Jump to content
BlackDeath

Leopard 2E / 2A6

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Could you tell me what are differences in terms of armour & firepower between those two? I read 2E is uparmored on the roof?

2A6 is not in the wiki :/

 

Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Wikipedia: "It has thicker armor on the turret and glacis plate than the German Leopard 2A6, and uses a Spanish-designed tank command and control system, similar to the one fitted in German Leopard 2s."

 

Some difference that I have noticed in game aside from cosmetic (Spanish as opposed to German on the controls, etc):

 

1. The Leopardo 2E by default uses different ammunition than the Leopard 2A6 to reflect what is in service with the Spanish Army.

 

2. The Leopardo 2E DOES NOT have ballistic data loaded for HEAT rounds, and normally relies of HE-T to fill that role. As such, loading any Leopardo 2E with DM12 will require manually calculating range for a correct ballistic solution (1/2 the lased range for under 3KM, a little over half for greater than 3KM; it isn't an exact science. See the tutorial for more info.) 

 

3. The Leopardo 2E has a digital map display on the right side of the Commander's Station, unlike the Leopard 2A6.

 

4. The Leopardo 2E has a zoom function on the GPS in daysight more, similar to the Strv 123. The Leopard 2A6 lacks this feature. 

 

5. The Leopardo 2E has greater protection for the Commander at "nametape defilade" compared to the Leopard 2A6. The Leopardo 2E surrounds the Commander with protective glass, additional armor, etc when outside the hatch.

 

Off the top of my head, this is all that really popped out at me. I'm sure there are more differences.

Edited by Mirzayev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging by this, it seems like the Leopardo 2E is straight up a superior tank compared to Leopard 2A6. Or am I missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bellinger said:

Judging by this, it seems like the Leopardo 2E is straight up a superior tank compared to Leopard 2A6. Or am I missing something?

 

The Leopardo 2E is a specialized version of the Leopard 2A6, designed to the specifications of the Spanish Army and their operating environment, and their chosen ammunition source. It is the second part that is the most interesting.

 

The Leopardo 2E default loadout consists of CL 3143 SABOT, and Slsgr 95 HE-T, to reflect the ammunition currently in service with the Spanish Army. Meanwhile, the "stock" Leopard 2A6 uses DM53 SABOT, and DM12A1 HEAT. 

 

Comparing the penetration values for each, starting with the SABOT round:

 

CL 3143 - 690mm RHA

DM53 - 800mm RHA

 

As evident, the DM53 has a little under a 16% more penetration compared to the CL 3143. Does this matter? While there are a nearly infinite number of variables, more penetration against an enemy tank is likely to cause more damage, and will increase the probability of a first-hit kill.

 

Moving onto HEAT or HE-T, I would first like to ensure that it is completely understood that HE and HEAT rounds are designed for different purposes. HE is primarily for "soft targets" like the standard-issue SteelBeasts bunker, while HEAT is designed for use against armored targets. Depending on the time period, HEAT was either used primarily against tanks, or in a more modern context, PCs to prevent over-penetration and to maximize damage to a target "softer" than a tank. With this being said:

 

Slsgr 95 HE-T: 290mm RHA

DM12A1 HEAT: 600mm RHA

 

As stated above, each round is made for a different purpose. However, all things being equal, I would be more comfortable running SABOT and HEAT versus SABOT and HE, not taking into account what ammo is actually purchased by a State.

 

So why not just swap out the Slsgr 95 with the DM12A1 in the mission editor and be done with it? 

 

As I pointed out previously, the Leopardo 2E DOES NOT have any ballistic solutions loaded into the ballistic computer on the DM12A1. Therefore, if you are carrying DM12A1 in a Leopardo 2E for whatever reason (NATO exercise, WW3, just for the fun of it?) you will need to lase, divide the return number by 1/2 if shooting under 3000 meters, and then fire. While repetition builds speed, having to manually input range will slow you down compared to simply lasing and blazing. Past 3000 meters, the guidance is to divide by "a little over half," which means plenty of rounds at the tank range before you start finding a solution that works. 

 

At the end of the day, it comes down to the entire weapon system, what you need it to do, and how it fits into the scenario narrative that is being constructed. Also, please don't take my previous post as a definitive guide to the differences between the Leopardo 2E and the Leopard 2A6; that was made based purely on my observations. I also cannot comment on real-world data, like general maintenance trends, the operational readiness of the fleet, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any idea how the leo 2E compares to the last leos A7/A7+?

I don't understand why they removed the german rounds from the ballistic computer, probably some political issues?

Edited by BlackDeath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. The ballistic computer in the Leopard 2 is based on hardware cartridges that you plug in. Generally we simplify in SB Pro in that we "assume" that for every scenario proper cartridges are available and mounted in the tanks to support the four different ballistic trajectory types. The Spanish Leopardo shows how reality looks like (because the Spanish Army insisted that we limited the functionality to what's possible in practice). IF the ballistic computer were entirely software based like in the M1, updates would be much easier. But in the mid 1970s (the age of punchcards...) the Bundeswehr didn't trust the concept of this newfangled "software thing" and insisted on a hardware based solution, and that's what they got.

 

You would do things differently, today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With in-app purchases, and price-adjustable fidelity. "Pay only when it counts", and, of course, non-refundable premium subscriptions.

 

Ah, the opportunities!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/11/2018 at 9:06 AM, Bellinger said:

Judging by this, it seems like the Leopardo 2E is straight up a superior tank compared to Leopard 2A6. Or am I missing something?

 

Basically it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...the mine-protected variants Leopard 2A6M and 2A6M2 might have an edge in this one specific threat scenario. Of course, the mine protection package could in principle be added to any Leo 2 series tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×