FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

[military]

Certainly not as far as the turret is concerned. Turkey offers AMAP armour ( a German product) based rebuilds for German Leopards, so would be hard to believe that it would be the sole offer

I was talking about the base Leopard 2A7 from the original manufacturer, KMW. I agree there are various third party upgrades for sale from a variety of countries and companies and I don't know their specs. If buying new Leopard 2s, Britain would be buying directly from KMW and not these third parties.

I was also ignoring some anti-IED/mine type upgrades. From Wiki, "The Leopard 2A6M is a version of the 2A6 with enhanced mine protection under the chassis, and internal enhancements to improve crew survivability." From another site, "..with the Leopard 2A7 Tank that is in service as of December 2014. This vehicle features new sighting equipment and the M armor package from the Leopard 2A6M."

So it seems like the Leopard 2A6M and 2A7 are better protected than the 2A5 and 2A6 against mines but probably not against Russian APFSDS rounds.

There is a confusing 2A7+ version that Wiki says Qatar and Hungary ordered. "The tank's protection has been increased by modular armour; the frontal protection has been improved with a dual-kit on the turret and hull front, while 360° protection against RPGs and mine protection increase the survivability of the tank in urban operations.[152] The modular armour's system components were first used by Canada in Afghanistan." This sounds like the 2A6M armour, particularly the reference to Canada, although who knows.

There is also a 2A7v upgrade which includes "a new armored modular system for the upper front glacis plate of the hull and a more powerful Auxiliary Power Unit of the current APU used on the A7 model." So I guess there is an armour upgrade to the hull.

I didn't find any references to turret armour upgrades against rival tanks.

[military]

What makes you think it's not upgradable?

Anything is upgradeable with more money but the Challenger 2 would even more of a niche fleet and the upgrade would not be as off the shelf as using a more popular foreign tank.

This is not true..

I posted on Leopard 2A7 armour just now.

There's already two separate APS programs in the UK regarding "main" vehicles. The only reason it hasn't been declared on which is the Army barely even knew what vehicles it'll definitely have.

Didn't know that; thanks.

A core part of the Government is in demanding local industry, whether it's of a worthwhile amount or not. That would likely delay the program somewhat.

Any program will be delayed for local industry. It is not like the RBSL plant that will make Boxers can turn out tanks without modifications.

5. The new Abrams SEP v3 may be the only western tank that has armour comparable to the top Russian tanks. It would likely be pricy for the UK to acquire

What do you mean by "Top Russian tanks?"

T-72B3, T-90M and T-14. Obviously the protection levels are T-14 > T-90M > T-72B3.

Also note that armour vs armour isn't a matter of "who has the most mm's", it's far more complex than that and often comes down to a better question of "can your armour resist their firepower while your firepower outmatches their armour?" which is a totally different set of affairs.

Russian tanks have good firepower too so this isn't helping the NATO case.

[ArmChairCivvy]

By the way, you know what happened to tank nut Dave

No, what then?

At least the site is still there. Merkava.net disappeared as soon as the tank got export clearance (the blogger worked in the factory... so contradicting info vs. salesman blurb became a risk).

[ArmChairCivvy]

I didn't find any references to turret armour upgrades

Started long ago " by 1992 all other variants had been modified to the A4 variant, totalling 2125 Leopard 2 A4’s in the West German Army. The A4 had an improved turret with flat titanium/tungsten armour, an automated fire and explosion suppression system" and has got substantially better since.
- when you look at the numbers, no wonder there's an 'upgrades industry' sprouting up here and there: Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey
- which also explains the competitive prices

[Ron5]

By the way, you know what happened to tank nut Dave

No, what then?

At least the site is still there. Merkava.net disappeared as soon as the tank got export clearance (the blogger worked in the factory... so contradicting info vs. salesman blurb became a risk).

Got visited by the grey men in suits for revealing info given in confidence. Access revoked for his sources.

[military]

Started long ago " by 1992 all other variants had been modified to the A4 variant, totalling 2125 Leopard 2 A4’s in the West German Army. The A4 had an improved turret with flat titanium/tungsten armour, an automated fire and explosion suppression system" and has got substantially better since.

My original claim was that the Leopard 2's armour hadn't been significantly updated since 1995's Leopard 2A5, which was fielded before Challenger 2 was itself fielded in 1998. I then revised this to say that the focus of publicly disclosed armour upgrades by the main manufacturer KMW since 1995 has been to protect against IEDs and mines, not Russian tanks. Russian tanks that have been upgraded or newly constructed in the last ten years are likely significantly more armoured in terms of protection against APFSDS.

For what's it worth, this video by a Russian-accented speaker indicates that the Leopard 2A7v front hull armour is rated 700 mm and the front of the turret is rated 820 mm. Another video from the same source says that Russian APFSDS for the T-72 and T-90 now is at 740 mm of penetration against 90 degree surface. His listed sources tend to be Russian language blogs.



Here's another video on Leopard 2A7v from the same YouTuber. It does indicate some armour irmprovements.

[ArmChairCivvy]

armour hadn't been significantly updated since 1995's Leopard 2A5, which was fielded before Challenger 2 was itself fielded in 1998.

