British Weapon Systems - Technical data and discussion

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
5338

No you took two unrelated sentence from a interview and put them together

The Challenger 2 ATD was shown off with 130mm as an option and then after the UK mod gave clearance that very same tank was fitted with the 130mm and shown off

It is quite obvious they had intrest since they were the ones who paid of the ATD and paid for the British crew to drive it and paid to maintain it and still have the tank to this day.

It is not argument to say the gun is for the MGSC programme and only for that and for Germany when a few months before the Challenger 130mm they were showing it for the Challenger 3

That is where the gun was only for a German project falls apart because it clearly wasn’t

Noise
Noise1440×1080 233 KB

So go cope about Italy shouldn’t get the KF-51 that they helped devolp and actually ordered

6 Likes
5339

oh for christ’s sake can we shelve the challenger 130 arguments already? its already taken over the CR3 technical discussion thread, we don’t need it here as well.

2 Likes
5340

I did state that

Well yeah. The chally 130 still is a different project alltogether.

I am gonna remind you.
It is a rheinmetall germany project not a RBSL project for a reason. How do you justify this?

The challenger 130 is a tech demonstrator fpr the 130mm, a proof of concept that is advertised towards germany. That is the official statement.
Thats why its released as rheinmetall and not rbsl as well

That you cant realise its not a RBSL project is sad.

5341

seriously, make a new thread or take it to DMs.

2 Likes
5342

I am not the one denying it was developed for both british and germany lol

5343

Please stop coming into threads with comments relating to the Challenger 2 130 and arguing with people, you’ve already polluted the Challenger 3 thread you don’t need to come and do it to this one

If you want to debate it, make a specific post about it or DM people

2 Likes
5344

I just answered to the people that asked.
I did not take it to those threads.
It was already there

5345

Clearly you both disagree on how much weight each claim should have and throwing the same justification at each other is achieving nothing. Agree to disagree and move on.

7 Likes
5346

Unrelated question is the sea harrier FA.2 HUD AOA indicator equivalent to degrees or is it units add.

And is there a conversion?

Nothing matches the AV-8A g capability chart that was used to model the harriers G capabilities. In terms of AOA for speed equaling G

5347

Still only answered the guy that asked why a german one got passed.
If people wouldnt react negatively to it and wouldnt make a big deal out of it, we wouldnt need to tell them the sources.

5348

I wasn’t directing my comments at either side. Pack it in, both of you.
image

15 Likes
5349

Ajax spall liner when ?? :)

1 Like
5350

When Vatniks leave the British Parliament

5351

Community Bug Reporting System mantlet fix hopefully tho

1 Like
5352

might as well be “wrong vehicle bug report” with the amount of missing features this this has

5353

Yea no, heres the biggest issue with game

5354

The Apache’s DIRCM?

5355

The report for the spall liner has been accepted, we must just wait and see

I say that but the Chally 2 spall liner reports have been ignored for well over a year now

5 Likes
5356

sad times

5357

Yea, no other Apache is capable of carrying that irl except for bock 6.5, which is only used by the US. Every other Apache is either a 4.0 or 4.5 depending on the nation. Which means all of these other 64Es are entirely in capable of carrying JAGMS and DCIRM.