Your not wrong lmao
There was only a 130 program LEAD by Germany in Germany (münster to be specific) the chally 130 only had markings of one company rheinmetall
Wonder why it only says rheinmetall
That’s irrelevant lmao never been a requirement
1 Like
That’s part of a separate program lmao the challanger 2 LEP what got funding in 2016 idk why you mentioned KNDS (Krauss maffie and nexter) because they are completely irrelevant to challanger 2 modernizations but they joined together a year before challanger 2 modernization got funding so 2015
And rbsl who your taking about a lot didn’t exist until late 2019 before they joined together it was rheinmetall ground systems and when challanger 130 was happening (because the British weren’t exactly interested) it was done in Germany BY rheinmetall defense. It was a separate modification to the LEP and Future challangers
My point precisely thanks for repeating what I said. Hahaha.
Only Britain owns those chassis. Are you trying to tell me Germany was going to build Challenger chassis to sell the tank to Germany or should we follow common sense instead of being a retarded game lawyer.
Proving what lmao it’s a tank modified by Germany and that’s where it should go lmao rbsl wasn’t involved in the 130mm modification that’s was just rheinmetall
1 Like
Irrelevant lmao we took the original challanger 2 LEP to Germany modified the turret (slightly) put the 130mm in and tested it… In münster it’s a German modification because the leopards would of taken more effort to modify for the 130.
Who owns the chassis has never been needed or important for gajin look at all the Canadian leopards in Germany or how Germany didn’t get vampires from Switzerland
1 Like
It’s not irrelevant just because you say so. Why go through the trouble of using a foreign tank chassis if you have the chassis the turret is intended for?
Yes and I’m saying that’s stupid because my mind doesn’t respect arbitrary boundaries that don’t even conform to common sense.
Go lick Gaijin’s bum. This game has been a mess for 4 years now. Which happens to coincide with other things that I’m not about to mention.
Coming up 14 years I’ve had this account.
Canada, Australia and NZ should all be under the UK tech tree because that’s their in real life force organisation, and all nations should use the equipment they’ve bought.
Sorry Canada you can’t use your own tank because Germany built it, Same with Aussie leopards and Abrams. It’s silly and dissolves nations and dear I say it “diversity” haha.
Deutschland den Deutsch auslanders raus
5 Likes
What the British had 0 interest currently for the 130 they wanted it for a option the the future (10 years roughly) not for now and that’s why rbsl wasn’t interested in the 130 program and that’s why rheinmetall did it so they could test it for some of their upcoming programs like Kf51
I don’t disagree but you’ve completely missed my point
So Germany should get the challanger 2 130 and the amx 30 super I completely agree you make a great point because we were the only operators and did the modification
Actually most of the Canadian fleet was dutch leopards Germany only loaned a few like the Canadian 2a4
And the Vickers Mk.7 that has a leopard 2 chassis?
I’m not sure I understand the hate of sharing western equipment between western countries, especially if it’s a unique tank like the mk7 or 130mm. This isn’t even copy paste.
2 Likes
That’s just because this isn’t a British tank 🤷♀️ sure it’s base is but it’s a modification done by Germany in Germany used by Germany (for testing) and we’ve already been cucked out of enough of our modifications like the amx 30 super what should of gone to German as a event maybe
1 Like
Official statment of the rheinmetall CEO the challenger 130 was produced as an advertisment of the 130mm gun to germany in the competition of the next main mbt cannon vs nexter.
The challenger was used instead of a leopard to do this because its fatter and easier to modify.
The project was made by germany, for germany in germany, tested in germany. In the configuration the 130mm version never touched the british soil.
The chassis was british owned yes, but they allowed rheinmetall to use it for their own project
"The main objective for Rheinmetall is the MGCS programme, in which the 130 mm competes against Nexter’s 140 mm proposal. “https://www.edrmagazine.eu/the-way-ahead
We are only using official rheinmetall statements to justify it.
The challenger 130 because of this was advertised as a Rheinmetall product and not RBSL as well.
But cause it is british chassis most germans are still fine for both nations to get it.
there is no 140mm challenger
no 140mm KF51. And gajin might pull a move to make the KF51 italian/hungary exclusive they are the official users of the 120mm variant even if they got nothing to do with the 130mm variant.
KF51 is essentialy on the same lvl as the challenger 130.
Generaly germany being as strong as it is in mbt development should be beneficial and good for them.
And not to be used by others to justify splitting its development
As i said earlier its a Rheinmetall tank, not an RBSL one. bae didnt have anything
3 Likes
Germany also owns the 2A4 chassis used to create the Vickers Mk.7…
Hypocrisy much, or not because muh Bri’ish?
1 Like
The Challenger 2 130 at it’s core is just a regunned Challenger 2 LEP, with the Challenger 2 LEP being a vehicle entirely designed for the British, with no real connection to Germany. It’s no coincidence that the Challenger 2 130 uses the exact same sights as the Ajax and later Challenger 3, its just a modified variant on a vehicle (based off a British vehicle) developed for the British but used out of convinence.
The Challenger 2 130 is just an evolution of the Challenger 2 LEP which is already in the British tree under the name Challenger 3 TD, giving it to Germany would be a comically stupid choice rather than just putting it after it’s its predessesor.
The Germans had zero intention of ever using any part of the vehicle but the gun/autoloader, while the entire rest of the vehicle was built by or for the UK. Therefore, I think its fair to give it to the UK. If the Germans also want it, it can go to both, but I think it would be out of place in the tech tree.
