Yea that was years ago. I think its correct that the mk3s had armor steel stowage boxes. But afger the atilla rework their thickness was reduced from 5mm to 3mm and its composition changed from RHA to structural steel. Even though the boxes are labeled rha
and the charge keep explode
noice protection
Well, before they artificially nerfed the whole tank, those rha boxes stopped spall from hitting the ammo did not pass thru the box itself. But structural steel in game allows this
A good image of the side turret armor mountings of Shir 2, which are obviously different vs Challenger 1
I disagree. Looks the same to me in the Junkyard challenger photos i posted above. Unless its a Shir 2 and not a decomissioned Challenger 1
Yeah, as I’ve said, it’s a Shir 2.
Then whats this one?
Mounts would be welded on later for all you know. This doesn’t prove anything and conflicts with other sources
1 Like
what sources?
All the declassified documents in this thread that agree it had a minimum chemical protection on the upper hull of 580mm, which it now does not satisfy in game. Some of those documents you yourself posted…
I still dont understand any of the logic implying it is ONLY empty space. What other tank constructed on the planet has that much empty space for fun. NOT A SINGLE TANK. Real estate is very VERY precious on an armored fighting vehicle. It couldve been filled with fuel, armor, more stowage. But what youre suggesting Fireball, or the original poster of the armor assumption, is that its just empty. Nothing there.
Which makes 0 sense. And trying to justify it when theres voids clearly present for armor packs. Is kind of silly.
I respect and appreciate your research. But i cannot agree with you.
1 Like
Head on, and that is shown for the central Glacis portion…
I’m just basing it off the best evidence so far, sure it’s not logical that it’s empty
It says 300mm at normal to glacis. And then provides an arc value?
And if is not logical that is empty. WHY is that acceptable? Because its not empty.
And why was it filled in the first place, and stayed that way for 4 years. Along with all the challenger 2s having composite there
Id argue theres more evidence its not empty, compared to evidence that it is.
Arc value is for the side plate, it’s not necessarily that level all the way round.
Tbh it was just assumed
To be fair it only shows there are no mounts on the back face of the shoulder cavity.
The fact there’s a solid bulkhead in front of the cavity means it’d probably be difficult for tool access along that axis of the vehicle. If there are any points to mount armour in there, fastenings are probably going in from the top down, rather than from the front
1 Like
And this is what i have been saying since the beginning.
Because there all of 0 pictures circulating of the bottom of the partitions looking inside.
Side note, what’s the side armour thickness on CR1 now?
Still 38mm
And st 80 degrees it only provides 218mm LOS, not 242 like the document
With a 50.8 side it comes out to like 290 los.