When has this c/ become a news channel for military equipment development?
Do you realize Europe is essentially at war with russia or do you think that is just a joke or something?
I don’t see how that makes it necessary to post every minor development in weapons industry to this community. And I find it especially weird that it is so often an account from a canadian instance posting these news.
I would not describe the Challenger 3 as a minor development? I would rather say it is one of the larger developments?
Seven prototypes enter testing. Okay, who cares? It’s not like Britain has made a final decision and placed an order to equip several decisions or something.
Seven is quite a lot honestly.
Yes, exactly. Does not seem to be a big step.
I mean it is seven more actual main battle tanks than russia possesses so it depends how you look at it shrugs.
What if it’s your government spreading the news trying to prepare you mentally for impending disagreements up into war. Or a foreign government.
Challenger 3 is just an upgraded Challenger 2. For the most part is just integrates subsystems already in use in other European systems like Leopard 2 and Puma(Rheinmetall is heavily involved, so it is a lot of German stuff) and puts them into the Challenger 2. The big one is the new gun(same as Leopard 2 and Abrams).
“just” is doing a lot of work here
If it’s not drone resistant, it’s useless.
It has a active protection system which can handle incoming missiles, that will be a solid defence against drones too. Russia has developed an APS which they’ve used successfully in the invasion, but they only had it ready a few months before their full-scale invasion started, so it’s only on newly-built or fully-refurbished tanks. It also has the drawback that it was initially designed to deal with missiles; Ukraine figured out that it could eventually be overwhelmed by just sending enough drones at it to drain its relatively limited ammo, something that would be impractical with expensive missiles, but until then it apparently handles incoming drones pretty effectively. The Challenger’s one has the benefits of being designed with the knowledge of what drone warfare looks like
It’s also worth noting that nobody publishes videos of drone attacks failing. A cheap little quadcopter with a grenade strapped to it is, ultimately, jut a way to throw a grenade unusually far. A tank like this can shrug off a grenade. Attacking them requires bigger, heavier, more expensive drones carrying bigger, heavier, more expensive munitions. Or you use the drone to sight artillery. But the point remains that even in the age of drone warfare, tanks are still harder to kill. There’s a reason both sides are still using them
You can totally strap a BIG payload to a cheap one way fpv.
I can’t think of something MORE drone resistant really if it is anything like the challenger 2.
Weren’t those wrecked in Ukraine? AFAIK there are currently no such tanks out there. Russia is trying something lately.
No, some were lost, they are also very heavy because they are so well armored. There just wasn’t a big enough of a supply chain plus the rifled tank cannon has its own esoteric industrial pipeline unlike all the other 120mm smoothbores… but no with all that in mind I still don’t think it was shown as a bad tank not at all.
Not bad, but as Ukraine shown
edus, any tank can be destroyed by a few cheap drones. Tanks have to adapt.They have
