Challenger 2 TES vs Challenger 2F

The Challenger 2 TES and Challenger 2f have the same side skirt protection, despite the TES being heavier and the armour being twice as thick. this makes it currently, pointless to use the TES when compared to the 2f.

the 2f is lighter, slightly (barely) faster, and offers you the exact same protection with its composite skirts while the TES with its thicker ERA skirts is slower. There are tanks in the game currently which use ERA to make them more difficult to pen from the flank, while the TES does not have this yet it has the armour to support that. the ERA is next to pointless, because all the missiles and rounds it faces have 2x its chemical protection and 10x its kinetic protection in penetration., so it just does not make sense to me, as its is and will only ever be useful against stock vehicles using HEAT-FS. the best way I can explain how it feels is playing the same tank twice, but the one you work furthest for, is worse.

Hope it gets a fix! IRL the challenger 2 TES has composite side skirts with ERA layered on top of it. its part of a “dual layered composite and ERA” system to enhance the protection against both chemical and kinetic rounds, and should preform way way better than it currently does. once more, other tanks in the game have the capabilities to defend their flanks with effective ERA, but this isnt present on the slow and lumbering challenger 2’s.


I believe that the Challenger series in the game indeed needs to improve its hull protection, especially after the installation of Dorchester armor. The significant increase in protection should be faithfully represented in the game. Additionally, the Challenger in the game requires better ammunition, such as the L28A1, to enhance the experience of using the top-tier tank from the United Kingdom.


L28 is supposed to simply be L27 made from tungsten instead of DU because of export concerns. The bigger number doesn’t mean it’s better, in fact there are a number of ways in which it might be worse.


Yes, you’re right. But now Germany tanks have DM53 and Soviet tanks have 3BM60. I think its essential to add British top tier ammo into Warthunder, for exanmple L28A1. Anyway british top tier tanks dont have either survivability or penetration. Its sad for players playing british tanks :(


Why, when L28A1 is exactly the same as L27A1?
There is no such thing as “top tier ammunition” for Challenger 2 - L27A1 is literally the best APFSDS that can be fired by the CR2’s rifled L30 gun. Gaijin could buff L27A1 for the sake of balance, but the idea that L28A1 be added as a better round than L27A1 has no basis in reality.

You simply wont get a reasonable DM53/DM63 analogue for Challengers until gaijin add a variant with a smoothbore gun. That could either be the Challenger 2 CLIP prototype (which could only carry a handful of rounds) or Challenger 3. The reason these tanks exist with a smoothbore gun is explicitly so they could fire “top tier ammunition” that’s better than L27A1


Take a short break, have some tea.
Then wait for Commonwealth tanks and light tank line come for British TT.


I think another issue is that, the challenger 2 struggles with post penetration damage. comparing the post pen to the T series tanks, the leopards and even the abrams in some cases, the L27A1 seems to have almost no post pen damage, or spawling. The only way I can explain it, is that it is like using WW2 Sabot, while everyone else has APBC with more pen. The challenger 2’s have been on the worse side of the MBT’s in the game for a long, long time and imo, they are the worst in the game second only to the ariete currently due to its large weak spots, terrible hull protection and lack of any unique ability’s that other tanks at its BR tend to have, such as the leo’s having the most penning round, the T series having strong armour, the french/americans being fast, it doesn’t have any of that and instead it just relies on the principle of not getting shot, and if you do get shot you will tend to just die or be out of action long enough that you do.

there are SO many fixes gaijin could implement to make top tier britain playable/more enjoyable, but the challenger 2’s side armour/composite/era has been broken, ie matching the TES for what I believe is over a year now and it doesn’t change and hasnt even been considered to be from my understanding, leaving british players to just suffer at the mercy of other nations who are by far better.

they could:

-make the barracuda netting reduce thermal signature, making it harder to spot on thermals. this would make it a good hull down sniper, so you are less likely to be hit in the breach and/or killed. if I remember correctly it was introduced because the crews inside the vehicles were getting too hot, and the netting significantly cooled the vehicle to the point it even reduced the thermal signature significantly also.

-introduce the engine upgrades the tank received in real life, as there are multiple versions of the CV12 engine they could give it, but they opted for the weakest and slowest one for all of them in the game even though the Black Night was designed with the CV12-9a in mind, a far superior engine compared to the 6a.

