Just to put this out there the challenger 2 LEP/ 3TD or 2 ATD whatever you want to call it is being designed with expansion from 120mm to 130mm from the get go. This was stated in multiple different press materials around the time of the 3 reveal and the 130mm tank test bed. So to say the 130mm tank test bed was done for sole purpose of advertising the gun to Germany is just being disingenuous to push what you want to happen for its addition to the game. The UK has been a customer for the 130mm gun from the get go and the fact the turret can already fit the 130mm gun and that the MoD loaned them a tank specifically for them to modify it and equip said gun to it shows Britain is a customer.
It’s Rheinmetall they could of just modified a leopard but last I heard there’s some competition between Krauss-maffei and Rheinmetall due to IP rights. Because of this Rheinmetall has explicitly stated they are willing and ready to build brand new challenger 3 tanks or just sell the turrets to customers other than the UK so the fact they used the challenger 2 130mm test bed to advertise the gun isn’t just them showing the gun to Germany it’s them advertising the gun to everyone who could be a potential buyer. Because of the RBSL partnership there involvement with the British MoD the designing of the challenger 3 and its advertised expansion to be able to equip the 130mm gun down the line it’s pretty damn fair to say the 130mm tested should be in the British tree
sources for that never realy were brought up. you are invited to do so.
You are aware we are just quoting the project leader Christoph Henselmann of the challenger 130 right?
not necesarily the case, the challenger was in germany for the 3TD programm.
The programm ended early, and rheinmetall requested access, paid whatever for their own purposes.
that is cleared up by the project leader as welle.
First of, the IP rights are about the export of the hull, so it doesnt matter. Rheinmetall can and always has worked on leos to show of stuff Leopard 2 ATD as example.
Back to the reason rheinmetall chose the challenger "The British tank is a little wider than the Leopard 2, making things easier,” " Rheinmetall was just being lazy so to say.
But you know what? thats completly ok, its the smart choice. work smart not hard
Oh yeah btw
thats not the case either. As stated in the same interview
“That said, the upgrade option would definitely require a wholly new turret, as the 130 mm gun fitted with its autoloader that would not fit in existing turrets.”
The challengeris turret is not completly newly desgined, and is not capable of the full service integration.
You are invited to prove your claims and the claims of the possible expansion.
I do not claim anything that isnt proven trough sources,
Either trough quotes of the article, or trought the actual video release on the rheinmetall youtube channel.
Another sign , since it wasnt done on the RSBL one, and neither was it marked as RBSL on the hull
You do realise the the challenger 3 turret is a whole new turret it’s got entirely newly built turret citadel and does not use the original superstructure whatsoever. The 130mm test bed itself is the the challenger 3 test development vehicle With an autoloader installed along with the 130mm gun and some counterweights strapped to the turret front.So yes your correct the 130mm system won’t fit in existing turrets but it does infact fit in the new challenger 3 turret as it does indeed have a whole new turret despite the exterior being reminiscent of the the CR2.
I also see you completely ignored the part about Rheinmetall wanting to build challenger 3 turrets or whole tanks for other countries that aren’t Britain if a customer wants them.
Anyway I’m not getting into this any further because quite frankly 1 it’s boring and 2 the basis of your argument the gun was changed in Germany by Germany using that logic nearly every tank in game could end up in every nations tech trees.
This doesn’t work. If I borrow my car to a friend so he can develop a new product using it he doesn’t then own my car… it’s still my car even if his prototype or whatever is attached to it.
Now if the brits sold the tank to RM and then bought it back things could be different.
90% of the tank was still British. 10% was RMs product.
and again, i requested you to actualy back that up with sources
again
"The main objective for Rheinmetall is the MGCS programme, in which the 130 mm competes against Nexter’s 140 mm proposal. " Germany, french is the main goal
"we expect the bi-national customer to decide which will be the main armament calibre, " talking about germany, france
it mentions keeping an eye on the US situation, but thats it
I am gonna say it again, please actualy back up your claims with actual quotes.
not realy.
I just dont actualy understand why no one of you is able to give actual sources for your claims, if you are so sure about it.
yes, but before giving it back, your friend returned everything to its previous condition, just as you have giving it to him. Do you have the right to the intellectual properties of his prototype?
Or did you ever actualy own the prototype yourself?
Not realy, you gave your car away and got it returned as given away.
i never said the UK shouldnt get it.
Its the majority of the british having a problem with the reality that its a german project mainly targeted at germany and well france cause of mgcs.
Actual sources, providing the opposite were never provided.
You cannot assume that, the entire citadel which forms the basis of the turret is newly made by Pearson engineering.
RBSL specifically state the tank has an “all new turret”, including the turret structure, differentiating it from the old cast turret.
This is supported by the fact the Pearson engineering, do not (publicly) have the capacity for major steel casting rather being focussed on welding and other fabrication methods.
So basically, the entire turret is completely different internally and externally to the Challenger 2 turret, so you cannot just claim it has the same internal space. As for if it can fit a 130mm, that is another argument, but the turret is entirely new and assumptions cannot be made off the Challenger 2 turret.
However, if the 130mm gun can fit into the Challenger 2 LEP turret, it is not unreasonable to believe it could fit into the Challenger 3 turret as it is a direct evolution.
RBSL specifically state the Challenger 3 has “significant growth potential” including “physical” growth, which would indicates the turret has been designed with future upgrades in mind in “all key capability areas” which would include firepower.
