Challenger 2 MBT - Technical data and Discussion

Nope

This doesnt fill me with much hope they are going to look at the big reports

5 Likes

Sorry for the shitty screenshot I’m on my phone.

1 Like

image
U sure?


My WT crashed XD

2 Likes

One of the reports he mentions is this one:

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/gBEhhxT7M3Ue

so I think its “fixed in a future version” that bug report hasnt even been updated yet

Well, it is a mix of fixed and will be fixed, but
image
The floor dm location got fixed

With how the thread linked above is going, I expect them to replace ch2’s mantlet with egg boxes instead of armour.

What they are doing to the abrams and the justification they use for the 7AV are, quite frankly, a joke.

1 Like

image

If the Challenger 2 still has mobility issues, can anyone submit additional bug reports for it. I dont have time at the moment


On the plus side, the correct skirts(only works on TES), can stop bmp2 apfsds on its own.

1 Like

wait whats the difference? It looks exactly the same as before on both TES and OES, only difference I see is OES is missing dust cover modeled. Im a bit lost

Also updated the mantlet report internally with some more consise and accurate information.
Should be looking at about 560mm on the top 2/3 of the mantlet, and 570mm on the bottom 2/3.

1 Like


Went from “composite block” crap to 100mm spaced RHa

1 Like

ohh its in the xray, ok thanks

1 Like

I wish they would change the description as 40-60mm implies it’s only 40 or 60mm and not 2 plates of 40 and 60mm with an air gap between.

1 Like

agreed.

Maybe we’ll get that at some point.

Can i just say only 50% would be the weld as both steel plates would have a small 45° chamfer for the weld to sit in/built up in, you wouldn’t weld two plates together with both edges at 90° for 2 reasons, 1. The welds wouldn’t be strong 2, the welds wouldn’t sit flush to the surface with that much build up. .

image
Here’s a basic example

5 Likes