Challenger 2 MBT - Technical data and Discussion (Part 2)

I can’t claim to be a conoisseur on anything German, nor, to put it bluntly, do I care too much, considering I have no intention of playing German MBTs anytime soon, so I wouldn’t know.

I mean I’d make the argument that the “upgrade in capability” is more the fact they don’t have to have their own supply chain hauling L30A1-compatible ammunition around. They can now, in theory, stop off at any NATO Replenishment point, and so long as they have “Tank Rounds” they can use them instead. Apart from anything else, by memory L30A1 ammunition stocks are finite, so it becomes a logistical problem too. It takes time and money to restart a production line, neither of which we particularly have at the minute, and Rheinmetall had demonstrated the ability to bung a L/55A1 into a Chally 2 turret by that point.

I don’t know that, of course. My point on Supply of Ammunition is merely conjecture. But I rather suspect that it had a significant influence.

changing to the L/55A1 gun wasn’t because the L30A1 gun was underperforming (and in fact there were claims it was as adequate and just as useful as the L55), it was because the British government want to standardise with the rest of NATO; so they can purchase rounds from Germany and America because the UK no longer have the facilities to manufacture new rounds for the challenger 2’s L30A1 gun.

So in short, they are gaining more benefits by changing to it.
-They gain access to newer 120mm munitions and the ability’s they have
-The ability to use the same munitions as allied nations so they can share rounds.
-They are able to purchase new rounds without having to manufacture them themselves from nations using standardized 120mm rounds.

Its literally just an infrastructure problem and not having the manufacturing capabilities, not the fact the L30A1 gun the UK had was underperforming or sub par in any way; literally just benefits outweighing the negatives.

Yes the Challenger 3 is an improvement over the Challenger 2; but most of those improvements are internal, electrical, or to do with armour; not really the gun itself. the only improvement that serves is longevity and infrastructure.

U see , i dont realy buy that excuse, because at that point thry could have just bought leopards directly as well. Get access to the largest western export tank, with the best available spare parts and so on.

Uk specialy stayed with challengers to keep production economy etc in the UK.
If they worried about availability and so on, they shouöd just have gotten leopards directly
Would have saved a shit tonnof loney in development as well

1 Like

I believe it was fairly public knowledge that, they can still make the parts and have factories and facilities that can machine bits for the challenger’s but the ammunition was the main problem; exasperated by the fact of donations to -insert conflict here- where many of the limited rounds were sent over with the donated vehicles; so an upgrade was needed on the GUN because of manufacturing limitations, but not the vehicle itself. If the British government want to do anything; they do it cheaply; and the cheapest most cost effective way to do the challenger 3 was to just replace the gun and upgrade some bits inside. the current facilities making challenger 2 parts could make challenger 3 parts but all the ammunition factories are closed/demolished for challenger 2 rounds, and all the ones being used currently are old stock.

barrels where the bigger problem, ended up aquiring them via rhienmetall. Might aswell go with the cheaper 55A1 barrels instead

2 Likes

yeah, anything to do with the actual armament it seems. everything else was fine when it came to supply; but the barrels and rounds were limited with no more being made, and like you said- it was coming from RH so why not just get the cheaper RH gun with all the benefits it comes with logistically in the long run.

-Don’t need to manufacture ammo themselves
-Can share ammo with other smoothbore 120mm users
-Can order the weapon system already being made en mass; therefore making it cheaper than a custom one just for them.

Logistically it all makes sense and helps; but none of it was to do with the existing gun being bad, or needing an upgrade at all. it was all about logistics; but they threw in other upgrades to justify the change.

The point being; If they are going to redesign the turret internals for the new ammo stowage, why not look at adding other electronic systems and some more modernization while they are at it? it didn’t NEED it but it makes sense to do it while its available. Same thing with the hull. if they were looking to redesign the inside of the hull to work with the new gun/ammo, why not have a look what else can be changed while its open to help its longevity. Nothing about the gun being bad. Just typical modernization things, and standardisation.

