Leopard 2

The Leopard 2 is a 3rd generation main battle tank originally developed by Krauss-Maffei in the 1970s for the West German army. The tank first entered service in 1979 and succeeded the earlier Leopard 1 as the main battle tank of the West German Army. It is armed with a 120 mm smoothbore cannon, and is powered by a V-12 twin-turbo diesel engine. Various versions have served in the armed forces of Germany and 13 other European countries, as well as several non-European nations, including Canada, Chile, Indonesia, and Singapore. The Leopard 2 was used in Kosovo with the German Army, in Afghanistan with the Dutch, Danish and Canadian contributions to the International Security Assistance Force, and saw action in Syria with the Turkish Armed Forces.

There are two main development batches of the tank: the original models up to Leopard 2A4, which have vertically faced turret armour, and the improved batch, namely the Leopard 2A5 and newer versions, which have angled arrow-shaped turret appliqué armour together with other improvements. All models feature digital fire control systems with laser rangefinders, a fully stabilised main gun and coaxial machine gun, and advanced night vision and sighting equipment (first vehicles used a low-light level TV system or LLLTV; thermal imaging was introduced later on). The tank has the ability to engage moving targets while moving over rough terrain.

History

Development

Even as the Leopard 1 was just entering service, the West German military was interested in producing an improved tank in the next decade. This resulted in the start of the MBT-70 development in cooperation with the United States beginning in 1963. However already in 1967 it became questionable whether the MBT-70 would enter service at any time in the foreseeable future. Therefore, the German government issued the order to research future upgrade options of the Leopard 1 to the German company Porsche in 1967.Krapke, p. 19

This study was named ''vergoldeter Leopard'' ( Gilded Leopard) and focused on incorporating advanced technology into the Leopard design. The projected upgrades added an autoloader, a coaxial autocannon and an independent commander's periscope.Krapke, p. 20 The anti-air machine gun could be operated from inside the vehicle and a TV surveillance camera was mounted on an extendable mast. The shape of the turret and hull was optimised using cast steel armour, while the suspension, transmission and the engine exhaust vents were improved.Krapke, p. 22

Prototype development

Following the end of the Gilded Leopard study in 1967, the West-German government decided to focus on the ''Experimentalentwicklung'' (experimental development) in a feasibility study and to develop new components for upgrading the Leopard 1 and for use on a future main battle tank programme. At first 25 million DM were invested, but after the industry came to the conclusion that with such a low budget the development of the two projected testbeds was not possible, a total of 30 to 32 million DM was invested. The experimental development was contracted to the company Krauss-Maffei, but with the obligation to cooperate with Porsche for the development of the chassis and with Wegmann for the development of the turret.

Two prototypes with differing components were built with the aim to improve the conception of the Leopard 1 in such a way that it would match the firepower requirements of the MBT-70. A high first-hit probability at ranges of and the ability to accurately engage targets on the move using a computerised fire control system were the main goals of the experimental development. The resulting vehicles were nicknamed ''Keiler'' ("tusker"). Two prototypes (ET 01 and ET 02) of the Keiler were built in 1969 and 1970, both of them being powered by the MB 872 engine.

The MBT-70 was a revolutionary design, but after large cost overruns and technological problems, Germany withdrew from the project in 1969. After unsuccessful attempts of saving the MBT-70 by conceptual changes in order to eliminate the biggest issue—the driver being seated in the turret—it became clear in late 1969 that Germany would stop the bi-national development. The assistant secretary of the military procurement division of the German Ministry of Defence suggested reusing as much technologies developed for the MBT-70 as possible in a further programme, which was nicknamed ''Eber'' ("boar") due to his being named Eberhardt. The ''Eber'' used a modified MBT-70 turret and hull, with the driver being seated in the hull. Only a wooden mock-up was made.

One year later, a choice was made to continue the development based on the earlier ''Keiler'' project of the late 1960s, instead of finishing the development of the ''Eber''. In 1971, the name of the design was determined as ''Leopard 2'' with the original Leopard retroactively becoming the Leopard 1, and Paul-Werner Krapke became the project officer of the Leopard 2 program. Originally two versions were projected: the gun-armed Leopard 2K and the Leopard 2FK, which would be armed with the XM150 gun/launcher weapon of the MBT-70.Jerchel, p. 6

In 1971 17 prototypes were ordered, but only 16 hulls were built as the production of hull PT12 was cancelled. Ten were ordered initially before another seven were ordered. The 17 turrets were designated T1 to T17, and the hulls were designated PT1 to PT11 and PT13 to PT17. To test a larger number of components and concepts, each prototype was fitted with components not found on the other prototypes. Ten of the turrets were equipped with 105 mm smoothbore guns, and the other seven prototypes were equipped with a 120 mm smoothbore gun.

