Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Technologies

52 strikes per day — and the tank in combat: how Leopard 1A5 survived a swarm drone attack

# In February 2026, a crew from the 5th Brigade recorded 52 hits from FPV and "Molniya" drones on a single Leopard 1A5 tank within a day. The vehicle was repaired. This is not luck — it is the result of specific technical solutions implemented back in 2024.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 7, 2026 · 2 min read

52 strikes per day — and the tank in combat: how Leopard 1A5 survived a swarm drone attack
Танк Leopard 1A5 (Фото: Оборонка)

A Leopard 1A5 from the 1st Tank Battalion of the 5th Separate Heavy Mechanized Brigade received 52 hits from Russian FPV drones and Molniya-type loitering munitions over the course of one day in February 2026. The crew survived. The tank was returned to service. This is reported by Oborona citing soldiers from the brigade.

What saved the vehicle

The Leopard 1A5 is a tank developed in the 1980s, not originally designed for an environment where drone-kamikaze swarms operate. The 5th Brigade's crews adapted it independently. Back in September 2024, the brigade developed its own protection standard, which received the unofficial designation Leopard 1A5V.

The modification provides several levels of protection simultaneously:

  • "Mangal" — a welded cage above the turret that forces drones to detonate before contact with armor;
  • Ukrainian-made ERA — dynamic protection blocks on the turret, glacis, sides and stern;
  • Chain-link mesh on the sides — catches FPVs before detonation;
  • Grates and chains on the engine-transmission compartment — absorb shrapnel;
  • "Hedgehog" — tangled steel cables that damage drone propellers when they approach.

On top of everything — a camouflage net with branches in position: the tank stands in a bunker, and even with constant enemy air surveillance, the time between detection and bringing the next drone to bear provides a chance for survival.

"Molniya" — not FPV

Among the 52 strikes were not only FPVs. Molniya is a loitering munition made of plywood, plastic and cardboard with an electric motor. According to Oborona, it carries 3-5 kg of explosives (often a TM-62 mine), flies up to 40 km at speeds of 72-90 km/h and is difficult to recognize by radars due to its hull materials. Its task is not the maneuverability of FPVs, but mass and explosive effect. The combination of both types in a single attack is an attempt to overwhelm the defense: FPVs strike accurately, Molniyas strike hard.

Tactical context

According to the brigade's soldiers, modern tank combat in this sector of the front essentially rules out maneuvering in open terrain. Equipment operates from prepared covered positions, and movement only occurs under cover or at night. This contradicts the classical doctrine of Leopard 1 employment, but reflects the reality where even a brief stop in open terrain means detection.

"The tank withstood 52 drone strikes. The crew is alive. The vehicle is in service."

Oborona, April 2025, citing the 1st Tank Battalion of the 5th Separate Heavy Mechanized Brigade

Leopard 1A5s that arrived from several European partners were initially criticized for outdated armor. The 5th Brigade's experience shows that the level of protection is determined much more by field modifications than by the original design.

An open question remains: if 1A5V-level protection allows for withstanding over 50 strikes per day, will this standard be officially scaled up to all Leopard 1A5s in the Armed Forces of Ukraine — or will it remain an initiative of individual battalions pending centralized funding and ERA component supply?

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026