From what we’ve heard CR2s rotor is solid titanium with the gun breech sitting right behind it. The side wedges of the mantle appear to be protected by Chobham. Damaged one from Ukraine shows it has a similar setup to the turret face after the cosmetic skin got blown off. Hollow in war thunder of course but if the Russians think it’s a weak spot power to them lol.
Yet another article today stating the Challenger 3 has a more powerful engine.
I know its not a primary source, but it seems most new articles mention it.
depends on where its coming from, if army recognition has an earlier article saying that it has an improved engine and this is based on that, then nothing has changed
my beautiful beautiful babies, P3 and P4
lemme tell you a secret, most of the unofficial news articles build on each other. Because they dont have offical information or interviews they just copy paste each other like parrots.
Meaning that they just continously repeat the mistakes of each other as well
and the only proof it doesn’t was a now ex MP who was quite bad
So we will see when it is done
You could try asking RBSL, I doubt it’s classified.
Lets just say i have nothing on paper right now
Here is a question for this forum, does the CR3 TD’s configuration exist from what we currently know? I know with certain the one in game has it’s supposed to get the 1500hp engine and transmission, the LWS is supposed to come with with Trophy APS and the armour is worse than the CR2’s
well yes it was the first functional tech demonstrator shown of. but it realy mostly only was the implementation of the gun until that points
not proven, that is the whole point whey it doesnt have it
only saw the mock up of that until now, not sure when we will see a working one.
armor wise its hard to say since it propably is all classified and gajin just doesnt like that and as a result does itself hard to implement it.
That being said the finished versions at least should get their spall liners back
The question I want to know is will the new CR3 armour negate the need for the OES/TES armour packages to be added to the tank prior to deployment?
This would be the only justification not to uprate the power output for CR3.
If it will still be required to operate with TES/OES kits then it is nothing short of idioacy using the same underpowered power pack.
i mean, we are speaking about the UK, wouldnt be anything new. They went with slow tanks to begin with
Challenger was an extension of the Cheiftain ethos, to defend positions hull down.
Lessons and experiences in Iraq, Bosnia and Ukraine should all be taken to improve the next generation of UK tanks.
cost question, as stingy as UK currently is it might not matter what they learned
The question then becomes would a tanks chances to survive increase if it had that additional 200-300hp?
A 2000hp power pack wont outrun an FPV drone.
Doesn’t matter so long as its ‘good enough’ and that’s been the MoD’s mantra for the last 80 years.
That has to change though it’s not cost effective to lose a tank and crew for in the grand scheme a small increase in the programmes cost.
Not really, the UK invented the concept of manoeuvrability warfare with the Crusader-type tanks, it was also envisaged that the UK would go with further mobile tanks but Churchill had already been set up for production and that was then shelved.
Also doesn’t help that since chieftain the tanks have (in very simple terms) just had new armour and FCS put into the same basic concept of a vehicle. Nothing revolutionary there either. But what were you expecting when you compare the budgets being used for these vehicles.
They don’t cook off until the crew is out; ‘good enough’.
I don’t like it either but they haven’t changed their mind yet, and they won’t until there is a radical shift in thinking, and that’s not just limited to the MoD.
i was talking about the challenger being slow to begin with.
doesnt matter that Uk “invented” manoverable warfare as well when most of their stuff still is rather slow
And that continued on towards the future