Yes, but it just further shows that challenger 130 is more german then you all said.
If the LEP turret was already designed purely by rheinemtall already in the first place.
Rheinmetall is the majority holder of RBSL as well. So the statement that rheinmetall only changed the gun. Is completly wrong to begin with
My point is just that the Challenger 3 turret can support the same stress and weight as the KF51’s turret, so a 130mm in that regard is possible
No it does not your just constantly grasping at things constantly. The Challenger 2 was loaned out for the LEP programme so Rheinmetall could develop there bid for the LEP programme. There was also bids from Lockheed Martin, elbit, ricardo among others. They did only change the gun and add an auto loader because the turret had already been constructed for the 2 LEP programme. The sole reason the LEP and 130mm was being constructed in Germany is because at the time they did not have the facilites and such to do so within the UK hence why RBSL was formed as that allowed them to skip the whole building new factories and such because BAE systems land already had the required facilities. If RH already had a footing in the UK it all would taken place within the UK but they couldn’t as they had no facilities to do so. Going by your logic if the elbit bid materialised the whole tank should go to Israel because they designed the turret before a contract was selected. It’s a challenger 2 / LEP hull, engine, optics, systems, turret etc apart from gun, auto loader and counter weights mounted to the turret front. The whole thing wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for the UK MoD it’s a British vehicle that was on loan to a company not a country it’s going in the British tree
2 Likes
The same applies to the challenger 130.
Its an advertisment towards germany mainly.
Thats its stated main goal.
It wouldnt exist if not for the mgcs project and its goal to get germany adapt it.
Hence why its german and suppoaed to be for germany
I do really like that turret, I wish there was more info on its protection levels though. I’m just curious how it stacks up against the American’s flat plates with DU, and the Germans wedges. Even just a comparison with CR2 would do.
Maybe with the introduction of CR3 we may begin to see some more information of Challenger 2 come out though, or concrete figures on CR1?
Well, I think that solves it
bet this is gonna make a certain wehraboo annoyed
3 Likes
To my knowledge the Challenger 2 LEP turret does not feature any of the upgraded Challenger 3 internal arrays, so the protection would likely be identical to the Challenger 2, as would the hull
The Challenger 2 turret in real life provides comparable protection to the M1A2s turret so around 600-700mm frontally against KE
not realy, its an advertisment move.
In that regard i like to point out that sketchy challenger video, where a british guy claimed DM83 was being shown of
https://x.com/i/status/1833829733013799099
It doesnt mean all to much
nah not realy, its not my fault it need you so long to actualy find any resemblance of proof the whole time
It is a picture from 2019 LEP, showing of the offer and possibility of requested.
Doesnt actualy mean the challenger 130 was made as a specific result of that.
Again, the clear official source regarding the challenger 130 still states its main objective was marketing towards germany
Not really like we have gone in circles before saying and considering a few months after this photo they actually put the 130mm kind of show it was marked to the UK
Germany were only possibly interested in the gun
It can perform two task at the same time show of the gun to the world and Germany and show what the Challenger 3 could be
The pire fact that they were showing it with 130mm shows the MoD were interested in it and the tank done by RBSL was made for that very gun in mind
5 Likes
Challenger 2 ATD shown with 130mm ammo for the British
Few months later it is shown off with said 130mm
It seems like it was meant for UK intrest
6 Likes
i did say its better prove then you were able to bring until now.
I was not aware of the picture shrug
But then again, advertisment exists, like the DM83 challenger video i showed.
Advertisment as well, its a DM63 being shown of for purposes.
Not to mention the running joke about the british particiaption in its development, which is just a political move as well
Because the service round will be KEneo2020 but only DM63 is being used on tank testing as the round is still in development
We are part of the development we are funding it. If you think that is a joke as you can’t comprehend someone helping with development then that is on you,
2 Likes
This is intentional, they did not accidentally place a full scale inert 130mm shell there, it is clearing indicating the vehicle could use a 130mm gun (Which it literally did, only a year or two later)
1 Like
Less then a year
November 2019 to July 2020 i think
1 Like
Last time i read about it, 130 was considered for Cr3, but to be implemented only when allies start using it, and there will be a steady supply of shells.
4 Likes
well that yes, but the initial statements where a lot of politicing to make it sound better.
Things like getting together to develop EKE etc. When the KE2020Neo was already so long in development and started testing phase
current timeline would be around 2030 the earliest then.
Thats the earliest a country has dedicated to put a 130mm cannon into service currently.
Plus a few years if you wanna make sure the logistics is fully puit into place
Thank you but no thank you lol. Don’t want the shitbed chase that is the chilly in in my tree xD.
But yeah, this has more to do with Germany (and France to a degree) than the UK. Same with that one boxer CTA40 prototype that was suggested not that long ago
2 Likes