Editing Leopard 2 (section)

===Development===
Even as the [[Leopard 1]] was entering service, the [[West Germany|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.<ref>Jerchel, p. 3.</ref> By 1967 it had become questionable whether the MBT-70 would enter service at any time in the foreseeable future. Therefore, the West German government issued the order to research future upgrade options for the Leopard 1 to the German company [[Porsche]] in 1967.<ref name="Krapke19">Krapke, p. 19.</ref>

This study was named ''vergoldeter Leopard'' ([[Leopard 1#Gilded Leopard, Eber and Keiler|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.<ref name="Krapke20">Krapke, p. 20.</ref> 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 engine exhaust vents were improved.<ref name="Krapke22">Krapke, p. 22.</ref>

====Prototype development====
[[File:Leopard 2 Prototyp PT15 T02 105mm.jpg|thumb|A Leopard 2 PT15 with 105&nbsp;mm smoothbore gun]]
[[File:Leo2Br80.jpg|thumb|A Leopard 2 prototype (1983)]]
[[File:Prototyp Leopard2 sk.jpg|thumb|The Leopard 2 T14 mod. with the modified turret housing composite armour]]

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.<ref name="Krapke20" /> At first 25 million [[Deutsche Mark|DM]] were invested, but after the industry came to the conclusion that with such a low budget the development of the two projected [[testbed]]s 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.<ref name="Jerchel, p. 5">Jerchel, p. 5.</ref>

Two prototypes with different components were built with the aim of improving the Leopard 1 to match the firepower requirements of the MBT-70. A high first-hit probability at ranges of {{convert|2000|m}} 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.<ref name="Jerchel, p. 5"/>

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 at 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.<ref name="Krapke22" /> The assistant secretary of the military procurement division of the [[Federal Ministry of Defence (Germany)|German Ministry of Defence]] suggested reusing as many 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.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.panzertruppe.com/detailansicht/id-50-jahre-fahrzeuge-der-gepanzerten-kampftruppen.html|title=50 Jahre gepanzerte Kampftruppen|last=Hilmes|first=Rolf|website=Panzertruppe|access-date=2018-02-22|language=de|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180712001316/https://www.panzertruppe.com/detailansicht/id-50-jahre-fahrzeuge-der-gepanzerten-kampftruppen.html|archive-date=2018-07-12|url-status=dead}}</ref> 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.<ref name="Jerchel6">Jerchel, p. 6.</ref>

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 {{cvt|105|mm}} [[smoothbore]] guns and the other seven prototypes were equipped with a {{cvt|120|mm}} smoothbore gun.<ref name="Jerchel6" /><ref>{{cite book|last1=Hilmes|first1=Rolf|title=Kampfpanzer Entwicklungen der Nachkriegszeit|year=1983|publisher=Soldat Und Technik|isbn=9783524890012|page=27|language=de}}</ref>

Hulls PT11 and PT17 were fitted with a [[hydropneumatic suspension]] based on the MBT-70 design.<ref name="Jerchel6" /> The running gears of these two hulls had only six road wheels. Different types of [[Auxiliary power unit|auxiliary power units (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 {{cvt|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.<ref name="Jerchel6" /> The prototypes were designed with a projected weight of [[Military Load Classification|MLC50]], which equals approximately {{convert|47.5|t}}. The welded turret utilised spaced armour formed by two steel plates.<ref name="Krapke27">Krapke, p. 27.</ref> 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 {{convert|1.5|t|ST}} in weight.<ref>Jerchel, p. 7.</ref> 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 {{convert|350|mm}} instead of the previous {{convert|1720|mm}}.<ref name="Krapke27" /> 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.<ref name="Krapke30">Krapke, p. 30.</ref>

The weight limit was increased from MLC50 to MLC60, which equals approximately {{convert|55|t}}. The T14 turret was modified to test a new armour configuration, taking on a blockier-looking appearance as a result of using vertical modules of spaced [[composite armour|multilayer armour]]. It was also used to test the new EMES-13 optical rangefinder. The modified T14 turret was designated ''T14 mod''.<ref name="Krapke30" /> and was fitted with a fully electric turret drive and stabilization system, which was developed jointly by [[General Electric]] and [[AEG Telefunken]].