Hulls PT11 and PT17 were fitted with a hydropneumatic suspension based on the MBT-70 design. The running gears of these two hulls had only six road wheels. Different types of APUs were mounted in the prototypes. All turrets were equipped with a machine gun for air defence except the turret mounted on PT11, where a 20 mm remotely operated autocannon was mounted. With the exception of hulls PT07, PT09, PT15 and PT17, all prototypes used the MB 873 engine. The road wheels were taken from the MBT-70 and the return rollers from the Leopard 1. The prototypes were designed with a projected weight of MLC50, which equals approximately . The welded turret utilised spaced armour formed by two steel plates.Krapke, p. 27 The prototypes were equipped with an EMES-12 optical rangefinder and fire control system, which later was adopted on the Leopard 1A4.

In mid-1973 a new turret was designed by Wegmann saving weight. It was nicknamed the ''Spitzmaus-Turm'' (shrew turret) due to the highly sloped front. This design was only possible with the new EMES-13 optical rangefinder, which required a base length of only instead of the previous . Based on experiences in the Yom Kippur War, a higher level of protection than the prototypes' heavily sloped spaced armour was demanded in late 1973 and the Spitzmaus-Turm was never produced.Krapke, p. 30

The weight limit was increased from MLC50 to MLC60, which equals approximately . The turret T14 was modified to test a new armour configuration, taking on a blockier-looking appearance as a result of using vertical modules of spaced multilayer armour. It was also used to test the new EMES-13 optical rangefinder. The modified turret T14 was designated ''T14 mod''. and was fitted with a fully electric turret drive and stabilization system, which was developed together by the companies General Electric and AEG Telefunken.

Leopard 2AV vs. XM1 Abrams

In July 1973 German Federal Minister of Defence Georg Leber and his US counterpart James R. Schlesinger agreed upon a higher degree of standardization in main battle tanks being favourable to NATO. By integrating components already fully developed by German companies for the Leopard 2, the costs of the XM1 Abrams, U.S. prototype tank developed after the MBT-70, should be reduced. A German commission was sent to the US to evaluate the harmonisation of components between the XM1 and Leopard 2. However, by American law it was not possible for a public bidder to interfere in a procurement tender after a contract with intention of profits and deadline was awarded to companies of the private industry.

As a result, the modification of the Leopard 2 prototypes in order to meet the US Army requirements was investigated. Following a number of further talks, a memorandum of understanding (MOU) was signed on 11 December 1974 between the Germany and the US, which declared that a modified version of the Leopard 2 should be trialled by the US against their XM1 prototypes,Krapke, p. 32 after the Americans had bought and investigated prototype PT07 in 1973.Jerchel, p. 8 The MOU obligated the Federal Republic of Germany to send a complete prototype, a hull, a vehicle for ballistic tests and a number of special ballistic parts to the US, where they would be put through US testing procedures for no additional costs.Krapke, p. 33

The Leopard 2AV (''austere version'') was based on the experiences of the previous Leopard 2 development. It was created in order to meet the US requirements and the latest protection requirements of the German MoD. The turret T14 mod was used as the base for the Leopard 2AV's turret, but meeting the required level of protection for the hull required several attempts until the final ballistic trials on 23 to 26 June 1976.Krapke, p. 34 Following the US' preference of laser rangefinders, the turret of prototype PT19 was fitted with a laser rangefinder developed together with the American company Hughes.Krapke, p. 37 and 38

In comparison with the earlier Leopard 2 prototypes, the fire control system was simplified by replacing the EMES-12 optical rangefinder and removing the crosswind sensor, the air-pressure and temperature sensors, the powder temperature sensor, the PERI R12 commander sight with IR searchlight, the short-range grenade launcher for use against infantry, the retractable search-light, the spotlight, the retractable passive night vision sight, the APU and the mechanical loading assistant.

Due to the design and production of the Leopard 2AV taking more time than expected, the shipment to the US and the US evaluation was delayed. It was not possible to test the Leopard 2AV before 1 September 1976. Despite the German wish that the Leopard 2AV and the XM1 prototypes would be evaluated at the same time, the US Army decided not to wait for the Leopard 2AV and tested the XM1 prototypes from Chrysler and General Motors beforehand.

