Jump to content
News Ticker
  • I am now accepting the following payment methods: Card Payments, Apple Pay, Google Pay and PayPal
  • Latest News

    French Leclerc


    Recommended Posts

    I am no expert on tanks, far from it. I am new here and saw this section so thought this may be a good subject of discussion for you tank "experts".

    Edited by TerryG
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Close up of the board giving some basic explanation....it did make me smile....a French tank....in a French museum.....mind you, in their defence, the sign is dated 1993, so a long time ago!

    Edited by TerryG
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    • 4 weeks later...

    Hi,

    Yes i'm French, yes the Leclerc is French, and i know what you will say...

    The sign is 1993, the Leclerc wasn't on duty on 1993...it was only tested... from the first in duty in 1998 and now it is the 7 th generation.Leclerc in Kosovo in 99 and 2000 were first and second generation.

    Actually the Leclerc is the ONLY battle tank able to fire on move at 60 km/h with more than 98% of succes on target...

    Leopard, Challenger (and they are also good tank)... are able to fire on move but at very low speed ...many other point to discuss...

    beer.gif

    Herl

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    A war is a poor place to test a tank. The capabilities had best be understood and integrated well before the vehicle and its crew are placed in harm's way.

    The Leclerc has a very nice profile and I must admit to having a weakness for a gyrostabilized gun platform.

    Edited by Bob Hunter
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    • 1 year later...
    • 7 months later...

    I sure hope that if the AMX-56 Leclerc is ever used in combat that they up-armour that very dodgy looking glacis plate. If not it's RPG target practice :speechless1:

    Regards Eddie

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Leclerc is equipped with a GIAT CN120-26 120mm smoothbore cannon. This cannon is theoretically capable of firing the same NATO standard 120mm rounds as the German Leopard 2 and US M1 Abrams, but in practice only custom French-produced ammunition is issued. I read somewhere that when firing NATO ammo it changes the ballistics and reduces the efficency of the main armament. I tried to hunt it down but can't find my source. That could be a problem with re-supply in a international situation.

    The gun is 52 calibres long instead of the 44 calibres common on most tanks of the Leclerc's generation, giving the rounds a higher muzzle velocity; on the other hand, the latest German and British tanks have 55 calibre guns which are even more powerful, and American tanks use advanced depleted-uranium penetrator rounds to compensate for their shorter guns.

    Edited by Laurence Strong
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Risking one of the many debates of "which is the best modern tank" I will just say the Leclerc is a good tank, a tank to rank with the others in it's league, "Abrams", Chally, Leo, Merkava, etc.

    Teething problems with the powerplant have been resolved in updates, thermal imaging etc all been added on later models.

    It has excellent fire on the move capabilty at high speed that is for sure. But the auto-loader is for me a no-no I'm afraid. That and the dubious design of the front armour would say to me no thank you.

    In my opinion there can only be three MBT's to consider when asking that and they are the M1, Chally II and the Merkava. Battle proven in harsh climates and crews with combat experience make up for any technical disadvantages.

    Until the Leclerc has been into combat it will have to wait to be added to my list.

    Regards Eddie.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    • 10 months later...

    "The Lecrerc is the best tank in the world"....i like that!!! cheeky.gif Not a bad tank as such, but better than our Challenger II? Nah....

    Cheers for the pics John, any more good 'uns? beer.gif

    The U.S M1A1 and M1A2 SEP Abrams Tank is the best tank: :D This is a picture of me in 2003 Samarra, Iraq the push to the North after 3ID took Baghdad.

    Lorenzo

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The U.S M1A1 and M1A2 SEP Abrams Tank is the best tank: :D

    Lorenzo

    How did I guess :D

    Did you see this thread Lorenzo?

    http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=1823...ne+Eh+M1+Abrams

    A very fine tank indeed, without a doubt. In fact excellent and what's more important, battle proven.

    For me It would be the Chally II though. Just my opinion of course.

    I think, as it stands, in both Gulf conflicts 100+ Abrams have been lost and 1 Chally in the friendly fire incident + 2 damaged. This isn't really a true ratio of losses due to the greater number of M1's in active combat service.

    It has to be said that many Abrams losses were not due to enemy fire though.

    As for the Leclerc and Leo II, until the tanks, and just as important the crews are battle proven it's a no contest.

    Bob stated ages ago "A war is a poor place to test a tank. The capabilities had best be understood and integrated well before the vehicle and its crew are placed in harm's way".

    I would say the capabilites of the tank are always known, that of the crew are not.

    Regards Eddie.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    How did I guess :D

    Did you see this thread Lorenzo?

    http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=1823...ne+Eh+M1+Abrams

    A very fine tank indeed, without a doubt. In fact excellent and what's more important, battle proven.

    For me It would be the Chally II though. Just my opinion of course.

    I think, as it stands, in both Gulf conflicts 100+ Abrams have been lost and 1 Chally in the friendly fire incident + 2 damaged. This isn't really a true ratio of losses due to the greater number of M1's in active combat service.

    It has to be said that many Abrams losses were not due to enemy fire though.

    As for the Leclerc and Leo II, until the tanks, and just as important the crews are battle proven it's a no contest.

    Bob stated ages ago "A war is a poor place to test a tank. The capabilities had best be understood and integrated well before the vehicle and its crew are placed in harm's way".

    I would say the capabilites of the tank are always known, that of the crew are not.

    Regards Eddie.

    Thank you This is the first time seeing it... Thank you for sharing it.

    Lorenzo

    Link to comment
    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
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...

    Important Information

    We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.