest the incident was highly likely. The Leopard fired from a distance of around 2.2km, hence why it was on 2 drones. They slowed the video down and can just about make out a shell coming in horizontally, suggesting a tank shell, rather than artillery. All other conclusions are the same a Red's. HE shell and a damaged but mobile tank.
Man, watch the beginning of the video 00:05 . Leo 2A6 fires a projectile and hits something few hundred meters in front of itself. Split of a second later and it cuts to different angle. 2nd part of the video is completely different crossroads where Russian T-72 tank gets hit by artillery shell.
Suchomimus?
At this distance, HE would probably even be a deliberate choice.
@@ClarkGallendez Watch 00:05 explosion at the crossroads. Definitely not 2 km away.
@@chilechichich465 agree. these videos are so ridiculously edited its amazing anyone believes them, let alone these UA-cam "experts".
Suchomimus was able to successfully geolocate it, and the location of the Leo and Russian tanks lines up. I do believe however that the shot we see the Leo fire isn't the one that hit the Russian tank. In the clip of the Leo, as the camera zooms out at the end and just before it cuts to the Russian tanks, you can see a cloud of smoke just to the right of the crossroads where the round had impacted. What I think happened, is that the Leo was engaging infantry at the crossroads, then saw the Russian tanks at a distance as they moved into the gap. The crew probably then quickly fired whatever round they already had loaded in order to scare off the Russian tanks.
Agreed.
Then what hit the Russian tanks? This could be the same location. But different day. The tanks may never have met.
Suchomimus is like the least unbiased youtuber out there
@@TheBooban read it again, he say the first shot in the video is on infatry and then shoots off camera and we see the impact.
@@TheFIFABoysagreed. I used to watch him when the war first just started , he had really nice clips and straight to the point vids but then he quickly became a Ukrainian bot
I imagine the Leopard was moving forwards to shoot at a Russian position and suddenly they had 2x enemy tanks moving across their front. They reacted well. I imagine they then backed the hell up and loaded APFDS for good measure. There is plenty of videos of crews abandoning their perfectly serviceable vehicles when hit with something less considerable than a 120mm HE round so kudos to both tank crews.
I imagine the Leopard was shooting and suddenly the reality was duct taped and there suddenly appeared 2 russian tanks.
Tank on tank engagements are very rare in this war, it's mostly tank hit by drones, kornets etc
Tank-on-tank engagements are pretty rare in general; tanks are breakthrough vehicles that are designed to punch through fortifications and possibly engage other tanks that get in the way, which would explain why most of the shells on board are HE rounds. A tank's deadliest rival on the battlefield isn't another tank, but rather anti-tank infantry.
The battle of Prokhorovka was one of the few exceptions to this rule, and it was a colossal waste of armored vehicles that could have been otherwise put to better tactical use.
@@alexeishayya-shirokov3603Nah this is another fake rule people created after this war. MBTs are made to fight other MBTs (or tanks in general) not to support infantry (Western tanks didn't even use HE, only started using now). And tank x tank engagements are not that rare, since they are used against eachother all the time. Examples? WW2 (which most tanks were destroyed by other tanks, not by artillery or infantry weapons like people started to say after this war), Gulf War, and other battles like Prokhorovka.
Tank x tank combat isn't that rare, rare is to capture this in footage.
@@igormsh14bidevisualizacoes45 I actually read that before this war. There's a very prominent military historian on UA-cam called The Imperator Knight (TIK History) who discusses the matter at length if you're interested.
@@igormsh14bidevisualizacoes45 its cause ww2 was when tanks were made in crazy numbers
edit: modern manpats didnt exist back then in ww2 and atgm were nonexistent, now you can put atgm on literally everything including a gaz tigr
They have happened several times in the last year and a half
The Norwegian Leopard 2A4's (that Ukraine has received some of) also have a longer storage bins at the back of the turret, simply for storing tents and winter gear, that partially cover the radiator fans like on the A6.
I think it might be one of those based on the location of the commander's independent periscope located in front of and slightly to the right of the commander's hatch, rather than behind and to the left as on the A6.
But it's hard to say for certain as the footage is very grainy.