Not direct confirmation that the 130mm can fit, but it shows the tank (specifically the turret) is designed with significant growth potential in “ALL KEY MBT CAPABILITY AREAS” which would likely include upgraded armaments.
Thats the thing, its still needed to be quite increased.
We can express the Kf51 turret to be a clear intent and supposed to be designed with the capability to fully functionaly use the 130mm cannon.
Everything considered i would say the Kf51 turret is quite a bit more massive/bigger then the challe ger 3
Thats always the problem with the british sources its always interpretation, while the german ones were clear intent towards germany.
While the grow potential might exist we dont actualy know how much would need to be changed to make it fully functional.
Ok thats good, but that just might be as well for export purposes, the same way rheinmetall offers to put KF51 turret on leopards for customers if requested. The intent for 130mm capability is missing here again as well.
Look i am for the implementation in both trees cause i know it likely was shown of to the british just as much as for germany.
But all sources clearly state the main purpose fpr germany. Thats the problem and i am just annoyed by the fact so many of you guys just fight the notion and dont just want to accept the fact that all sources and intents go tpwards germany.
Its a rheinmetall project no rbsl.
The logo was specialy repainted and it was released on the rheinemtal channel.
Add to that the statements of the interview.
The statement of germany ahould just get the KF51 doesnt work anymore cause italy and hungary ordered Kf51 120mm.
I prefer the KF51 as a completle german alternative myself.
But gajin might screw us over and make it a italy speciality product.
And germany gets nothing of their rightfull developments.
We dont want a precedent. Thats why we need to make that stand.
Thats why i want a fair implementation for both nations. To respect them both.
Yet most of the best/top vehicles at top tier are NATO lol.
I have no horse in this race, but I don’t think that is how loaning/renting works. The Chally prototype that Rheinmetall got is still under british ownership, that is why the British had to give that permission.
If I rent or loan a car I don’t suddenly become the owner of said car for that period.
Ita more figuratively speaken.
Of course the ownership stays but. The result is rheinemtalls.
My example with if i loaned/lent you a laptop and you made a thesis. Is it my thesis cause you used my laptop?
Or my chisel and you make a statue. Is it my statue. And so on.
The intellectual property rights and the specific challenger 130 configuration stay with rheinmetall.
A landlord isnt allowed to do whatever to his property either if he has renters in it
Yours is worse.
The functionality of the challenger changed.
Its not the same tank anymore.
No matter what u claim.
Its not equal to the change of a mere frame.
A frame would only be repainting of the tank
When the painting itself changed.
Rheinmetall made the challenger 130.
Removed everything that made the tank what it was. And gave you your own unchanged basis back. The challenger 130 was never in the hands or ownership of the UK.
U cant change that. The freaking 130mm configuration as it was shown of never even was on the british Islands
It was always and has always been UK MoD property and changing the gun isnt removing everything that made it the tank it was it is still the Challenger 2 ATD / Challenger 3 test bed
Not really
You mean it fires bigger tank rounds?
You are just reaching whch is kind why i think this pointless
No matrer what you will claim the tank is German even though they never owned it or even operated on it (Spoiler the crew who drive the tank are not German but British)
Changing the gun and extendibg the turret forward mantle to make space.
Yes. Of you wanna put the 130mm equal to the 120mm. Then u dont need it innthe first place if you dont see the difference.
Ah yeah i am reaching with official interview statements of it being for germany. It being released on the german rheinmetall account and being marked as rheinmetall instead of RBSL 😂
All official sources show german and u dont have anything besides the original vehicle being british.
Its like saying the greece 2a6 with 105mm cannon is german developed as well, cause they “only” changed the gun.
In that regard, where is your source for that🤷
Everything officialy specified is as german as far as i am aware.
Developed in germany, built in germany, tested in germany. Marked by standalone german company. Advertised for germany.
Thats a lot of german.
Whats the british one again?
Provided by uk. Ah yeah thats a lot
The Challenger 3 and KF51 actually share quite a lot of systems, a very key system for mounting a larger cannon is the turret drive and stabilisation system.
Both the KF51 and Challenger 3 share the Curtiss-Wright Turret Drive Stabilisation Systems (TDSS ) which evidently can support a 130mm cannon as that is what the KF51 uses.
I can go on about other similarities, such as the gun housing being of similar design as they use the same Rheinmetall cannons etc…
Externally the KF51 turret may appear larger, but once again, we don’t really know. The external dimensions depend on armour and other aspects, which can make a turret significantly larger externally.
Considering the KF51 is based off the Leopard 2, which Rheinmetall themselves said was less spacious than the Challenger 2 with regards to fitting a 130mm cannon, the opposite may be true by your prior logic.
It’s clear the Challenger 3 does have significant growth potential, and I agree that sources are vague, but I dont think a 130mm is off the table as we have already seen the same core turret design (Challenger 2 130mm) use one.
That means Rheinmetall themselves designed, manufactured and presented the whole base turret of months before RBSL even existed. That means the whole turret of CR130 is made by Rheinemtall, not just “gun replacement”
The challenger turret used by rheinmetall was already done by themself as well, following those sources funded in their own initiative 😂
And i know janets at time questionable
And i am not saying germany should get the LEP.
That ones clearly marketed towards UK
Before the RBSL partnership existed companies were competing for the challenger 2 LEP program hence why that model existed before the RBSL partnership started. Rheinmetall, BAE and other companies where all competing for the contract to upgrade the challenger tanks. It could of been a tank developed by a sole company on its own had BAE, Rheinmetall and other entrants won the contract but BAE and Rh decided to create a partnership instead
