Leopard 1 variants

AFAIK, the first MBT application for HITFACT II (by then-OTO Melara) was a C1 Ariete demonstrator - aimed at the Ariete AMV (Aggiornamento Mezza Vita or MLU). The planned C2 Ariete didn't lead anywhere and the final Ariete AMV was retain the C1's original steel turret.

The first actual Leopard 1 proposal was Leonardo's pitch for the Exército Brasileiro's VBC CC Corrente programme - an upgrade for the Leopard 1A5 BR (as was the Cockerill 3105). That proposal to Brazil didn't go anywhere either (which, for those interested in potential Leo 1A5 upgrades for Ukraine, is probably a good thing).

The HITFACT II turret is of aluminum construction which lowers a Leo 1A5's loaded weight by more than 4 tonnes (the original steel turret weighing around 9-t, HITFACT II about 5.45-t). Yet, somehow, the Leonardo turret has the same ballistic protection rating (Level 4/STANAG-4569) as the Leo 1A5 original. Edit: See reply #87

A minor puzzle for me is HITFACT II being a 3-man turret. Since the thing has a 12-round autoloader, what is the exact role of that fourth crew member?
 

Attachments

  • Hitfact-II-Ariete-1.jpg
    Hitfact-II-Ariete-1.jpg
    121.3 KB · Views: 386
  • Hitfact-II-Leo1-3v.jpg
    Hitfact-II-Leo1-3v.jpg
    97.4 KB · Views: 308
Last edited:
Apophenia said:
AFAIK, the first MBT application for HITFACT II (by then-OTO Melara) was a C1 Ariete demonstrator - aimed at the Ariete AMV (Aggiornamento Mezza Vita or MLU). The planned C2 Ariete didn't lead anywhere and the final Ariete AMV was retain the C1's original steel turret.

The first actual Leopard 1 proposal was Leonardo's pitch for the Exército Brasileiro's VBC CC Corrente programme - an upgrade for the Leopard 1A5 BR (as was the Cockerill 3105). That proposal to Brazil didn't go anywhere either (which, for those interested in potential Leo 1A5 upgrades for Ukraine, is probably a good thing).

The HITFACT II turret is of aluminum construction which lowers a Leo 1A5's loaded weight by more than 4 tonnes (the original steel turret weighing around 9-t, HITFACT II about 5.45-t). Yet, somehow, the Leonardo turret has the same ballistic protection rating (Level 4/STANAG-4569) as the Leo 1A5 original.

A minor puzzle for me is HITFACT II being a 3-man turret. Since the thing has a 12-round autoloader, what is the exact role of that fourth crew member?
Click to expand...
As I understand it the 3-man crew is due it not having a true autoloader, but rather a loader's assist. Leonardo does market the turret as being 2 or 3 man crewed on their brochure but I've yet to see the former. Brazil tested both manual and assisted loading versions recently from what I recall and they found the latter to have no real advantages over manual loading.
 
Apophenia said:
The HITFACT II turret is of aluminum construction which lowers a Leo 1A5's loaded weight by more than 4 tonnes (the original steel turret weighing around 9-t, HITFACT II about 5.45-t). Yet, somehow, the Leonardo turret has the same ballistic protection rating (Level 4/STANAG-4569) as the Leo 1A5 original.
Click to expand...

The Leopard 1A5 is armor protection has not been qualified according to NATO STANAG 4569 (which is a much newer standard than the tank and only meant for light and medium vehicles); its protection significantly exceeds the Level 4 of STANAG 4569.
 
sp_mm said:
That's actually a Leopard C1 with MEXAS, a small batch of C1s were up-armored with MEXAS for KFOR.
Click to expand...

The Leopard C1 with MEXAS shown apparently belonged to B Squadron, 4th Troop, Royal Canadian Dragoons. When photographed, the MEXAS panels - tan as supplied by IBD - had just been oversprayed with 3-coloured NATO camouflage to match the original vehicle paint.

During the KFOR deployment, the 'designation' Leopard C1A1 got batted around. AFAIK, there is no evidence for such nomenclature ... but that didn't stop the Leopard C2 with MEXAS from being dubbed a 'C2A1'.

Going back to paintwork, IIRC, by the time of the Leo C2s with MEXAS, the CF standard scheme for armour had become all-over CARC (Chemical Agent Resistant Coating) green. Which raises a question: Were any C2s repainted in all-over tan (as seen on so many scale model depictions of the type)?

Leopard C2 with MEXAS in Afghanistan were often smeared with tannish mud and, eventually, fitted with tan-coloured heat shield blankets (over turrets and drivers' area). But I don't recall any C2s repainted in all-over tan.
 

Attachments

  • Leo-C2-blanket-Anthony-Sewards.jpg
    Leo-C2-blanket-Anthony-Sewards.jpg
    140.2 KB · Views: 167
  • leo-c2-with-mexas-blanket.jpg
    leo-c2-with-mexas-blanket.jpg
    78.2 KB · Views: 198
MihoshiK said:
The age of the cope cage is upon us.
Click to expand...
Yes, for a ridiculed Russian battlefield improvisation, learnt in actual battle, the cope cage seems to not just have merit, but the notion has kicked on in both the Ukrainian and the West.

