FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

[mr.fred]

On a tangent, Chieftain is another case of the problems of international co-operation. Somewhat screwed over by an engine technology mandated by international agreement.

CR2 - There's nothing dramatically wrong with it that can't be ascribed to two decades of minimal investment and collapse of another international project.

[shark bait]

The minimal investment is the problem, not enough units to dilute the fixed costs. That's where the advantages of these bigger international projects are realised.

[mr.fred]

That's the theory, at least. The question then becomes: is the saving sufficient to outweigh the increased fixed costs inherent in international "cooperation"?

[shark bait]

That is indeed the question, and from my observations it appears it is.

This is going to be a sweeping statement, but the RAF with no bespoke platforms has well supported kit in service, where as the Army which is almost exclusively bespoke kit, its struggling to support it across the board, which is now harming capability.

[S M H]

This is going to be a sweeping statement, but the RAF with no bespoke platforms has well supported kit in service, where as the Army which is almost exclusively bespoke kit, its struggling to support it across the board, which is now harming capability.

If we were to be sensible we could seriously consider refurbishing the stored German tanks More than surfactant to cover operational and high readiness stored tanks. Scrapping the challengers.as they are effectively becoming an obsolete and orphaned . But try getting that past the army hat badge members.

[mr.fred]

If we acquire new gun tanks, do we also replace the CRAAV, Trojan, Titan and driver training tanks as well?

[shark bait]

Good point.

[ArmChairCivvy]

do we also replace the CRAAV

Has there been a renaming as it used to be like this (for the successive generations):
CRAAV.... said CRARVE is slang used by the crews for a chally arv CHAARV... said CHARVE is slang used for a chiefy arv
and now the official army site has it as "The Challenger Armoured Repair and Recovery Vehicle (CRARRV)" which reproduces the phonetics already settled on?

[mr.fred]

Or I goofed. But you know the one I mean? The repair and recovery version.
This one:
http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/23260.aspx
CRARRV

[ArmChairCivvy]

Yep, I wonder how many we have of them?

It is five for the Leopard-based Hippos (one for each Cdo, though the renamed Force Protection one hardly needs theirs, plus one spare).

[RetroSicotte]

Yep, I wonder how many we have of them?

75 CRARRV
33 Titan
33 Trojan

[ArmChairCivvy]

75 CRARRV

Wow, one to three (217, perhaps going down further)

Titans and Trojans are priceless to any type of formation. So deriving a similar ratio would not be informative.

[arfah]

IMG_0116.JPG

Trojan also deployed on Op. Herrick.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Trojan also deployed on Op. Herrick.

The dry canyons were too wide even for Titan?

How does it compare, btw, with the 26m bridge that a Leo2 can lay (even the US Army uses it under a different name, Wolverine)?
- sometimes it is good to have a speedier option, on wheels, to deliver the bridge to where needed:
"The Leguan laying system can also be carried by wheeled vehicles, such as the 8x8 vehicle by MAN or the 10x10 vehicle by the Finnish company SISU. "

[Gabriele]

75 CRARRV
33 Titan
33 Trojan

Note: there are only CRARRV 4-5 CRARRV in each tank regiment: one in each tank squadron and one in the REME LAD.
CRARRV is also used by the REME Close Support battalions in the armoured roles, adding a few more, and it is found in heavy artillery and heavy engineer units to support AS-90, Trojan and Titan.
Even adding generous allocations in BATUS, in the training fleet and everywhere, the actual fleet in use is much smaller than 75. Going down to 2 (+1) tank regiment, 2 heavy REME close support, 2 heavy artillery and 2 heavy engineer reduces the requirement even further, obviously.

As for Titan and Trojan, the armoured engineer regiments were originally given between 4 (UK-based regiments) and 6 (Germany based regiments) of each.