With regards to the Vickers MK.7 - Yes, the chassis was never owned by Vickers, however, the vehicle was developed specifically to be exported by the UK. It also has a deep design history with the British Army, with technology used for the turret later being used to design the Challenger 2.
The only connection Germany has to it is that a German company made the hull, of which Germany already has in their tech tree. Giving it to Germany makes little sense apart from the pettieness of players to get a vehicle for their tree rather than another tree.
Before someone claims Germany had any role in the turret, no, they did not. The turret on the Vickers Mk.7 we have ingame is the exact same turret from the Vickers Mk.4 which was an entirely British design, hull and turret.
Giving it to Britain brings a novel turret with genuine British history, paired with a unique hull for the tech tree as a whole. Giving it to Germany gives them a vehicle with a turret Germany has no connection to, on a hull their tree already has several of, I think it’s clear Gaijin made the right choice.
4 Likes
then the UK gets a gunless challenger, since thats the british part of the tank
and germany can get the gun and autoloader just lying in spawn
2 Likes
I think a lot of German mains would take this over the British tree just getting the whole thing
Nothing for me then nothing for you mentality
4 Likes
not fighting that, its one of the reasons many are ok with britain getting it.
The challenger doesnt center around the features you named. Its single purpose and existence is the gun integration
But the fact is that one of the main reasons the challenger 130 was made was as a proof of concept specialy for germany. It was not meaned as a british export. And specialy marketed as rheinmetall and not RBSL for those reasons as well
2 Likes
Its entire ‘history’ started and ended with a behind-the-doors trial(s) that never led to anything of essence, in theory, yeah - it has a history, in practice, aside from the fact the vehicle was never going to be exported due to the fact Vickers had never even tried to acquire a license, but still tried to pitch it outside of the UK which led KMW to essentially going nuclear on them and killing the whole project with a “give the hull back”.
Yes, the technology was indeed used later on to a degree - the same applies to CR 130s, whose technology will also be re-used BY GERMANY on the Leopard 3, namely the cannon and the autoloader, by of course. By that logic, the CR 130 as a variant, has more connection with the Germans. I don’t deny it was based on the CR 2 LEP chassis, but as modifications, the intentions behind them, and who they were mainly pitched to, CR 130 would logically fit in the German TT as a tech-demo just as well as in the UK TT as a one-off.
The only connection Germany has to it is that a German company made the hull, of which Germany already has in their tech tree. Giving it to Germany makes little sense apart from the pettieness of players to get a vehicle for their tree rather than another tree.
The same argument can be applied to the UK, see;
“The only connection the UK has to the CR 130 is that a British company made the hull, and the turret shell, which the UK already has in their tech tree, which was outfitted with German sub-components and some major components.”
Before I get told “blah blah blah but X nation deserves it more”, I don’t want the CR 130 in the German TT, i’m waiting for the Leopard 3 instead.
1 Like
Proof of concept of the gun and autoloader only - the tank itself was not a proof of concept of anything apart from those. The tank the gun was fitted to was designed specifically by the British and later modified by Rheinmetall for the British (2 LEP), only right at the end did they use it for testing their gun as a little add on.
Germany can have plenty of other vehicles using the 130mm Rhm gun, which were actually entirely German designs such as the KF51.
1 Like
besides one of its main reasons being made was specialy to advertise it to germany, statement of rheinmetall CEO
Reasons its advertised as an Rheinmetall tank not a RBSL one.
Same issue as the challenger 130 basicaly.
Italy/hungary are the “official” users of the 120mm version so gajin might decide to make it their exclusive when its a german design and not used by them, just as challenger 130
Just accept that it should be added to both nations, no harm in it
1 Like
The fact that the vehicle ultimately did not proceed furthur than prototypes does not mean it lacks history within a country. The Begleitpanzer 57, Radkampfwagen, and KPZ-70 are all examples of German projects that ultimately went nowhere but are do you want to say those have no history too?
This completely depends on if you value the vehicle itself or it’s purpose. If we look at the vehicle, Britain is the obvious choice.
If you look at it’s purpose, Germany comes into the equation a lot more. However, I could argue that the technology for the 130mm would apply to any Rheinmetall project involving that gun, which would not necessarily be limited to Germany.
We’ve already seen hints that the Challenger 2 LEP had the 130mm considered, so you could make the argument for the British too.
Just to be clear, the entire vehicle is based of the Challenger 2 LEP, not just the 2 LEP chassis.
It is quite literally just a Challenger 2 LEP with armament changes and a turret vismod.
As much as I’m sure it’ll be worth the wait, you will be waiting for a very long time considering it doesn’t even exist in real life yet.
No clue what kind of paragraph you are working on, since its going since some time
I am still aware the challenger 2 LEP was pictured with the 130mm at an earlier point and might have been considered.
But this doesnt change that the challenger 130 was specialy done as a rheinmetall project and advertised officialy towards germany, as stated by the rheinmetall CEO, challenger being used cause its fatter and easier to modify then a leo.
His words.
I have no idea why you are so against just adding it to both nations, but you are basicaly denying the vehicle a big part of its history. the statement developed by germany, in germany, tested in germany, build in germany for germany is right.
Germany having other options doesnt matter cause its still a germany vehicle and it should be a strength and benefit and not a weakness to exclude its vehicles
1 Like