where did i say it was the best western MBT? at all. It has great cross country performance (for its size and weight as ive said) due to the sophisticated hydrogas suspension, which has been proven to be highly effective.
It has the worst accuracy?
almost every report on the CR2 cannon has its accuracy being top notch , the issue isnt the accuracy the issue is the fact that it wears faster than smoothbore counterparts, and has laughably worse penetration in its darts due to the 3 stage ammunition.
Again a source for that? even the ukrainians using it are praising its accuracy over the tanks they have, calling it “a sniper among tanks” i believe is the quote.
Its accuracy is again one of its key good points. I get the tank isnt some indestructible wonder weapon that folks want it to be. (No tank is) Yet people believe it to be absolutely useless xD which it also isnt
So you use yotubers video to prove your point.
Whos sources for the accuracy of the gun, are from the chieftain, a tank that is from 1966 and its accuracy tests.
Meanwhile In the real world, teh challanger again is being touted as highly accurate, and even won the Iron spear competition against the abrams and leopards that were there. so yeah it is an accurate gun, the tanks accuracy isnt its issue.
Also most youtubers (if not all) are heavily biased, especially red effect if he likes a tank, hell shout its amazing, if he dislikes it, facts regardless (as shown in the linked video) he will try find a way to say it sucks, e.g using the chieftains accuracy charts from decades previous to the challanger 2 to try say that the tank is innacurate.
you do realise on the chieftain as well it had about a 97% first shot hit rate as well in trials, go watch the tank chats from the bovington tank museum on it. or better go see it yourself!.
(they can be biased as well)
The fact is, the tank gun mounted on teh challanger 2 is not identical to the chieftain cannon at all, even ingame they have different names.
The challanger 2 tank is a highly accurate tank. that was never questioned.
dont just copy a piece out of the comment of what i said, I did also say that that too can be biased. though the tank museum is more reputable than red effect as a source.
But neither the statistics from a trial from 1973 (which i believe is red effect source of dispersion etc) nor the tank museums claim are relevant to the CR2 which is incredibly accurate.
Im not taking only that lol
I quoted that bit specifically as its something i have a good amount on
I dont recall any dispersion, its mostly a report on crew abilities and doctrine
but yeah thats 1973 and the challenger 2 is 1998, big difference especially in technology
