"DU provides essential health risks, especially for crews of tanks hit by DU rounds." That has got to be one of the most ridiculous lines I have ever heard in a military documentary

@secret5070

3 күн бұрын

😂 yeah because you wouldn’t want to die 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

@ericgrace9995

3 күн бұрын

I dropped down to make this exact comment. I am both shaking my head at its stupidity while laughing.

@Michael_Brock

Күн бұрын

There are also massive cost implications. DU is essentially a worthless byproduct of Uranium fuel for power stations and A booms, that weapons manufacturers can obtain for zero or low cost. Tungsten is very expensive and china mines 85% of it, 68 thousand tons with Russia a distant second at 3 thousand 600 tons.

Күн бұрын

The problem with DU rounds is, that these toxic substances stay around after the war is over.

I actually saw two Challenger 3 tanks on trucks on the German Autobahn yesterday.

@RyanBrown-nx8dw

11 күн бұрын

I bet u feel proud

@Masterafro999

8 күн бұрын

​​@@RyanBrown-nx8dw I would.😂 Not many people have actually seen them with their own eyes...have you?

@RyanBrown-nx8dw

8 күн бұрын

@@Masterafro999 seen those other challenger and Abrams tanks get turned into banderite dust with shovel power u think ur shitty upgraded tank is gonna make a difference 🤣

@RyanBrown-nx8dw

8 күн бұрын

@@Masterafro999 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@RyanBrown-nx8dw

8 күн бұрын

@@Masterafro999 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

They're testing in Germany because Rheinmetall are the developer of the new turret and gun system, and it's pretty normal to test your own product at your own facilities ;)

@user-lo6hg3np8s

12 күн бұрын

почему в Украине испытания не проводя ?

@knowahnosenothing4862

12 күн бұрын

@@user-lo6hg3np8s If you look carefully, they are.

@klausberfelde-je2ye

11 күн бұрын

​@@user-lo6hg3np8s You need more or less a laboratory environment, where you can measure everything out... afterwards, I guess Ukraine could be a challenging environment to practice. But equipped with state-of-the-art technology, you ever have to face the possibility, that it can be captured by Russia. Having this said, it´s a decision you have to take. How much know how are you willing to offer to your enemy, in case of being captured. Opening them the ability for reverse engineering.

@user-lo6hg3np8s

11 күн бұрын

@@klausberfelde-je2ye воевать тоже в лабоатории планирует? реверс инженеринг? зачем? что там может быть секретного чего нет в России? термоядерный двигатель? :-) для музея сгодится.

@svenvanwier7196

11 күн бұрын

@@user-lo6hg3np8s Just like the T-14 has not been seen in Ukraine, or new Abrahams. Its mostly the munition they want to keep from Russia but I am not sure. As for testing, they require labs, they want to measure everything into the NM i guess.

Thought the whole point of smooth bore guns was greater muzzle velocity for kinetic energy rounds, but at the expense of range. Challenger 2 used rifled guns to enable the use of HESH ammunition , which works in a different way and doesn’t require the same velocity?

@stunick1573

11 күн бұрын

It is. Smooth bore beats rifled prove over the years. His comment about the rifled 125mm being better is a lie. Plus American's have the depleted uranium rounds is Britain want's them. This guy is way off with his biased opinions.

@td6460

6 күн бұрын

The HESH round works principally not by penetrating armor, but by causing a pressure shock inside the hull, called spalling, which in older generation Soviet armor would essentially turn the affected crew into a smoothie. That is not the case with more modern hull designs which incorporate special lining to prevent those tiny fragments from forming.

@wacojones8062

4 күн бұрын

@@td6460 If HESH hits a clean surface the spalling inside is huge. If it hits grating and similar blocks it can tear tracks apart, damage air intakes and filters. I Trained 19D scouts in the TOW system at Fort Knox there was a plate of Class A armor 4 inches thick that had been hit with a 75mm Recoilless rifle HEP projectile the spall was 2 inches thick the size of a very large serving platter for a large, cooked turkey. HESH/HEP is best used against lighter vehicles or the engine areas on modern tanks.

@andrewtadd4373

Күн бұрын

The C3 has been testing at ranges of 5000m, 2k beyond C2 and other current NATO tanks

@zhufortheimpaler4041

24 минут бұрын

@@andrewtadd4373 Leopard 2A6 has the same effective combat range since 2006 (up to 6000m with KE rounds). Challenger 2 gets Leopard 2´s gun etc.

The Challenger 3's has the cannon from the Leopard 2a7, so it is being tested in Germany

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

And sights and electronics and armor... Rheinmetall Challenger 3 lol.

@LarsPW

12 күн бұрын

Everybody seems to use the same cannon, US have the same in their Abrams.

@williamzk9083

12 күн бұрын

@@jonny2954 The composite Armour is British developed. Britain shared the technology with the USA and Germany.

@ataxpayer723

12 күн бұрын

The video clearly mentions that the UK test ranges are not certified for testing the specialized amo, hence the testing in Germany.

@williamzk9083

12 күн бұрын

@@ataxpayer723 with that certification it may be that any measurements are in accurate. They may also be safety issues.

The Uk still has over 250 challenger 2 in storage to use DP rounds

The Challenger 3 is a Challenger 2 with fresh lipstick and new eyelashes.

@fernandojohnsen7639

12 күн бұрын

Bro speak nonsense. He looks the Same but 80% difference

@badwolf66

11 күн бұрын

A T-90M is but a T-72BU.

@fernandojohnsen7639

11 күн бұрын

@@badwolf66 yeah theese days this is possible.

@ianmiles7916

7 күн бұрын

🙄

@garethrowlands

6 күн бұрын

And new eyes and a new gun.