==== American evaluation of Leopard 2AV and XM1 Abrams ====
In July 1973 German Federal Minister of Defence [[Georg Leber]] and his [[United States of America|US]] counterpart [[James R. Schlesinger]] agreed upon a higher degree of standardisation 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 [[M1 Abrams|XM1 Abrams]], U.S. prototype tank developed after the MBT-70, could be reduced. A German commission was sent to the US to evaluate the harmonisation of components between the XM1 and Leopard 2.<ref name="Waffensystem" /> However, under 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 private sector companies.<ref name="Waffensystem">{{cite book|last1=Krapke|first1=Paul-Werner|title=Das Waffensystem Kampfpanzer Leopard 2|date=1984|publisher=Allgemeine schweizerische Militärzeitschrift<!--|access-date=30 October 2015-->|language=de}}</ref>

[[File:Early Leopard 2 Tank Prototype at Yuma Proving Ground, 1975.jpg|thumb|right|Leopard 2 prototype tested at the Yuma Proving Ground, September 1975]]

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 December 11, 1974, between Germany and the US, which declared that a modified version of the Leopard 2 should be trialed by the US against their XM1 prototypes,<ref name="Krapke32">Krapke, p. 32.</ref> after the Americans had bought and investigated prototype PT07 in 1973.<ref name="Jerchel, p. 8">Jerchel, p. 8.</ref> The MoU obliged 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.<ref name="Krapke33">Krapke, p. 33.</ref>

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 T14 mod turret 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.<ref name="Krapke34">Krapke, p. 34.</ref> Following the US' preference of [[laser rangefinder]]s, the turret of prototype PT19 was fitted with a laser rangefinder developed together with the American company [[Hughes Aircraft Company|Hughes]].<ref name="Krapke3738">Krapke, pp. 37 and 38.</ref>

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 searchlight, the spotlight, the retractable passive night vision sight, the APU and the mechanical loading assistant.<ref name="Krapke33" />

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.<ref name="Krapke34"/> 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.<ref name="Waffensystem" /><ref name="considerations">{{cite book|last1=Staats|first1=Elmer B.|title=Department Of Defense Consideration Of West Germany's Leopard As The Army's New Main Battle Tank|date=1977-11-28|publisher=U.S. Government Accountability Office|location=United States<!--|access-date=30 October 2015-->}}</ref>

Two new prototype hulls and three turrets were shipped to the US: PT20 mounting a {{cvt|105|mm}} rifled [[Royal Ordnance L7|L7]] gun and a Hughes fire control system, PT19 with the same fire control system but able to swap out the gun for the {{cvt|120|mm}} [[Rheinmetall]] smoothbore gun, and the PT21 fitted with the Krupp [[Atlas Elektronik]] EMES-13 fire control system and the {{cvt|120|mm}} Rheinmetall gun.<ref name="Jerchel, p. 8"/> The Leopard 2AV fully met the US requirements.<ref name="Krapke35">Krapke, p. 35.</ref> 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.<ref name="Krapke35" /> 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.<ref name="considerations" />

The US Army evaluation showed that on the XM1 a larger portion of the tank's surface was covered by special armour (composite armour arrays) than on the Leopard 2AV.<ref name="considerations" /> Differences in armour protection were attributed to the different perceptions of the expected threats and the haste in which the Leopard 2AV was designed to accommodate special armour.<ref name="considerations" /> On mobility trials the Leopard 2AV performed equal to better than the XM1 prototypes. The [[Honeywell AGT1500|AGT-1500]] turbine engine proved to consume about 50% more fuel<ref name="SpiegelSitten" /> and the Diehl tracks had a higher endurance, while the tracks used on the XM1 prototypes failed to meet the Army's requirements.<ref name="Krapke35" /> The heat signature of the MTU diesel engine was much lower.<ref name="SpiegelSitten">{{cite news|title=Orientalische Sitten|url=http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-40941854.html|access-date=2015-12-16|publisher=Der Spiegel|date=1977-03-14|language=de|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160209170007/http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-40941854.html|archive-date=2016-02-09|url-status=live}}</ref> The fire control system and the sights of the Leopard 2 were considered to be better and the {{cvt|120|mm}} gun proved to be superior.<ref name="considerations" /> The projected production costs for one XM1 tank were US$728,000 in 1976, and the costs for one Leopard 2AV were US$56,000 higher.<ref name="considerations" />

