4th crew man is essential someone has to make the tea :-). if you ever get to the u.k make a visit to Bovington tank museum in dorset and don't forget we did invent the tank from little willie to this monster.

@californianreacts

Жыл бұрын

Ah yes of course! Silly me! Have to keep moral up after all haha. Tank museum in Bovington? Say no more, I'm looking it up!

The Abraham's MBT is awesome. Don't think for one moment we Brits don't appreciate American hardware. My favourite is the Stryker APc

@qasimmir7117

Жыл бұрын

You start your appreciation by pronouncing their tank's name correctly.

It's a fine tank, especially considering the government's lack of investment for upgrades for it. But no tank, not even this one, is 'indestructible.' It's a tank, not Captain Scarlett.

@rexex345

Ай бұрын

Until you realise challenger 2s have been caught in ambushes, without so much as scratched paint, or 1 which lost it's track to an IED and then spent 1 hour being pelted with RPGs only to have 0 significant damage. These things are snipers built like fortresses, and given the weapons they were being pelted with were the same as what they were originally built with in mind, they pretty much are indestructible to the standards of their time and even now l.

Tanks with a 3 man crew do away with the loader, and have an auto-loading system. This is what causes most of the Russian flying turret phenomenon. A hit to the turret will cook off all the shells that are stored around the turret ring ready for the auto-loader to load. In the Challenger, Ammunition is stored in bins at the back of the turret. The doors of the bins are the strongest part, so if the ammunition cooks off, all the energy exits rearwards via blow out panels. If you look at that Wiki page, it says the Abrams uses Chobham armour, this is the British armour developed for the Challenger 1. All US MBTs before the Abrams used the British L7 105mm main gun, the Abrams changed to the German Rheinmetall 120mm main gun. Both the US & UK have up-graded their Chobham armour, idk what the US calls theirs, but the UK up-grade used on Challenger 2 is called Dorchester.

@californianreacts

Жыл бұрын

Thank you Nick for this extra bit of information! I have to remember as well about the size of these tanks and how much they can do and store. Impressive!

@oco8783

Жыл бұрын

Autoloaders can have blowoff panels?

@tacfoley4443

11 ай бұрын

@@oco8783 Yup. In the case of russian tanks it takes the shape of the complete turret......

If you ever make it over to the uk you need to visit the Bovington tank museum , its a great place. Their anual tankfest event was released on KZread to watch the last couple of years

It's a fabulous, potentially war-winning MBT. It's just a pity they didn't build 2000 of them (instead of 450, of which only around 300 are serviceable today).

@suryanshsagar2677

9 ай бұрын

They're burning in ukraine 😂

Don't forget the most important piece of equipment fitted to the C2. The kettle for brewing tea!!

@petarnovakovich240

10 ай бұрын

Called "Ther Boiling Vessel".

Thanks for this review. My late father, who served as medic alongside the tank regiment during the Second World War, would no doubt have waxed lyrical about this new beast of armour. 🤔🤭

@californianreacts

Жыл бұрын

Appreciate the comment! I'll give my thanks to your father for serving, and as a medic. Rough stuff I'm sure from what I've heard. My grandparents were in the air force as a pilot and the other in the Navy, but in the pacific theater. That generation truly lives up to the name, "The Greatest Generation".

Challenger 2 burns on the fields in Ukraine like a box of matches 04/09/2023

Ukraine has already got challenger tanks and are being used on battlefield as we speak Its armour is classified and the challenger 2 is the only NATO tank with a rifled barrel and this because of one specific round it fires called a squashums which has depleted uranium in it and is used as an anti tank round

@Oxley016

Жыл бұрын

The special round you refer to that requires a rifled barrel is the High Explosive Squash Head (HESH) round which uses a plastic explosive tipped warhead. The round that uses the depleted uranium is a Armour Piercing Fin Stabilised Discarding Sabot (APFSDS) kinetic penetrator round which uses a solid rod of tungsten/depleted uranium as a super dense dart to pierce through armour of enemy tanks.

@californianreacts

Жыл бұрын

Have they been used in Ukraine yet do you know? Last I heard they were just delivered and training and such.

@kathnunan641

Жыл бұрын

@@californianreacts Challenger 2 were delivered to Ukraine about 4 to 6 weeks ago and Ukrainian military has said they are the battlefield but wont say where they are

@kiltedgod

Жыл бұрын

@@kathnunan641 Quite right, without Air Superiority, which Ukraine does not have, Tanks are a risk deploying, certainly offensively. Russia has recently had "technical issues" with it's spy satellites so they cannot find tanks at the moment except by CTR which is high risk.

@tclanjtopsom4846

Жыл бұрын

The rifled barrel is a flaw not a good thing. Abram's have been using depleted uranium shells for decades

As a UK veteran I am glad we have gave Ukraine our old challengers that aren't getting updated. We should be giving them everything they need and I can only hope it serves them well on the battlefield alongside the Leopards and Abrams. Slava Ukraini!