The U.S Army's M1 Abrahams has the 120mm smoothbore and can fire the depleted uranium round so not sure whether you've got your facts quite right? in other words this round is already a standardized NATO Round! 🤔

@jackpowell9276

3 күн бұрын

My understanding was C2 used and loved HESH rounds an in asymetic warfare such as iraq these were fantastic and gave the challenger a real edge as DU sabots for peer tank penetration just weren't needed much. HESH rounds work best from a rifled barrel and there isn't a smoothbore equivalent.

@latscott

3 күн бұрын

@@jackpowell9276 I do agree High Explosive Squash Head (HESH) the mainstay of British Army Ammunition for decades and a highly effective 2 part ammunition, is the casualty in this switch from rifled to smoothbore not (DU) Depleted Uranium SABOT as it is already a standardized NATO 120mm smoothbore round. I'm not sure about Germany's stance on DU as they're a little bit more Politically Correct not wishing to anger the Green lobby on this type of issue, and therefore have most likely "well I know", decided to develop the Kenictic Tungsten SABOT round. Remember the UK will have to invest in buying a whole new arsenal/stockpile of ammunition costing Millions of Dollars or Euros for the new smoothbore 1 part round and this is why they're carrying out trials in Germany under Rheinmetall bequest regarding the Tungsten round. Just remember Uranium is actually a harder substance than Tungsten in the periodic table. So really this whole story is about what ammunition to buy in bulk nothing more. I also believe that the remaining 100 or so Challenger 2s which are destined to go into deep storage as a safeguard for any future hostility will have the ability to draw on the already substantial stockpile of the perfectly serviceable 120mm rifled round. Once this rifled ammunition is consumed on the battlefield there would be an opportunity to upgrade these Tanks to MK3 standard or an MK4 even, having the option to leapfrog as and when technology evolves thus maximising your options into the future. Similar upgrade programs like the extended life program on the CVRT family and the radical Scimitar MK1 to the later MK2 programs have been successful adaptations. Another example is the venerable 1960s Cold War era FV432 APC/AFV being upgraded and put back into service in Iraq and Afghanistan which proved to be another successful upgrade program turning the AFV chassis into the Bull Dog. This is my educated take on this whole interlinked story... 🤔

@andrewtadd4373

Күн бұрын

​@jackpowell9276 i believe the new smart rounds will fill the void left by hesh. They can be programmed for contact, delayed, and airburst detonation

Күн бұрын

The internal ballistics is standardised, not the rounds itself. So every user country can design or buy their own rounds. These rounds can be fired from every gun but the fire control system has to know the external ballistics of the round.

it is tested in Germany because the turret is build by Rheinmetall....the 120mm smoothbore gun is build by Rheinmetall too, thus blurring the differences between all NATO tanks, aka they are all on par with NATO-standards....

@toecutter6968

12 күн бұрын

The turret is built by Pearson engineering in the UK.

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

​@@toecutter6968 Yes, built. It was however designed by Rheinmetall.

@derdude9654

12 күн бұрын

Leo2A8UK😂

@larryperera8724

6 күн бұрын

NATO standards are not very effective against Russia 🇷🇺

@jonny2954

6 күн бұрын

@@larryperera8724 PZH 2000 and HIMARS 🗿

Looks like tanks need a rethink with drones having the upper hand without expensive and heavy protection for these beasts.

@theedude2207

4 күн бұрын

Anti-Drone Jamming Technology is advancing, Russia has been forced into that race, and you can see here on KZread some videos about how they are adapting and how they're developing an anti-drone unit to fit universally on all tanks. Although Drone Warfare is evolving as well to try to counter these developments as well as finding new uses for them. Russia has recently been using lots of manpower now again to try to advance, as loosing equipment to a drone is getting costly, hence why Russian deaths are climbing quickly again.

This tank looks actually nice looking 👌 who agrees?

@jonathanjacob5453

12 күн бұрын

All NATO’s stuff looks nice. It’s part of the marketing strategy.

@KrameNaj

12 күн бұрын

@@jonathanjacob5453 I like the design of it, I more like the T-90m Looks more cooler 👍👍

@RyanBrown-nx8dw

11 күн бұрын

​@@KrameNaj😂😂😂😂😂

@KrameNaj

11 күн бұрын

@@RyanBrown-nx8dw 😁

@frankleespeaking9519

9 күн бұрын

Yes. I was in us army, and always thought British tanks were the best looking

It's HESH that has been given up

A load of old bollocks once again spoken about this mbt, it was the hesh round we kept useing the rifled barrel for and chal 2 uses Dorchester armour and the chal 3 is going to use dorchester 2.0 increasing use of a different form of ceramic in it, be great if they got facts right on these

@BrianKnox-dd2pi

8 күн бұрын

yes indeed,,,,,,

@thewomble1509

5 күн бұрын

Talking of bolox, the armour is a new two type system called EPSOM-FARNHAM, not Dorchester.

I hope it can get out the factory doors. Unlike a Chally 1 I was asked to escort in 1989 from ROF Leeds to Bovvy. Doors open big rumbly tank pokes its nose out, loud sounds of mechanical un happiness. Sorry folks gearbox is buggered.

@Withnail1969

3 күн бұрын

Too heavy for the parts installed

@gaptaxi

3 күн бұрын

Challenger 1 was basically Chieftan with better turret armour, Challenger 2 is radically different, different engine and gearbox entirely, the L60 should never have been fitted to any tank, it is a constand rev marine or generator engine, one of the best, but when you add a gearbox that moves like a fiddlers elbow?

@Mk1Male

Күн бұрын

@@gaptaxi Chally 1 was nothing like a Chieftain. What are you smoking.

recoil is subtle

The Challenger 3 gets trialed and tested in germany, because the design team and parent company sits in germany and the UK does not have a relevant capability in that regard. The UK will only put together the delivered upgrade components in its Rheinmetall owned factory. The Challenger 2s DU Ammunition severely laggs behind NATO non DU Ammuniton like DM63 from germany. DM63 has about 25% higher penetration than the british L27a1 DU round.

looks like the challenger 3 gun has been downgraded to suit NATO ammunition. The Challenger 2 rifled barrel has long been known for its accuracy, with Ukraine tank crews boasting about 'their sniper tank', looks like a race to the bottom in the quest for 'standardization'..