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. US Army test officials discovered that the PT19 Leopard 2AV prototype used for mobility trials did not contain special armour.{{refn|group=nb|name=Kelly|According to the [[United States House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations|House Armed Services Subcommittee on Armed Services Investigations]], after knocking on the PT19 Leopard 2AV prototype, a hollow sound was heard by Colonel Robert J. Sunell. German Colonel Franz Kettman acknowledged that PT19 was not fitted with any special armor. The American estimated that with the special armour the {{cvt|105|mm}} gun Leopard 2AV would have weighed {{convert|63.2|ST}} instead of {{convert|59.6|ST}}, calling into question the data collected during mobility testing.<ref name="Hollow Tank">{{cite report|author=Investigations Subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services|title=Hearings on the Status of the Army XM-1 Tank Program|date=1977-10-18|pages=1–12|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HVCEoh4hys0C&q=test%20rig|access-date=2024-01-09}}</ref>{{sfn|Kelly|1989|p=187-188}}}}

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.<ref name="SpiegelSitten"/> 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.<ref name="SpiegelSitten"/> Firing on the move was demonstrated on flat tracks, which nullified the better [[Gun stabilizer|stabilization systems]] of the Leopard 2AV.<ref name="SpiegelSitten"/>

Germany later withdrew its tank from consideration.{{sfn|Kelly|1989|p=187-188}}

====Series production====
[[File:Bundesarchiv B 145 Bild-F073468-0019, Manöver, Kampfpanzer Leopard 2.jpg|thumb|Leopard 2 tanks during a [[military exercise|manoeuvre]] in 1986]]

The decision to put the Leopard 2 tank in production for the German army was made after a study was undertaken{{when|date=September 2022}}, 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&nbsp;mm smoothbore gun, improved armour protection, a new fire control system and a {{convert|890|kW}} or {{convert|1100|kW}} engine.<ref name="Krapke31">Krapke, p. 31.</ref> Various changes were applied to the Leopard 2 design before the series production started in 1979.<ref name="Krapke41">Krapke, p. 41.</ref><ref name="Krapke5455">Krapke, pp. 54 and 55.</ref> The engine, transmission, and suspension were slightly modified and improved. The ballistic protection of the turret and hull was improved and weak spots were eliminated.<ref name="Krapke38"/>

The turret bustle containing the ready ammunition racks and the hydraulic system was separated from the crew compartment and fitted with blowout panels. The development of several new components was 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.<ref name="Krapke38">Krapke, p. 38.</ref>

The German company Krupp-Atlas-Elektronik acquired the licence of the Hughes design and modified it to meet the needs of the German army.<ref name="Krapke38" /> The modified rangefinder received the designation EMES-15. The installation of the US AGT-1500 turbine engine in the Leopard 2 was tested by MaK.<ref name="Krapke35" /> The AGT-1500 was from the United States and required deep modifications to the Leopard 2's chassis. However, driving tests at the WTD 41 revealed a number of drawbacks such as high fuel consumption and the poor performance of the transmission including the brakes.<ref name="Krapke35" /> 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 T21 turret and was used by the German army school in [[Munster Training Area|Munster]] for troop trials until 1979.<ref>Jerchel, pp. 10 and 11.</ref> 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.<ref name="Krapke39">Krapke, p. 39.</ref>

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 number of Leopard 2 tanks ordered by Germany to a total of 2125.<ref name="Jerchel, p. 20 and 21">Jerchel, pp. 20 and 21.</ref> 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.<ref name="Jerchel, p. 20 and 21"/>