@californianreacts

Жыл бұрын

Agreed! Or else they seem to be "retired" forever until they become scrap. At least that's what happens to old military equipment here in the US. Might as well put them to good use, a good cause.

@samuel10125

Жыл бұрын

I'm not our military is already having serious problems in equipment and manpower the more we give Ukraine the less our military has.

@bigman23DOTS

Жыл бұрын

Along side 6 or so Bradley’s like unbeatable!!!

@damiensteiner9919

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your service. We have a Royal Marine Falklands vet in our apartment block. I make sure he is okay. Bad PTSD

Typically a tank has a Driver, Gunner, Loader and Commander, some have a 5th crew aswell. The reason why British tanks have a rifled barrel is a round called HESH, high-explosive squash head, which is a round for use on softer targets and bunkers. The HESH round will not work with the smooth bore gun on the Challenger 3. For anti tank rounds the british use Armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) but the rifled barrel doesn't used the standard NATO round, its need a special type cause this standard NATO fin-stabilized discarding sabot ammunition is less accurate when used in a rifled barrel, so the British have to use special ammunition to work with the rifling of the gun. The Chobham armour used on the Challenger and other NATO tanks has to be made as a slab due to its composite nature, that why the turrets on these tank are angular rather than curved

@californianreacts

Жыл бұрын

Thank you, Stu! I'm not sure why I was thinking a crew of 3 for a tank was the normal. I have to remember how large these tanks are, and how much they can store and do.

@stue2298

Жыл бұрын

@@californianreacts There are some modern tanks that have 3 crew like the chinese type 99 tank, mainly due to the use of autoloaders. Some older tanks only had 2 crew but the crew member that had to look out for dangers and targets, was also loading a firing the gun, so he had too many things to do at the same time to do them effectively.

That's an interesting thought (the Ukraine thing).

Ok, I will tell you chally 2's secret weapon, it's not the armour, it's not the crew, it's not the main gun or just how accurate that thing is, oh no none of these, it's the water boiler in the turret for making a brew, (slang for making tea) hehe

One factor both the UK with Challenger 2 and the US with Abrams, the biggest concern with sending large amounts to Ukraine, increases the odds of Russia getting their hands on one them and reverse engineering the armour and targeting technology.

@kizzyp2735

Жыл бұрын

Probably because we are now going to the Abrams X and Challenger 3 ... Abrams and Chally 2 going to Ukraine may be better than what the Russians have but still old tech.

@TheMrReee

Жыл бұрын

@@kizzyp2735 absolutely, it is old tech by western standards, but I don't think most people realise just how far behind Russian internal corruption has put them, for Russia, getting their hands on western armour technology is invaluable. Russia always had the numbers, but the western countries have always been ahead in technology.

Retiring tank's and other military equipment or giving it away to other nation's is a dumb decision we barely have enough to protect our own country never mind help other nation's

Glad that the UK stayed with the Challenger and not switched over to the Leopard. The Leopard is not as robust IMO.

It's not indestructible when I use it on Combat Mission Shock Force 2 😥

As a Brit I will be honest that the challenger 2 is an extremely capable tank however considering that it’s suffering from both age as well as budget cuts and limitations I personally believe that we should adopt the leopard 2 tank as a potential replacement, given that the challenger 2 again is a highly formidable and highly capable vehicle, it is starting to show its age, and with things like the 130 upgrade as well as trying to get the thing nato standard, shows it’s inherent flaws, where at the time where many countries were building their own vehicles and equipments to their own standards, the British were kind of stuck with the challenger2 since at the time britian mostly had a large stockpile of hesh ammunition and at the time the challenger 1 was originally meant to be sent to Iran but due to political reasons the British only ever sent one changer tank as a test bed, all the while being stuck with the aging chieftains which suffered from engine problems, as well as much like everyone else was stuck with a rifled gun, and so being the penny savers the British government typically is, went F it, we’ve got several dozen advanced tanks as well as its assembly lines and parts in production and so adopted what was supposed to be an export and kept it for themselves, thus in turn it was far cheaper to simply use a tank in which at the time had large surpluses of hesh rounds and as well as having a much smaller turret ring profile and turret, utilizing the famous two piece ammunition over the once piece ammunition favored by everyone else, by that time the German 120 mm cannon became the standard and britian was unable to adopt and adapt the challenger and challenger 2’s to fit and accept the much larger and more space consuming one piece 120mm round along with ripping out the guns of over four hundred tanks and replace them with the rhinemetal 120mm cannon as well as the ammunition for said gun, again much like the US 6.8 program meant to replace the 5.56 ammunition used by everyone in nato, was effectively a disaster and a complete failure and waste of time and money in which the 6.8 program was mostly dropped, simply because the logistics of reequipping over a thousand soldiers with new guns as well as spare parts and the required ammunition for them takes time and mostly money and the same reason why ripping out over four hundred tank guns in and of itself isn’t cheap to begin with, not to mention the subsequent replacement of said guns leaving the tanks out of commission for a considerable period of time, all the while ballistic components and computers have to be recalibrated and set to the correct angle because even the smallest deviation at the start could lead to massive changes the further a away a target is where two millimeters to the left could result in a mile and a half difference two miles away, not only that but the gun stabilizers and gyroscopes have to be redesigned and recalibrated to fit either a heavier or lighter gun, not to mention the small and confined space in which a tank is supposed to house and load said ammunition where, they did a test just to see what would happen and they were barely able to fit less than twenty rounds of ammunition into the storage locker in the turret and again as much as the challenger 2 is my personal favorite, either the British military either adopts a foreign tank namely the leopard 2 which would be cheaper, or alternatively upgrade all of the tanks to the new challenger 3 which again would be as expensive and untested but personally I’d go with the challenger 3

