History and military technology: Interview with a former Leopard 2A4 gunner in the German Army

A former Leopard 2 accepted an interview for the blog. M. served in a Leopard 2A4 in the mid-late 80s as a gunner,

Hello M., many thanks for accepting an interview for alejandro-8.blogspot.com. Could you provide us an overview of your career in the Bundeswehr?

In the 80`s everyone has to attend to go to the Army, or THW (civilian Technical Support Service or doing service in a social unit as a helper). Because I first was interested in an Army carreer, I enlisted myself. After been there a while, I withdraw my plans, because there wasn`t enough posts, to get really in an officers career. So ended up as a regular “Obergefreiter” which is some kind of PFC (private first class). I was a loader on a Leopard II A 4 in a company in a bataillon of “Panzergrendiere” (Infantry). The regular time was than in those days 15 months of duty.

What do you think were the strong and weak points of the Leopard 2A4?

Weak: As always the top especially the openings for the air intake system.
Strong: Easily with a trained crew most efficiently in reckoning and destroying enemy vehicles. The different features were very helpful, the ammo (2 kinds of ammo for armoured and unarmored vehicles), and of coursed the 120mm smooth canon of “Rheinmetall”. Also two MG 3, a newer version of the old MG-43 which was used by the Wehrmacht, was helpful to protect the tank against enemy infantry.

When training, at was the typical distance to the objective and speed of the tank when you fired? And the longest distance at which your tank ever fired?

The usually capacity was 2.000 meters, but it was also possible to get a full hit at 4.000 meters. The A4 got a special feature, called “Waffennachführanlage” (weapon tracking system) which enables the canon at ANY speed to point on the choosen target. When it was in “bad position” it wasn`t possible to shoot, only when the optic instruments were again on the target, it was possible to shoot. It was very precise!

What was the typical ammunition configuration (% APFSDS and HEAT)?

2 type of ammunition.
KE – Kinetische Energie (kinetic energy) = for armored targets. A 50cm large arrow made of Wolfram (Tungsten) which was able to penetrate very thick armor.
MZ – Mehrzweck (Multipurpose) = for unarmored targets /lorries, buildings...) filled with explosives in a highly military quality
In terms of maintenance, was there any component or system that was more delicate? Were there any issues with the supply chain?
We have to take much care of the optic system, which has a very specific cleaning process. The canon has once in awhile to cleaned inside and of course the hydrometers, when they changed their color from blue in slight purple, we had to change them, so the instruments were not to get soaked in water. Also the chains took some hard work to change its rubber patches – which allows the tank to get much more speed on regular streets.

What was the component that required more maintenance/attention?

Changing the rubber patches was much work. First we had to lose the tracks from the tank, so it lays down flat on the ground. Then every single rubber path was to dismantle with a large hammer and special chisel, to get off the track. And then again with a large hammers pushing the new rubber patch in its new place. It took 16 soldiers with long crowbars to turn the tracks upside down so the work could be done. That usually took many hours.

What was the maximum distance you covered in a day during deployments or exercises? Did the tank cope well or needed extra maintenance?

When “training in field” it was limited to 72 hours in a single shift. It was said, that just one minute later, that was a clear sign that NATO was in a war. So there was a limit to the hours of one shift. My longest shift was in a practice area in Bergen-Hohne and it lasted 58 hours. Driving, guarding, fighting and patrolling.

Did you practise NBC situations? What was the approach/procedure in these situations? How did the NBC kit affect the rate of fire?

The tank was nearly safe from the threats. Inside the tank was an air overpressure, so biological and chemical materials can´t come inside. We were equipped with Atropine syringe, for self treatment. We had special rubber suits, to detect outside the tank ABC (Atomic, biological, chemical) materials. In that situation, we had to put the front of the tank to the main explosion, and after that leave the place. We should have stayed in the tank. Inside the tank work was going on like before, it doesn`t affect much our work while driving, fighting.

Did you have the opportunity to train with other countries (NATO for example)? What was your impression about their training and equipment? Any tank (or other weapon) you liked or disliked?

No. I just heard, that American soldiers were impressed, because we were young, normally 18years old and already had many special skills.

What about the Soviet Army/Warsaw Pact, what was your impression on their tanks? Was there any equipment you particularly liked/disliked?

We had lessons to learn about the “weak parts” of their tanks. It was said, they had much more tanks, but their capacity & quality wasn´t that high, so we had the feeling, we had a superior tank.

Did you receive intelligence on potential threats (T-72, AT missiles, IEDs)? If so, how accurate was it once you got access to the weapon?

No

Were you serving when Germany was reunified? Were there any changes in your day to day routine?

I was on duty July 1986 until October 1987, Germany was reunited in 1989. We had once a guided tour do the area on the german-german border, were we would have fought, “our” battleground when it had come to a war. We were very close to the border and all the markings on the bus, our names and ranks were taped, and we were closely monitored by the guard tower soldiers of the former GDR.

What is your opinion on autoloaders?

We once had a museum tour at the German tank Museum in Munster. We saw a A 70 (German tank in the 1970´s, as far as I can remember that) which had an autoloader. Quite useful on the one hand, but the loader had more to do, so we as loaders were responsible for the coaxial and the turret MG, and some other duties. Our team on the A4 was 4 soldiers. Maybe more space for the soldiers, less to carry with them (clothings, water, food, equipment, barbed wire, wood, camouflage nets...)

Is there an anecdote you would like to share before we finish the interview?

Oh, yes :o)

Once we had a training in Bergen-Hohne, the biggest military training area in Germany. We were on attack with the 1st platoon (4 Leos). In the distance there were wooden targets on wire, which jumped from the ground to show a silhouette of a tank, truck, vehicle. Then we had to shoot in a specific position or at full speed at these targets. And also dozens of single wooden infantry jumped as silhouettes and we had to get them down with our coaxial MG. I forgot to uninstall a steel cap at the top of the gun of the coaxial MG (to avoid that bullets were accidentally fired). Our tank commander taught us, we should fight, as we were in a real tank fight. So I yelled in the communication system: “Coaxial – failure, try to cope with, but now we can`t use it”. So the driver, he was one a of tricky guy – did just that, a “Russenkreisel” a russian turnover, like they did in WWII when they pass the german trenches, and while turning the tanks on the spot they crushed the german hiding in their trenches. Our tank destroyed the whole wire system, the wooden silhouettes, everything. The commander yelled at him, to stop that. Drivers reply: “We are at war, I have to stop them!” :o)

Photos taken by M. during his service in the Bundeswehr

History and military technology

Sunday, 19 March 2023

Interview with a former Leopard 2A4 gunner in the German Army

No comments:

Post a Comment