There we go, that’s better full video in now! 😂
I don't see the curved "offramp" roads in the video of the Leopard firing. If you look at the very end of the Leopard video after the crossroads, there is a single road, no curved side roads. I agree I think it is two videos spliced together.
Also, there is a gap in the trees along the left side that isn't present in the Leopard video. I that one, the trees are solid all the way to the crossroad intersection
on the bottom side of the road.
@@ionfleming3648there are some UA-camrs who geolocated this incident and the location seems pretty much the same shown in the video
@@ionfleming3648It's already geolocated and seems it did happened and there were two drones in two different sides.
Suchomimus has done some geolocation work that suggests this is likely a genuine clip from two different perspectives (ie two different spotter drones). He does do a lot of geolocating so I’m inclined to trust his conclusion. He does follow the general opinion that these are T80’s, but I’m equally inclined to take RedEffect’s opinion on the Russian tanks.
And yes, this is a victorious engagement for the L2. Two Russian tanks retreated from being engaged by one Ukrainian one, with one likely suffering damage to external fittings requiring repairs. It meant that whatever operation the Ukraine units were on could continue as planned while the Russian one could not. Definition of a Mission Kill in my mind.
I agree. The term here is a "mission kill".
I’m impressed after nearly 2 years of Russia basically dominating every single armor engagement that happens, Ukraine gets solid win. Molodets, krepkiy vrag.
@@Mortablunt The numbers are clearly speaking a different language, troll.
@@vloplobHe must be counting the now Ukrainian operated Russian tanks that were “donated” in the first week of the war, killing other Russian tanks currently. All are Russian kills, yes?
@@Mortablunt 80+ losses of T-90 tanks vs less than 20 losses of western tanks say otherwise LOL
it make sense that Leo original plan was to attack manned trenches/fortification, spotted those T72 and decided to shoot frst rather than risking being the receiving end of it 😂
Yeah, we see very few tank battles in this war. Tanks are mainly used as forward mobile artillery and to screen IFV's and dismounted infantry. If Ukraine gets past the mined entrenched positions and into open maneuver warfare then we'll see tank battles.
Yeah that’s typically how fighting works. Shoot first or be shot.
The t72 that was hit had its turret looking the other way tho so how would they have received a shell when they had the element of surprise
Spotted or got reports of them. I don't really get why you used an emoji at the end of your comment? Is there anything funny about that?
Obviously he had loaded HE because he was looking for those pesky arty in the corner of the map...
Finally a non biased source. If the daily mail or telegraph saw they'd make it a piece of propaganda.
Given the rarity of tank vs tank combat it makes sense to load high explosives (for the more likely Infanterie and bunkerbusting)
T-80 gave that Leopard a wink and told him. I'll be back.
with 10 gun launched anti tank shovels
Could it be that the round, whether it be a HE or armor piercing, hit the ERA on tue Russian tank and that's why there was such a big explosion? Either way, i think it was extremely wise for the tanks to retreat immediately. They didn't know if anything on the tank was damaged or if the crew was fine. I once read that in german tanks during ww2, the germans after taking a hit had to individually sound off to see if everyone was alright and that would take time. They could retreat and call in an artillery or drone strike.
ERA alone would NOT have resulted in that large of an explosion. It was an HE round hitting ERA.
ERA is powerful, but not that powerful. You’d definitely need a HE shell plus ERA to make that, an AT shell + ERA wouldn’t even be that big.
Have any of you 🤡 ever seen modern reactive armor blow up? Ok. Shut up with your, it's an HE round. 🤣 Mo Rons.
An HE shell detonated, you can see it left one of the tanks turrets smoking at the top
the era probably saved the tank but it definetly was HE round, or it was not a tank round at all
It can be a STRV 122 as well, there the back of the turret also covers the fans. Granted, the length of the barrel is a bit shorter on the 122, so this is probobly a 2A6.
yeah, it doesnt look right for a 122
@@Fred_the_1996 well true. But just saying that the turret covers half the fans is notnsufficent.
Canadian 2a4. Looks exactly like one and they have the longer back of the turret
Hey, the Leo2 actually did something
not really, the video is edited
It does quite a lot. Of course Ukrainians might over-exposure them in their footage to promote sending further units, but They are used regularily often as an unit with best sensors in area to complement drone spotting and infantry support
Yeah, did not explode in the first 30 minutes.