@terranaxiomuk

Жыл бұрын

Let's adopt a less capable tank to the same capability 😂 Go back to world of tanks.

@alanthomas2064

Жыл бұрын

Only a brit would run his only country down eh? I wonder if other countries have this?

@alanthomas2064

Жыл бұрын

A lot of words to run your own country down eh? Still: we here in the UK make an art of it eh?

@hadesdogs4366

Жыл бұрын

@@alanthomas2064 very few to be honest but t I can’t blame you, for thinking that, although to be fair, we’ve already gone through four prime ministers within less than two months, criminals run rampant umong our streets and our agriculture is polluting our waters, but hay America, like father like son 😂😂, ours was tea Americans is oil

@glastonbury4304

11 ай бұрын

Who won Iron Spear in 2023, the Challenger 2 , enough said...

When has the challenger 2 been in battle😂 I know is an antique but in the last 20 years say.😂

@ShanghaiRooster

Жыл бұрын

Iraq.

@craigbrigstock2695

Жыл бұрын

Iraq, Kosovo, Bosnia, afghanistan

Have you considered putting the video you're watching into a slightly smaller box with your facecam beside it so that they don't overlap? It's annoying to watch something that's partially obscured by something else.

The challenger 2 is a nasty bugger if your on the other end of its gun.

Leopard 2 and Puma…..

Destroyed by drivers who get them airborne and bend the idler arms lol

Abrams is a top tank,but without the Chobham armour the British gave to America it would be easily destroyed

Let's see how it performs in Ukraine. 👍

@californianreacts

Жыл бұрын

Yes indeed!

@lee11991964

Жыл бұрын

Don't forget this tank was especially designed during the cold war to face off against Soviet Armour, so by going out to Ukraine its going exactly where it was designed to fight.

@cleoarchwhiza9006

9 ай бұрын

They just used it, not good start though. I hope it does better next time.

This video did not age well 😂😂😂

Russian tanks have 3 since they have a auto loader vs Nato tanks have 4 with a 18 year old lad loader but the smelly french have 3 cause they run a auto loader.

the Challenger II tank has absolutely nothing more than the others, EXCEPT 11 tons of extra armor, 20 cm of armor left and right, that makes any tank the most indestructible in the world! therefore, for the English, stop incensing your tank, it is a very slow dinosaur, speed with these more than 73 tons = 56 km/h!

Зачем challenger 2 зеркала заднего вида? Чтобы лучше видеть поле боя!

@SL-ed6kq

10 ай бұрын

Надеюсь он горит хуже чем спичка, очень хочется увидеть его целым в танковом музее😂

4 crew because it doesn't use auto-loader.

@chrisyoung9653

10 ай бұрын

not sure if you know this but auto loaders are much slower. not many people realise this

@AethelwulfOfNordHymbraLand2333

8 ай бұрын

​@@chrisyoung9653No, they're not.

@chrisyoung9653

8 ай бұрын

@@AethelwulfOfNordHymbraLand2333 yes they are. It's not hard to check mate 😂

There is no doubt the 'retired' tanks will go to Ukraine..

Not a fan of the Challenger 3 due to the gun. The fact that yet again the Greed of the government, they place a foreign gun in a British legend j myself find disgraceful. Though hopes for a Challenger 4 in the far future having a British gun to reclaim its honour.

@qasimmir7117

Жыл бұрын

We don't have any industry to produce a tank gun. The German 120 smoothbore is all that's available. Even when we did have the industry to make tanks and tank guns, the British would always refrain from making new tank guns instead preferring to make 'new' guns out of older ones. This has been going on since forever. The last we made a properly new gun was for Chieftain in the 1960s, and before that was the 17 pounder that got turned into the 20 pounder and 105mm.

Its never fought equal opponent! Well it has now and got destroyed in ukraine.

React on incredible and emotional Quran recitation. Many people have reacted on that.

Britain better upgrade to the leopard 2.

@glastonbury4304

11 ай бұрын

Challenger 2 beat the Leopard in NATO's tank competition Iron Spear 2023, enough said , the Leopard is a paper tiger...

@Brookspirit

11 ай бұрын

As the Ukrainians how good they are. I'm not sure if they have any left.

Just been checking Ukrainian and Russian Telegram news feeds. Some burning overnight. Russia finally nailed some. Hopefully some video feeds coming soon! 😁😆😅❤