there will always be disputed tanks so I don’t think it’s a problem
ok so removal from the british one and adding it to the disputed, well the british will like that
I’m British, and I don’t mind, and I can name a fair few who’d agree
I put it under Britain because it’s on the chassis of a Challenger 2 LEP and not built for German service.
add the japanese 135mm btw
1 Like
I really like and want to see the japanese 135mm added, but my one concern is I can’t really find any info on it, just the info from the SCT-1 fourm suggestion which just amounts to it could achive 2000 m/s muzzle velocity
2 Likes
well it exists and japan gets nothing else
It was never mounted to a vehicle
You still are contradicting yourself.
Embt 140 is co developed by germany.
Aditionaly is a leo chassis as well
Neither is the challenger 130 built for the british service
Your thread is about discussion and implementation of the vehicles.
Not to mention them for germany would just be wrong
I already discussed putting certain vehicles in other areas, however I decided against it because it.
The tldr is that you dont wanna give germanys its vehicles.
While i can understand the challenger.
The same argument u are making does not make sense for the embt 140
The Challenger 2 was used as demonstrator in Germany to showcase the capabilities, the loaner vehicle was sent back to Britain.
The EMBT could go to both but I don’t want to copy and paste information across the post, I’m not ruling out that I will at some point but for now I want to finish what I have on the board, I chose France initially because the vehicle was showcased in France and has a French combat module.
Which is specialy stated to be done towards germany, as stated in the interview, add to that it being a rheinmetall vehicle not rbsl
I find the mention of it enough and then a short sentence like more info in the british/french section enough.
And again, you are completly contradicting yourself.
The challenger 130 was showcased in germany and has a german combat module.
You arent following a linear rule but are deciding it on the spot depending on your preference.
Embt 140 and challenger 130 are completly different situations , with your own decisions, would they be the same for both vehicles at least one of them would be in the german section.
The differenr treatment is just vexing me
Thats just another itteration of the embt series
No, EMBT is about the hull, idk what you are on, ASCALON gun is purely a KNDS France product, in this case it’s a french modification of a leo so Germany has 0 claim on it.
But yeah EMBT with ASCALON should be shared with both Germany and France.
I haven’t contradicted myself, seems like you don’t even know what that word means.
The Challenger 2 130 isn’t a entirely new vehicle nor does it have a new turret, the turret is just modified and fitted with a new cannon, my guess is that it’ll be treated like the Challenger 3, the EMBT has a entirely new turret notably known as the “Ascalon Demonstrator Turret” to fit the ASCALON 140.
So don’t worry I’ve thought about these things before adding them.
Ascalon gun is french yes.
But that tank is a french german project.
The embt isnt about the hull either.
Its the german french collaboration project to show of their work in progrese towards the mgcs.
The video you shared isnt specialy about the ascalon, but a new embt generation.
Every 2 years on eurosatory, france and germany show of the newest embt.
Which the clip you have send is
So for the challenger 130 the remodell of the turret is not enough.
But for the embt it is.
Gotcha, you are picking as yiu like it yourself
No what is showed is just a testbed because France has no suitable testbed for it, this is not an embt hull as far as people explained to me but a leo2a4, great if it was for some reason another embt hull but this does not look to be the case.