Tank Chats #92 | Challenger 2: Part 2 | The Tank Museum
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 січ 2020
- Part 2 of a two-part episode on Challenger 2. As David Willey had so much to say about this British in-service vehicle, it has been split into two parts. The second part examines the Challenger 2 in service. David talks to soldiers currently serving on the Challenger 2, looks at where it has seen service and some of the tank's features. With thanks to the British Army for their assistance. Watch part 1 here: • Tank Chats #92 | Chall...
SUBSCRIBE to The Tank Museum UA-cam channel: ► / @thetankmuseum
Support the work of The Tank Museum on Patreon: ► / tankmuseum
Press the little bell above to enable NOTIFICATIONS so you don’t miss the latest Tank Museum videos.
Visit The Tank Museum SHOP: ►tankmuseumshop.org/
Follow The Tank Museum on FACEBOOK: ► / tankmuseum
Twitter: ► / tankmuseum
Instagram: ► / tankmuseum
Tiger Tank Blog: ► blog.tiger-tank.com/
Tank 100 First World War Centenary Blog: ► tank100.com/
The Tank Museum E-Newsletter sign-up: mailchi.mp/e6fae2ac8bee/newsl...
#tankmuseum #tanks #challenger2 #britisharmy #davidwilleytankchat #davidwilleychallenger2
Would be hilarious if you could arrange for a Challenger crew to operate a WW2 era British tank during one of the museum arena events, than interview them about the experience.
Oh that's a great idea man ... I hope the do it someday for tankfest ...
Vladimir Efimov I would assume many of the guys driving and working on them are x tankies
Oh I like this idea
Guy Martin did this with his WW1 mkv? Build . RTR were involved and crewed the tank also in bits of the show from memory :)
Would be cool. I do know that a lot of serving tankers already learn a lot about the past vehicles - and training right next to the museum is a perfect opportunity. So really, a lot of tankers already have a little bit of insight over the upgrades and progression over the century.
David Willey is an incredibly effective Tank Chat delivery platform. I hope he remains in service with the Tank Museum for many decades to come.
As long as he's ''serviced'' regularly, why not!
Great bit of kit 😘
Brilliant! Packed full of info. Willey has a very good delivery style. You don't drift off at any point and despite its length you're left feeling the chat has ended too early.
A coordinated staff effort that stands above all others, this is what makes being a Tank Museum Patreon Supporter a worthy cause.
Joe Budde cheers to you for that
Your comment appears to be hours before the upload. Do you have early access? If so, how might I get the same privilege?
@@hanzup4117 As stated I am a Patreon supporter of The Tank Museum, we get 24 hr advance on releases.
@@joebudde3302 Cheers :)
For a moment, I thought you were on about MoD procurement. ..
Functions of a British Tank Crew:
Gunner being on the correct Target.
Driver going in the right direction.
Operator having the right Ammo loaded and making Tea.
Priorities Lads, priorities.
MajesticDemonLord right tea selection critical as well, don’t want to confuse a Darjeeling with an Assam...could be catastrophic!
@@theoldplankwoodworks2415 doesn't that fall under 'having the right Ammo loaded'...
You forgot:
Tank Commander hitting the enemy with his sword
@@lancerd4934 For Russ! And the Allfather!
And Playing PlayStation
David Wiley is such a fountain of knowledge.
Font. Font of knowledge.
I like the fact that some dudes threw like 30 RPG rockets at one and it kept going. At some point, you have to think "this ain't working, mates."
In one incident, a Challenger 2 came under attack from infantry; all sights were damaged and the tank threw a track trying to turn out of trouble.
It was then hit by around 15 RPGS and a Milan anti-tank missle but none penetrated.
It only stopped being under fire when supporting friendly infantry arrived to rescue it.
No crew were injured and after having the track repaired and new sights fitted, the tank was back on operations about 6 hours later.
Insurgent: "By the almighty, I swear the next one WILL work, Fadhil!"
Challenger tank crew (Sipping tea): "Ten for the effort chaps, ten for the effort..."
If it makes them run away in fear and panic its always better than having to fight them.
It looks so good in that Berlin Brigade camo
This may be the Tank Museums Magnum Opus. (So far)
"the challenger two would normally have Dorchester armour added on in combat theatre"
ARE YOU LISTENING WAR THUNDER
Well now it got its Dorchester pack finally, second thing we need is one with the MEGATRON package and the L27A1 round
That addon weight would make the tank incapable of taking the key map points at the first stage of the fight. Nobody likes sluggish tanks.