You don't see many videos of Leopards doing stuff because NATO asks Ukraine to keep them classified for a while untill they feel its safe to release them. This is why we are only seeing this video from June/July in September a few months later.
I'm sure over the next few months we will see much more footage of Leopards, with it being good and bad.
actually we dont see any tank doing anything too often
Looks very much cut to look like it's a tank vs tank. The shot would most likely go hit the trees instead of the road. Also the second part looks like a simple 90° turn. But the first part is a 4 way intersection.
they are two different engagements. you can see the explosion from the leopard shot on the other side of the crossroad. at 0:06 and again at 1:51 they hit nothing but bushes.
at 2:15 you have the video paused so you can clearly see the smoke from the shot on the right-hand side of the screen.
I was expecting your review as soon as I saw the video. Great analysis as usual!
I don’t really think the turret rear alone is enough to identify the tank as a Leo 2A6 seeing as the Finnish 2A4 has an enlarged turret rear as well.
So seeing your comment made me think "good point" so I had a quick look- From what I found, the Fins have sent 3 leo2 to ukraine for mineclearing and training duties, rather than frontline combat. Based on that I doubt this is a finnish leopard.
@@vincediscombe7360 Other comments suggest this is a Canadian 2A4 as that has a similar extended turret and were sent to Ukraine.
Watch in slow motion 1:03
You can see a screen similar to HEAT
0:06 can be seen
An explosion occurs in front of the leopard
And I don’t think Ukraine didn’t prioritize changing shells when it discovered Russian tanks in advance.
yeah, it is so stupid to say that tank should shoot as fast as possible. maybe in game. this is nonsense. tank should be invisible as long as it possible untill is in good distance and position to destroy target. and to use right ammunition is not even arguable...
@@non9886 You don't know what you're talking about.
@@non9886
In this situation, changing shells isn't ideal. Its slow and you might get discovered earlier on
If this is abrahams, its fine since it can take few punches from a russian tank (see: operation desert storm)
But this is leo, we dont know yet if it can take a hit.
@@AnimaRandom You ignored a question
If the Ukrainian drone was in that location, they had at least a minute to prepare or more.
I can understand that if you happen to be in this situation, firing is the best option.
But when you have drones for reconnaissance, it's weird for a leopard to use HE for attack.
@@AnimaRandomyeah it can take short steel apfsds from the sides and fron but it prob wont take long DU and long tungsten sabots from the sides, maybe the front
"Hit
200🦁 50💡"
That’s happen when u are stock😂
@@5yo5kov i hate it so much that most modern tanks start with HEAT when stock, when pretty much every modern tank has a ton of ERA to counter exactly that.
Footage was geolocated, it’s the same video.
Distance was about 2.28km
Thank you very much. There are the best analyzes ever found to come across you tube. I appreciate the deep knowledge of the subject. Thanks. Tom 49/44/29 // 13/22/57 a tankman
Your vehicle is hit. if the impact (whether direct or indirect) caused enough trouble so that you have to retreat, then you have lost the engagement. Better to call it there and assess the damage (maybe even save the vehicle in the process) than risk being hit with another possibly deadlier round.
I find it very intriguing how the tanks didn't shoot back, or how that leopard was just alone, but there is always the possibility that more armor was down the road but it only shows the leo. But if so i wonder why they would just have a single tank engage enemies, because Russia usually has tanks in pairs of two or three. But also if we could get any updates on the T-90M's in ukraine right now that would be very informative.
it's a composite of two videos. The cameraman could have turned the drone's camera towards the hit, but instead you're shown a montage. Whose tanks? What's the hit from? What's the leopard got to do with it? Kringe.
There was a Bradley behind the Leopard, so my guess would be the Leopard A6 was the spearhead for a column (which would make total sense, have your heaviest armor in front).
@@denisdenisov7623classic vatnik take. “Leopard tanks are inferior to Russian wunderwaffle” “wait, what do you mean 1 Leo humiliated 2 Russian tanks by itself? FAKE!”
“Ukraine gay Nazis are inferior. They will never destroy superior Russian supersoldaten.” “Wait, what do you mean they’re in Sevastopol? Fake soros funded globohomo conspiracy!”