@zhufortheimpaler4041

16 минут бұрын

thats a stupid british myth. To anyone who knows a little bit about tank gunnery, it is very clear that rifled guns are inferior to smoothbores. why? because the rifling makes the gas seal less tight, increases friction and requires a more complex sabot for APFSDS rounds, to neutralise the rifling, as rifling does work against APFSDS rounds not for them. The L30a1 120mm L/55 rifled of challenger 2 has 2km less effective range, 25% lower average penetration capability with comparable ammunition, lower barrel life and requires a more complex sabot than the RH120 L/55a1 smoothbore gun that Challenger 3 now gets.

The Challenger 3 is a beautiful Main Battle Tank~♥

@user-qv2pi7hk5c

13 күн бұрын

No different to 2 lol.

@williamzk9083

13 күн бұрын

@@user-qv2pi7hk5cbetter armour, seperate commander and gunner sights. Better optoelectronics, greatly improved APS new gun

@user-qv2pi7hk5c

13 күн бұрын

@@williamzk9083 ok can it stop a plane and what the plane uses ? NO . WE HAVE ZERO HELP HERE ..

@DaveHaze

13 күн бұрын

outdated like battleships in CV's era. Its the era of drones!

@williamzk9083

13 күн бұрын

@@DaveHaze Challenger III has APS. It can probably be tuned to deal with drones as well as missiles. Anti drone systems are coming,

Why don't we just outsource all of our defence procurement, Russia to provide our tanks, Italy to provide our submarines, whoops sorry surface Navy, France to provide the fastest armoured cars able to drive in reverse with an automatic white flag waving device. The list is endless !!

It needs 1650 hp not 1200

@jaymorris3468

9 күн бұрын

Challenger 2 and 3 is upgradeable to 1500 plus but the challenger 2 engine at the lower horsepower (1200 plus) has more torque by quite a bit than the later Abrams which has over 1500hp, its about torque not hp.

Well it's a good looking tank, but british army should get 500 tanks instead of 148 aswell as 1250 Boxer and 750 Ajax Ifv 80 M142 HIMARS and 120 Boxer RCH - 155 mm to be a Top tier fighting force.

Tungsten will never replace DU rounds, because it is thermodynamically inert. DU on the other hand emblazes and any spall ignites everything around it. For practical purposes it replicates a WP round, but able to penetrate heavy armor at the same time. The radiation exposure is a myth. You are going to kill them anyway, why do you care? At Fort Carson when this became an online scare screed, the US Army had to go find BU training rounds from artillery (much larger), and could not do so. The local Granite rocks had so much more radiation, that it completely masked any traces of the DU. That was a major embarrassment to the local Wokie and Enviro groups. Some actually cried, and went back to live amongst the granite radiating rocks, where they came from.

Gonna need some anti drone systems asap

the yellow reflective jacket , the great british institution

Germany does not use DU ammunition, thus they went to L55 gun to increase penetration of non-DU rounds. America still retains the L44 gun because it uses DU ammunition. So if UK chooses to do so it can purchase American made M829 series DU rounds.

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

Nah. Common myth made up by Abrams fanboys. DU was only better in the 80s when tungsten alloys weren't as advanced, and even then only against semi-infinite steel targets. Tungsten alloys perform equal, in some cases even better than DU against modern NERA arrays because of lower ductility. The US tested the L55 designated as M256E1 and found it to perform superior with tungsten and DU alloy penetrators. Problem was the Abrams stabiliser had issues with the heavier barrel and required a complete refit, which was deemed too expensive. In fact the US wanted to get rid of the M256 since the 90s, just look at the XM360E1. Wouldn't make sense to develop a new higher pressure tank gun if the current one is sufficient, huh? TL;DR: Abrams has erection problems with the longer barrel, so they had to stick with the short one. Meanwhile the Germans are ahead not one, but two generations with the L55A1 (L44

@levilastun829

12 күн бұрын

I read that a DU APFSDS round has its maximum penetration potential at a velocity of around 1500 to 1600 m/s. While a Tungsten alloy APFSDS round has its maximum potential at more than 1800 m/s. In addition using lower muzzle velocity rounds could have a slightly higher barrel life, in comparison to a higher velocity round.

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

@@levilastun829 No. DU rounds still increase penetration above 1600 m/s, just not to the degree they scale penetration up to 1600 m/s. A given projectile of the same weight and dimensions traveling at higher velocity will always have more kinetic energy and kinetic energy is directly related to penetration, regardless of material. Also performance at 1600 m/s is hardly an argument for a 1600 m/s muzzle velocity because when the projectile enters an enemy tank at 2000 meters it's actually closer to 1500 m/s (1480 m/s to be exact). Also higher velocity means less time traveled and flatter trajectory, meaning higher accuracy and hit probability. So ye, absolutely no reason to not go for higher velocity. Just Abrooms fanboys making things up to excuse the Army not upgunning the Abrams because expensive.

