btw called it kek
As Italy and Hungary use the 120mm version, that leaves nowhere for the 130mm version to go. The obvious choice will be to give the 130mm version to Germany.
I’ve already said thats an option I’m ok with.
However, I think a lot of German mains are making a lot of fuss over a vehicle which ultimately they do not need nor have anywhere near as much connection to as they claim.
we talking about gajin here, the obvious choice for us, is not obvious for them
i mean, i just am on the side of a nation getting all vehicles they deserve, added right away if possible.
Letting them just sit their is meh.
Indian rafale for UK / SU 30.
germany getting als its cold war russian vehicles and so on.
I am happy france got its df105 and we both got the clovis at the same time and that should continue
1 Like
Refer to the previous comment.
True, but replace Germany with Britain and it’s also true, just for different parts of the vehicle.
As I’ve said I’m fine with both getting it, just not Germany exclusively, and I do think it belongs in Britain a lot more.
yes, but not in the challenger 130 configuration the main feature of it. its name sake and whole reason for its existence
1 Like
Once again this is purpose vs actual vehicle as I was talking about earlier, which I don’t think we will agree on as we value different things.
All of these were national projects, the Mk.7 was a private venture by Vickers.
We’ve already seen hints that the Challenger 2 LEP had the 130mm considered, so you could make the argument for the British too.
I’ll be honest, that’s nothing. That’s a forced interpretation because AN INERT model of a round that was barely existing at the time, was put in front of the CR 2 LEP, doesn’t mean the 130mm was being considered for the CR 2 LEP.
Just to be clear, the entire vehicle is based of the Challenger 2 LEP, not just the 2 LEP chassis.
Okay? That’s irrelevant. Case in point, it’s two sides of the same coin.
1 Like
The Begleitpanzer was a private venture, the German government never requested it be made or funded it.
“Believing they had identified a niche in the market, the Thyssen-Henschel and Bofors companies began a private venture (without funding or official support from the West-German military) to develop an ‘Infantry Escort Vehicle’. The resulting vehicle, debuted in November 1977, was based on a modified hull of the recently introduced Marder IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle). It was designated the Begleitpanzer (Accompanying Tank) 57 and was classified as an Armored Infantry Fire Support Vehicle, or ‘AIFSV’.” - Tank Encyclopedia
No history I guess… it wasn’t even entirely made by a German company, a significant part of the work was Swedish. I guess maybe they could do with another IFV…
Marder II when
I mean the swedes literally gave the gun everything else was fitted and done by thyssen and Henschel not relevant to chally 2 130 (plus it went to Germany for being the manufacturing country)
Geniuenly, do not use the Tank Encyclopedia article as a source or even reference for Begleit. It has such an incredible amount of inaccuracies and misconceptions that it is not even funny anymore.
Even the part with “infantry escort vehicle” is already insultingly misleading as the vehicle’s primary role was relieving the burden on allied main battle tanks by dealing with any known target that could become a threat - or would have to be dealt with by said MBTs otherwise. (as per Thyssen Henschels own brochure)
Bofors supplied already existing compononts of the 57 mm SAK L/70 Mk. 1 naval gun, including ammunition and existing stabilization systems. The rest of the vehicle (chassis [TH 301], turret, ATGM loading & laying system, etc.) was developed by Rheinstahl AG (later [1976+]: Thyssen Henschel).
Any further potential involvement of Bofors is solely up to interpretation/guesswork and cannot be proven with the available information (e.g. whether it used any sort of BOFORS-made fire control components)
The functional model was presented to bundeswehr officials exclusively to pitch the idea of a new type of AFV, which Begleitpanzer 57 mm was not even the only proposal of. Oerlikon (together with Blohm & Voss) also subsequently proposed a 35 mm variant (both as upgrade for the Marder and as retrofit for the Jagdpanzer Kanone).
This “new type” was the result of Bundeswehr studies (which Thyssen Henschel was a part of), emerging when the future of the Leopard 2 was still uncertain and the necessity of dedicated supporting assets (AFVs) was projected.