@@denisdenisov7623seems like an two different videos. The Russian tank looks like it hit a land mine or it was a close artillery shell
@@denisdenisov7623 You actually want to pretend that someone doctored vision to create a video in which a Russian tank was hit but not destroyed? And you want to pretend a drone camera can tilt to show a second tank 2 to 3kms away, and produce useable vision. That's very silly, Denis.
i think its 2 different videos). Massive dust from tank shot? Not really. It maybe heat by artillery
Its two footages . Look at the cloud left im the picture when big explosion was visible, they swing the drone abit and you see a second smokecloud and that is not at 1,5km
The reactive armor did it's job and defended the Russian tank and the crew from destruction. The Russians are putting reactive armor on their tanks for a reason. Yes it's not a 100% protection, but it's not useless either. Better than just a base armor. Tanks without either an active protection or reactive armor are just sitting ducks in today's battlefield.
Reactive stops chemical penetration. Whether they had ERA or not makes no different to HE. It explodes externally regardless.
the people operating the challenger 2 certainly didn't know that
@@viktoriyaserebryakov2755well ERA is in essence spaced armour of some sort which is HE's worst enemy. .
The only reason why they survived is because they were shooting HEAT shells and not KE rounds. If it was a KE i can assure you those t 80s wouldnt have survived.
@@saucyinnit8799 Doesn't matter. 125mm HE won't destroy a tank (maybe if it hits the roof from a good angle? maybeee?) it will mainly damage external modules like optics and stuff.
Could also been an APFSDS overpenning and triggering ERA blocks.
ERA don’t explode like that
Are we even sure that the footage of the leo 2 and Russian tanks are the same engagement? I mean the leo 2 fires and we can see the explosion just down the road cross the junction. That leo 2 can only see down the road in front so has a very narrow firing ark. I think these are two completely different events.
It’s been geolocated 😂
@@LewisB3217not seen anything about this.... even if true both bits of footage could be released same time in a similar area and both bits of footage geo located in similar area. Just because its geo located doesn't mean that this it's the same engagement. They could be weeks apart.
Confirmation would be seeing the all tanks in the same footage. By the looks of this the footage is taken by two separate drones as well.
If this is the same engagement then thoes shots must be taken as 1 or 2km otherwise we should easily have footage of all the tanks in the same clip from the same drone, however we dont...or well at least not yet.
So yes something smacked that Russian tank.... but was it a Leo 2.... dont know.
Also the road in the first clip has asphalt and it continues up, in the second clip most of the roads are muddy, doesn’t add up
I have a feeling there would be a lot of angry shovel seeking that Leo
*BOBR logo appears next to you*
@@OtherlingQueen ukranians need shovel proof technology
Да надо будет на фронт привезти еше немного бронебойных саперных лопат
@@ligmasurvivor5600 I think what they need more than anti-shovel technology is to dodge FPVs more efficiently
@@OtherlingQueen cope cages should stop fpvs
*Bro was grinding a stock tank i feel his pain* 💀💀
WT flashbacks😂
2:45 "If a tank is damaged and has to retreat that means it lost."
lol, where were you when all the leopards were getting immolated and only like 2 dudes climbed out and ran away and all the wehrbs were crying muh survivability it actually won!!!!
Lol
Because it's about tank vs tank battle he is speaking in this video. Did those destroyed leopard you speak about got destroyed by another tanks? Then no the question of who won a tank battle can only be said in an tank battle not in an tank vs helicopter battle where most of the tanks can't do shit about the helicopter.
Tanks for watching!
😂
It's standard practice for tanks to have an HE round loaded when driving around the battlefield. When sighting another tank tactic dictates to shoot what you have loaded and then to load sabot
If you have a reason to expect tank engagements sabot is the best plan. Infantry can be dealt with by co-axial as well if you run into them. HEDP might be sufficient round if you don't know exactly what you can expect to encounter.
@@herptek ypu might be right, but usually tanks don‘t do that
@@sangay9361 They don't do what exactly, expect tank engagements?
Looking at the video from the ground there seems to be a road branching off to the left exactly where the tank is shot, while from the top view the cloud smoke has only trees in that same place. I feel like those are two seperate pieces of footage simply chained together because the place looked similar.
