Thats whatbi found Challenger 3 MBT - Technical Data and Discussion - #566 by Battered_Walrus
But its nothing installed yet
The RWS is the same. For some reason I thought he was talking about the LWS
Probably mount’s like Ajax’s RWS where it replaces the commander’s sight.
It isn’t an issue for the T-55’s either as they get their first stage ammo from the hull storage. Despite being potentially more difficult to access.
2 Likes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCaBLjg6No0 4:58 the rear/side of the turret should be the ready racks and the hull is a secondary storage like in the leopards for example. no way the hulls is the first stage its much harder to reach.
1 Like
Yeah, I agree with you. The game models them this way though. So they either need to change the Challengers to how they should be with the back of the turret ammo as part of the first stage, or they need to be more consistent with what is considered first stage. It is the same in at least 3 of the T-55 variants.
1 Like
@Astro_Kayak
AFAIK irl loaders prefer hull rack as turret is quite cramped. Also the commander versions of T-54/55 reduce turret racks for installation of better radio, which makes reasonable that hull rack is become primary rack.
Ok, but if it is reasonable for the T-54/55 and T-62 variants why isn’t it the same for the Challengers? There are videos of Challenger loaders taking rounds from the rack at the back of the turret when firing.
Also the game doesn’t consider the command tanks as far as I am aware.
While it is technically a different tank the T-62 has the same thing where the hull rack is considered the ready rack in game, however the manual for the T-62 calls the two rounds in the turrent rack the ready rack.
My point is that if it is allowed for the T-54, T-55, T-62, and the Chieftains why is not the same for the Challengers? And while an arguement in the past could be made for the Challengers having a reduced ready rack as they had the fastest reload at their br this is no longer the case. And so the Challengers need to have their ready rack increased to be on par with the other tanks they are facing.
4 Likes
Look at who made the T 54/55 and T 62, Russia, look who made the Challenger 2, Britain. This is another simple case of Anti-Britain bias
The turret cheeks look way more angled now
1 Like
I made this regarding the future of the british tech tree, would be great to get some oppinions. Future of British Ground Top Tier
Yeah recharge of ready rack or number of 1st stage ammo should be increased. Reload should be brought down to the correct 3-4secs for ace crew as seen in this video
1 Like
I wonder if it the final version will get more turret armour like the model Grant Shapps showed off.
1 Like
have yall noticed how they already changed the shape of the cheeks from the p1/p2 to p3/p4? wonder what else they changed (from a full boxier cheek exterior to a more rounded on on tthe lower part of the lips
1 Like
also new driver periscope has a “thermal fusion” type camera which can overlay hotspots, pretty funky stuff for a driver, then imagine for gunner n commander
I just hope they cover more of the total frontal surface of the turret with armour instead of only 1/3 of the total frontal crosssection with armour and the rest is forehead
the cr3 turret doesnt have that top incline the cr2 does. we have allready seen the turret without the roof armour and its straight.
Spoiler
Wow, that looks so weird
oh it will, btw dont even worry about protection much, stuff like AMAP n current armor from RBSL can are about 1.5x-2.5x better than RHA for KE, when compared to usual dorchester its a huge improvement, then you also consider the new ufp addon plate/composite + new lfp composite block with close performance and we can guess the challenger 3 will have armor compared to the leopard 2a7v without any OES kits (outside of the lfp addon comp block)