The primary driving force behind changing the gun was interoperability with standard NATO ammunition. Britian was pretty much unique at this point in using rifled cannons and HESH. The gun itself wasn’t an issue performance wise, ammunition and future prospects of it were. Whereas most smoothbore cannons have future potential for new shells.

Of course there comes a performance upgrade which the L/55 due to its very nature.

9 Likes

Don’t you want better penetration on the worst Challenger 2?

Would be nice if they develop 120mm HESH. You know, just for the laughs. Though it would be nice if DM11 could be treated as an APHE.

1 Like

Man, I’ve stopped caring. Gaijin’s narrative is that the Challengers have always been obsolete garbage dumps and if that’s how they want to protray them, up to them. In the same way that apparently the Royal Navy was one of the worst navies there was, and how the British Air Force just clearly couldn’t build any capable aircraft, and we should have all folded and imported F-14s, F-15s and the like for all eternity.

However, back in the real world, there’s a reason, back when we hadn’t shot ourselves in the foot and still had the ability to make anything, why we opted to build our own design rather than buy someone’s foreign imports.

1 Like

I can never understand how the British Government didn’t have the foresight to know that War Thunder would become the hit game of 2013. Should’ve imported a large amount of T-series tanks and other stuff.

5 Likes

Yea, they were not as smart as all those publishers, who were making mistakes all over their military publications, but they striked a deal in 1991 to include the exact same information about a vehicle, so it gives a random dude in 2024 a illusion of having an ability to change things in hit game War Thunder.

2 Likes

The real tragedy is we have seen in the Torando F3 what our equipment can do when Gaijin stops ignoring the community and fixes the problems reported.

We could so easily be one of the strongest nations in game (with the right playstyle) but gaijin just wont let us.

(to clarify what I mean)

We could easily have a 2-3x more IFVs than we do now (scimitar, ferret, Ajax, etc) and probably the same with SPAA (Rover with Javelin, Warrior VERDI 2, Tracked Rapier, Supacat HVM, etc) . Whilst Challenger 2 probably wont ever be made “meta” they could certainly turn it into one of the best long range snipers/support tanks. With the right additions and fixes. Along with things like the Tornado Gr4/Harrier Gr9A with Brimstones. We could be made one of the best “support” nations in game and a valuable asset to any team beyond having OP tanks like Germany, Sweden and Soivets quite often are.

4 Likes

They had to Pre Nerf Brits. And somehow we are still performing ok “amazing”

In which if we trust the scrape that happened in January. Brits are tied 2nd (With the Sweds) for Win rates just behind France.

I wonder if there is someone crazy enough to go through every UK Tree vehicle and say if Gaijin has screwed it over in the past and if it is upto specs as of now. Because that would be an epic post.

Yeah, it would be. Just from what I know about Rank 6-8 aircraft. There is probably at least 1 major issue per vehicle that would be a good thing to fix. (even if that is just a notable BR change)

I want muh Hunter F.6 at 9.3

Yeah, that s a big one, or jsut SRAAMs that will hit a target outside of a 200-400m window

I mean the ability to fire at a target from the front would fix some of the issues

Yeah, I can see a reasonable argument against all-aspect SRAAMs (would be kinda OP in downtier and unlike Red Tops, cant be defeated kinematically), but even just 2km range, TVC fixes and a better rear aspect angle, and they would be fine

1 Like

I need the massive :thunk: emote for this one

Yeah, when they get their heads in gear, we do get some pretty nice kit. F.3 went from “waste of time” to “favourite jet by far” in game once they started fixing.

Still waiting on my CVR(T)s for Ground Sim and such and such.

Not to mention, part of me kinda wants to see more Vickers MBTs, especially the Mark 4, and upgraded Chieftains. Mk.11 with TI would be cool.

And that’s by no means least, look at muh Challengers. If the turret wasn’t near enough empty, best sniping tank in game? Hell, even when I do spin it as a hull down sniper now, it works, but the moment someone thinks and aims vaguely for your weakspots, minus 2 crew, breech out, smoke, reverse.

3 Likes