This war has the worst media manipulation we've ever seen. And it's done by both sides. So, I don't blindly believe an ounce of what either side claims.
So-called “vatnik” making an honest unbiased assessment of a video. Love ur content Red, keep it up!
RedEffect is not really a vatnik, a large portion of his audience on the other hand..
Most unbiased youtuber❤
Imagine sitting in a T-72 and encountering a Leopard 2A6, i would literally shit my pants, knowing damn well my chance to win is low af
No, you'd just target one of its numerous weak spots and fuck it up instantly.
Nah you would be fine. It all comes down to who gets the initiative, you just gotta flank or ambush it so having previous information of its location would be essential.
The one who hits first usually wins.
Load a 3BM60 and the Leopard would be a smoking ruin.
@@JAnx01This aint warthunder bud
@@blahmountain3621 You're right, you don't look for a weak spot in real combat, but the Leopard's hull armor is one giant weak spot.
Thanks AGAIN! I have seen this video several times and was waiting for your video on it!
The engagement was geo located to be N->S (reported by Suchomimus). So the tank that was hit appears to have been tagged by either an Anti-Tank Mine or shoulder-fired ordinance coming from the T-72/80's left side. _(perhaps lured into a trap, by the Leo?)_
I speculate this based on the West->East dust 'jet' that you can see, _as well as_ the small smoke/dust cloud that is visible off to the left in the field, after the drone camera wobbles and pans left just after the tank is hit.
Not saying I'm right, but, that definitely caught my attention and figured it with bringing up.
that cloud could be just from an damaged smoke dispencer
Absolutely agree. That's just two Videos cut together. But why is the question?I think it's main purpose is just for propaganda to get more and more of those advanced tanks into the country.
There we go, it's fixed
Original video started around 1:25
My version of events:
1.) Leo 2 entered the position, thought he would meet infantry and light equipment, or was preparing to fire against fortifications; upon encountering a tank, he immediately entered the battle.
T72\T80 having received a high-explosive hit, they thought that they had come under artillery fire and immediately retreated.
2.) Since there is no single frame, it is possible that this is generally a fake or an edit, Ukrainians are often noticed doing this.
Not only ukrainians but on both sides much is faked.
But its confirmed and geo located by suchoimus. The Video isnt fake.
I don't like what is happening = fake
@@Leander00 to be fair the guy is right.
@@Leander00don’t say like that about Ukraine
@@Leander00 So, you claim this is the same crossroads in 1st and 2nd part of the video? And dont tell me it was 2.2 km away cause at 00:05 Leo clearly hits something few hundred meters in front of itself.
So that T-72 would’ve been crippled if the Leopard 2A6 crew loaded a Sabot round before hand.
So I guess we could assume that the reason why they loaded an HE round was because their original mission could’ve been to engage Russian fortifications and lightly armored IFVs and APCs, since from what I read that is what HE rounds are mainly used for, and everybody knows that Sabot rounds are used for tank on tank engagements. All in all these engagements are rare during this war like how a few months back when we all saw the T-80 engage an armored column with drone and artillery support.
Honestly it was smart for those T-72s to retreat especially the one that got hit. And this is one of Ukraine’s few tank on tank victories in this war so far, or are there any other victories?
First one with Western tank.
@@sys3248 yeah because the others were usually either with T-64s, T-72s, T-80s or BM Oplots/T-84s
@@Mal101M yeah that’s true, and to my knowledge it was only T-64s that engaged Russian tanks seen in videos from last year with Russian T-72s emerging as victorious, but I am just pointing out that Oplots were Ukraine’s most modern tank before the arrival of Leopard 2s and Challenger 2s, right?
@@moalzaben5554 its still most modern Ukrane`s tank. Its for sure better than challenger
@@sys3248First one on video by western tank*
Tank dueling happens :
*You have summoned the Red Effect*
I was here a minute after the video was uploaded , i realize the video is not right and probable cut somewhere , then it was set to private 😂
Suchomimus also made a video about this battle. He geo-located the tanks and it does confirm that this video is real.
Suchomimus can never be trusted,
@@buravan1512 Does it matter who geolocates something? Given the data is correct it shouldnt matter right?