Original allocation plans were as follows:

1 each in Land Warfare Centre Warminster
2 each in BATUS
1 each in School Electrical and Mechanical Engineering SEME
5 each in Bovington training fleet
6 in each Germany-based regiment (x 2)
4 in each UK-based regiment (x 3)

Now, going down to two regiments only with the heavy equipment, the actual usage will drop a lot again.

Sure, changing main battle tank would ideally require keeping commonality by switching the support vehicles as well, but the british army has far worse commonality issues than these, given the numbers. Challenger-based support vehicles could well stay, and get a whole lot of spare powerpacks and parts if CR2 itself was replaced.

But no worries, it is not going to happen. They'll just waste 700 millions on a lick of paint and a few new touch-ups to 170 tanks or so.

The Close Support Bridge No 10 used by Titan also spans 26 meters gaps, but it is launched vertically and scissors over the gap. LEGUAN is horizontally launched, which is a bit stealthier for obvious reasons.

[ArmChairCivvy]

one in each tank squadron and one in the REME LAD.
CRARRV is also used by the REME Close Support battalions in the armoured roles, adding a few more, and it is found in heavy artillery and heavy engineer units to support AS-90, Trojan and Titan.
Even adding generous allocations in BATUS, in the training fleet and everywhere, the actual fleet in use is much smaller than 75. Going down to 2 (+1) tank regiment, 2 heavy REME close support, 2 heavy artillery and 2 heavy engineer reduces the requirement even further, obviously.

OK, may be a third (up to a half).

I was just wondering, as
- the old Leoprads changing hands all the time, and, at times, for peanuts
- but all these special versions being like Gold Dust, every army actually having been able to buy some, hanging onto them for their dear life
Well, no such second-hand market in Challies; could there be? Selling the whole package (sans ammo!)

[RetroSicotte]

Trojan also deployed on Op. Herrick.

The dry canyons were too wide even for Titan?

How does it compare, btw, with the 26m bridge that a Leo2 can lay (even the US Army uses it under a different name, Wolverine)?
- sometimes it is good to have a speedier option, on wheels, to deliver the bridge to where needed:
"The Leguan laying system can also be carried by wheeled vehicles, such as the 8x8 vehicle by MAN or the 10x10 vehicle by the Finnish company SISU. "

It can deploy 26m ones, yeah.

[Lord Jim]

Regardless of whether we upgrade the CR2 or obtain alternatives we should be keeping the CR2 support variants. They are newer than the CR2 MBTs and remember countries that use the M1 are often using the M88 based on the M48 as their ARV, so you don't have to have the same platform across the fleet. Also give the small size of the fleet there would be little additional running costs as there will remain plenty of spares for the Support CR2 variants whatever happens. Maybe we could get a couple of dozen 152mm demo guns from the US Army and fit then to a number of CR2s as AVREs, now they would be useful in built up areas!

[mr.fred]

Maybe we could get a couple of dozen 152mm demo guns from the US Army and fit then to a number of CR2s as AVREs, now they would be useful in built up areas!

Maybe slightly better than standard MBTs but absolutely effing useless everywhere else, and a disproportionate logistic burden.

In a world of smart bombs, smart artillery, shoulder-launched rockets, ATGW and 120mm tank guns, why do people get so obsessed with this one-trick pony?

[ArmChairCivvy]

useful in built up areas!

Both lists omitted the most useful one: guided 120 mm mortar rounds

[mr.fred]

Are mortars not a form of artillery then?

[ArmChairCivvy]

In most countries classed as an infantry weapon

[shark bait]

even up at 120mm?

[ArmChairCivvy]

Yes, France being a clear exception.

I wonder if the expeditionary nature of many of their ops has dictated that Caesar has 120 mm mortars "in tow" within the same batteries (not even at a higher up level formation)... to be able to fire "behind the hill" albeit with only a third of the range?
- I am sure Frenchie can advise us

[ArmChairCivvy]

Graphene, once more, to become a hot topic?
http://newatlas.com/3d-graphene/47304/? ... b-90656513