I am very sure it an 2nd Gen but the rest I will do some research.
In that case Challenger 3 is also 3++ due bein based on Challenger 2.
You just disproved your point.
Well, the M1E3 is also based on the M1A2 abrams no?? So the US lied that it an 4th gen tank by your logic?
You’re the one who claims Leopard2A7V bein 3+ gen while in reality its 4th gen, just like challenger 3.
Dont know wha you thinking but think again.
then proof it…
In my understanding the Leo 2a7v is just an extremely superior version of the Leo 2A4.
Prove what? Chally 3 is based on Chally 2?
So does Challenger 3 smart kid.
Its based on Challenger 2 hull with significant upgrades.
Here, they already made a suggestion about Chally 3 with modular armor.
Now look at those pictures and claim that Chally 3 is entirely new tank, I dare you.
According to this source all leo 2 are consider an 3rd gen MBT.
https://zeszyty-naukowe.awl.edu.pl/article/161760/en#sec-654244
It said Challenger 3 is an 4th gen MBT too.
https://defence-blog.com/uk-delays-challenger-3-battle-tank-production
Basically everything. is the Su-57 a 4th-gen aircraft because it is base on crazy amount of upgrades from the older 4++ gen flankers?
I mean, do you really expect them to completely redesign every part of the tank?
The source you shared doesn’t even talk about 2A6/A6E models, let alone the 2A7V.
Lol.
3rd party web side claims Challenger 3 is 4th gen MBT, source: “trust me bro”.
Yeah man I’m totally sure Su-57 shares the same airframe,avionics,flight performance that Su-27 has.
Same goes for F-22 as well, bet its based on F-16 :))
So challenger 3, a tank based on Challenger 2 is 4th gen but 2A7V which shares hull design with 2A4 suddenly becomes 3rd gen?
Lmao even.
Exactly, so they have some similarity.
The Leo 2 has always been a 3rd-gen tank, all variants. If you want to compare that, you should be comparing the Leo 2 and Leo 3, not comparing the special upgrade variant of that specific tank. You shall compare the massive major upgrade of it…
that’s because it is
unlike Aircraft that’s no real clear cut-off by technological/avionics/weaponry leaps, MBT gens are mostly defined by service dates
It doesn’t need to, have you even read the entire thing?
So there’s no point in calling it a Challenger 3, is there? It’s a Challenger 2 if it’s classified as an 3rd gen
Su-57 has no similitary aside from having the same designation due bein related to same company.
Source: Trust me bro.
So if we just remove the 2A7V designation and slaps 3 at the end of Leopard 2 is it okay for you to call 4th gen? Cause thats what they did with Challenger 3.
Honestly the amount of cope I’m seeing right now is hilarious, I guess British mains can’t handle the truth due to their superiority complex.
There is a bunch of stuff that can, but it isn’t going to make a big difference in the game… it will only make a big difference in real life.
And who decides that, you or the so called “trust me source”?
Lmao.
That study is based on early leopards variants whil the main point is the Leopard2A5 that was recieved by Poland army.
It has nothing to do with mote advanced version of Leopard2’s.
At best there’s C4I integration (also introduced on some “3rd” gens), the Type 10 otherwise has no real leap over existing “3rd gen” features (Autoloader/Composite/CITV/FCS etc.)
and as you say it makes no difference in game
Where are you even getting that from?
Find atleast a source as long as it not wikipedia.
I don’t trust your source.
That the whole point. Are you serious? It the evolution. They kept upgrading until it was too far from the original tank then they declare it as an next gen MBT because fo how much more advance it is compare to it older ones. So your saying the Su-57 simply is an 4th gen fighter then.
Prove it…show the proper evidence. Don’t hide.
It will make no difference in the game unless Gaijin decides to take realism to another level and cause a ridiculous amount of extra bugs.
The military and the manufacture.
I mean, if you call all the sources fake, even the ones from the Ministry of Defence. We can wait 30 years and come back here, then I can probably prove even more evidence when the tank came to service.