Damn Red really went in on the Challenger 2 in this one…
1 Like
He didn’t really talk about anything people didn’t already know
I think everyone here knows the Challenger 2 is not some kind of wonder tank and needs to be replaced
3 Likes
Oh no I agree I just found it interesting that he used his angrier voice similar to the old Arjun video. He usually poses the effectiveness of a tank in the title but here just straight up says it sucks. I also think he was a little unfair in some of his points especially in regards to HESH.
We know the Cr2 weaknesses and we know the British army trains to a higher standard to mitigate them.
Blow out panels do not stop tanks from burning they provide time for the crew to bail out. We have seen plenty of Leopard 2 and M1s burning.
The gun was good for what it would face, it could penetrate the latest Russian tanks. It’s accurate and HESH was fantastic in Iraq (so much so the US tankers bemoaned how useless HE was.)
The ammo or charge volatility, compared to single piece ammo I don’t know much about. I know Germany DM53 has a non burning charge, did Britain opt for that with charges separate?
It’s the usual anti Cr2 it’s heavy its slow and the gun is bad
2 Likes
I think most of his points are reasonable
His HESH example was a bit weird I do agree, he used a comparison of the T64 and the Cheiftain to judge the accuracy of the Challenger 2’s HESH. I understand he didn’t have data on the Challenger 2, but the Challenger 2 has a completely different fire control system and gun to the Cheiftain, its not really a good example.
Its like me comparing the T62 and Leopard 1’s firing accuracy to judge if the Leopard 2 or T90M have better accuracy.
Also.
-
He used the example of the Ukrainians driving the Challenger 2 into a pit of mud as an example of the tank being “bad offroad”. Obviously if you drive a tank into a 3m deep pit of mud its going to get stuck, that was just driver error.
-
As usual he talked about the Challenger 2’s hull ammo stowage being an issue and saying its “no better than a Russian tank”.
That just isn’t true, the Challenger 2 has its hull ammo stored in protective bins, Russian tanks do not have this. The Challenger 2’s hull stowage is not good, but its not as bad as Russian tanks.
He also left out the fact that the leopard 2 has its hull ammunition stored in exactly the same way just next to the driver. We saw with the Turkish Leopards, that will catastrophically explode when hit and destroy the entire tank.
At least he was very positive about the Challenger 3, saying it solved basically all of the Challenger 2’s issues. Its a shame people in the comments are repeating the same bullshit that the tank is made by the Germans. The only fully German component is the gun, the Abrams has a license built German gun and I dont see people saying that’s German.
8 Likes
I believe DM63 has a non burning charge
DM53 is still vulerable to exploding
3 Likes
It’s harsh but accurate, the UK MOD has left the challenger 2 to rot in a depressing sense, it hasn’t received anywhere near the amount of MLU that it needs and they haven’t adopted any of the modified variants proposed by RBSL or BAE, only now are they building the challenger 3 however it still suffers from most of the same issues as the C2 so the MOD has gone in a circle again…
1 Like
Yes, DM63 is an inert round, and one that should be implemented to the game, since it doesn’t add much else that we don’t already have (still missing the anti-ERA tip and accurate penetration) on the DM53 round.
That’s just British sunken cost fallacy, we are fortunate it’s never faced a peer adversary.
But we are also on an Island and costs for the Navy and Airforce make more sense
it frustrates me ((as a brit)) that the government are happy to provide for -insert conflict here- and are viewing -insert conflict here- and yet they haven’t learnt anything from it… the kings of the battlefield right now are drones and artillery, but yet they added 0 defence to the vehicle that would perhaps mitigate it, ie aps systems, additional roof protection etc which they have seen on the Black Night program, and the RBSL Challenger 3 TD - yet they have decided to not go for those systems. I would have thought that, if you make something really expensive, you would want to protect that investment. but instead they have left it without things it would need to protect itself.
1 Like
Well the same logic is seemingly applied for the rest of the infrastructure in Britain
1 Like
What bothered me specifically about his HESH example was him saying it’s next to useless unless it’s hitting a concrete bunker. Which is also simply not true.
But truth be told a lot of what he said is valid it’s just the oversimplification of some issues and bad examples of his drive me up a wall sometimes. Can’t even discuss the tank in his own comment section because it’s 80% vatnik circle jerk and 20% cope 🤦🏻
1 Like
I put a bug report in for the destroyed model of the challenger 2 a while back, because the driver hatch seems to do something wonky.
pretty sure it shouldn’t look like that, even if its destroyed. something small but I thought looked incorrect.
He mentioned that the Challenger 2’s were being upgraded with 3rd generation catherine thermals
Howcome they dont get those ingame
Because the upgrades are a recent thing, while most of the challys are based on their versions from before that upgrade. The only Chally that falls under Catherine MP is BN, and it already has Gen3
because all the challenger 2’s in the game are based on their “entry” level upgrades without anything additional put onto them if i remember right. there were upgrade engines that could be used in the challenger 2’s like the CV12-9a; a more powerful version of the current CV12 engine. The black night program was made with that engine in mind, but gaijin have not put any upgrades like that onto them for… reasons? I think mainly it is because they were not widely adopted, or used.
BN was night fight equipment and APS, not the engine. Neither was 2019 LEP.
though saying that, the challenger 2 that Bovington tank museum have, there’s a video somewhere of it driving around and the commentator says it has a “independent commander thermal suite” - but its literally the challenger 2 OES in the game, which doesn’t have said quoted thermal suite.
Nope, the one in game is based on its first iteration, that is the one form 2015
1 Like
gotcha