No
it was approved and given clearance by us and was shown to have the 130mm as some the Challenger 3 could have
2 Likes
source still says main goal was germany and france
No it doesn’t
We are going in circles here
ah yeah, always forgot that one.
Honestly easiest way is to just agree to give to both involved partys.
But the british just seem kinda allergic to sharing.
At least for france germany i hope gajin continues adding everything to both partys like they finaly remedied with df105 and did with the clovis.
EMBT to both countries makes it a hell lot easier
1 Like
so you saying the project leader is a lier?
It’s an upgrade option, hence the reason why it’s mounting is the same as the 120mm for ease of implementation, from what i remember seeing. Similar situation with the abrams adopting the 105mm first.
No im saying that you are lying about a source and being disingenuous the 130m installation was given approval and clearance by the British MoD who already knew the tank was advertised with having the gun and wanted to see it. Stateing that the sole purpose was to show of the a gun that might be used MCGS on a platform that definitely isn’t even related to the project is a stretch. It is a gun made for one programme that is first shown off on a tank of a completely different program
This was done by Rheinmetall UK who then merged with BAE and the Challenger 2 ATD was first shown after the merger at DSEI in September 2019 when the merger was July 2019
2 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
2 Likes
i never denied that
u guys literaly only now were able to provide a resemblance of source for that
i did not, i always quoted it as the main goal.
This doesnt mean there is other goals, thats why i always to just add it to the UK as well.
it is, its a tech demonstrator for the 130mm in general. that includes germany and france as a proof of concept.
It was done just as much for germany and france. You are the one not wanting to accept that.
well sources only stated rheinmetall, it just being an officer doesnt help either.
pretty much, i already explained multiple times why i have to.
You not wanting to listen to it aint my problem
You know what fair enough
1 Like
German mains BEGGING for the Challenger, it’s just too goated I guess
2 Likes
I mean, it’s good to point out hypocrites.
Because that’s what people who tell people everything related to them should also only go to them, yet when they have a chance to claim someone else’s thing tho go all in on claiming it, are.
1 Like
eh not realy, just cant allow a precedent. I prefer the KF51 myself as well.
i am not a fan of arguing with you guys either
Like i already stated multiple times
whats hypocritical of anything i stated?
Cause i discussed a tank developed / built/tested and advertised towards germany to go there.
But i am against a leopard or abrams to go to the UK that have absolutly no relation to it?
Once the Uk develops a leopard modificiation they have the whole right to get it.
But canada and australia are not subtrees. So you are wrong about calling me a hypocrit.
fkin liar lmfaooo
1 Like
i stated the whole time just add it to both nations, you were the ones fighting me on that
If a nation can get a tank over a gun and having it loaned for 3 weeks, that isn’t a good precedent to set… Especially if the tank is made for another nation
2 Likes
u are describing sweden there. You are aware of that right?
And unlike sweden, germany actualy like i already said was built/tested/advertised towads germany itself as well
official statement fromn the rheinmetall project developer, it was made for germany and france.
MGCS was made for France and Germany, not CR2 (130). If this was the case, MGCS would not be on a Leopard hull…
1 Like
mgcs doesnt exist yet. you are aware of that right?
Its a proof of concept and tech demonstrator of the viability and its potential towards germany and france