@verdebusterAP

12 күн бұрын

@@jonny2954 You are just a wealth of disinformation The L55 was not adopted as the US found by reworking the propellant of the M829, they could get the same performance without the need for expensive refit Secondly the XM360 was still highly experimental in the 90s and its Electrothermal-chemical (ETC) was not considered mature enough for use but most importantly it needs an autoloader which the Abrams didnt have

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

@@verdebusterAP No, you just blindly gobbled up the BS the fanboys made up in defense of the Abrams. If the L44 could've matched the L55 with just a new propellant the Germans would've done the same. They're not stupid. It's _their_ gun tube after all. The M829A3 introduction was literally delayed in 2003 following a _too hot_ propellant mix. L44A1 and L55A1 exist because L44 and L55 are at their pressure limit now. Other Abrooms myths: "M256 ackchyually has higher chamber pressure than the L44" No. Same gun tube. Recoil mechanism and mout is different, that's it. "M256/L44 ackchyually have higher chamber pressure than the L55 because it's shorter" Also no. Design requirement of the L55 was literally that it can sustain the same or higher chamber pressure than the L44 for ammunition commonality. "Germans only switched to the L55 because they have to offset performance of non-DU ammunition" This is the funniest one. DU apparently is the only material that has adiabatic shear, however the Americans _themselves_ created self sharpening tungsten alloys at the US Army Research Laboratory in the early 90s. Whoops. DM63 fired from a L55 doesen't just match a M829A3 fired from a L44. It _outperforms_ it. So either the Germans accidentally overshot the target of matching DU ammo, or they actually had a real reason to make sure they can penetrate modern Russian armor (perhaps look at a map and realize most Abrams tanks are in fact on the continent called "America" and most German tanks are less than 1000 km from the Russian border, makes sense eh?) Germans got a gun now that's both higher pressure and longer than the M256 and Abrooms fanboys still think it's only to offset the lack of DU penetrators. No. The Germans just have assessed Russian armor capabilities differently than the US and put more emphasis and per-vehicle funding on their armored corps. It's a little obvious once you see a Bradley parked next to a Puma in joint exercises. Also you are confusing the XM360 with the XM360E1. The XM360E1 was specifically designed for the Abrams. While the XM360 was developed to match the performance of the M256 on a lighter vehicle, the XM360E1 was ment to exceed the performance of the M256 on a heavy vehicle.

They have DU rounds for this gun already. Whole point being UK will be using the same Ammo and gun as the US and Germany. Meaning lower logistics for ammo supplies. Bur also spares, repairs and maintenance. There are modern rounds developed or in development that can match or out do DU rounds. Much cheaper, and much safer ( unless your getting hit with it)

@zhufortheimpaler4041

7 минут бұрын

there are already DU and non DU rounds n service for the 120mm for close to 20 years that match or outperform the british DU rounds. German DM63, in service since 2001, 25% higher performence than L26 and L27 DU rounds. US M829A3, the same.

Is this a paid advertisement?

Da ist den Briten zumindest äußerlich ein nettes Leopard II Plagiat gelungen !

@markhepworth

6 күн бұрын

Doesn’t look anything like the Leopard 🤦‍♂️🤷‍♂️😆

@pyramos5770

6 күн бұрын

@@markhepworth Ich weiß wie Du es meinst. Aber es ist so. Vor der Modernisierung mit den spitz zulaufenden Geschossabweisern am Turm sah der Leopard II genauso aus. Wie ein Zwilling. Dieses Modell ist auch noch in der Ukraine im Einsatz mit wenigen Exemplaren allerdings. Diese früheren Modelle hießen Leopard II A4. Schau ihn Dir an und Du wirst mir Recht geben :) Die ganze Bauweise mit den fast senkrecht stehenden Panzerplatten ist sehr deutsch. Aber es ehrt ja die Konstrukteure wenn andere Staaten diese Bauweise übernehmen ,finde ich.

Thanks but you did not explain the new Rheinmetal ammunition which i understand is revolutionary. Would be nice to get an expose on this

They need something like a 1600HP engine for adequate electrical power and a laser defense system on a crows or mk46 mount with a backup GAU19B or Dillon Aero 503D as part of a Trophy hybrid APS. They say DU rounds are 20% more penetration? but tungsten is a harder material. Maybe 20% more lethal post penetration due to pyrophoric effects? Someone please educate me. Does DU obtain higher velocities to achieve those numbers?

@kevinhunkin6364

5 күн бұрын

Already sorted with the engine

New game changer! New game changer.

So we are dropping depleted uranium (DU) armour piercing rounds for ammunition with less penetrating power (at least until they’ve figured how to increase the kinetic energy of tungsten rounds) because we are worried about the health of crews hit by DU rounds? So unless we have an incident of friendly fire, why are we worried about the health of a potential enemy aggressor? The argument against DU may be in a Parliamentary Report, but the reasoning doesn’t add up. Therefore, I wonder what the real reason is? It’s not about shortage of DU as apparently: “At the other end of the fuel cycle, when the uranium is taken out of reactors and reprocessed at Sellafield in Cumbria for every kilogram of plutonium produced there are 100 kilograms of spent uranium. There are at least 20,000 tonnes of DU in store at Sellafield alone.12 Jan 2001” Hmmm!?🤔

@gaptaxi

3 күн бұрын

Its not about the crews, it is about civilians living in the battle areas years later! Never watched Judge Deed(?) ?

The secret is that its just a challenger 2.

The commentators remarks about DU were rubbish. Even if it were true that DU is absorbed into the kidneys, that would be the last of my worries if in an FAV hit by a D U round.

It's Challenger 2 with couple upgrades.. Keep old faulty and bring couple new. There will be very few.... Because UK don't have $$$$$ to convert more.

You would assume the UK would just use US DU rounds. With the exception of length, the barrel is the same. The recoil system is different, between US and German guns. They would only need to qualify the targeting parameters.

@gerlachsieders4578

12 күн бұрын

yes its the 120mm smoothbore barrel by Rheinmetall

@morgensternc

11 күн бұрын

In comparison, the US ammunition is outdated. The L55 is not only longer, it works with higher preasures as well. So the penetration capability is +30% compared to the L44. In addition, the newest german ammo is very safe, it does not blow up if hit. But in this aspect, Challenger had / has the best protection of stored ammo of all NATO tanks.