@@Josh_21 russian devs for ya
@Mists & Shadows yeah and david just said that it can do up to 80 realistically on a road...
@@Max-xl9qv no change in engine power as there were upgrades to the CV12 when they added the armour
This should be seen by everyone who is interested in armoured warfare. 15:40 onwards has interviews with real modern tank crews, and is excellent.
Never crewed a chally that the A/C worked on 😂 but I loved serving on it
David is a national treasure. Any video with him in is bound to be great. The dude has so much awesome knowledge.
An impressive bit of kit indeed.
When I turn up with my Challenger II the locals just back off. ;-)
I been lucky enough to have a private tour of the museum with David Willey and his knowledge is amazing the way he explains items is so good. In person he is even better than on camera, these episodes are amazing. I would ask every one who watches these videos to support the tank museum so they can carry on the education they give to people. Awesome video as always!!!
David Willey has such great voice, I could listen to him all day. Hats off to you sir!
"Crew Temperature System". Because 'air conditioning' is just too sissy.
Lol
Wait till you hear about the US army's door glass regulator handle
Well it is called CTCS crew temperature control system
I wouldn't suggest using the air con. while on maneuvers in manatoba Canada during the late fall. Crew temp sys works well to call out both heat and cold.
Well that's also partly the way the British Army speaks. "Tool, fine adjustment, 14 bounds" is a sledgehammer.
Comment from a British tanker when I asked him which he would prefer - a Leopard or a Challie 2... "I'd rather live in a Leopard, but I'd rather fight in a Challenger." Says it all really.
Superb video. Thanks very much, David :) Think I'll go and buy that Challenger 2 Haynes manual from the museum now!
SaggyBallz46 someone sounds a little salty that Norway doesn’t even make its own tanks
@@MrJoVaWa poor chap, you didnt even understand the message of the comment, but hey keep living in that blind nation that abuses African society for gold and buys blood gold and diamonds. damn i thought you were from Switzerland sorry, but still my message stands
cant see the Netherlands doing anything beneficial for themselves without help from nato, dont be that guy ;)
Clearly a lie. Leopard 2 has no tea making facility.
I enjoyed my time in the REME as an A vehicle mechanic. Never got to work on the Challenger 2 though... worked with 2RTR and QRIH with their Challenger 1. My baby ARRV was still a Chieftain though. The Challenger I were a joy to work on but their gearbox was really pants. Oh and the regiments were fantastic too to work with.
Mr. Willey is an outstanding presenter 👍🏻 on Point, no digression and from start to finish absolutely intriguing!
Lucky enough to have been at ATDU with V5 and V8 and instrumental in getting V5 to the Tank Museum, great to see her again.
Amazing video, very nice to get the practical info from the crew as well and the empirical from you David. Nice job keep up the great work. Love these Tank Museum videos!
Nothing but admiration for the lads that crew these things. I had the opportunity to sit in one a good few (20?) years ago and had no idea that I was at all claustrophobic until I was in the gunner's chair tight up against the chest pad, with the commander's knees behind me and the lid shut.
Nice to see some CAF members working with the Brits
Very impressive. My cousin is a tank commander in the the US army. I love the Abrams but the challenger is very impressive I hope to see more
Love the interviews with the soldiers, thanks for doing those.
Excellent cheers, 2nd part well worth the wait!
Good lord. That tanks camo pattern... strap a double set of wings and give the crew silk scarves and it wouldn't look out of place in a Great War aerodrome!
Chase it’s the British urban camouflage system originally developed for use in Berlin during the Cold War
It looks great imo
This is for sure the most awesome tank chat that you have produced! Thanks a lot!
Another great video. The quality of Tank Museum content has been rapidly improving over the last years - this is the best so far.
Love the videos. The content is very educational. Thank you
Fantastic insight, thanks for this!
Very interesting. Great production. Amazing tank! thank you very much.
These two videos were absolutely brilliant. I really enjoyed them tremendously. Keep up the awesome work guys!
A really interesting one. I particularly liked hearing from the crew of one, even if there were doubtless things they weren't allowed to say for the broadcast version.
You had to love tvedu drill's in the PTT. Excellent bit of kit. Did us proud on the telic tours.
Great video, thank you thank museum. Also am loving that block 'dazzle' camo job, very cool indeed!
