FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4233
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
- Has liked: 94 times
- Been liked: 325 times
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
that means we are down to 199 plus 75 Stored lets hope we pledge to upgrade 190 to CH-3 standard
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Just a tidbit that came out of a conversation at the Reform Club.
Focus is shifting onto the turret numbers produced (more) with the umming and ahhing about chassis numbers being less of an issue.
Read into that what you will (I took it as a CH3 turret on something like a K2 BP etc.).
Focus is shifting onto the turret numbers produced (more) with the umming and ahhing about chassis numbers being less of an issue.
Read into that what you will (I took it as a CH3 turret on something like a K2 BP etc.).
- These users liked the author Mr Carrot for the post (total 2):
- Ron5 • TheLoneRanger
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2716
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
- Has liked: 79 times
- Been liked: 92 times
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Can you elaborate or speculate a little?Mr Carrot wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 13:28 Just a tidbit that came out of a conversation at the Reform Club.
Focus is shifting onto the turret numbers produced (more) with the umming and ahhing about chassis numbers being less of an issue.
Read into that what you will (I took it as a CH3 turret on something like a K2 BP etc.).
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Policy discussion with MOD CS - so non technical but they option being discussed was to announce the turrets as "tanks" and worry about the chassis later.
Can't go into much more detail due to SC etc.
- These users liked the author Mr Carrot for the post:
- dmereifield
-
- Member
- Posts: 283
- Joined: 01 Jul 2020, 19:15
- Has liked: 85 times
- Been liked: 85 times
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Interesting idea for sure. Are turrets that interchangeable? ie do the turrent mounting points now follow some kind of standard as far as dimensions go ?Mr Carrot wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 13:28 Just a tidbit that came out of a conversation at the Reform Club.
Focus is shifting onto the turret numbers produced (more) with the umming and ahhing about chassis numbers being less of an issue.
Read into that what you will (I took it as a CH3 turret on something like a K2 BP etc.).
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1331
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
- Has liked: 9 times
- Been liked: 48 times
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Depends on the turret and the hull. I suspect you couldn’t whip a turret off an existing tank and drop it on a wholly different model hull, but changing the physical interface wouldn’t be a huge modification.TheLoneRanger wrote: ↑06 Mar 2023, 17:28 Interesting idea for sure. Are turrets that interchangeable? ie do the turrent mounting points now follow some kind of standard as far as dimensions go ?
You’d still have to deal with turret basket size, how and where you access any ammunition in the hull, electrical and electric interfaces.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4233
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
- Has liked: 94 times
- Been liked: 325 times
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
maybe they are trying to do what John Cocherill just did with it 3105 turret on the Leopard 1
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
CR3 is progressing with new contract signed, this time with MilDef to manufacture Generic Vehicle Architecture-compliant Processors and Ethernet Switches.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1137
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
- Has liked: 46 times
- Been liked: 56 times
Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
That appears to be consistent with BOXER (but not AJAX).