@Masterafro999

8 күн бұрын

​​@@morgensternc has/had?! No. In what world?! How is the challengers ammunition placement safer than any old t-series tank?! It isn't. It's worse in fact. The CR2 has ammunition and charges all over the hull. It has no blowout panels and will throw its turret if anything explosive is hit. The CR3 will suffer the same fate with the exception of German insensitive powder loads. The US Abrams is currently the only MBT that stores all of its ammunition in the turret bustle...

When the fuck are they gonna fix the hull and power to weight ratio?

@thewomble1509

5 күн бұрын

Do you know what Torque is/does?

I do not get why this is called Challenger 3. It is the very same tank fitted with a new gun. If anything, this is Challenger 2.5 or Challenger 2 Evo or something but its clearly not a generation leap.

@davec5153

12 күн бұрын

It is, its only retained the hull shell, everything else is new and updated.

@Disbelief-

12 күн бұрын

New gun, better ammo, new sights,commander thermals, hunter-killer capabilities, new electronics, new armour, new fire control system and if I recall correctly some kind of battle management system. This is definitely a generational leap. Also if I recall correctly there was an emphasis on modularity in the design process to make upgrade packages easier to add.

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

Marketing stunt.

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

@@Disbelief- Compared to the Leopard 2A4 the Leopard 2A7 also has new sights, hunter-killer capability, new electronics, new armour, new fire control system. Doesen't make it a Leopard 3.

@levilastun829

12 күн бұрын

It has a completely different turret, which has a bustle ammo rack which is fitted with blowout panels. In addition the fire control system is much better.

No need for DU rounds..rapid firing guns with sensors are much important with advanced detection systems especially for drone attacks

@williamdodds1394

13 күн бұрын

knowing the brits a gpmg mount thats your drone lot.

@storyanaksekolah2

12 күн бұрын

they built it to fight dessert farmers 😂

@williamdodds1394

12 күн бұрын

@@storyanaksekolah2 You do talk aload of nonsense its a top rate tank the uk needs a new tank so does nato kf51 is a start.

@storyanaksekolah2

12 күн бұрын

@@williamdodds1394 you should learn how to writing first 😂

@williamdodds1394

12 күн бұрын

@@storyanaksekolah2 Learn how to writing first ? no such sentence you should learn how to communicate it might get home after a break down.

Didn't the Brirish close their "Tank Factory" test facility a few years ago following defense cuts? Anyway they would need to build and stock pile thousands of them if they are to ever take on the Russians.

@josue_kay

11 күн бұрын

Or run to the US for help, right after picking a fight with Russia. 😂

@gaptaxi

3 күн бұрын

It is the USA that starts Wars and then asks the Brits for help, then floods the EU and the UK with THEIR Refugees! @@josue_kay

You need to get straight to testing in Ukraine before you get your hopes too high.

@geofreyssenteza591

12 күн бұрын

It was immediately destroyed the moment it rolled on the battlefield in Ukraine. Performs so better in western media but on the Frontline it only compares to a Soviet T60 in battle realities

Looks like a tiger war 2 and watch channel- Rus is not Russia, Rus is the whole world

Testing in Germany is logical given the UK provides the chassis but the gun and turret are German. German testing grounds are very similar to East European prospective battle areas.

Just a thought you want to test your weapon in every possible clime and place so I wouldnt be surprised if ended up in Alaska for Cold weather testing

@ataxpayer723

12 күн бұрын

The video clearly mentions that the UK test ranges are not certified for testing the specialized amo, hence the testing in Germany.

And Germany has thousands of square miles of tank manoeuvring and firing ranges where the NIMBY neighbours don’t start ringing the police after 2 shots.

Still underpowered, should have switched to MTU motor.

@knowahnosenothing4862

12 күн бұрын

I heard they had a 1600hp version.

@thatonelocalauthority2809

5 күн бұрын

They’re gonna supercharge the engine to get about 1600 HP out of it.

No details on why they needed to get enhanced permission to use in the UK? 🤔

@davec5153

12 күн бұрын

Cheaper to do it in Germany as its their gun.

@hummingbird9149

12 күн бұрын

because there is none... they're testing in Germany because Rheinmetall are the developer of the new turret and gun system. Pretty normal to test your own product at your own facilities ;)

@DepakoteMeister

6 күн бұрын

Ranges have to be MOD cleared as suitable for up to a certain level of weapon power (e.g. a range might only be cleared for up to .50 BMG), probable that some of Chally 3 ammunition exceeds current range limits.

How does it suffet Russian lancet 3 drones and kornet missiles ?

Why not test it in a real battle scenario like in Ukraine After all, Britain supplied Ukraine with several Challenger two tanks Russian Kornet missile with tandem charged warheads quickly defeated the tank’s unprotected sections The result was Ukraine withdrew Abrams tanks from the front line action amid Russian barrage of drone attacks which left no ground safe for Tanks ... along with the British Challenger 2 and German-made Leopard 2 tanks The Challenger was not popular with Ukranian Tank Crews, the tank’s 1,200-horsepower engine is under-powered for a 71-ton vehicle. Challenger 2s often get bogged down in Ukraine’s soft soil and needed towing by other Challengers or engineering vehicles. Ukraine never got add-on armor on the sides of the hull and the lower frontal plate left the tanks vulnerable and the extra three tons of weight would make Ukrainian Challenger 2s even less mobile on soft ground The Russias took advantage of the weakness by deploying drones handheld anti-tank weapons, and heavier munitions that blasted right through the unprotected sections Challenger 2s amounted to an error in Ukraine’s order of battle. They barely are worth the effort to maintain and arm them. Oh, and to tow them when they get stuck. Upping the model designation number with a few modifications will not change that in Ukraine against Russia

@niweshlekhak9646

11 күн бұрын

Compared to Russian tanks Challenger are worth to keep.

Russia has 155mm Artillery Tanks. With High Explosive Guided Munitions.