Nice crew interviews: I learned as a Driver drive, don't get lost. As a Gunner shoot, don't miss. As a Operator load, don't mess it up. As a Commander, stick your nose in the wind and enjoy the show !
Thanks...From Tank country here in Kentucky...!
Very surprising to hear about the commander's lack of night vision ( it wasn't clear whether it was in general, or just for the hunter-killer/designator mechanism ). Either way. Great video though, as always.
the commanders sight does have night vision
@@tacticalvelociraptor9458 It doesn't.
@@Panzerzwerg The Enforcer RWS mounted on Challenger 2 nowadays has a thermal sight
@@Panzerzwerg what do i know .. im just a challenger 2 crewman
@@tacticalvelociraptor9458 Please explain
So this is one of the most detailed description of challanger 2 and actually overall a tank...
Cheers!!
Fantastic, insight par excellence. Thanks for posting.
Being an old loader on an M1A1 Abrams the loading process on this tank always baffles my mind, just seems so clumsy. I do like the idea of the track tension being able to be adjusted by the driver though!
Another amazing video, thank you and keep up the great work
Great chat! Can't wait to get back to Bovington.
Excellently produced video 👏👏
Great video. Always my favourite military vehicle as a kid.
Thanks for another great upload.
As always - excellent video.
Just one small discrepancy - any tracked vehicle with the drive sprocket at the rear has a dead track ie the only part of the track under tension is between the road wheels and the sprocket, putting less load on idlers and top rollers ( if fitted ) One advantage is that if the track or any front suspension units are damaged the track can be shortened to bypass the damaged units. If the sprocket is at the front the track is live - even the track at the top is under tension.
The fact that the track bushes tend to make the track to curl up is reminiscent of the Roadless DG type of tracks.
A great video, as always!
I guess this tank was too modern for Mr Fletcher to be interested in, eh? :P
Best. Tank. Ever!
Very helpful video. Looking at the different colour schemes will be a great reference for my 1/35 model kit.
I just missed out on an excellent build on eBay D: I'm not talented enough to paint one myself :(
Hanz up I’ve also have the Challenger 1 and an Abrams to do at sometime.
@@mike.47 Give me one xD
Takom make great chieftain models, and those are the ones which originally had the fantastic blocky Berlin camo.
Still prefer Centurions though.
I need to learn how to paint them properly :)
Well done!
Imagine what British Armour designers could come up with if the MOD actually gave them proper funding.
Most likely bought Leopard 2s and made British upgrades, like the Swedes did with the STRV-122, but with more tea involved.
Seriously, we kept the stupid rifled gun because it was cheaper to keep using ammo stocks we had left over from Chieftain and Challenger 1, even when that meant we couldn't exchange ammo with literally every other NATO tank and their superior smoothbore weapons. We praised the Leopard 2 in trials for just about everything other than the armour, but this was a Leopard 2A4 with C-type composite arrays. We were not able to test the D-type arrays, and anyway, we found the M1A2 Abrams' armour slightly better than Challenger 2 anyway, and Leopard 2A5 had better armour than M1A2 when tested by Sweden, who STILL upgraded it. Result? If we'd had the money, and no political pressure, we'd have bought Leopard 2s and installed British designed armour arrays, likely also designed DU ammunition compatible with the gun, like the US did with M829. Done deal, would have been a far better tank.
ThePeople'sPanzer he already talked boy HESH in part 1
@@_tertle3892 I didn't mention HESH.
ThePeople'sPanzer I thought you might of been on about HESH as that was different to what everyone else was useing an need rifled barrels
@@_tertle3892 Well, it's relevant. The HESH and smoke rounds are the only ones that require rifling to operate. The sabot rounds actually don't spin, and use a rotating driving band to negate the effect of the rifling (spinning a fin stabilised sabot round worsens the accuracy).
However, as HESH is no longer a particularly effective round (the Russians even tested our rounds, captured from Iran, and found them no more effective than their 125mm fin stabilised HE) it has to be said that the downsides of a rifled gun are no longer worth retaining it. Those downsides are a loss of muzzle energy, restrictions on compatible ammunition types, reduced power of APFSDS rounds, and increased barrel wear (600 rounds vs 5000 for smoothbore).
This is why we are moving to the German smoothbore gun soon.
Perfekt👋 Love the TM, DW and Modern Tanks💙
Thanks👍
Beautiful tank
Brilliant video
Great cover Mr. Willey....A trip to BATUS.🥶...this summer.... would be super.
