So the mighty Challenger 2 TES and 2F have been humbled by Gaijin’s implementation of the two vehicles. With the biggest issue being how Gaijin twisted ‘side skirt ERA can protect against 30mm APDS’ into ‘the whole side protection, ERA+50mm hull armour can barely survive 30mm APDS’ but that’s not my biggest concern. My biggest concern is how the IED equipment and barracuda have no effect despite being modelled.
Barracuda/solar shield
The barracuda on the Challenger 2 TES and 2F should come in more than just one camouflage, and should change camouflage pattern according to the selected camouflage on the tank. In its current state, selecting desert camo would give the tank desert camo but the barracuda would remain in standard camo. The barracuda should be compatible with different camouflages as there are many Challenger 2 TES and 2F platforms in real life that have barracuda of different camoflage.
Challenger 2 TES with late bicolour camo barracuda.
Challenger 2 TES with late desert camo barracuda.
The barracuda also acts as a solar shield, and reduces the thermal signature of the tank, making it invisible (not completely, just meaning it doesn’t glow in thermal vision) from the front in thermal vision, and only the rear of the tank visible to thermal vision.
Barracude solar shield article page 1/2.
Barracuda solar shield article page 2/2.
Reducing the thermal signature of the tank would give it a nice unique advantage and make it more worth the repair cost which is completely overblown considering the vehicles’ current state.
IED detection equipment
The Challenger 2 TES and 2F have IED (Improvised Explosive Device) detection equipment modelled in game, boxes with aeriels on the right and left side of the tanks’ frontal hull, and on the back of the turret behind the ammunition rack. These devices however have no effect in game. Considering the amount of vehicles at lower BRs than the Challenger 2 TES and 2F that have laser warning systems, it would be completely balanced to have the Challenger 2 TES and 2F have working IED detectors. These work in a similar way to laser warning systems: they detect incoming IEDs (unguided bombs, laser-guided bombs, TV-guided bombs, retarded bombs, artillery strikes, AGMs, ATGMs, and rockets) within a 2km radius of a horizontal 360° and vertical +180° sector and give the crew inside a warning, in game this could be a red message saying “IED warning!” like the laser warning system does “Laser warning!”.
(I would put an image of the IED detection equipment in game here but I am only able to use 5 images and the IED jammer is more important)
IED countermeasure equipment
The Challenger 2 TES and 2F have a radio IED jammer on top of the back of the turret in the shape of a table with aeriels modelled in game, but again, with no effect. It would be entirely balanced to have this IED jammer working in game as there are many other vehicles at 11.3 with IRCMs, a similar piece of equipment. The radio IED jammer stops any threats that are radio controlled, this includes any AGM or ATGM that isn’t controlled down a wire, and is fully radio/laser/TV guided; any AGM, ATGM, or GBU, within 1.5km in a horizontal 360° and vertical +180° sector around the Challenger 2 TES and 2F would lose guidence and fall out of the sky, or for GBUs, stop tracking and fall like a regular bomb. This radio IED jammer also jams scout UAVs launched from light vehicles and any scout UAVs within the area listed above would lose control and fall out of the sky. Making this equipment work will make up for how much easier it makes the tank to be spotted considering the large table-like structure on the turret giving away the tanks’ position.
Radio IED jammer.
Other tanks such as the M1A2 SEP, the Warrior IFV, the Merkava (can’t remember which varient) have similar IED protection equipment to the Challenger 2 TES and 2F so if this is to be approved of, those vehicles should also be considered.
These changes to the Challenger 2 TES and 2F would make the tanks much more useful, worth the research and silver lions, and balanced (as they are very underperforming in their current state) and would be a worthy addition in helping the top-tier Britain ground forces experience.