@@NATOenthusiast Yes. Google MBT80 and check the references. The Haynes Challenger 2 manual is also a good source of info and anything in the Public Records Office relating to the development of C1 and C2 will highlight the same info.
@@johnrussell3755 depending on how you see it it's lighter without the add on armour but less protected without the add on armour... also the 120 rifled isn't well suited to shooting other tanks but it's mainly shooting HESH at building with russians in them...
@@trigger1471 really? Rifled guns will always be inferior to smoothbore when it comes to firing APSFDS (which I will refer to Dart rounds), Rifled guns induce a spin on the shells it fires, which is why the Challengers HESH shell remains accurate over longer distances, this however does not apply to the dart rounds the challenger fires, because the dart rounds are already stable in-flight and requires adding a spin band to the dart rounds casing to counteract the spin which only serves to slow down the dart round thus reducing its penetration. My comment was therefore “not the most stupid comment ever”. I rest my case.
в то время как да, «Челленджер» сейчас «устарел» и технически никогда не мог бороться с танками, на том же уровне, что и «Абрамс» или «Леопард», «Челленджер» мог бы легче убивать российскую пехоту из-за HESH-снаряда, который может пробить дыры в зданиях, а иногда и принести сказанное. здания вниз поверх русской пехоты.
Good catch.
I'd like to make a partition!
Give the Challenger 2 an 1500hp engine!
It's got one. The CV12 can run at 1500hp and always could. It was derated to 1200hp in order to save wear and tear on the packs and tracks.
@@thewomble1509 do you have a sauce for that?
I’d like to see it!
@@NATOenthusiast Yes. Google MBT80 and check the references. The Haynes Challenger 2 manual is also a good source of info and anything in the Public Records Office relating to the development of C1 and C2 will highlight the same info.
нато .сша милитаристы...
NATO tanks zooom wzoom xooom.
from what i see in this video...this tank is not suitable for Ukraine war..
It has a gun, they can definitely find some useful task for it....
@@Rigalatlon gun doesn't matter much if the thing is such heavy in the Ukrainian soil
@@johnrussell3755 depending on how you see it it's lighter without the add on armour but less protected without the add on armour...
also the 120 rifled isn't well suited to shooting other tanks but it's mainly shooting HESH at building with russians in them...
@@NATOenthusiast that comment about the gun was the most stupid comment ever
@@trigger1471 really? Rifled guns will always be inferior to smoothbore when it comes to firing APSFDS (which I will refer to Dart rounds), Rifled guns induce a spin on the shells it fires, which is why the Challengers HESH shell remains accurate over longer distances, this however does not apply to the dart rounds the challenger fires, because the dart rounds are already stable in-flight and requires adding a spin band to the dart rounds casing to counteract the spin which only serves to slow down the dart round thus reducing its penetration.
My comment was therefore “not the most stupid comment ever”.
I rest my case.
танк морально устарел да и для своего времени был говно
в то время как да, «Челленджер» сейчас «устарел» и технически никогда не мог бороться с танками, на том же уровне, что и «Абрамс» или «Леопард», «Челленджер» мог бы легче убивать российскую пехоту из-за HESH-снаряда, который может пробить дыры в зданиях, а иногда и принести сказанное. здания вниз поверх русской пехоты.