There are so many sources to the contrary... just saying

[RetroSicotte]

That youtuber is notoriously inaccurate with their data and has been called out several times in the past. No better than Matsimus.

[RunningStrong]

That youtuber is notoriously inaccurate with their data and has been called out several times in the past. No better than Matsimus.

I'm pretty sure Matsimus just reads Wikipedia pages!

[military]

That youtuber is notoriously inaccurate with their data and has been called out several times in the past. No better than Matsimus.

I am sure every source has been wrong before. What specifically was the YouTuber RedAlert wrong about?

[RetroSicotte]

You'd need a list longer than the character limit, lol.

But in a nutshell, he reads vague "guesstimates" and then reports them as "It is". Almost all his videos' sources rely on information gleaned from often vague or nebulous sources, but repeated via his videos as "hard facts" without discussing exactly what his sources are. For example, many of his stuff related to British things is sourced out of the Chieftain 5/2 composite documents that predated Burlington by over a decade.

[military]

Because I brought up Leopard 2's armour before, this thread on another discussion forum is a long and detailed discussion of Leopard 2's armour. I would say 2/3s of the discussion is about Cold War era tanks. There are few comparisons to other modern tanks. It does seem like the new German 2A7v model has extra armour compared to the 2A7/2A6/2A5. The Qatari 2A7+ variant might have more armour than the German 2A7v. With several companies other than KMW (like Rheinmetall) offering upgrades, the topic of Leopard 2 armour is complicated.

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic ... -2-thread/

[ArmChairCivvy]

Has this view (shows more than the normal frontal 'shots') been posted here yet?
https://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/med ... gerung.jpg
LEP + enhanced fighting value in one package

[RetroSicotte]

That was the prospective image ahead of the physical prototypes, what became them.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Did they turn out different?

[RetroSicotte]

Broad strokes are all the same really. Only main difference is we haven't seen the TES kit on the prototype yet, but thats a known quantity that it fits on the hull, so little reason to test it for now I guess. (Until ATDU gets ahold of the new one.)

[inch]

With all this challenger tank poss upgrade programme and/or cuts to the fleet all trying to combat /match the Russian armata tank costing £2.9 million each , wouldn't it be cheaper just to buy a load of them saving loads (tongue in cheek folks)

[RunningStrong]

With all this challenger tank poss upgrade programme and/or cuts to the fleet all trying to combat /match the Russian armata tank costing £2.9 million each , wouldn't it be cheaper just to buy a load of them saving loads (tongue in cheek folks)

You mean the T14 Armata that the Russians have cancelled?

[ArmChairCivvy]

the Russian armata tank costing £2.9m

he T14 Armata that the Russians have cancelled?

Between 50 and a hundred prototypes were delivered, back to the drawing board... and anyone who cares to dig further back (on the Russian thread) than this post by me

The massive corruption news in the Armata context did not reach the West (which was too fixated on the WunderWaffe babble), but it did reach the Duma
- then, too, the financial hole created was 'filled' by means of recapitalisation... it was a while back when I quoted the sums involved on these pages

will find the massive sums... that will need dividing by 50 or 100, to add on top of that 2.9 mln

[inch]

Well I learn something everyday runningstrong , didn't know they cancelled program ,why? thought they were the tank to compete with or was it spin or was it just cost ,ie they couldn't afford it ?

[ArmChairCivvy]

was it spin or was it just cost ,ie they couldn't afford it ?

Both, just that the major cost element was lining the pockets of people who were not designing/ building/ testing tanks

[RunningStrong]

Well I learn something everyday runningstrong , didn't know they cancelled program ,why? thought they were the tank to compete with or was it spin or was it just cost ,ie they couldn't afford it ?

Not to deviate too much from the thread, and not to speculate too much but...

The concept was reasonably sound, the implementation of a remote turret allowing the crew to be housed in a strengthened hull citadel was a marked change in doctrine for Russian armour and crew protection.

The use of video systems for all aspects of crew situational awareness (ISTAR), and the use of an auto loader in the turret, is a huge change from the Russian hardware developed to date.

I don't think they could do it reliably and effectively given the sanctions Russia faces.

[ArmChairCivvy]

I don't think they could do it reliably and effectively

Even if I agree, there is still a lesson to be learnt: the next gen should be applying those ideas and sharing the hull/ automotives with a heavy IFV and an SPG, to append to the formations using the other two hulls.
- the crux with us is: who to do it with?
- "we" had a secret project with the Israelis, to replace the Centurion. After 20 yrs they went their own way, and we ours: sold the 'unhappy' Shir2s to unsuspecting buyers (plural ), used the components i.e. the hot production line to quickly stitch up a better design for ourselves... and got a decent design after some further iteration. Then paused for, err, how many decades - fully cashing in the peace dividend, while blowing up the very same Soviet designs that ours had been specced to defeat.

[Ron5]

I would have thought it was blinding obvious that the Challenger upgrade program should result in a tank that could be favorably compared to Armata regardless of whether the Russian tank has been cancelled or not.

But then again, I'm not a UK politician.

[ArmChairCivvy]

130 mm... here we come (the awkward Armata turret arrangement us said to be ... for a 140mm gun . But they will have to get the whole thing working first. That said: we are never in a hurry, either, are we?).