@@buravan1512okay Russian propagandist. The truth hurts I know.
suchomimus is literally the prime example of propaganda....@@alexalbrecht5768
@@alexalbrecht5768 So he's a Russian propagandist for bringing up a valid point? Suchomimus is a proud partisan and he doesn't even try to hide it. Why would anyone trust him? I'm not arguing that he couldn't do a proper analysis on some event and cement its validity with evidence and bulletproof logic, but taking his words at face value without checking every single step in his proofs is moronic.
I used to one-shot mothertruckers with my KV-2 rounds in WT. Leopards and T series are very similar. Whoever gets the first shot, wins.
Its true about first shots but they are not the same tanks
as it was being said on the channel of Torsten Heinrich the HE shell most likely destroyed the russian tanks fog projector setting it off completely in an instant which is why there was such an impressive cloud
i think id turn back if i got hit with that distance cus that s enough telling me it had me target lock centered
I think most people would count a “win” as destroying or immobilizing the enemy vehicle. That didn’t happen. Sounds like a cope to me.
so the vehicle isnt lost when its internal electronics are likely fucked? this T-72 likely has to be sent back and undergo heavy repairs, it wont see the frontline for a few weeks. thats a loss, enough of these and the enemy still ends up with a lack of firepower no? its like saying injuring a soldier isnt a loss but it is, every man less at the front has to be replaced somehow or you eventually simply lose.
@@simplyruben3184 your entire statement is conjecture. RU doesn’t have to transport damaged equipment hundreds of km away either.
The position has been geolocated to be east of Balka Uspenivs'ka, the positions there would line up with the claimed engagement distance of 2,28 km.
At these ranges, a High Explosive projectile is actually a really good option as well
HE is the worst projectile you can be using at long distances
It's a bit more, almost 3 km (2,9 to be precise)
@@lodickasvlajeckou Why? It's effect is the same at any range.
@@lodickasvlajeckou @mikes989 A direct from a 120 mm HE grenade will most likely damage or destroy optics and is likely to blast the track segments apart. If any hatches are open or improperly shut the crewmembers will have shattered eardrums, concussions and in severe cases internal bleeding. If HE is what you have loaded, just slinging it is a pretty good bet.
@@dukeofwar1003 The fact that I commented on the accuracy and you reply on effects is one thing but you Just cannot argue that HE shells have good accuracy
2 difference videos together
Geolocated and confirmed
Was the large explosion maybe caused by the Russian tank's ERA modules? That would mean the round fired possibly wasn't a HE round. Maybe a sabot round passed through the russian tank's trurret or something like that.
The Russian tank drove away.
@@huntergatherer7796 Indeed it did. Maybe I am totally wrong, but I could imagine a tank driving away after a sabot passed through its turret and probably killed the turret crew members. It sounds possible to me that the driver and the propulsion system can survive such an event as long as the ammo does not cook off.
@@Titoxic_the driver would die too since they aren't separated from the turret..
@@huntergatherer7796 The driver is very much separated. The driver is the only crew member who is not in the turret and in a forward position. That being said the driver could also be dead and not being able to hold the clutch pedal down makes the tank move forward.
another well editted video by the Ukrainian side, but nvm :D They were obliged to prepare something after the videos with burning Leopards and Challenger.
oh you mean like the vid of the Leopards getting hit which turned out to be a harvester? or the Lancet videos of "destructions" of Leopards which is just the lancet hitting the smoke system?
@@KingSpittusFactus I am talking about prooved videos of destroyed Leopard and Challenger, nothing more or less ;) No idea neither what hit them, nor when, just videos of destroyed tanks :)
@@fulcrum5690 cope more LoL
Big leopard 2 W
@@crispy682 what makes you think that?
@@crispy682i did, can confirm, leopard w
There is no way to confirm whether or not this is two separate videos stitched together from two different engagements.
isn't digital editing a wonderful thing? Let's you create what ever fictional story your little heart desire's.
Russian tank survived direct hit..that is awesome no matter what
This looks like an edited video. The Leopard fires directly down a tree lined road, but there is no intersection near where the tank was 'hit'. Second, the explosion is up and out and ejects a lot of earth, so it appears to be a mine. If just the edge of the track caught it, a mine may not immobilize a MBT.