Two new prototype hulls and three turrets were shipped to the US: PT20 mounting a 105 mm rifled L7 gun and a Hughes fire control system, PT19 with the same fire control system but able to swap out the gun for the 120 mm Rheinmetall smoothbore gun, and the PT21 fitted with the Krupp Atlas Elektronik EMES-13 fire control system and the 120 mm Rheinmetall gun. The Leopard 2AV fully met the US requirements.Krapke, p. 35 A study made by the American FMC Corporation showed that it was possible to produce the Leopard 2AV under licence in America without exceeding the cost limits set by the US Army. Before the trials were finished, it was decided that instead of the US Army possibly adopting the Leopard 2AV, the focus was shifted to the possibilities of common components between the two tanks. FMC, after having acquired the licenses for the production of the Leopard 2AV, decided not to submit a technical proposal, as they saw little to no chance for the US Army adopting a vehicle not developed in the US.

The US Army evaluation showed that on the XM1 a larger portion of the tank's surface was covered by special armour than on the Leopard 2AV. Differences in armour protection were attributed to the different perceptions on the expected threats and the haste in which the Leopard 2AV was designed to accommodate special armour. On mobility trials the Leopard 2AV performed equal to better than the XM1 prototypes. The AGT-1500 gas turbine proved to consume about 50% more fuel and the Diehl tracks had a higher endurance, while the tracks used on the XM1 prototypes failed to meet the Army's requirements. The heat signature of the MTU diesel engine was much lower. The fire control system and the sights of the Leopard 2 were considered to be better and the 120 mm gun proved to be superior. The projected production costs for one XM1 tank were $728,000 in 1976, the costs for one Leopard 2AV were $56,000 higher.

After the American evaluation of the Leopard 2AV and the US Army's decision to opt for the XM1 Abrams, both American and German sources blamed the other side. According to American literature, it was discovered that the Leopard 2AV prototype used for mobility trials was underweight.In ''King of the Killing Zone'' Orr Kelly reported that after knocking on one Leopard 2AV prototype, a hollow sound was discovered by Colonel Robert J. Sunell. When confronting the German Colonel Kettman, he admitted that PT19 (the mobility test-bed) was not fitted with any special armour. Orr Kelly claims that the Leopard 2AV would have weighed 64 short tons instead of the 59.6 short tons and as a result, the performance data of the mobility was invalidated. However, the weight value claimed by Orr Kelly does not match the actual weight of a Leopard 2 fitted with special armour nor does it match the weight mentioned in US documents from the evaluation.

In Germany, the test conditions were criticised for being unrealistic and favouring the XM1. Instead of using actual performance data, the calculated hypothetical acceleration was used. The XM1 was found to have a slightly higher rate of fire despite having internal layouts similar to the Leopard 2AV, because the XM1 prototypes were manned by professional crews, while the Leopard 2AV had to be manned by conscripts in order to prove that the Leopard 2AV was not too complicated. Firing on the move was demonstrated on flat tracks, which nullified the better stabilization systems of the Leopard 2AV.

Series production

The decision to put the Leopard 2 tank in production for the German army was made after a study was undertaken, which showed that adopting the Leopard 2 model would result in a greater combat potential of the German army than producing more Leopard 1A4 tanks or developing an improved version of the Leopard 1A4 with 105/120 mm smoothbore gun, improved armour protection, a new fire control system and a or engine.Krapke, p. 31 Various changes were applied to the Leopard 2 design before the series production started in 1979.Krapke, p. 41Krapke, p. 54 and 55 The engine, transmission and suspension were slightly modified and improved. The ballistic protection of turret and hull was improved and weak spots were eliminated.

The turret bustle containing the ready ammunition racks and the hydraulic systems was separated from the crew compartment and fitted with blow-out panels. The development of several new components introduced to the Leopard 2 during the Leopard 2AV development and after the US testing was completed. For the series version the Hughes-designed laser rangefinder made with US Common Modules was chosen over the passive EMES-13 rangefinder. The EMES-13 system was considered to be the superior solution, but the Hughes system was cheaper and fully developed.Krapke, p. 38

The German company Krupp-Atlas-Elektronik acquired the licence of the Hughes design and modified it to meet the needs of the German army. The modified rangefinder received the designation EMES-15. The installation of the US Honeywell AGT1500 in the Leopard 2 was tested by MaK. The AGT-1500 was borrowed from the United States and required deep modifications of the Leopard 2's chassis. However, driving tests at the WTD 41 revealed a number of drawbacks such as high fuel consumption and the lacking performance of the transmission including the brakes. This project was thus terminated.

