what it is
“Delivery of the first pre-production Challenger 3 and the commencement of trials marks a critical milestone on the journey to the Army’s modernised Main Battle Tank capability. Challenger 3 will be at the heart of the Army’s Armoured Brigade Combat Teams, alongside Ajax and Boxer, under Future Soldier. Events in Ukraine have underscored the need for credible warfighting capabilities. The Army’s Armoured Brigade Combat Teams, with Challenger 3 at their centre, are key to the UK’s contribution to NATO’s deterrence.”
snail gib ajax
1 Like
That’s literally my first thought
i do love my airgaps
2 Likes
Nah, must be 40mm aluminium.
So CR3 isn’t going to have the upgraded engine from the 2E?
Chally 2E uses a MTU basically the same engine the Leo 2 uses, Chally 3 uses an uprated chally 2 engine with a new transmission i belive
1 Like
That is if they want to spend some money to get the transmission Cooling system working.
It is the same, but upgraded
Is it me or is the breach/drivers port weakspot even bigger on the new prototype, looks like the lower half of the mantlet armour wedge thing is missing. Maybe it’s the gun’s elevation angle?
Depends how much the trials crew complain about the engine(the only remaining hope for that)
They could also be clever and make another prototype with the MTU to compare
This is what I’m hoping for.
Sabotage the engines so they all break down.
The MTU engine is not a drop in replacement for the current power pack. It would require a fairly major rear hull rework (the output shaft is in a different place for starters).
First of all, 2E was used for foreign trade, so it replaced the European Power Pack (MTU883)
The power upgrade of Challenger 3 needs to be traced back to the CV12-9A engine developed under HAAIP.
The CV12 TCA MK9A engine can be traced back to the CV12-8A engine used in the “Titan” AVLB armoured bridge vehicle and the “Troy” AVRE armoured engineering vehicle (in fact, they are exactly the same just to adjust the torque curve in the TN54E transmission system adapted to CR3, and the model is also modified to the CV12-9A engine)
better TN54E has already been test
Good news, there is armor here
amazing isnt it. its also the only one with those gaps. somehow that type of spaced armour must be special. instead of layers between the composite they just pushed the spaced armour to the side :v
well the type 10 is also very badly modeled as it seems. other than that we can absolutely see why the devs looked at it and have to remake the whole thing. if only in these 5 years they looked at it sooner.
this photo looks clearer in contrast, it looks like its a full block set on top of the hull. this has to indicate the interior is also changed
I’m not certain there’s going to be any usable documents that could get them to change this, but surely they can’t genuinely have looked at the “Challenger 3” with its entirely new gun and probably entirely new fcs said “Yep, that’s going to have the exact same gun elevation speed.” (neither tank has the horizontal drive or elevation mechanism modification installed)
Which, if I remember correctly, was copy-pasted from the Challenger 1 (now updated and faster) which was copy-pasted from the Chieftain Mk10 (now updated and faster)?
4 Likes