That explosion looks nothing like a mine but ok, mines usually yk, cripple the tank they’re hitting, doesn’t matter if it’s the “edge” of the track 😂
If it were a mine the tank would not have been able to drive away lmao
@@LewisB3217
Reading comprehension isn't a thing, these days, huh?
And in fact, single mine hits have failed to disable Ukrainian T72s, which is why Russia started double laying them. Had you been paying any attention, youd know there have been numerous news segments specifically on Russia 'stacking' mines, because single mines weren't doing the job.
@@springbloom5940 I don’t pay attention to Russian news, you got me there 🤣 either way, that wasn’t a mine
@@LewisB3217
Don't even possess the capacity to feel embarrassed, do you?
He havent unlocked all the modules yet.. he still using stock round
Fair analysis
I call it fake !! The video cuts away on very suspicious point of time.
Clearly two different videos spliced together. If a Leopard was out in the open, lancet drones would be having a field day
Geolocated and confirmed
@@xaiano794by trustworthy Ukrainian sources
Can you make another bmpt or a t44 video
Its allready geolocated and proven to be 2 drones that observed.
Then what was that on 00:05 that Leo 2a6 hit?
@@chilechichich465 a T72 with HE. no 80BVM as the exhaust would be on the arse and not on the side left.
Right after the Leopard shot you can see the dirt kick up just past the intersection, I wonder if the round hit the ground there. Makes me skeptical of this video
Yeah must be all fake 😂
@@LewisB3217 Not saying its fake at all, its just a speculation and observation. I just dont believe the shot that was recorded of the Leo firing was the shot that hit the tank in the second video from the drone. I could be wrong and I probably am but who really knows I was not there.
While it is possible that video is doctored, and events took place in different time, positions of tanks have been geolocated and tanks were aprox. 1.5 km from eachother
If you are hit and you can retreat. Do it. Russian tanks already blown leopard on video before. They have nothing to prove. Also there is no context behind this video. You dont know the situation, could be ambush, could be that russian tank was already damaged or shelled.
Russian tank being hit by a Leopard shell: Pathetic
Russian tank being hit by a FPV drone the size of a hand: I'm dead
That is how tanks work.Tanks have 98% of their protection in FRONT, and designed to face other tanks.
happens with ukranians too cause nozh exists+fpv target either top armor or abandoned tanks with open hatches
@@tiagodagostiniget this man a true
lancet strikes do kill ukranian tanks pretty bad
'I'm you, but tiny and made of Australian cardboard'
Looks doctored imho, cuts,different brightness after cut and different lens focus
Mix of two different cameras. Yup, grass is green on both, just as trees... and, yes, that can be the same event, but from two different drones. Let's say, about 25% chances for that. So, that is one old song from the band called "Imagination", and song is: "Just an illusion". Most likely.
Huge win for Leo 2. It survived an engagement without destroying or even heavily damaging the opponent. Damn. People in the West really have high expectations for their gear in Ukraine. Can't blame them tho, all things considered :D
we get it, you're a zealot
Nope russisan Tank survived
With one shot, it damaged one of your tanks, and, made two of your tanks run-away. Russians are silly, deceitful, and cowardly. Always have been; always will be. 😏
@@johnharrison674520 million slavics and millions of Russians died during the war against Nazi germany. Those people amounted to more than anything you ever will. You have a very sad life.
I mean Russia already lost 2300+ tanks versus around 500 for Ukraine.
Big win lol.
Well no tank was lost
How do you know that? The tank retreated and maybe is not able to fight anymore and maybe never will be. We just dont know.
@@rene551 Yeah we don't know at must it's damage and we'll need repaired but we know it wasn't destroyed from the video
@@cordellmohawk8408 It wasnt destroyed bc it moved. Sometimes damages are beyond repairs and the tanks needs to be written off by army engineers and will go for scrap.
@@rene551 Well if you got hit first would you relocate lol and we just don't know Russia tanks are easily repaired
Thank you for sharing your analysis
this is a non win for leopard 2 because no tank destroyed, no damage, we dont know if the leopard 2 it still alive with amounts of drones around.
