Voennoe Delo: British tank Challenger-2! (English subtitles)

[BlffaBacon]

How did they manage to get so much so wrong? Some of the shots are from inside an Abrahms, our priorities are firepower, mobility and protection and not the other way round, the list is endless.

[BitnikGr]

@BlffaBacon Yeah. This is not their best episode I suppose. :) I guess they were short of footage from inside of Challenger and thus used Abrams.

However, basing on traditional history of British heavy tanks of WW II and that Challenger 2 is often named as the most protected tank in the World, many experts conclude that priorities of British tank building school are protection-firepower-mobility.

[transonicbuoy1]

Thanks for the info. I should have known that. Five years ago, I spent two days with the 1st Tank Rgt, in Castlemartin, Wales, for a magazine article. Live firing exercises. It was my best work trip ever.

[SoulSnatching]

Ehmm isn't that an M1A2 interior at 3:29?

[transonicbuoy1]

Good documentary. It should point out tho that the M1 has the same armour as the C2.

[AgCCannonFodder]

@transonicbuoy1 No it doesn't, the Abrams has Chobham, the C2, had an upgraded form, called Dorcester.

[mr9396]

Maybe they should have mentioned how one challenger 2 survived 72 rpg hits in one incident, and 12 rpg hits and a MILAN anti tank round.

[BitnikGr]

@mr9396 Maybe you should know that that story is a lie. It was described in detail in "Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank" by Osprey publications. That tank survived 7 RPGs... and maybe 1 ATGM...

As it was described in BBC News in 2003 is a lie.

[mr9396]

@BitnikGr. Can you please prove prove that.

[BitnikGr]

@mr9396 I already told you where to read it. Osprey publications "Challenger 2 MBT". Unfortunately, the Press do many mistakes when they write articles about military hardware. Not only BBC and not only in UK of course.

[BitnikGr]

@mr9396 Youtube comments are too short to describe the whole event.

It is described in details in “Challenger 2” by Simon Dunstan.

Squadron C of The Royal Scots Dragoon Guards together with 40th battalion was attacking Basra from South. At 11:30 column was ambushed by RPG and firearms.

Tank 2-2 received 4 RPG hits and started retreating. Tank 2-1 with TC Beird remained to cover the retreat. Tank was blinded by several RPGs. Repairs took 3 days and they counted 8 RPG hit marks and 1 ATGM

[BHuang92]

the Challenger 2 tank is my favorite tank ever!!!!

[JohnnyZenith]

No such thing as Royal Army.

[freebeerfordworkers]

@JohnnyZenith Common mistake, foreigners think everything in the army is "Royal" a para told me a US marine introduced him to friends as a "Royal Paratrooper". He said nothing.

[redreaper2020]

I love how Russian military television uses music from Red Alert. Awesome.

[xylaphonemaster]

@redreaper2020 That's because Frank Klepaki rules.

[redreaper2020]

@xylaphonemaster agreed.

[megawutt]

It's called British Army not Royal Army...

stupid journalists

[18kersh]

@megawutt British Army not Royal ? ok

[hussaruk]

Bullshit, I was attached to 14/20th from the royal hussars in op desert storm and challenger performed brilliantly. The Americans had probs with gas turbine engines.

[steelpanther88]

cool documentaries, especially mixing video footage with cheesy Red Alert game music :D

[beastatlay]

Sorry, but this video's take on Challenger 1's reliability in Desert Storm/GRANBY is bullshit. Challenger had an availability rate of 90% (Dunstan, 1998), among the highest of any AFV there. Of the hundreds deployed only around 25 required pack changes during the entire campaign. Between them they destroyed over 300 Iraqi AFVs, one squadron accounting for 78 T-55s alone. A single Challenger from 14th/20th destroyed 8 tanks as well as 10 APCs. A source for Russian soreness perhaps?

[BitnikGr]

@beastatlay Thank you for your comment. Comments like this one are very valueable, because they show the fact that "truth is somewhere in the middle".

Something I beleive and repeat always.

Every military documentary tries to show advantages of their own and disadvantages of "potential enemy".

Problem with Iraqi sand for Challengers and especcially for jet-powered Abrams is well known. Probably Russian estimations are exaggerated, while NATO numbers are reduced. Truth is somewhere between 'em.

[BitnikGr]

@beastatlay Despite of this show's opinion about reliability of Challenger 1, it was mentioned as a predecessor and part of history which followed to creation of Challenger 2, just like Centurion. Challenger 1 isn't main subject of this video. And you have to agree, that they say very good positive words about Challenger 2, which is indeed a big improvement of previous version and today is actually equal to any other NATO MBT.

[14th20thKRHkickass]

@beastatlay Whey the KRH doing what they do best!

[vodkasvictim]

@beastatlay

I don't mean to be rude, but I'd like a source for your statements about the reliability of challenger 1.

I don't believe it was such a poor performer myself, but I need to see a source to prove things one way or the other. This is the only source I've ever come across mentioning poor reliability for chally1...