During its production run during the Cold War, 16 Leopard 2 tanks were being produced per month. The vehicles were produced at a slower rate in the following decades, however KMW still retained the capacity to return to such manufacturing levels should they need to be made again at a higher rate and supply chains are able to deliver sufficient materials.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/02/03/norway-wants-to-buy-dozens-of-new-leopard-2-tanks/|title=Norway wants to buy dozens of new Leopard 2 tanks|website=[[Defense News]]|date=2023-03-03|last=Gosselin-Malo|first=Elizabeth}}</ref>

==== Further improvements ====
[[File:Dutch Leopard 2A4 in Defensive Hull-down Position 1997.jpg|thumb|right|Dutch Leopard 2A4 tanks, 1997]]

While previous models only varied in detail, the Leopard 2A4 introduced a digital ballistic computer and an improved fire extinguishing system. Starting with 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 improvement) programme was initiated in Germany with the delivery of first prototypes. The official military requirements were published in March 1990.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 68">{{cite book|last1=Hilmes|first1=Rolf|title=Kampfpanzer heute und morgen: Konzepte – Systeme – Technologien|date=2007-11-30|publisher=Motorbuch Verlag|location=Germany|isbn=978-3613027930|page=68|language=de}}</ref>

The KWS programme was projected to consist of three stages. The first stage replaced the [[Rheinmetall 120 mm gun#Rh-120 L/44 120 mm|Rheinmetall 120&nbsp;mm L/44]] gun barrel and the corresponding gun mount with a longer barrelled and more lethal [[Rheinmetall 120 mm gun#Rh-120 L/55 120 mm|L/55]] version.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 68" /> This stage was adopted in the form of 225 Leopard 2A6 tanks, starting in 2001 and lasting until 2005.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 70">{{cite book|last1=Hilmes|first1=Rolf|title=Kampfpanzer heute und morgen: Konzepte – Systeme – Technologien|date=2007-11-30|publisher=Motorbuch Verlag|location=Germany|isbn=978-3613027930|page=70|language=de}}</ref> Stage 2 focused on improvements of armour protection and survivability: it was adopted in the 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. The first batch of 225 Leopard 2 tanks was upgraded to Leopard 2A5 configuration between 1995 and 1998; a second batch of 125 followed from 1999 to 2002.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 69">{{cite book|last1=Hilmes|first1=Rolf|title=Kampfpanzer heute und morgen: Konzepte – Systeme – Technologien|date=2007-11-30|publisher=Motorbuch Verlag|location=Germany|isbn=978-3613027930|page=69|language=de}}</ref>

[[File:Een Leopard 2A5 gevechtstank op snelheid 1999 2155 501335.jpg|thumb|right|The Leopard 2A5 can be recognized for its angular spaced armour on the turret cheeks and 44-calibre 120 mm main gun.]]
[[File:German Army Leopard 2A6 tank in Oct. 2012.jpg|thumb|A German Army Leopard 2A6, assigned to the 104th Panzer Battalion conducting high-speed manoeuvres]]

The third stage was the planned replacement of the Leopard 2 turret by a new turret fitted with a {{cvt|140|mm}} NPzK tank gun, an autoloader, and the IFIS battlefield management system.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 68" /> The ballistic protection at the hull was to be improved.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 68" /> Originally a total requirement for 650 Leopard 2 tanks with KWS 3 was projected.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 70" /> It was never finalised, but the {{cvt|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 Armoured Platforms) project of the German army. The Leopard 2A6M was developed with a kit providing enhanced protection against mines that can detonate below the hull (like mines with bending wire triggers) and [[explosively formed penetrator]] mines.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 70" /> The weight of the Leopard 2A6M is {{convert|62.5|t}}.<ref name="Hilmes KPz HuM 71" >{{cite book|last1=Hilmes|first1=Rolf|title=Kampfpanzer heute und morgen: Konzepte – Systeme – Technologien|date=2007-11-30|publisher=Motorbuch Verlag|location=Germany|isbn=978-3613027930|page=71|language=de}}</ref>