7challenger broken😂😂😂
Hmmm interesting. Hopefully more info comes out
Tiger 1 and king tiger:I’m So proud to you my grandson
It's quite possible that it's altered because the video quality Changes noticeably.
it was filmed from 2 different drones.
@@bobcprimus weird decision to do so. It also enforced the chances of it being altered.
@@saucyinnit8799Not weird at all if it's a long range engagement which would prohibit seeing both tanks in frame, let alone both the shot and the hit on target at once from a single drone above the Leo 2A6. Can't capture both in frame at the same time with just one drone.
@@sietuuba it doesn't need to capture both tanks in a single frame, as far as i'm aware it can just zoom in or hover to the Russian tanks and then just exchange viewing the Russian tanks and the Leopard 2.
@@saucyinnit8799 well, it certainly can, but I would believe the drones are not primarily there to make battlefield journalism, but have a tactical military purpose first and foremost
the leo didn't even destroy an old t72 🤡
you know that the DM53 can just go through the front and comes out of the back of any T72
@@KingSpittusFactusso you claim
@@KingSpittusFactus ok armchair commander. Back to playing world of tanks or war thunder. LMAO
@@M.Larson_13you’re brain dead
Funnily enough HE isn’t ideal for destroying tanks?
i wouldnt say it would be a win, but a success. If the footage is even showing the same event. which.. is always questionable with this cut footage.
You can't film 2 locations in one cut unless they are close. This was 2.3km away
Yes, those were T- 72 tanks. Ukrainian sources mention T-72 tanks..
Even a Tiger tank can hit a static target at 1500m, what a huge victory, not even a mobile kill
Well, yeah, T-72s don't always fall apart easily. If the tank would be demobilised by an HE shell, that would be pretty bad luck.
Are you being sarcastic?
@@aleide2980 it's a huge victory for the Leopard, it even did something, it spent a round and got to the front
@@Ruzzky_Bly4t Leopard 2's don't even have HE-FRAG rounds, it's APFDS or HEAT
@@mrc4731yes they do they have DM-11 programmable HE-FRAG it’s their domestic answer to MPAT without the AT
What russians mean by winning is the psychological side of the story. Soldiers might be more confident in engaging leopard 2 tanks knowing they even got hit and not destroyed
From a distance of 1.5 km it is impossible for you to distinguish the Leopard 2 from other tanks.
@@carkawalakhatulistiwa binoculars and such equipments exist, nerd
@@shturm9391 If you want your words to be taken at least somewhat seriously, you might want to drop the insults.
@@shturm9391 yeah and still the russians managed to confuse a john deere tractor for a leopard 2.
@mrfun177 you would never knew that it was a tractor, when nobody would told you that. Btw it was a distance of 8km
If it hit the front with an HE and the turret was also front that barrel is more than just a little fucked thing most likely won’t fire straight or might even cause a blockage meaning you are replacing more than just a couple of plates on it and tank barrels are not cheap
Hello Red! How do you evaluate the news about the restoration of T-80 production? I view this news with doubt, because... for the whole of Russia - 1 multi-tonnage machine, with a matrix tailored for the T-72.
The real question is why the Leo 2 didn’t follow up with an APFSDS round ? Even a second HE round would have caused some additional damage maybe even destruction, the Leo 2 crew lost a great opportunity
the russian tanks where hidden behind the hot explosion cloud,
the leo simply hat no visuals on the t72. takes a moment for the cloud to becom translucent even to ir
the leo2 does not have autoloader plus the massive smoke masked detection of the t72 which quickly proceeded to retreat, that would be my guess.
Cause it is all fake
If you are on advance and see that the enemy tank crew is panicking, there is a high chance that the enemy could abandon the vehicle at some distance of the fight. There were multiple occasions where Russians fled and abandoned a tank after engagement.
I concur with the notion that you cant hit what you cant see. Load a sabot and wait for the smoke to clear and pop the target if its still there. It wasnt, so thats that.
what game changer is a tank when you must wait 3month to engage enamy tank?
they probably hit some ERA .... would explain why they can still drive off ....and if they didnt know from what direction the shot came ....than deploying smoke and getting out of there seems to be the right call...... and yes coach-warriors ...a tactical retreat is an actual working strategy and not a sign of cowardice
Is there a follow up shot from the Leo crew?