Why the Challenger 130 should NOT go to Germany

  1. It’s a Challenger hull and a (albeit very modified) turret. Yes it has a German Gun and Autoloader but so did the Challenger 2 LEP was supposed to be the original upgrade before the rest of the Challenger 3 upgrades were used.
  2. Germany can get several modern and DOMESTIC “big gun” tanks. That being the KF51 and the Swiss Pz 87-140 WE. Britain has the Chieftain 130 or 140 and the Challenger. And I very much know every German main would prefer the KF51 over the Challenger 130.
10 Likes

Heaven help, this crazy idea didn’t really exist, did it?

2 Likes

only reason i think challenger 130 should not go to germany its cuz germany already has KF51 with a 130 mm gun and UK reallistically wouldnt get anything better over the challenger 2, anyways the turret its completely done from 0 based on the challenger 2 turret just with new armor, systems and gun of course together with a new turret drive this was for the challenger 2 LEP, the challenger 2 130mm its done completely by rheinmetall aswell based on their last Challenger 2 LEP on a hull that was given by BAE in case they broke anything for the LEP progamme and this led to the creation of the Challenger 130

4 Likes

So does the Vickers Mk.7 go to Germany now? Its a Leopard 2 hull with a new turret (as the LEP, which is also new and not just a modification of old Chally 2 turrets). Yes it has a British gun but so did previous German tanks.
It was even designed for export…

8 Likes

While I absolutely agree it really doesn’t need to go to Germany on the grounds, they have options of their own, specifically the KF-51, I do not exactly believe it is fair to say they shouldn’t be allowed get it, because quite frankly then Britan should have zero rights to having the Vickers mark 7 as well then since it was a Leopard 2 hull still with a British turret installed onto it but was made by a British company, because the Challenger 130 is literally that, a British hull with a Germany turret installed onto it which was made by a German company, which makes your whole complaining hilarious to me given the contradiction of that fact, last time I checked no one took issue with it the Vicker Mark7 being under Britian for using a German hull, and I doubt it would be any different if they did the same for the Challenger 130 under Germany (they would more likely complain about still Germany having other options which is valid).

Also, if you really want to state your disapproval of the idea, how about you actually put it under the right section of the forums because this is painful obvious this is response to the suggestion made for this exact vehicle for it being under Germany.

5 Likes

Completely unrelated note, but can we bar Russia from getting any other warships it “loaned” from us (I’m talking about you Royal Sovereign)

Given the thing was maintained so badly she basically instantly got sold for scrap when she returned to Britain, it would not be fair for what is an entirely British built design and serving British warship to go to a country that could not even maintain it.

5 Likes

So the Italian Leopard 40/70 must go to Germany and Sweden because of turret and hull.
And no the Vickers Mk 7 was also going to go to Germany, but they changed their minds.

1 Like

British hull. German MODIFIED British turret. German Gun and Autoloader. By all means then the Argentine F-16’s should come to us because it has British components in it. The A-7 Corsair should come to us because it has a British engine. The German Typhoon should come to us because we made most of the fuselage, the engines, and the radar. Vickers bought the Hull of the Leopard and put their own turret onto it.

No this is a response to the yapping on the Challenger 2 thread. Also as SMIN said it Will not go to Germany.

2 Likes

If you want you can have the Mk 7. Worse turret and gun. WITH the same reload. Go ahead. I’m not going to stop you. However it is a Vickers turret on a hull they bought.
And yes it was designed for export but let us count all the people that bought it… Let’s see we have Brazil. Who didn’t buy it and they instead built the turret to go in their own tank.

Well fair enough then, I haven’t bothered looking at that thread and when I first saw this post it was not long after someone commented on the suggestion for that particular vehicle. Though that does beg the question then why was a separate post needed to state what you did? I mean I might bother looking at the post for the Chally, but i cannot imagine a reason as to why a completely separate post is required.

Also I’m not here to argue, I agree the Chally 130 shouldn’t go to Germany but not on the grounds that because it has no right to go to Germany but they have little need for it and would be better if Britain got it. The only reason I responded is because the part of your reasoning you highlighted doesn’t make any sense without further explanation.

2 Likes

Two people were moaning on in the CR2 thread about how it should go to Germany. So I made this to move the complaining away from logical discussion.

Why Pz-87-140 is the ‘DOMESTIC’ tank? 140mm NPzK was made in swiss.

ill disagree here the turret was made from 0 but with the basis of the same structure to keep the armor effectivity integral, it had a lot of changes over the british turret of course, even janes review in the interview asked about this and the turret its completely new, it would be much more expensive to heavily modified an existing turret than to create a new one that can be created in mass and dosent require to unweld and weld new parts wich its obviously more expensive.

The TF41 was jointly developed by Allison and Rolls Royce, so it’s as much an American engine as a British engine.

Also, do you not see the irony of saying Britain should get the F16 because it uses some British components?

Why do the UK mains beg for any and all US vehicle they can?

There is ongoing debate over the Challenger 130, primarily driven by individuals with a history of leveraging Commonwealth ties or British connections to influence decisions. While the Commonwealth’s role is important, it shouldn’t be exploited to remove items from their appropriate tech trees (TTs). German players face double standards, as British players criticize them for requests like the Swiss F16 or the Swiss Hunter which btw wasnt asked by the German community. This inconsistency and bias are why the issue continues to be brought up, highlighting the perceived unfairness

I agree that the Challenger 130 should be added to the British tech tree, but not simply because it’s based on a Challenger hull. There are similar instances, like the Vickers Mk 7, which the German community did not complain about. The perspective should be more neutral, focusing on Britain’s future needs. Britain will require the Challenger 130 to stay competitive when vehicles like the KF51 and T14.

Although i appreciate Germany, i strive to remain neutral between both sides. If i was biased, my comments would be baseless rants. Before criticizing people for their requests, it’s important to consider their needs, their relationship with the nation, or the vehicle they are discussing. Decisions should be made neutrally, based on the situation, rather than reacting negatively to requests for subtrees or items from particular nations. The key is to stay calm and think things through without bias and this goes for anyone not only british or german or whoever.

His point flew over your head didn’t it

2 Likes

tbf he was using the same argument as him, he was getting quite aggresive in my opinion, the thing here is that it should be kept chill and not use double edged arguments when the same could be said with the vickers mk7, the challenger 130 should go to britain but not because its a challenger 2 hull, but because they will need it, and germany has an option already

Not at all. His examples were not great.

its different comparing some components to a whole new turret

Boy this is awkward.