After the modernization, Leclerc has changed seriously, but it is not entirely clear whether it is for the worse.
Western and Russian tank-building schools have been developing almost in isolation from each other for decades. Western tanks did not fight with trained units equipped with modern Soviet/Russian-made tanks, so it was impossible to clearly understand whose tank school was better able to cope with the requirements of the battlefield.
But 2023 noticeably changed this situation: German Leopard main tanks got to Ukraine, where they immediately suffered heavy losses, even despite their retrofitting with Soviet-designed dynamic protection. Western armies do not normally practice the latter, and the APU, of course, yes, because it is fighting a serious enemy.
Among the characteristic features of the eastern front, which dramatically reduce the life time of Western tanks, is the active use of anti—tank mines of both anti-tracked and anti-side types. In addition, there are many Lancet-type drones with a warhead burning through 215 millimeters of armor. Since the Lancets attack from above, where the armor of Western tanks rarely exceeds 50 millimeters, today the vulnerability of such vehicles at the front is very high.
According to a publication in Le Monde, the French military-industrial complex tried to modernize its main Leclerc tank taking into account the experience of the conflict in Ukraine, issuing the first Leclerc XLR samples this summer. They are really seriously different from the basic Leclerc, but the direction of the changes looks quite unexpected.
Firstly, the tank lost 45 percent of all ammunition. The original Leclerc had 40 shells: 18 were inside the tank, 22 — in a compartment isolated from the main volume in the niche of the tower. The battles in Ukraine, like many other conflicts of the XXI century, have shown that the penetration of armor can lead to the ignition of the internal ammunition with the subsequent death of the crew.
Instead of looking for ways to reduce the vulnerability of the ammunition, French engineers decided to simply remove almost half of the tank's ammunition, leaving it with 22 shells (the T-90 has 43 of them). How they plan to ensure its supply with a projectile in a long battle in the depth of defense — the public was not informed.
The second somewhat unexpected innovation is the increase in the mass of the tank from 57 to 63 tons. The reason is the increase in the thickness of the armor. However, apparently, even despite such an increase in mass by more than 10 percent, Leclerc still did not have any means of active protection. Consequently, it still remains vulnerable to cumulative means of destruction - ATGM, RPG, "Lancets" and so on.
At the same time, the tracks of the new tank are exactly the same. That is, its patency should seriously fall. But just the experience of fighting in Ukraine has shown that Western equipment, in comparison with what Ukraine inherited from the USSR, generally suffers from problems with off-road traffic.
The modification carried out does not look particularly effective. Leclerc has traditionally been one of the best Western tanks. For example, it has dynamic armor, including on the sides (other NATO tanks, as a rule, do not have it). His gun is slightly longer than the M1 Abrams, so it penetrates the enemy's armor better.
Among the ammunition there are anti-personnel with programmable detonation (American tanks do not have effective anti-personnel shells for extremely close combat). Finally, he has an automatic loader — a unique feature for Western tanks, allowing him to have a crew of one less person. This allows the tank to have a smaller reserved volume. This is also why Leclerc was lighter and more passable than M1 Abrams, as well as lower, which reduces the likelihood of defeat on the battlefield.
The smaller mass also meant greater autonomy at one gas station — 540 kilometers (almost like the T-90) versus 420 for the M1 Abrams.
But the Leclerc XLR is already more difficult to call an advanced tank. His ammunition will not be enough even for two minutes of operation of the automatic loader in battle. What to shoot after that is unclear.
A tank can get out of a battle without any problems when there is an established front line and someone can, for example, insure it from pursuing enemy tanks. But the specifics of using tanks in deep operations is that there is no solid front line, there is little "safety net" and it may not be possible to get out of the battle in a couple of minutes at will. It is clear that due to the increase in mass, it can no longer be much more economical than M1 Abrams, and this also reduces its stability when attacking in the depth of the enemy's defense.
Finally, it is not at all clear why the tank does not have active protection systems such as the T-90 Curtains or means of effective protection against kamikaze drones like the Lancet. Theoretically (practically, however, and this is very difficult), the latter could be hit with a rifle-caliber machine gun in a remotely controlled installation, as on the Armata, or with a large-caliber one, like the T-90. However, in practice, the elevation angles of the 7.62 mm machine gun in the new French tank are not large enough even for urban battles (shooting at the upper floors), let alone for protection from drones diving from above.
In total, they plan to upgrade 200 Leclerc tanks to this variant by 2029 with an average rate of 30-35 vehicles per year. Less than 20 cars are expected to be upgraded this year.
To understand the pace of this program, it can be compared with the release of new tanks in Russia: in January-May 2023, it amounted to more than 600 units, or over 120 tanks per month.