@scottmorley7738

5 күн бұрын

I assume you are referring to the 152mm gun on the T-14. Considering Russia has less than 10 of them, I doubt anyone gives them a second thought. There's a reason Russia has lost more T-55's in Ukraine than T-14's. The T-55 actually works and doesn't break down on parade grounds unlike the T-14. And remember, the T-55 is 76 years old.

Sounds like depleted uranium rounds.

@williamzk9083

13 күн бұрын

It could be DU, it could be programable rounds. The latest Rh-120 has a programming breech for these

@markosborne53

12 күн бұрын

@@williamzk9083 sounds like your on the money. Smart munitions

Why not buy leopard 3 instead of making another expensive tank . Nato needs to standardise equipment not have every single country come up with a mbt

@niweshlekhak9646

11 күн бұрын

4 different countries making MBT creates competition, competition makes each other better.

@Ghosy01

11 күн бұрын

@@niweshlekhak9646 except no one buys challengers.

@niweshlekhak9646

10 күн бұрын

@@Ghosy01 Denmark has Challengers.

@emilsinclair4190

7 күн бұрын

​@@niweshlekhak9646I think they have the leo

@thatonelocalauthority2809

5 күн бұрын

Because every NATO nations has different needs, and no tank on earth is built to all those needs, especially across two continents. An example would be that, Italy has heavily mountainous terrain, and leopards would struggle in said terrain, hence why Italy place a focus on light tanks, as they are much faster and lighter. The UK is an island nation that’s also hilly, and so they need a tank purpose built for them. It’s also a matter of nationally security. Having your tanks come from another nation means that your security is literally in their control. And Britain is one of the world’s major powers lol, one of the highest GDPs, they will make their own vehicles. Sure this has a German gun, but so does the Abrams so.

The experience in Ukraine has caused all Western militaries to reevaluate tank design to defend against the drone threat.

A New Weapon System based on Theoretical predictions always seem to be The Silver Bullet. Only on The Battlefield will it's True Performance come to light. Till then, it remains A Paper Tiger.

It's a German gun in a German designed turret built by a German company - of course it will be tested in Germany.

The Challenger 3 is a resto-mod on an old Challenger 2 chassis. The gun is a smooth bore German weapon not as accurate as the gun it replaces, which can now no longer be built in the UK.

Maybe some form of autonomous vehicle could send D.U. rounds on your command! By using A crew less vehicle? You escape the radiation! That's more battle savvy*

Send this to Ukraine,to test

What is DU ammunition?

@magnem1043

12 күн бұрын

Depleted uranium, basically nuclear waste product which is harder then normal metal

@johngillespie9459

4 күн бұрын

Hard yes, but denser than almost all other metals, except perhaps some man made elements they can whip up in cyclotrons. Cross sectional density is vital to armor penetration.

@bradolsen8629

4 күн бұрын

Thanks for the info. I appreciate that.

Its a game changer, please send it to Ukraine 🇬🇧🇺🇸🤡

@vkham9944

10 күн бұрын

Zelensky comedian -- decision to support the Ukro-Nazi terrorist. Zelensky regime lead to a rose in tight wing extremism across Europe. 💀💀💀💀💀

A question for those in the know, surely if you're in this tank, any tank and its gets hit; even if you ok, you're deaf? and a deaf soldier, tank commander? not good? I really think we need to focus on drone tech these days, machines fighting machines.

@user-lo6hg3np8s

12 күн бұрын

есть поговорка "генералы живут прошлыми войнами" и ни кто не знает как будут воевать в следующей войне. наделаете кучу дронов, а противник уже что то придумал как их все уничтожить нажатием одной кнопки, импульс какой электромагнитный супермощный и т.д. чем дальше воевать будете?

@QAYWSXEDCCXYDSAEWQ

12 күн бұрын

@@user-lo6hg3np8s Unfortunately your EMP device will also disable all the electronics in your tank too; so it is of limited use really.

Nowhere near enough being upgraded

Challenger 3... Britain is upgrading the grand total of 147 tanks. That will certainly keep Putin awake at night.

@josue_kay

11 күн бұрын

🤣

Why didn’t they come to the United States for these tests? Strange very strange.

@BewareOfTheKraut

11 күн бұрын

Have a look at a map.

@scrubvision5652

8 күн бұрын

not very sharp one this fella 😂😂

The british are always late - for decades they are bragging the smoothbore is better. It will tanke years until the "new" tanks will be delivered. Now they change to NATO-Standard set by Rheinmetall. But Rheinmetall and KNDS already have developed a 130mm and 140mm canon for the next Tank. A tragic.

Took away our d u punch cut overall tank numbers where is this a win .

Ok, I get it, after the performance of the Challenger 2 at the Ukrainian war, in 2023-24, you're so over the Challenger 2, right?

Does the tank have air conditioning? Serious question. Crew comfort should be a priority if the tank is to operate in freezing cold (Siberia) or desert conditions. An air-con pump takes up little room and provides a world of comfort. It also removes condensation from the tank which is important for modern electronics. Does it have an active defence system to intercept modern anti-tank missiles such as the Javelin? We know that the Chinese and the Russians have access to such systems too or are you planning to build a small barn on top of the vehicle to combat top-down assault weapons? The vehicle may suffice against poorly equipped adversaries wielding an RPG but on a modern battlefield against a near-peer adversary such as China, how do you expect it to survive against modern anti-tank weapons because Ukraine is showing us that the tanks are being decimated.

