British Challenger 2

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 06:28 AM
link   
im not sure what to believe. is the british challenger 2 better than m1 a2 abrams that the us has? DO YOU REALLY THINK THE US WOULD LET ANOTHER COUNTRY HAVE THE MORE SUPERIOR VEHICLES? my answer is hell no.




posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Well, the US and the UK have been working jointly on many weaponry and aircraft projects lately. I would say that what ever we have-USA-the UK probably has something of equivalence for it. I dont know the specs off hand for the Challenger 2 though, so Im not sure. The UK are our allies. I would be more worried if Iran had an answer to the M1Abrahms than the UK. Then we should start to worry a little.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 06:44 AM
link   
There are plenty of answer the M1A2, one of them is the MI-28 Havoc, a capable tank buster, more than able to destroy and M1A2. Although this has no relevance to the topic, I was just reasuring that the M1A2 is not invincible.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 06:49 AM
link   
It can be argued that the British have led the way in tank design from the 50's to the present, starting with the Centurion which is THE model that all modern tanks trace there ancestry back to. Also the British lead the way in armour protection, Chobham armour, which they share with the American Government.

IMHO and a number of sources, overall the Challenger2 tank is superior to the Abrams M1 A2 and of course in certain areas the M1 A2 is superior to the Challenger 2

Also as a side note I watched a program on, I think it was Discovery (not too sure), that the British have developed an 'Electric Armour' that can defeat several RPG direct hits without damaging the armour.

Spacemunkey



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Basically look at my signature for answers.

Considering we sold the US and germans their armour tech in the 80's... but have since moved on to newer and better things... it's safe to say the Challenger 2 is the best protected and most survivable tank in NATO.

The british rifled gun is also more accurate and can fire further, though it is incompatible with NATO standards.

The M1A2 is however faster, though it's range is limited... and you don't want to be standing behind one either as the exhausts from the gas turbine will fry you



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 07:31 AM
link   
Some Pics

M1A2



Challenger 2




posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by MAVERICK05
im not sure what to believe. is the british challenger 2 better than m1 a2 abrams that the us has? DO YOU REALLY THINK THE US WOULD LET ANOTHER COUNTRY HAVE THE MORE SUPERIOR VEHICLES? my answer is hell no.


- .... errr and exactly how would you prevent the UK developing a better tank than the US....again?

.... or the Germans (Leopard 2 is an excellent piece of kit).

.... or the French (the AMX 30-on and Leclerc are excellent versitile AFV's)

Up until the Abrams US tanks were absolutely 2nd division stuff.

Hell the Japanese type 74 was a better tank than anything the US had until the Abrams came along!

The idea the USA "wouldn't allow" others to construct and field their own better AFV's is not only 100% wrong but utterly laughable.

[edit on 14-1-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 10:21 AM
link   
You see the new French K1a? Its quite impressive. Check this out:




And it has a bumper to bumper 100,000 miles warranty!!



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
You see the new French K1a? Its quite impressive. Check this out:

And it has a bumper to bumper 100,000 miles warranty!!


Thats hillarious! My wife and I bought a Kia Rio Cinco last august. Its been a great little car. I dont think I'd put it up agianst the Challenger 2 though
Unless we were racing



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 03:51 PM
link   
this is to sminkey pinkey. to your first saying on "until the abrams came along" they HAVE came along, im talking about NOW, not in past years. and when i said that i dont think that we would let them have better vehicles, i didnt mean it literally, i meant it as kind of a rivalry between countries, as in "our tanks are the #," not physically not letting them manufacture their own.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 04:26 PM
link   
I dont know which is better, but i wouldn't want to be on the revieving end of either.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Hmmm, Does it matter?

Like spacemunkey said they both have better points to each other.
The point is they will never...and I hope...ever fight against each other,and that they work together to over come our enemies.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 08:28 PM
link   
personally i'd prefer one of those cool giant japanese robots found in the cartoons
but I like both the Challenger II and the M1A2, but I think the Challenger II is the better tank all round. Don't try and tell an englishman otherwise, it's a source of great pride for them


I'm a soviet tank man myself, they aren't the best tanks in the world but I love their style (personal preference). While no match for todays tanks, the T-64bv and t-80bv are my all time favourite tanks.

here's a pic of a t-64b:

external image

and here's a pick of the t-80bv (i think) :





anyways hope you enjoy the snaps


thanks,
drfunk





Mod Edit: Shrunk pics

[edit on 14-1-2005 by dbates]



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 04:53 AM
link   
I personally think the Challenger II is the better tanks...

The Armor is better, the guns is more accurate, more up to date equipment.

I still love the Abrams too, esspecially the M1A2 SEP...

But one thing has to be noted..

Abrams:
Armor: Brittish
Gun: English

The engine on the Abrams is an inefficient Gasoline Engine, NOT a fuel efficient diesel...



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Abrams:
Armor: Brittish
Gun: English

I highly doubt Abrams gun is English.
Maybe Challenger has better all-around protection but IMO newest Abrams have better frontal armor.



The engine on the Abrams is an inefficient Gasoline Engine, NOT a fuel efficient diesel...


But Abrams is faster, much more agile and quiter.

[edit on 15-1-2005 by longbow]



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 07:23 AM
link   
The abrams runs on a fuel inefficient gas turbine system (what a gas guzzler), but it provides a lot of power and is good for tanks IMO for those nations who can afford such a system.

As for the main gun, I believe it's produced in america but it is a german designed gun (all the best guns are
) by rheinmetall corp. But it may be produced in Germany as well

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 07:27 AM
link   
I cant seem to find any links that say the abrahms M1,MA1,MA2 even use chobrahm armour.



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Well it doesn't use 'chobham' armor persay, just an american designed version that is similar to the chobham system developed by the BoM. This was used in the M1 series but with the introduction of the M1A1(HA), M1A1-D and the M1A2 they also added DU plates.


thanks,



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
Don't try and tell an englishman otherwise, it's a source of great pride for them


We have to have pride in something or Britain just gets depressing.


My opinion is that each tanks is designed with a different spec in mind, the british tanks has better armour/gun but the tech in the US tanks is supirior...



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Both tanks are damn good; as for the gun on the Abrams, it is just as accurate as the Challenger's gun when fired because of the computer targeting system; the gun itself, however, isn't quite as accurate in itself as the one on the Challenger 2. But like I said, the targeting system makes up for that.

As for engines, engines are the choice of the country; the Abrams utilizes the gas-turbine engine, but that provides more power; however, they are getting ready to replace that engine with a better engine eventually.

As for the armor, I believe the U.S. uses a version of the British armor, as the British are the best at tank armor.

But the U.S. military uses lots of things of foreign-design, U.S. make. A lot of electronics systems is aircraft are of French design. The engines on a lot of U.S. tanker aircraft are a joint French-American product. Most of the guns in the U.S. military are of German design. And then all the other stuff is U.S. made as well.





new topics
top topics
 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join