I always feel just a little bit creepy whenever the main gun of a tank is pointed directly into the camera.
I can't imagine what it would feel like looking down the barrel of one when its angry with me!
Then the breach block opens, and a hand pops out offering tea
Great video and a great tank. The latest upgrade is quite impressive. The gun remains for the present but it's bound to be upgraded in the future.
How many cups of tea per minute is the kettle rated for?
Do the crew have an option for battleshort to brew at a higher rate without running the risk of it shutting down?
10 cups a Minute of regular Tea,
7-8 cups a minute for Speciality Tea.
That's a pretty good throughput, much higher than I expected.
I do wonder about the rationing of tea, and the etiquette surrounding it...
If a tank was brewing tea for attached forces are they expected to supply their own, or does a tank have a significantly increased supply (due to its mechanized nature) with an expectation to share with those less fortunate?
Ommy Had the same BV in my old CV90. We drink coffee, not tea but I imagine the principle is much the same. If and when in cooperation with leg infantry (light infantry or recce elements) the vehicle provides everything edible be it food, hot water, coffee sticks or whatever. Seriously, they have to walk/ski.
@@903lew I find this completely unacceptable. You don't hand out tea and snacks just like you don't hand out ammunition or armor plates. Failure to carry vital supplies can be fatal in an engagement, and losing a tank ruins everyone's day. What if, for instance, the TC is having his afternoon tea and there are no more chocolate chip biscuits? Is he supposed to eat those horrendous things with peanuts on them and still be expected to perform well? Of course not. For the good of the war effort, the infantry must carry their own supplies.
Chally 2 is outstanding!
I don't know if it's the best, but it's the one I like the best.
Track tensioning information. The Chieftain thanks you for sharing, I'm sure.
Driver pushes button. Job done!
Makes great tea as well
Just excellent.
Part 3 will be new turret and L55 Smoothboore from Rheinmetall. The ex-BAE site in Telford is being prepped for the work right now.
Great video. As always.
I have fired a lot of HEP rounds in the M68 on an M48A5. I was not surprised when the US Army stopped using the round. A HEAT round has a lot higher hit rate and does a lot of explosive damage. My personal experience with HEP is it is more like lobbing a football. They go up and curve to the left. Unless you maintain a very high proficiency its very difficult to hit anything. I would rather give the same targets 2 HEAT rounds in the same time it takes to hit with a single HEP (HESH).
A very good impressive tank, I particularly like the thought for driver extraction and integration of a crew environmental unit with the NBC filtration and overpressure system. The maintenance of those can be really quite important!
That turret top looks pretty thick, good job. Even before Javelin, dropping heavy mortar bombs or howitzer shells on tanks has probably killed as many tanks as other tanks!
Very interesting!
I would like see a "TANK CHAT" on the Brazil upgraded US ARMY WALKER BULLDOG tank. I believe it was an M-41.
Thanks.
Marvellous insights all round, plus all the progressive & prospective Upgrades on the cards; what is slightly amusing here, your use of the word Ergonomics>>When I served briefly in BAOR, Chieftain/Challenger transition I used to say: "An ergonomics Inspector would condemn this!" Must get down to the Museum & Battle DAY treat!(12 Secs Turret spin WOW!)
Could you guys PLEASE give us more close up views of the vehicles?? I knew the Challenger 2 was an absolute monster and mad dog but seing some of the closer views that we get when the camera zooms closer to David´s face its mind blowing seing those plates, the details on the tank, the thickness in the some of the armor, its incredible and im now very interesting to see more footage in greater detail of these awesome tanks
The armour plate thickness you see is just a sort of shell that covers the real thick stuff that is Chobham armour.
@@paulbantick8266 Im aware but still impressive never the less
Right, David. Your opening with a straightforward request for subscribers has just earned you one. Now, let's see what this channel is like, um?
5:20 tank selfie!
Don't even need a selfie stick too. Its got one built in ...
Now _that_ made for an interesting tank chat👍👍
I especially liked to hear opinions and reports from the crew who are in service on the vehicle. And I really appreciate the increase in looks on technical details. You made an entire leap into the direction of future tank chats, I presume 😉
I still have three questions, though.
What is this Cobham armour? (Did I spell it right?) Is it some kind of fibre composite?
What is the way this slotted add-on armour works? How do you decide whether to use the slotted style or traditional side skirts?
@@komradearti9935 Chobham is believed to be a composite made of various layers including metals and ceramics but is not a type of NERA.