Swedens influence in this project is virtually nonexistent, except for BOFORS being well… a swedish company. The demonstrator was specifically designed for the Bundeswehr based on then foreseen future tactical requirements.
Anyway going back to the Challenger topic, the turret was heavily modified (yes I argue that putting a 130mm gun and autoloader inside a challenger turret counts as heavily modified) by Rheinmetall in germany. Unlike Begleit, this system is not designed for a specific army but a general offering for future MBTs of any nation they can get an export license to (as per usual)
On their website, you can directly see RWM (Unterlüss, Germany) being listed as the respective representative for the gun system:
That aside, the entire video was literally taken at Rheinmetall’s test-site/firing-range in Unterlüß…
The linked legal representative is also not RBSL or any other UK subsidiary but Rheinmetall AG
All that aside, I do believe that there would be better options for additions for either of the two tech-trees, however I do not think that claiming the addition of it to either nation to be unreasonable is justified.
Especially not in case of germany, which I believe to have a more substantial relation to this demonstrator. (Given that the gun is a german company’s (/subdivision’s) development, the autoloader and necessary turret-redesign to fit such, had been done in germany, where said vehicle was also tested, even if just for the sake of making a promotional video)
5 Likes
Yes, it was presented because it was a private venture. A vehicle designed specifically for the German Army would not require a presentation of that kind, same with the idea of having to “pitch” the vehicle, this doesn’t contradict what I said.
The Vickers MK.7 was also used to test novel technologies that Britain very much intended to use on their future tanks, such as the Challenger 2. It was a primarily export intended vehicle, however, it’s design and development were very much involved with and for the benefit of the British MoD as well.
There is also limited information indicating that the Mk.7 was offered to the British Army as a Challenger 1 replacement, despite the fact to our knowledge it did not meet all of their requirements.
This does not change the fact both were private ventures, if anything your post supports my statement from my previous post that vehicles can have national history even if they are private ventures.
Not entirely sure what your point was in this section, all this proves is that Rheinmetall made and tested it, which I do not disagree with.
That’s fair and I understand that, it’s your opinion and I don’t think it’s particularly unreasonable.
I believe the British tree deserves it more as at it’s core it’s a British vehicle, with it’s direct predesssor in the British tree already (and not the German tree).
Regardless i am happy for both nations to get it, I think it would be out of place and unneeded in the German tree, but as long as the British get it too I don’t mind.
1 Like
Challenger 130, “it’s name sake and reason it exists”. That goes both ways. The Challenger suspension was heavy enough not to modify IIRC. It also has the same Challenger 3 turret with some different geometry to the front of it, the same sights as the Ajax. It would have been lucrative for Rheinmetall to make the British pay for the technology jump while they had the most reasoning to change to 120 or even 130mm with a history of demonstrating they were willing to go with a bespoke rifled barrel design compared to the rest of NATO.
Just saying that is an innoffical name the community gave it for the ease of use.
The correct name is more likely “rheinmetall 130mm tech demonstrator”
That all doesnt matter and is what ifs.
Official statements by rheinmetall made for germany.
The Uk decided not to pursue the 130mm cannon. Germany now decided to develop their first own 130mm mbt for in use. So the "chally 130mm did its supposed job of advertising its capabilities of the cannon for germany.
Germany was always the main goal in the project. Again it was a rheinmetall project not rbsl.
Dont take your own interprations into it without proof.
1 Like
ok so if the uk didnt persue the 130mm cr2 did the germans?
cause if the germans arent interested in a 130mm cr2 its the same as the uk.
Not in the form of the chally 2 since it was a test bed but since they are the manufacturers for the varient it’s where it would go. No side was interesting in wasn’t even something to go into production or anything just testing the gun
it was made for germany yes and lead to germany ordering a 130mm cannon now
as the rheinmetall CEO stated, the challenger was chosen for this test over the leopard cause the challenger 2 was fatter and easier to modify for this purpose
1 Like
Not sure why you germans would want a chally anyway aren’t they all rubbish and non meta in your eyes?
I’m in the give it to both and be done with it camp
oh most of us are of this opinion.
Its the brits that fight us on it
1 Like
Because it was our program 🤷♀️ and it should go to both lmao
1 Like