The latest version of the tank is the Leopard 2A7, which entered service in an initial batch of 20 tanks in 2014.<ref name="Janes2A7" /> Already before the first Leopard 2A7 tank was handed over to the German Army, plans for upgrades were made.<ref name="Bundeswehr_2A7">{{cite web|author1=Alessa Weber|author2=Patricia Franke|title=Neue "Leos" für das Heer|url=http://www.bundeswehr.de/portal/a/bwde/!ut/p/c4/NYvBDoIwEET_qEsTE9GbwMWb4aDihSx0QxpL2yxbufjxtgdnknd5M_CCXI8fu6DY4NHBE4bZnqddTbshhW9J5BxtCtM2GuJROMVI8CjHPJiDJykU8mIzF0YJrGJgccUk5myUNTBUumv0sfpHf0_9rW3vh7rurk0PcV0vP2ckU98!/|website=bundeswehr.de|publisher=Bundeswehr|access-date=2016-03-29|language=de|date=2014-12-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160406164307/http://www.bundeswehr.de/portal/a/bwde/!ut/p/c4/NYvBDoIwEET_qEsTE9GbwMWb4aDihSx0QxpL2yxbufjxtgdnknd5M_CCXI8fu6DY4NHBE4bZnqddTbshhW9J5BxtCtM2GuJROMVI8CjHPJiDJykU8mIzF0YJrGJgccUk5myUNTBUumv0sfpHf0_9rW3vh7rurk0PcV0vP2ckU98!|archive-date=2016-04-06|url-status=dead}}</ref> At this time an "extensive" increase in combat value, while retaining the original mobility of the Leopard 2, was planned.<ref name="Bundeswehr_2A7" /> The optics of the tank will also be improved.<ref name="Bundeswehr_2A7" />

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.<ref>{{cite news|last=Jungholt|first=Thorsten|date=2015-04-26|title=Bundeswehr-Kampfpanzer Leopard 2 fehlt wirksame Munition|work=DIE WELT|url=https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article140083741/Bundeswehr-Kampfpanzern-fehlt-wirksame-Munition.html|access-date=2020-12-30|language=de}}</ref>

In 2015 Rheinmetall disclosed that it was developing a new {{cvt|130|mm}} smoothbore gun for the Leopard 2 tank and its successor.{{citation needed|date=April 2020}} This gun will offer a 50% increase in performance and penetration.<ref>{{cite news|date=2021-03-05|title=Why 130 mm and not a bigger calibre?|work=EDR online|url=https://www.edrmagazine.eu/why-130-mm-and-not-a-bigger-calibre|access-date=2023-03-28}}</ref> Marketing for the new gun was slated to begin in 2016.{{citation needed|date=April 2020}}

==== 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 tank|Leclerc]] tanks. Technologies and concepts will be investigated to determine what capabilities are needed in a future tank.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dw.de/germany-france-to-jointly-develop-leopard-3-tank/a-18468270|title=Germany, France to jointly develop 'Leopard 3' tank|date=2015-05-22|work=Deutsche Welle|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150525214308/http://www.dw.de/germany-france-to-jointly-develop-leopard-3-tank/a-18468270|archive-date=2015-05-25}}</ref> Deployment of the new tank, titled [[Main Ground Combat System]] (MGCS), will be preceded by incremental upgrades to the Leopard 2, including a new digital turret core system and situational awareness system and an [[active protection system]] (APS).<ref name="nationalinterest.org">{{cite web|url=http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/get-ready-russia-european-power-has-plans-lethal-new-tank-15251|title=Get Ready, Russia: This European Power Has Plans For a Lethal New Tank|website=The National Interest|date=2016-02-18|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160607182023/http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/get-ready-russia-european-power-has-plans-lethal-new-tank-15251|archive-date=2016-06-07}}</ref>

A short-term lethality increase will come from a higher pressure {{cvt|120|mm}} gun firing new ammunition, expected to deliver 20 percent better performance than the [[Rheinmetall 120 mm gun|L/55]]. Mid-term efforts will focus on a Rheinmetall {{cvt|130|mm}} cannon concept offering 50 percent better armour penetration. With the Russian [[T-14 Armata]] being equipped with the [[Arena (countermeasure)|Afghanit]], an active protection system designed to mitigate the effectiveness of [[ATGM]], more importance is being placed on direct-fire weapons.<ref name="nationalinterest.org"/>