@ataxpayer723

12 күн бұрын

The Challenger 3 will feature a number of significant upgrades over the Challenger 2, including: A new 120mm smoothbore gun that can fire the most advanced ammunition available. A new suite of sights providing tank commanders with enhanced day and night targeting abilities. A new armour solution that provides improved protection against a wider range of threats. A turret that can be fitted to the tanks of allies and global partners. Significantly improved mobility through an upgraded engine and new hydrogas suspension. An active protection system that can intercept incoming missiles and rockets The Rafael Trophy Active Protection System (APS) is an Israeli-made system that protects armored vehicles from rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) and anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs). It is the only fully-integrated, combat-proven APS in the world, and has been installed on Israeli Defense Forces' Merkava tanks since 2010. The Rafael Trophy APS is being integrated onto the Challenger 3 tank as part of a £20 million contract awarded by the UK Ministry of Defence in 2023. The integration is expected to be completed in 2027, when the Challenger 3 is scheduled to enter service with the British Army. The integration of the Trophy APS onto the Challenger 3 will significantly enhance the tank's survivability against rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank guided missiles. The Trophy APS will provide the Challenger 3 with a layer of protection that will allow it to operate in more hostile environments and against more sophisticated threats. The integration of the Trophy APS onto the Challenger 3 is a significant development for the British Army. It will provide the Army with a tank that is more survivable and better equipped to meet the challenges of modern warfare.

@knowahnosenothing4862

12 күн бұрын

The West has given away it's technological edge.

@mkiwinewzealandtravel2618

12 күн бұрын

@@ataxpayer723 Yes I have heard similar information for quite some time. The question is, can they defend against modern anti-tank missiles and mines? With the proliferation of drones, the tanks will face threats from the air, from man-portable systems, and from anti-tank weapons mounted on fast-moving lightly armoured vehicles. So the question remains, do they have active defence systems capable of defeating anti-tank missiles. A 120mm smoothbore gun and fancy optics won't save the tank from these weapons.

@joedoe7041

11 күн бұрын

@@ataxpayer723 but does it have air conditioning

@josue_kay

11 күн бұрын

China is not a "near-peer" military, nor is Russia; they're superior. They singlehandedly fight their own wars, unlike the 32 alliance of so-called best militaries.

5:15 min out of a total of 8:00 to actually start stating the differences btw the Ch2 & the CH3!!!!

Because we now have to rely on Germany to produce our MBTs

@RyanBrown-nx8dw

11 күн бұрын

Ya its really pathetic

@mrflibble9783

10 күн бұрын

Production is all UK based. Germans designed it. Pearson are building the turret, and the guns are built under license in the UK

Because Germans know how to build better tank.

Losing D.U. rounds has nothing to do with the switch to a smoothbore gun. That's all health and environment related. Smoothbore are in fact better for firing discarding sabot ammunition, like the current D.U. rounds. The round the Challenger can no longer use is the H.E.S.H or high explosive squash head round. That needs rifling to spin it for stable flight (accuracy). Sabot rounds like D.U. use fins for stabilisation, spin even works against this to some degree. British Army wanted to retain H.E.S.H for Challenger 2. As it's useful against light armour and soft targets behind cover. D.U rounds are only really useful against heavy armour.

@verdebusterAP

12 күн бұрын

Incorrect Depleted uranium is vastly superior to Tungsten however the companies that make depleted uranium are virtually non-existent now. Orbital ATK which makes the US made M829 series was brought by Northrup who announced in 2023 that they would no longer make depleted uranium rounds. Simply put, no one is making depleted uranium rounds any more as far as Western countries go.Long before Ukraine, the appearance of T-14 already questioned the existening capabilities 120mm ammunition that the time The US made the M829A4 in 2016 however as stated before, no one in the EU was making DU rounds and the UK' CHARM-3 hadnt upgraded since 1999 so there was doubts about its effectiveness as well the ability of tungsten to penetrate newer Russian armor The 130mm solves all problems , First Sabo rounds have 50 percent more kinetic energy which easily allow 130mm rounds to punch through any Russian armor The most important fact is that HEAT round in 130mm carries larger warhead which also equally as dangerous if not worse

@davidb1565

12 күн бұрын

@@verdebusterAP Who's incorrect about what?

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

@@verdebusterAP It's not vastly superior. It used to perform better than tungsten alloys in the 80s but only against semi-infinite steel targets. Against modern composite armor arrays tungsten alloys perform better because opf lower ductility.

@verdebusterAP

12 күн бұрын

@@jonny2954 Incorrect Depleted uranium principal advantages over tungsten is it naturally self sharpening and pyrophoric While Tungsten has near similar density , its lacks DU natural abilities Thats why the US uses DU liners in the Abrams Composite armor can blunt Tungsten rod rounds however DU rounds are much harder since their self sharpening allows them to retain their form DU is pyrophoric so even if the rod is stop, the metal will burn at a high temp which is bad for tanks for several reason You can line Tungsten with zirconium powder for incendiary effect but it burns at 3000-4000 F while DU burns at over 10,000 F Yes modern alloys are better than previous generations but they still lag behind DU

@jonny2954

12 күн бұрын

@@verdebusterAP Read my comment. Self-sharpening, that's why it performed better on semi-infinite steel targets early on. Modern NERA arrays don't care, the lower ductility of tungsten alloys help them perform better in that case. APFSDS after armor effects rely on penetrator fragmentation and spall. While both kinds of penetrators get very hot they're simply too small (especially after going through armor) to heat up anything around them to havy any effect. According to the US Army Research Laboratory, there is no difference in perforation of steel targets between DU and modern tungsten penetrators. The Americans say it _themselves_ dude. You kinda dense.

Can it fly ? If not we are in trouble

Cóż,na zachodzie zaczelismy robic biżuterię militarną. Przydalo by sie zacząć robic ją nie w manufakturze, a w fabryce z prawdziwego zdarzenia. .liczy sie tez ilosc i mozliwosc uzupelnien strat.

Bad they have the hatches open. Drones

The State of the Fart Challenger 3 MBT

Germany-💪

@hawadeemuhtar2754

13 күн бұрын

🤣🤣

@JDDC-tq7qm

11 күн бұрын

Losers lost 2 world wars😂😂

"Ukraine has made it clear; a bigger jump is needed. " ER.. HELLO.. this is a British tank and nothing to do with you, Zelensky. Just bugger off.