-improve the ERA giving it a level of kinetic protection making the TES have a purpose and ability that other NATO tanks dont have, in the fact it could be used to brawl other tanks. this shouldn’t be out right removed from consideration, seeming as the Russian tanks in the game currently are incredibly powerful in the brawling aspect, that way you would have a NATO team who can and the USSR team who can. right now, even the thought of brawling with the Chally 2 will give you ptsd of the Russian or German variety.

-Improve the statistics of the L27A1, lets be honest, all the top tier rounds in the game are under classified pen values, and the statistics for them are made up as we go along, so improving them would not be too far from the truth of something they could do.

-The TES’s jammer could perhaps be used to proxy detonate certain missiles/explosive devices. things using wire guided would clearly still make it to target, but why not have it able to jam/stop certain projectiles? not too sure about this one due to how majority of guidance systems work, but it could be feasible for some radio/frequency guided missiles.

-Contrary to belief, the Chobham armour in the challengers is an improved version of that given to other NATO countries. While Britain shared the information with allied countries on how to create it, they kept certain aspects of that to themselves keeping their version superior to that given to others, meaning it should be stronger than that of the Abrams etc. ((unknown source))

-At tankfest, they did a demonstration with the Challenger 2, during this the commentator explained that the tank has a “independent commander thermal suite” but the tank being used was based on the TES, which in game does not have such a feature. it did leave me confused, and this would only be a small improvement if it were to get it, but an improvement no less.


ERA issue… a little difficult

1 Like

and yet, kontact-1 can still defeat 650mm pen APFSDS… at this point, its more about making the british team more competitive, even if they have to use made up statistics on what and how effective armour is, much like they seem to have done with the T series. The state of the game worries me right now, when a leopard 2a6 can shoot the front plate of a T-72 TURMST, and have its round deleted even though the TURMST is a whole 1.0 br below it, or shoot a T-80 BVM in the side and have its round once again deleted, on top of that russia now have the best SPAA in the game mostly due to the missile nerfs making things like VT-1’s difficult to use, AND they have some of the best CAS aircraft in the game as well, and are only getting more such as the new SU-39, and SU-25 which I have seen tank multiple VT-1 missiles and continue to fly, while an A-10 folds after one hit from a stinger.

1 Like

Until somebody can find other documents or files to prove , CR2’s ERA just that bad. 30mm KE

1 Like

It’s not Armour Shield R…




This seems to be reference to this configuration of CR2 with the older style of Chobham blocks on the TES mounting base and the mentioned Chobham element on the front hull

This was displayed at UOR demonstrations in the UK in sept 2008
The new side blocks with ERA went directly to vehicles in Iraq and started showing up around November 2008

Those ones are meant to be ERA.

CRAARV was modified with the TES base mount as well, but fits the ERA blocks used on Bulldog and Warrior rather than the Challenger 2 ones that are optimised for coverage on the CR2.

Ed:- nvm, have understood you’re suggesting the CR2 ERA is ASPRO-H
Bear in mind though that ASPRO is an acronym for ArmorShield PROtection and Armorshield-R is advertised as a development or the armor for Bradley the same as Armorshield-H/ASPRO-H is. They only differ in one being for STANAG 5 threats and the other STANAG 6.

1 Like

All of the Uk vehicles/used/use ASPRO-HMT is my point.


I really agree with you, the main point is that challenger TES even could defence 9M133 in Warthunder before, but now it could not. I really want know why gaijin did that. (sad

1 Like

It’s not though? the L28A1 has a higher muzzle velocity afaik.

Assuming it’s lighter yea, but inversely it’s also going to be weaker due to the WHa. So overall pen wouldn’t change much. L27A1 is pretty heavy, we know its heavier/contains more DU than L26A1, which weighs somewhere in the region of 4.63-4.85kg.

1 Like


Well it’s a mystery how it would achieve better performance considering they use the same L16/L17 propellant charge for both rounds and tungsten is denser than DU. The same size penetrator made of tungsten would be heavier than a DU one and consequently have lower MV.
L28A1 can only achieve being lighter and subsequently have higher MV than L27A1 by making it smaller, which carries its own reductions on penetration since it then has lesser KE than if it was the same size as L27.

L28A2 is the one that’s rumoured to be significantly smaller and lighter, because this round is supposed to ballistically match the old L23A2 for Oman who don’t have the long-rod rounds, and wanted to use the same L18 charge for all ammunition natures without the expense of updating the FCS.
In Britain we use L18 as a reduced range charge for L29 PRAC, but it’s also a IM-compliant charge for replacing L14 charge when firing L23 APFSDS.