feel free to provide evidence that’s what makes the conversation go foward if both parties can provide evidence there is more info to collect
I will not provide active combat footage as I assume it goes against the rules of the forum but I will however show 3 challengers on the front lines, I can assure you they’ve all seen combat though.
All three of these are different Challenger 2s as apparent from the differing camos and cope cage present, all three include videos one from a drone in which they can be seen combatting enemy tanks on the front lines. Again I will not provide the entire videos as they would violate multiple rules of the forums.
i dont have a way of knowing this is the front line if it was with gps image or something or a way of identiying where it is i could take it but i wont just take “they are in the frontlines” as source since its just pictures of the challengers somewhere, yeah its in ukraine its rather obvious but where?
Ive already said these are all screenshots taken within a video of an active war, the bottom image is taken directly after it fired upon an enemy position. its also apparent from the first 2 as one uses a cope cage which is a modification only used by Ukraine and the other was within the vicinity of the first.
This is still more compelling information than the “source” provided in which a challenger 1s armor was attempted to be upgraded back in the 90s, there is also a photo of a hit sustained by a challenger 2 from a t80, which I will attempt to find.
ik its ukraine its rather obvious by the modifications but the issue is that it can be either doing the bunker buster role atm and not fighting directly in the frontlines and just attacking left over positions like its common to do
also the source for the armor clearly states for the CR2 so idk what’s so wrong about it it is the most consistant info related to the CR2 atm
Im not going to lie to you I quite enjoy posting on the forums so this is all I can manage to show, anything more and I would probably get muted or banned. I simply showed these in order to prove that they were being used in combat and that there are videos of them availible.
then send me in dm’s the vid i dont have an issue with that and you wont get banned for it + my dm’s are always open
‘‘The challenger 2 is, from a protection point of view, comparable to an Abrams. That didn’t stop it getting knocked out in Ukraine, by actually some pretty limited, straightforward capabilities. Hit a mine and lost it’s track, as soon as it was static, laser guided artillery fire/lancets […]’’
-Jack Watling, RUSI
By that logic, the T-80UM2 is the most survivable tank in Ukraine, only a single one has been lost.
See the flaw in that reasoning? Creating a narrative based on excluding all relevant context is something anyone can do.
The obvious context we’re missing is:
A) How many Challenger 2’s are provided and operational to begin with? What is the ratio of operational Challenger 2’s compared to operational Leo 2’s and M1’s?
B) How many Challenger 2’s are engaged in front line combat, and for what period of time?
C) How many Challenger 2’s have sustained hits, and how many of those hits would’ve inflicted greater damage if it were sustained on a Leopard 2 or M1, if at all?
Based on the concrete data available to us thus far, a Challenger 2 was destroyed beyond repair by very basic means, there is no indication that a Challenger 2 is any more resillient than a Leopard 2 or M1. At least with the Leopard 2A6 we’ve seen a concrete case of one surviving a direct hit from a Russian attack helicopter -fired ATGM.
7 Likes
More than that. There is a video from the very early stages of the counter-offensive where two Leopard 2A6s had been hit by Kornet ATGMs, they shrugged them off and retreated under their own power.
Based on an analysis relased later by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, only one of them had suffered damage, and it was mostly to its electrical circuits.
3 Likes
Should it be like a event vehicle like the Maus tank where you still have to research it after you get it?
You don’t have to blame Gaijin for everything, I’m pretty sure it was the MoD who threatened severe action if they used any classified info to model the tank in game (as they should).
1 Like
I mean, we literally can and have good reason to. Look at the TES bug reports. It’s almost as if Gaijin refuse to see common sense in an attempt to avoid buffing it.
“Oh the NERA Blocks should be STANAG Level 5”
"They are.
“They’re not, a round under that spec goes through the block, goes through the backing plate, and only gets stopped by the hull”
“That’s STANAG Level 5”
“No it’s not, the Block has to resist the shell by itself”
“It does”
“No it does not, if you put three end to end and fire the round, it only gets stopped by the third one”
“We disagree, it meets STANAG Level 5”
“We also think the CE protection levels are wrong, the Blocks are described as being able to defend against modern threats”
“They are”
“They can barely stop an RPG-7 in game, nevermind, oh I don’t know, a modern weapon such as a Kornet”
“Well they’re good enough”
7 Likes
So they interpreted a combination of the ERA and the side armour being protected to stanag level 5, instead of the block alone being stanag 5. Which sucks but I kinda expect that from Gaijin.
I still think the vehicle will remain trash in the game unless someone can magically come up with documentation for a 2500+ horsepower engine though. It’s so slow in the test drive, I probably wouldn’t even use it for free. Legacy challengers barely feel fast enough as is
Obviously it should go to Britain. I don’t want my country’s stuff in the American tree. Mates already are too incompetent to use what they got from us, at least give it to people who know what they’re doing so we have half competent team mates.
1 Like
Exactly that, when it’s fairly obvious to any sane person that that cannot be the case. To add insult to injury the backing plate that the NERA/Composite is mounted to is modeled as Aluminium… when the only open source we have is that it is steel.
Which, of course, nerfs it ever so slightly.
1 Like
Considering Gaijin is giving the US the Skink now, I think it’s about time the British tree got the Aussie Abrams. I had a simple rule:
- Unique Commonwealth vehicles go to the British tree.
- Vehicles with no modifications go to their parent tree.
The US had nothing to do with the Skink, they didn’t even want it. So might as well give the British the Aussie Abrams because Gaijin just does whatever they want.
6 Likes
Well. Maybe we wouldn’t care about the commonwealth shit if the devs didn’t screw British peeps over.
Because the commonwealth means we would get to use vehicles that are correct/mostly correct, because the devs can get it right for everyone else (Well… More correct at least for some things).
Like. The Devs cannot add any AA with a gun to 7.7 without it getting +BRed. Same with the scout tanks; Fox Drama, which stops the Scimitar and other light tanks with “fast” firing guns. Chally 2… Yeah. Imma not talk about that thing.
So just asking for what other nations get means they cannot screw UK over… Besides BR. But they already do that enough anyway, more will be more noticeable and more peeps would speak up. Which is why they don’t want to add mainstays of the Commonwealth to the UK.
1 Like