@@komradearti9935 NERA is an add on armour package like ERA designed to be added outside the vehicles normal armour to reduce the chance of some munitions penetrating. It is a "blow once and replace" hence why made in small blocks as it is sacrificial.
The "Chobhan" is the main armour, it is believed to be a sandwich of various materials which dissipate shockwaves (from HESH type weapons), the penetration by HEAT type weapons, while still giving protection against solid penetrator.
It does not blow out, it does not expand to increase the path, it works differently.
By your definition any composite armour is NERA. Just because it is layered does not mean they all have a "violent" reaction.
Chobham is passive, much like standard steel, just more effective against certain threats due to its makeup.
The UK even went to the trouble af adding ERA to the Chobham side armour at one point as it was being hit so many times and was expensive to replace (not the main armour but the additional add on).
@@komradearti9935 NERA was developed to be a safer to transport, safer to handle, less dangerous to troops near the vehicle add on armour that can do a similar job to ERA.
Due to the lack of explosive it can also be added to any armour no matter the thickness unlike ERA. It is also not susceptible to precursor charges as there is no explosive to detonate.
Some Leo 2 variants (The Leo 2 AV was a series of prototypes for US testing not a production vehicle) along with the Leclerc make extensive use of NERA (most Leo 2 A5 and above though use spaced armour of various designs).
Chobham type armour as used on Challenger and Abrahams is not a form of NERA, it is the base armour, a composite type (of a not publicly known just guessed arrangement), similar in idea to composites used by the Soviets/Russia, China, S Korea, India, Turkey - amongst others.
It is a one shot system as the NERA block "blows out" using the force of the HEAT round.
Sherman kind of had to be totally rebuilt over a few years and it needed it, but challenger 2 is kind of as good as you will get in a steel hull. They could be around for 50 years.
The only question I can see regarding the tank is "how many will we need?". That's a question that is almost impossible to answer too. For example since just after the beginning of WWII air superiority has been critical for winning a war. However SAM technology has gone from "can just about hit the side of a barn - from inside the barn" to being able to reach 20km altitude with relative ease. If this carries on then it is possible that mobile SAMs would deny airspace to either side. In that situation gaining and holding ground would be purely down to infantry and armour. If things go the other way IE aircraft dominating combat tanks will still be needed for holding ground but perhaps not so much for offensive action.
00:32 being enclosed in tonnes of armour, but yet painting your face with camo... is so stealthy!
except what if you need to stick your head out like the driver or the commander? what if you get hit and you need to leave the vehicle?...
@@yareyare_dechi Hi!
I will be glad to touch on both questions you have been kind enough to bring forth.
1. If a driver, or commander is sticking his head out in a combat situation, such as let's say urban fighting, or any other close quarter engagement, then he is definitely doing something wrong. I specifically spoke of close quarters for a reason I will touch on later on.
2. If a battle tank is hit (I'm assuming is what you mean), and the crew need to evacuate it, then it's only too obvious that they have already been spotted, and all hell will break loose on their position (small arms, artillery etc) regardless if the camouflaged crew has taken cover or not.
I have served in the armoured division of my country's armed forces, and I can assure you that a battle tank is so large that it can easily be spotted with naked eye, from kilometres away.
At distance, a little smudge of camo paint on one's face isn't concealing anything.
This is why I specifically mentioned close quarter engagement earlier. One has to be quite close to see a head protruding form a battle tank.
And as I said earlier, if the crew are sticking their heads out in a close quarters combat situation, then they are doing something very wrong.
It is a common practice for snipers to shoot at the tanks optics in order to "blind" the crew and force them to stick their heads out.
A trained tank crew is aware of this, and therefore keep their heads in, rendering any camo on their faces as useless.
It's protocol. The men in this video are sticking to protocol.
And this is what my comment is aiming at.
I have to agree with
Masada1911 this maybe the best Tank Chat so far. Didn't think they could improve on something that was brilliant to begin with but I have been proven wrong. Fascinating series.
The more i learn about challenger 2 the more im impressed. Put a rheinmetall smoothbore on it and i think it'd be the perfect package.
Erm... the armour needs changing, as do the electronic systems, optics, and engine/ powerpack. There's not actually a huge ammount of original Challenger 2 hardware worth keeping. The lessons, in usability, robustness, etc, are very important and should be retained, but the thing is so damn heavy for the actual protection levels it offers against modern ammo, that just changing the turret and gun will only be a temporary fix until we start considering a totally new chassis for the next generation.