In January 1977 Germany ordered a small pre-series of three hulls and two turrets which were delivered in 1978. These vehicles had increased armour protection on the front of the hull. One of the hulls was fitted with the earlier turret T21 and was used by the German army school in Munster for troop trials until 1979. In September 1977, 1,800 Leopard 2 tanks were ordered, to be produced in five batches. The main contractor was Krauss-Maffei, but Maschinenbau Kiel (MaK) was awarded a contract for producing 45% of the tanks. The first batch consisted of 380 tanks. The delivery of six tanks was scheduled for 1979, 114 for 1980, 180 for 1981 and 300 tanks each following year.Krapke, p. 39

The first series-production tank was delivered on 25 October 1979. By 1982, all of the first batch of 380 Leopard 2 tanks had been completed. 209 were built by Krauss-Maffei (chassis no. 10001 to 10210) and 171 by MaK (chassis no. 20001 to 20172). The first production tanks were fitted with the PzB-200 image intensifier due to production shortages of the new thermal night-sight system, which was later retrofitted to the earlier models. After the original five batches, three further batches of Leopard 2 tanks were ordered, increasing the amount of Leopard 2 tanks ordered by Germany to a total of 2,125.Jerchel, p. 20 and 21 The sixth batch was ordered in June 1987 and consisted of 150 tanks, which were produced between January 1988 and May 1989. The seventh batch of 100 tanks was produced between May 1988 and April 1990. The last batch for the German army totalling 75 tanks was produced from January 1991 to March 1992.

Further improvements

While previous models only varied in detail, the Leopard 2A4 introduced a digital ballistic computer and an improved fire extinguishing system. Starting within the sixth batch tanks were fitted with an improved armour array and new side skirts. In 1984 the German military procurement agency stated a number of requirements for a future Leopard 2 upgrade. In 1989, the ''Kampfwertsteigerung'' (combat potential increasement) programme was initiated in Germany with the delivery of first prototypes. The official military requirements were published in March 1990.

The KWS programme was projected to consist of three stages. The first stage of the KWS programme replaced the Rheinmetall 120 mm L/44 gun barrel and the corresponding gun mount with a longer barrelled and more lethal L/55 version. This stage was adopted in form of 225 Leopard 2A6 tanks starting in 2001 and a lasting to 2005. The KWS stage 2 focused on improvements of armour protection and survivability, it was adopted in form of the Leopard 2A5 starting in 1995. The base armour of the tank was exchanged and additional armour modules were installed at the turret. A first batch of 225 Leopard 2 tanks was upgraded to Leopard 2A5 configuration between 1995 and 1998, a second batch of 125 followed 1999 to 2002.

In the third stage of KWS was the planned replacement of the Leopard 2 turret by a new turret fitted with a 140 mm NPzK tank gun, an autoloader and the IFIS battlefield management system. The ballistic protection at the hull was to be improved. Originally a total requirement for 650 Leopard 2 tanks with KWS 3 was projected. It was never finalised, but the 140 mm NPzK tank gun was tested on an older prototype. In 1995 it was decided to cancel due to changes in the political environment. The funds were redirected to the Neue Gepanzerte Plattformen (New Armored Platforms) project of the German army. The Leopard 2A6M was developed with an enhanced mine-protection kit providing protection against mines that can detonate below the hull (like mines with bending wire trigger) and Explosively formed penetrator mines. The weight of the Leopard 2A6M is 62.5 tonnes.

The latest version of the tank is the Leopard 2A7, which entered service in a small initial batch of 20 tanks in 2014. Already before the first Leopard 2A7 tank was handed over to the German Army, plans for future upgrades were already made. At this time an "''extensive''" increase in combat value while retaining the original mobility of the Leopard 2 was planned. The optics of the tank also will be improved.

In April 2015, Welt am Sonntag claimed that tungsten (wolfram) rounds used in Leopard 2 cannot penetrate the Russian T-90 or the modernized version of the T-80. They also stated that the German military will develop a new improved round, but it will be exclusively developed for the Leopard 2A7.

In 2015 Rheinmetall disclosed that it was developing a new 130 mm smoothbore gun for the Leopard 2 tank and its successor. This gun will offer a 50% increase in performance and penetration. Marketing for the new gun was slated to begin in 2016.

Replacement

The Leopard 2 first entered service in 1979, and its service life is anticipated to end around 2030. In May 2015, the German Ministry of Defence announced plans to develop a tank jointly with France as a successor to both the Leopard 2 and Leclerc tanks. Technologies and concepts will be investigated to determine what capabilities are needed in a future tank. Deployment of the new tank, titled Main Ground Combat System

HOME


Content is Copyleft
Website design, code, and AI is Copyrighted (c) 2014-2017 by Stephen Payne


Consider donating to Wikimedia



As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases