Challenger 2: The British Main Battle Tank
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 жов 2024
- British Challenger 2 main battle tanks could be heading to Ukraine to help its forces in their defence against Russia's invasion.
It would mean Russia would be fighting an undefeated platform - not once has the Challenger 2 been destroyed at the hands of an enemy.
The tank has a glistening service record in Bosnia, Kosovo and Iraq.
I'd rather be in Challenger 2 than any other tank
I rather be in almost any other modern tank than that piece of junk. Worst tank of NATO.
@@tomk3732 lol
@@Gary-bz1rf I actually know tanks very, very well - from specs of most WWII tanks to tanks of today. Almost encyclopedic know how. Clearly you don't know much about tanks.
@@Gary-bz1rf So what it was hit few times - it was never hit hard & we can say that T-72 was also hit many times and also carried on.
It is one of the worst tanks and by far worse "modernish" tank of NATO. It is crap for a lot of reasons - its main competitor for worst tank is Arjun from India. There are so many problems with this tank that one cannot even have a single video about it - you need like two.
UK should scrap all of them and buy something more modern & of decent design, like say the new German Panther tank or even some Leopards.
@@tomk3732 Welp at least it has a kettle inside
It has not been lost in combat because it has the best armour of any tank, and has the record of the longest tank on tank kill.
I mean a hit from the side with any modern APFSDS will render it’s crew into mincemeat.
@@KungFuWizardOfJesus Any tank would be severely crippled with an APFSDS round hitting clean through the side, however unlike War Thunder, APFSDS shatters and sometimes "glides" along plate lines making it not cleanly penetrate and spall inside the tank. This is most often seen on the front plate though.
Can you imagine that this tank has a poor performance during an exercise, but when this tank took on a real battle, it outclass everything else
Who the fk gave this guy his info 😂 challenger has had the most combat out of all modern tanks
The Challenger 2 was deployed in Basra in Iraq in 2003. 120 tanks went out. 120 came back, with one badly damaged by a blue on blue by another Challenger 2. Weird video.
Abrams fan boy, don't suggest to an American that something they haven't got may be better.
@@theubiquitouspotato the only relevant difference is the engine's though right?
@@highplainsdrifter842 technically the gun is different the challenger 2 was initially rifled and unstablised, and had pain in the arse ammo. I think the new one is " heavily inspired" by the abrams. They haven't got a single high ticket item that wasnt produced with a brit or including a British invention. So fair is fair.
@@theubiquitouspotato the Challenger 2 has always had a stabilised gun and sights. Even later Shermans had that...
No friendly fire, huh. Thought one was taken out by air with the crew killed.
Abraham's worse nightmare is FF. 7 destroyed, and two self sabotaged. I'm honestly surprised no I.E.D. has destroyed either of them. I heard they would find a bunch of 155mm shells together and I'm petty sure no tank could survive such a blast.
One single challenger in Iraq was hit by something like 7rpg rounds. This tank is designed to take on the Russian hordes and shoot and scoot fm 1 defensive position to another. Its the best tank in the world. Its a lot heavier than other tanks and its slower than some but its built to survive. It has outperformed Leopard and Abraham tanks in combat
The challenger 2 wasn't exposed to much combat? When in Iraq 1 got hit by 7 rpgs. They have been used in combat and they've taken direct hits and survived and functioned. If you're going to make videos do some research
Never fought agaisnt a powerful nation
@@elcormoran1 with over 500,000 troops and 2200 tanks at time of the invasion, that’s more than most European powers, I’d say they were sufficiently large enough an adversary 😂😂
It hasn't lost a single tank because of its armour more like. Used to be Chobham armour, now its Dorchester. An even better version of Chobham. Top secret and only shared with America on the Abrams if I remember right.
The Abrams has chobham….
@@cosmiccolonel the abrams HAD Chobham, but they switched to depleted uranium in the late 80s.this somehow made it lighter than Dorchester armour. Telling anyone with half a brain that Dorchester armour has depleted uranium in it.
Yeah mate they were in Iraq, my mate was in one that took basra that wasn't a danger free mission.
Blasting sandal Warriors
It is also far more reliable than the Abrams with better armour and none lost meanwhile the Abrams has been knocked out many times and breaks down in the desert because of its turbine engine which can't cope with sand and also has a shorter range than a Challenger 2.
WTF is this guy smoking. Other than the Abrams the Challenger 2 is the only NATO MBT to see front line service.
Leopard 2 has also seen combat, check your facts buddy.
@@luciussander8217very limited service in peacekeeping missions and limited offensive operations in Syria. Never been in a tank on tank engagement or part of a large battle group.
A very illogically constructed review
Glad one of my ex gfs dont have the chance to wreck one of those....there wouldn't be any cars left on the road
Armour is the thing I like about it but challenger 3 is impressive with a smooth bore cannon instead and advance electronics.
So your logic is. It's never been destroyed in combat. Cause they didn't build that many. Lol ok
What Challenger2 tank never lose one tank in combat in two Gulf Wars!
Title: never lost.
Not never lose.
Challenger 2. The volvo of the tank world.
We need to be building more, quickly.
Yeah, try doing some research instead of closet flag waving.
The tank thats never lost.
Not lose
It’s had more combat experience than the Leopard 2 …or the Leclerc….or the Merkava ….or the Korean Panther 2 tank ….
Is it "Challenges 2" with "low radiation" shells?
That abrams looks funny (jkjkjk)
The super-1 of tanks.
Very good
You mean the Ukrainian Challenger 2. I mean, they didn’t pay for any but it’s theirs now.
Yes it was Accident in Basra 2003. Loading Challenger 2 tank onto trailer!
Use them on the uk coast line /
deploy them on the Kent coast beaches, plenty of invaders there
Poor titular grammar.
i would rather take a javelin
There's a lot of cope in this video, not sure why. It's a very tough and capable tank, world class. One or a thousand, it helped destory the Republican Guard nad has destroyed many many other tanks, which couldn't take it out.
Easy when you pick your fights with much weaker militaries!!
This aid package that nato has atm is going to prove who has the best tank honestly I think the challenger and leopard will be equally matched while the custom amour on the Abrams without the uranium amour will be apart of the Ukrainian landscape they should not send any at all they have sent enough Bradleys wich can destroy any tanks that the Russians have in Ukraine
The tank never fought a real army
The Iraq army was the 4th biggest ground military at the point of the first golf war #notarealarmy
@@Arvivez yeah thats what the americans always said, but the truth is that irán was 4 biggest army in the middle east, foh
@@Arvivez And after US training were defeated by ISIS in 3 days during battle of Mosul - loosing 60 M1 Abrams tanks in the process!
@@elcormoran1 These people find everyway possible to cope. Do they think fighting Russia will be like Iraq?
0% failure in combat is 0%. Unlike the Abrams.
It has seen exactly the same combat levels as the Abrams and more than the Leopard.
The Challenger I was in Kuwait and cleared out 100s of Iraqi MBTs and armoured vehicles within 96 hours. The Abrams couldn't keep up.
the Challenger also has the longest combat kill @ 5.1 Kms.
Yanks can NEVER give any credit to anything British. Its pathetic.
It got penned by a RPG7 so
Worst tank in NATO. Totally obsolete. Mobility terrible by WWII standards. Main gun obsolete by 1970s. Only positive aspect is tea making equipment ;)
Here is a man who doesn’t understand situations. The Challenger 2 mobility is fine especially with its superior hydrogas suspension, it’s a little slower than Abrams and Leopard 2 but it isn’t a slow tank. The gun was more effective for what it was actually used for. Iraq proved that point.
@@qasimmir7117 Here is a man that thinks that mobility lower than T-34 is acceptable ;)
Its gun was obsolete by 1970s. Iraq does not prove anything as Iraqis lost 50 M1A1 tanks to pickups.
It will do well in Ukraine
The challenger 2 has a record not equalled and has been heavily used in combat, dont know where u get your info
Excuses excuses
this tank was destroy in Syria
Not
@@iceblue72wot manufacturer advertises it as the world's most reliable main battle tank. As of January 2008, two Challenger 2s have been damaged in combat, and one destroyed by another Challenger 2 in a friendly fire incident. Challenger 2. there is no such thing as best tanks because there will always will be anti-tank weapons and even better tanks coming out
@@basook6116
No one ever said this tank is invincible. Every tank can be destroyed but this tank is the best protected and none were destroyed by the enemy and definitely not in Syria.🤣
@@qasimmir7117 I agree with you 100% that no tanks are built to be indestructible. I do make mistake with tanks; Challenger 2 was destroyed during operations was by another in a friendly fire 2003 incident at Basra when the destroyed tank had its hatch open at the time of the incident. It has seen operational service in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Iraq. however, it was 2016 at least eight Leopard 2A4s were reportedly destroyed during a Turkish operation against Islamic State in Syria.
@@basook6116
Ok.
Nor it has lol as a western tank it’s had the second most exposure next to the Abrams.
In which the later has lost quite a lot of vehicles in combat.
No it isnt, off the top of my head french and korean tanks are way more expensive then british and american tanks, maybe not better but more pricey
This feels like a cope vid😂
Not seen much service?!? You kidding?
Слава Россия ☦️🇷🇺☦️
Lmfao
Challenger2 for the nazis. That a shame
This is a very weak video.
Bla bla bla
yes, they can lose by week enemy,but what will happend when they face an enemy on theirs level?
LOL...tanks are the Betamax of modern weapon systems.Good luck surviving on the new battlefield
Words that have been said multiple times through modern history, yet when push comes to shove, the tank somehow becomes relevant again.
@Qasim Mir Germany had tanks and lost, Egypt, Syria, Iraq... had tanks and lost, the US had tanks in Afghanistan and lost and Ukraine despite having tanks have lost.
it will burn
Yes, it will burn diesel and ammunition.
Abrams lead the way.
Thats why challenger 2 isnt destroyed yet
No mate british tanks fought independently on multiple occasions in iraq
@@Player-rr5gk abrams were in the front
They led the way and others were mopping up few remaining behind
@@Meteorknite
The Americans operated mostly in different areas than the British.
No big expiriens in serius fight sou we will see I houp it works 💪