Great.
Yet another interesting and entertaining tank chat! Would love to see the next one on M1 Abrams
They don't have any in the museum, so unfortunately that is unlikely unless someone brings one over for Tankfest.
@@Retrosicotte oh man I wish America will allow to give (1) M1 Abrams from their military graveyard to Tankfest.
There is one m1a1 on public display in a museum on the east coast. Nick Moran "the Cheiftan" did a good video on it a while back.
served on cheiftan, challanger1,challanger2
Imagine if Games Workshop based the next version of the Leman Russ on the Challenger 2.
It would be rad.
It would also make me collect guard again!
So british tankers are like a happy family with dad, mom and two kids :D
'We have the great advantage with Challenger 2'...we can nip across the road & borrow one from next door if ours breaks down ;)
Question for the Tank Museum staff:
In what way did the organization change in it's development from a national museum to a highly (In my opinion) international institute? Does it affect the way you receive your funding, what kind of opportunities did it give, and in what way did it change your obligations?
It's not possible to have a proper tank museum without having lots of international vehicles. There always have been loads at Bovington, even on the days when visitors were allowed to climb all over them.
(Sadly not on the staff!)
I'd love to see a side-by side comparison of the Leo2A5 and the Chal2R3 in a sense of what the two armies prioritized and improved, and especially which solutions they came to independently
Leopard 2A5 basically has the Challenger 2 beaten on all grounds other than post-penetration survivability to the hull. (If Leopard 2 is penetrated in the hull front, it will detonate ammo stored there and destroy the tank.)
This is somewhat mitigated by the rather strong armour packages that can be fitted to the Leopard's hull, as seen on the Leopard 2E, STRV-122, Leopard 2A6M, and A7V model, which are generally accepted as stronger than the Challenger 2's frontal hull protection.
Leopard 2A5 onwards have far stronger turrets than Challenger 2, especially against kinetic munitions. Challenger 2 has never had an armour upgrade to the turret front, which available data puts at between 580-650mm equivelant KE protection, behind both the M1A2 Abrams and the Leopard 2A5, with the A7 and STRV-122 models having even stronger turrets than that.
Leopard 2A5 and onward are more mobile, weighing less and with more engine power, greater torque at all engine speeds, and ensuing better mobility on all terrain, though Challenger isn't quite as far behind off-road, owing to the ride quality from the hydrogas suspension.
Firepower isn't much of a contest either. The German smooth-bore gun has access to a greater range of higher power munitions, and the fire control software has been updated more frequently and is more capable. The commander's and gunner's thermal sights are superior, and it has full day/night hunter-killer capability which Challenger 2 lacks.
Challenger 2 is superior if a shell penetrates the hull. Leopard 2 is superior at everything you want to do to prevent the enemy getting that shot in the first place (see the enemy first, shoot them first, kill them first, and if they shoot back, stop the round first.)
I think if you saw them side by side you'd realise the Leo 2 design prioritised mobility and the Challenger 2 protection. The Leopard 2's powerpack takes up half the tank and obviously had a significant affect on the rest of the design, squashing everything forward.
here are some tanks rolling around...hey look, cows!
According to Wikipedia, with all the add-on armour, the overall weight would be
75.0 tonnes (European) or 73.8 long tons (British) or 82.7 short tons (US)
Even heavier than a Tiger II.
For road and bridge classification we round up to nearest 10 tonne on MBT - when Chally 1 was introduced it was CL 70 for our bridges
'understand the issues....' :)
The Chally 2: tactical brew.
I wish you could park this tank next to other tanks like Abrams, Leo2, T-72 and get photos from all angles so we have a better idea of the size comparison. At least do it virtually
Can't help noticing how short the challenger crews are...is it a requirement when you sign up?
I remember that Challenger that was hammered with RPGS. I think it was stuck in a ditch and the enemy was swarming all around it. They shot out all the sights, so the crew just had to sit, pray and weight for relief. Challenger did her job that day!
Just wondering if there is any research into drone tanks?
Please do something like that for all the MBTs (at least the western tanks).
A bit late to the party, but a question about the Challenger’s combat record: A lot was said on the survivability of the Challenger, and a tally of “over 30” RPG hits in a single engagement was quoted. I’ve seen a report about 70 RPGs, but there doesn’t seem to be any official confirmation on this (just a BBC news report). Don’t suppose anyone has any proper military reporting on the subject?