Challenger 3 brings Leopard 2 tech as an upgrade to the Challenger 2. There are reasons why the Challenger 2 never was a success in the international market. /s

@niweshlekhak9646

11 күн бұрын

Challenger 2 was sold to many middle eastern countries. Only reason Europe doesn’t buy it is because of UK leaving the EU, pressure from Germany.

@mrflibble9783

10 күн бұрын

Yes, timing mainly. The Leopard 2 hit the market as a number of nations were looking at upgrading. The challenger 2 came after that. But, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Velocity over range. It is a shame that we spent so much money on a tank that will need to have many new upgrades over the next 5 years. Europe will come together as an arms industry and start making the best the world has to offer. It's just a shame that it has been on account of the war in Ukraine.

It's too heavy

Easy! EVERYONE goes to Graf! (silly humans!)

O segredo é ser destruído, bando de mentirosos.

And que the keyboard tank experts...

Nonsense!What British dominance are you talking about!Challenger dominates Ukro garages,where it is hidden after being hymaliated on the front line!

@Da_Gr88

5 күн бұрын

A Challenger II was abandoned by its crew then Russia blew it up for a PR win, you absolute loser.

@windymiller6908

4 күн бұрын

Difficult to argue with that. I wonder if the MOD would still have gone ahead with modifying Chal 2 to 3, if it knew about the problems Chal 2 is having in Ukraine...notably the weight and underpowering of the thing. I would like to think not, but knowing the MOD...I wouldn't like to bet on it.................................

Very interesting details Who seriously gives a shit about EKR. It should 1 shot 1 kill If DUM/DUR is cheaper, faster kill ratio; more battlefield effective, then why the hell are we bothering with EKR/KER To satisfy who to get access to the Rhinemettal barrel? If that’s the politic requirement to satisfy the deal; it’s pathetic! And someone is getting a backhander somewhere 1 shot, 1 kill! Anything more than that means added risks to Challenger3 crews; because they can’t shoot and scoot! Rheinmetal L56A1 yes but with prerequisite that it’s DUR/DUM capable Yes there are risks but we’re talking in a war situation. Everyone knows that when DUM burns it gives off Ceasium 137! It worked in GW1&2 so why change it now

All this tech for 50$ FPV drone to take out ))

@davidmenjivar8890

13 күн бұрын

The War in Ukraine 🇺🇦 has changed the meaning of “Modern Warfare” Minefields have stopped Challenger 2 I do believe that a tank is useless on its own, so it will need lots of support from land and air Glory to Ukraine 🇺🇦 and Peace 🕊️

@JB-xj4rn

11 күн бұрын

@@davidmenjivar8890 screw ukraine

@hksp

11 күн бұрын

@@davidmenjivar8890ucrain can f off in pieces

@CasualYtUser

6 күн бұрын

Aps exist for a reason. Sadly Russia doesn't like to use them and uses shitty cope cages instead.

@mattwright2964

6 күн бұрын

Everything will be affected by drones but drones can be deployed on both sides and counter drone technology is a big area of growth. The existence of drones does not mean a country will not have any tanks. Tanks will soon have ways they can deploy various anti-drone measures.

There are only going to be 123 of them , ruskies have 12000 mbt!!

Tanks are no longer king ! the MOD should now be prioritising research and development into air/land/sea drones and anti-drone systems

Poms asking Germans to test its armaments. What is the worl coming to? Take your tanks to Ukraine for some realistic testing. Im sure the RF forces will give you an honest assessment!

Leo2A8UK 😂

Marvellous we keep telling everyone in the world what we've got and who made it,why not keep your mouths shut,wait for the battle field,its now redundant.

They are testung in germany because in the UK they are too busy training Ukranian and Israeli soldiers and tank operators. They are training both Jews and Nazis at the same time......... laughable.

Depleted uranium ammunition is useless against 500 dollar FPV drones arm with RPG Warhead😂 Today battlefield Tank vs Drone...!!!

@niweshlekhak9646

13 күн бұрын

it took 27 drones to damage 1 Challenger tank, you will just be using drones on tank while infantry will be flooding your city.

@Felipe-km8ut

13 күн бұрын

😂😂😂😂😂

@storyanaksekolah2

12 күн бұрын

​@@niweshlekhak9646really? all western tank had 0 kill in ukraine 😂

@user-lo6hg3np8s

12 күн бұрын

@@niweshlekhak9646 а он ланцет или краснополь пробывал?

The most stupid statement I've ever heard at 5:50.........

It's still far better than what russia has ever put on the battlefield and far more reliable then what russia has ever built

@chad_8313

12 күн бұрын

Neither tank can survive a drone hit. Russia has thousands of tanks. The UK has like 30. Who runs out first?

@kas52

12 күн бұрын

What did you inhale?

@user-lo6hg3np8s

12 күн бұрын

ржу немогу.

@EsromNhira-vw1vq

12 күн бұрын

Only a kids have a false impression that their father can kick anyone in the community, how can someone in his senses post such insanity as if Russia and, Britain were once at war and the British tanks wipes out all Russian tanks, you are delusional

@eyeseverywhere1599

11 күн бұрын

I'm doesnt matter how many tanks you have if the crew isn't properly trained as we have seen in the war with Ukraine. British tanks are built to last and do the job with a highly trained crew, and it is a British tank that holds the world record for the longest ranged tank on tank kill. The armour on a British tank is far superior, then the amour on a Russian tank. At least the Ukrainian tank crew walked way after a drone hit, but I can't say much for the Russian tanks

If you need a working Tank buy a Leopard or let it develop by Germans.😂

@mrflibble9783

10 күн бұрын

Challenger 3s new turret and gun are designed by Germans. Just build under license in the UK. So, should work fine.

Challenger 3 alias New Putin's matches !😂😂😂😂😂😂

We shouldnt waste any more money on these useless dinosaurs

Hhj