[BitnikGr]

@vodkasvictim "This is the only source I've ever come across mentioning poor reliability for chally1"

Do you mean this particular video?

I can give you a source of poor reliability of Challenger 2E too.

Greek MBT tender 1998. Challengers 2 were quite raw yet at that time. And Challenger 2E which participated in that tender had major troubles with it's engine-transmission-gear box all 3 weeks. After each excersize it had troubles. A full gear box replacement took 3 days!

...

[beastatlay]

@BitnikGr

If your information is correct, then the faults with the Challenger 2E engine (MTU - German), transmission (Renk GmbH - German) and gearbox (Renk again) are hardly applicable to the Challenger 2 as used by the British: their version uses none of these components.

As for "NATO" manipulating reliability stats, given that the British Army gave rates of just 40% reliability for the CET engineering vehicle and DROPS truck in the same figures I find that very hard to believe.

[BitnikGr]

@beastatlay In same tender Leclerc and Challenger 2E had Europack powerplants installed. It was working fine with Leclerc, but with particular Challenger 2E it produced hell lot of problems.

[BitnikGr]

@vodkasvictim ...

But again, this doesn't mean that all Challengers 2 are so crappy! In 1998 it just came into service and was very raw platform. Maybe it was just one unlucky problematic tank. Who knows...

Leclerc is in service since 1992 and till now is not very reliable and raw. While Challenger 2 have turned into one of the best MBT in the world.

Just like this video states in the end. "It finished the work on mistakes of the pass".

[beastatlay]

@vodkasvictim

It's in my original message: "Challenger Main Battle Tank: 1982-97" by Simon Dunstan, 1998. I don't think you even need to resort to digging up sources to know that the video's assertion that almost all Challengers were out of action in less than a week is, frankly, laughable propaganda worthy of the old Pravda.

[zipacna1980]

@beastatlay Comparing a Challenger with T-55 which is a 1946 year model is stupid, isn't it?:)

[Bjjownsu10]

@beastatlay Lol this is the first time I hear that the Challenger was unreliable for god's sake the British call this thank the most reliable tank in the world.

[BitnikGr]

@Bjjownsu10 key word in your sentence is "British".

Of cause Brits call this tank as the most reliable in the world! Guess what, Indians call Arjun as the most reliable tank in the world too. And I am sure, that Israelis believe the same for Arjun... as Germans for Leopard... etc etc etc

I repeat, that in Greek tender in '98 Challenger 2E had hell lot of problems with engine and transmission. Neither it was the best in live fire tests, despite it passed them all.

[redreaper2020]

@beastatlay Actually, I'm pretty sure that the translation or information on the show is a bit mixed up. Th challenger had a very poor service record in the desert--in the late 80s, during training exercises, which led to quick changes such as a new air filter that made it perform so excellently in the gulf.

[BitnikGr]

@redreaper2020 Translation is fine :)

Actually I am pretty amazed how ppl don't believe in so simple things that first version of anything may not be ideal and there is a lot of room for improvement.

Abrams had a lot of troubles because of sand in '91 campaign too.

SA-80A1 was quite unreliable, until SA-80A2 arrived.

Challenger 1 also had its "baby illnesses". Challenger 2 is more mature and reliable.

[redreaper2020]

@BitnikGr You have a great point--SA80A1 was rather unreliable in a harsh environment, just like the M16A1!

I'd say, as an impartial viewer, the Chal2 is, for pure combat performance both logistically and performance-wise, the best vehicle in the world. It's expensive and hard to transport (a major advantage of Russian tanks), and its acceleration isn't as good as some others (advantage to the abrams), but it's an amazing vehicle nonetheless.

[normison69]

@beastatlay i think they know better than some internet troll.

[normison69]

@beastatlay i think they know better than some internet troll. Challengers killed obsolete and even crappy when they were new tanks, so it didnt meet equal tank like T-90. I see some british soreness trying to make their tanks look better that they actually are.

[14th20thKRHkickass]

1st of all it gets challenger and challenger 2 mixed, also 0.37 that is the drivers compartment of an abrams, challenger 2 has a drive pedal, a massive break pedal and 2 sticks for power distribution, it also has a small gearbox (but no clutch pedal) with 1 reverse gear and 5 forward gears (labelled 1,2,3,4,6 for some reason)

[BitnikGr]

@14th20thKRHkickass Thank you for you comment.

Yes, this show usually describe short history of main subject, before presenting it.

I think it is a good approach.

Wikipedia states that Challenger 2 has 6 forward and 2 reverse gear. Which is correct?

[BitnikGr]

@14th20thKRHkickass and yes, you are correct about driver seat. There is a photo of Challenger's driver seat in flickr. Nothing like with 0:34 in this video. Thank you for pointing this out.

[STALGRAD]

Отличная мишень!!

[21StCenturyWarfare]

haroshi tank

really great tank and looks awesome

[javabeserk]

great video..thnk u..