It wouldn’t surprise me, Germany did something similar with a Panzer 3 (more of a mobile machine gun nest than anything else)
but an Su-152… did they want to do it because there was a shortage of 152 ammo?
Ps. linked the suggestion for more information
Yet they are still there.
Point stands.
Considered to worse than all Chally 2’s except TES by most of the people.
Huh I guess countless NATO training results and real life conlflicts lies, oh wait they dont.
Both modern Abrams and Leopard2 models are superior than Challenger 2’s in terms of overall capabilities, deal with it.
lol, this claim alone proves that you never touched any Merkava in the first place.
Never thought I see day when a person who didn’t play single Merkava 4 claims he knows better than the person who plays it.
Best gun handling? Even more lmao.
Merkava 4 has 34 degree horizontal rotation and 15 degree elevation with best crew, it doesnt even come close to Leopard2 or T-90M/80BVM that offers 40/40.
Another false claim.
Its completely true because one has better coverage angles and can even stop best A2G munition and APFSDS rounds while other one works only against AGM munitions.
I prefer to have less charges that protects me from anything rather than having average APS system.
Only for those who has having issues with aiming.
I understood it, it seems you’re the one who didn’t.
So am I when it comes to your false claims and constant complains but here we are.
In this case of placements two piece ammunition is better because you cannot ignite the penetrator by simply shooting at it.
This just shows you also have no idea about how two piece ammunition works.
Was stating the facts, didn’t realized you cant even handle that, too bad I don’t care.
Just because something isn’t meta doesn’t mean its bad, learn the difference.
Also so many words for lame excuses.
Yeah, Finland was kinda pushed to the limits with everything.
I own a journal from a engineer who talks about how poor the conditions were for them and how absolutely worthless 90% of Soviet equipment was because it had just been through hell with little to no repairs.
Warped wheels cracked armor, engines missing cylinders or being too unreliable. Hell the Fins hated the BT’s so much the entire Christie Battalion was scrapped after 1 month.
No really time or resources to develop your own equipment, you gotta grab and go, weld and bolt on armor to light vehicles so they can fight much more dangerous and well armored vehicles.
KV-1s were almost always a priority but the Soviet AT guns captured from the Soviets were so poor against heavy armor that most often heavies needed to be knocked out via other heavy armor or prolong the encounter with the enemy to drain them and have the faster units leave the KV-1s behind.
Early factory models had 75mm plates on the face, this KV named Millionaire was attacked in September iirc and was essentially stuck after a track was broken and the vehicle left abandoned. The Fins repaired the track and tried towing it but after a few hours of nothing working they made the decision to deny recapture of the vehicle with an explosive charge set near the wheels on the hull.
Iirc yes, ammo was a big problem for the Fins but the ISU could also be used as a recovery vehicle
That is also a interesting tank, I hadn’t seen that before thank you
but not tech tree like the hornets or the adats
most people would be wrong, better firepower and better survivability with similar armor and the same in mostly everything else its not worse by any means
The challenger 2 won iron spear 2023 against both the abrams and leopard
The challenger 2 has the lowest loss rate out of the 3 in the current conflict there in
The challenger 1 scored the furthest tank on tank kill with challenger 2s reported to have scored multiple 5km+ shots in ukraine
the challenger 2 not only won iron spear it was crowned the best nato tank in the world in iron spear
just as an example
27 out of 31 abrams were lost in ukraine
41 out 80 leopard 2s were lost in ukraine
2 challengers out of 14 were lost in ukraine
i can look at the xray to get the info i need
so? faster than the challengers
no just in general
no im very aware of that and yes i do know how 2 piece ammo works im not an idiot like you keep implying, (the ammo placement is still worse)
your not stating facts your just being a moron
“learn the difference” after i just told you the challengers my favourite mbt to play? your a funny one
F-35 ground?
F-35A as ground force suggestion
Well spotted, was working on a ground vehicle at first but had problems with sources for it
why ground ?
because the BWP-2000 is an ifv
i mean why f35 in ground ?
I hope he’s doing well
He was working on BWP but changed it to F35 and forgot to change tag
oh that make sense.
Merkava doesn’t have better survivability, in fact is worse due to lacking spall liners in the first place.
It has objectively worse armor in general areas, I already proved you with screenshots, dont make more false claims.
And both Abrams and Leopards won countless awards as well, in fact both of them won more than Challengers 2 in general.
Which both of them delivered before the Chally 2 and used more extensive and aggressively under unexperienced crews.
Selective realism will not get you anywhere.
No wonder why you are so clueless, even with xray and armor protection section you still make false claims.
You claimed it has the best gun handling, not better than Chally2.
Stop trying to twist it.
Sorry but you have massive skill issue in this case.
I’m using my T-80UE-1 on top tier generally, a tank that has worse penetration than Chally2, yet I’m having no issues penetrating enemy tanks.
I guess learn to aim.
Press “X” to doubt.
Wohoooo,spicy.
I like it, sadly truth still stands.
Just because X vehicle is your favorite one doesn’t mean you know how to play and perform in it.
You still don’t understand the difference.
Anyway, you do you.
it has better ammo placement and crew placement. spall liners in the turret and ufp arent gonna do you much good
against main gun rounds sure but the merkavas much better against autocannon fire
moving the goalpost again
tell me what “false claims” ive made
we were comparing the merkava and challenger 2 why the hell would i be talking about anything else
not once did i quote i had an issue with it i just stated that its there
im not a great ground player but i know how to perform in a challenger i would say and i can see you havent played more than 100 matches in either 12.7 CR2
No ıt doesn’t, any penetration that can create enough spalling will detonate the ammo, you would’ve know this if you played with them but guess what? You didn’t.
So in terms placement its no better than Chally 2.
Crew placement is more less same, stop claiming absurd things.
It does, upon the breach penetration turret spall liner can catch spalling.
Same goes for ufp liner in case your ufp somewhat gets penetrated.
Jeez how clueless are you?
Much better against autocannons? You do realize merkava has huge hole on breach and autocannons can even penetrate engine section right? Wait of course you dont cause you never played them.
You’re then who tried to justify Challengers performance on Ukraine, very poor attempt I must say.
I think I explained them multiple times already, not my problem if you have comprehending issues and cant understand what I wrote.
Trying to cover your mistake I see, sadly that doesnt work like that.
You’re not a child and you should be able to express your intentions clearly.
By claiming “ was comparing merkava to challenger” while saying Merkava has the best gun handling isn’t good chief.
Remind me who claimed 16mm penetration makes significant differences or better yet who kept complaining about Challenger2’s firepower?
Yet my both Black Night and 2E has better stats than yours which proves my point even further.
Like i’ve said just because you like x vehicle and play with it a lot doesnt mean you perform good.
Anyway I think I’ve made my point clear so I’m gonna sleep now and end this conversation.
Until then.