Regards
Pioneer
 
Last edited:
More info as well as renders of EODH's Leopard 1A5 upgrade project popped up, company-designated as Leopard 1HEL. It seems to be a cooperative project between EODH, KNDS, and DUMA.
Upgrades according to them are as follows (sorry for the long post):

  • New 1,000 horsepower powerpack.
  • Operation in environments with ambient temperatures of -25°C / +45°C.
  • Engine air filtration with automatic cleaning.
    New powertrain, strengthened and upgraded to take advantage of the higher torque and heavier combat weight of the LEO 1HEL.
  • New final drives, strengthened and adapted to mate with the new gearbox.
  • A new one-piece rubber track is available as an option for better suspension performance and weight savings.
  • New suspension with hydropneumatic wishbones that offer better performance and free up the interior space occupied by the existing torsion bars.
  • Automatic track tensioner controlled from driving position.
  • New battery and power management system.

  • The upgrade package covers the Fire Control System (FCS) and the GCS (Gun Control System).
  • It is specially designed for upgrading older types of tanks.
  • The FCS is based on a fully stabilized main sight for the gunner parallel to the tank gun.
  • Fully stabilized independent panoramic periscope for the commander, which uses the same type of optical sensors as the gunner and with integrated 12.7 mm M2 RWS (Remote Weapon Station).
  • Gunner and commander sights incorporate long-range thermal imaging camera, day camera with continuous zoom lens, digital laser rangefinder and laser pointer (for alignment with the gun barrel).
  • Dynamic Muzzle Reference System, Automatic Target Tracking, Web Weather Data and Positioning System (GPS/compass) available.
  • It has an Automatic Target Tracking Unit, for the advanced processing of the digital video image coming from the gunner's or commander's day camera or thermal sight.
  • Fire Control Circuits allow the commander to activate or deactivate each weapon system and provide him with the ability to override the gunner.
  • The commander can continuously detect new targets and automatically pass them to the gunner (Hunter-Killer).
  • While the gunner engages a target the commander can engage a threat with the 12.7mm M2 heavy machine gun built into the Independent Panoramic Periscope (Killer – Killer).
  • The new crew positions provide improved ergonomics, comfort and survivability.
  • Human-machine interfaces use multi-function LCD touch screens and wired control panels that allow easy role switching and data sharing.
  • A peripheral observation system with 8x zoom cameras is available, providing the crew with full tactical situational awareness.
  • The Remote Weapon Station (RWS) is fully interfaced with the commander's independent panoramic periscope for anti-aircraft and anti-drone use.
  • Capable of incorporating A/T guided missiles and/or side-launched missiles (ATGMs).
  • LM (Loitering Ammunition) integration available.
  • The ability to integrate an organic Drone for detection/targeting is available.

  • The LEO1 HEL is a fully digitized, network-centric combat platform with widespread use/fusion of sensors and weapons, assisted by artificial intelligence that acts as a force multiplier in the modern battlefield.
  • It features multi-layer connectivity with command echelons and concurrent robotic systems such as UAVs, UGVs and LMs, using secure, high-speed data links.
  • It achieves the sharing and exchange of real-time tactical situational imaging data to conduct combined operations from the individual soldier to the Tactical Battle Group and Brigade level.
  • Next generation Battlefield Management System (BMS) with operator support through Artificial Intelligence (AI) to reduce workload and quick decision making.

  • Complete package of Passive/Active protection to deal with all modern threats. The weight of the modernized tank is now 46 tons.
  • A full suite of active protection sensors and countermeasures is offered.
  • The Remote Weapon Station (RWS) is offered with an integrated EW (Early Warning) Anti-Drone system.

  • Digital intercom system with noise canceling headset for use with up to 3 Combat Network (CNR) transceivers.
  • External communications system with software-driven V/UHF transceiver for voice and C2 communications with ground and airborne platforms and SATCOM transceiver.
  • Secure high-speed radio data capture for controlling drones and robotic vehicles.
  • Communication server to serve C5I needs with automatic selection of the optimal communication channel.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • Leopard1a5_EODH_17.jpg
    Leopard1a5_EODH_17.jpg
    5.2 MB · Views: 150
  • Leopard1a5_EODH_16.jpg
    Leopard1a5_EODH_16.jpg
    4.4 MB · Views: 152
  • Leopard1a5_EODH_14.jpg
    Leopard1a5_EODH_14.jpg
    4.4 MB · Views: 167
  • Leopard1a5_EODH_12.jpg
    Leopard1a5_EODH_12.jpg
    5.1 MB · Views: 178
  • Leopard1a5_EODH.2300.jpg
    Leopard1a5_EODH.2300.jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 179

tempimagep6illy-jpg.797397

tempimageenixgf-jpg.797398
 
1987 - Sixteen prototypes logged over 60,000 miles of logging. Development costs reached US$90 million. The GT-601 gas turbine has been extensively tested in the US, UK, France, Israel and Germany. ITI hoped to receive orders for the conversion of M-47, M-48, M-109, AMX-30 and German main battle tanks, as well as orders related to power generation, industrial and marine energy.
the time period coincides with the M 47, M 48 and Leopard -1 tanks, perhaps it was on this tank that the gas turbine was installed, and then it was installed on the Leopard -2 only from the Abrams
 
Seems like a good use of the Leopard 1 hull, especially considering how much more valuable such short-range AA has become. I wonder why the turret is somewhat elevated that platform versus the Leopard 2 prototype shown earlier where it is pretty much flush with the hull.
 
Last edited:
Colonial-Marine said:
Seems like a good use of the Leopard 1 hull, especially considering how much more valuable such short-range AA has become. I wonder why the turret is somewhat elevated that platform versus the Leopard 2 prototype shown earlier where it is pretty much flush with the hull.
Click to expand...
Turret ring adapter?

Is the Leo2 turret ring different size than the Leo1?
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom