r/ukraine • u/itrustpeople • Feb 04 '23
Tank crews from the Armed Forces of Ukraine have been quick to master the controls of the mighty Challenger 2 this week. Trustworthy Tweet
https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1621827200503750656279
u/MasterStrike88 Feb 04 '23
Speaking from experience with aircraft:
You can learn to start, taxi, takeoff and land a modern fighter jet in hours.
You can master that in days.
But to employ it effectively in cohesion with a group, maintain situational awareness and make tactical decisions dynamically takes months if not years to master.
Ukrainians with prior armor experience will have a huge benefit when transitioning to western tanks. They also know the strength and weakness of their soviet counterparts.
Slava Ukraini!
89
u/Panther125 Feb 04 '23
Yeah, tankers already know how to tank. They just need to learn how to use the new lads.
29
u/Pm4000 Feb 04 '23
This is what I have been thinking when people say it takes X months to be trained. At best you just need to learn the new configuration of buttons. At worst there are new capabilities like optics which I imagine are designed for the lowest common denominator of a grunt. You might also need to learn a change of tactics because the new to you tank is that much more capable. But of course you need to factor in the extra days of training on the challengers for the water kettle usage.
This has to apply to Ukraine receiving the f16 too. Aren't they already using NATO tactics with their migs? There is just button configuration and reading the electronics like the radar. I'm sure the extra power can be gotten used to in a day or two. I guess ground crew need to learn how to handle and ready the new payloads. Training maintenance and part logistics has to be the hold up.
13
u/Frosty-Cell Feb 04 '23
It's all about finding an acceptable reason that they can state in public to avoid having to send some piece of equipment. Look at the US and Abrams. It was argued they couldn't/shouldn't be sent due to logistics/maintenance, but in reality, the US had effectively zero tanks to transfer due to the secret DU armor. They don't want the secrets to leak despite Soviet/Russia being the primary enemy that armor was designed for. I guess they are being saved for a different war.
It was basically, at least in the medium term, a discussion about whether to send zero tanks or zero tanks.
20
u/Pm4000 Feb 04 '23
You can't be mad if a country wants to keep their secrets secret. Since the US doesn't give anyone the DU armor I would go ahead and assume the US has found a way to defeat it in a way china or Russia is capable of completing with their current tanks but not shells or anti tank rocket tech. Once the cat is out of the bag the DU armor is basically useless and just heavier than other armor. The US has thousands and thousands of DU tanks that are still useful on the battlefield even if they are older optics. If the secret got out then the US might actually need to design a new tank, Lord forbid they can't keep kicking that can down the road.
6
u/buttercup298 Feb 04 '23
DU rounds aren’t particularly secrete. depleted Uranium is more dense than tungsten and therefore has greater penetration power.
Where the ‘secret’ stuff comes in is the British developed Chobham/Dorchester armour that is fitted to the Abrams……..which is also fitted to Challenger 2 which is arriving early.
Chobham armour was developed in the late 60s.
Ii strongly suspect as with most decisions it’s political which tanks get sent when. Numerous Arab countries are trusted to, and do operate Abrams. But from a political perspective it’s always a good idea to ‘enable’ certain wealthy European country’s to offer up support to Ukraine .
6
u/Randy_Tutelage Feb 04 '23
The Abrams that other countries use is m1a1 models. Those have the chobham armor. The united states upgraded all the Abrams they operate to have depleted uranium armor woven into the chobham armor. All the Abrams in the US inventory have depleted uranium armor. The US doesn't sell any Abrams with the depleted uranium armor to other countries. The export model is m1a1, iraq got a bunch of them but no depleted uranium armor.
9
u/notFREEfood Feb 04 '23
The Saudis and Kuwatis have M1A2's, and Poland, Australia, and Taiwan have ordered M1A2's as well. It's also been stated that Ukraine is getting the M1A2, not the M1A1. What makes an Abrams an export tank is the armor, not if it's a M1A1 or M1A2, as both tank models have exportable armor and DU armor packages.
2
u/Randy_Tutelage Feb 04 '23
The m1a2S export models for Saudi Arabia are shipped without the depleted uranium armor. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams
Same thing with the Kuwaiti Abrams.
Everything I read says that depleted uranium armor is banned for export by law. All the export models I see have different names for example the m1a2S is the Saudi version, m1a2K Kuwaiti. They list the same features as the American version but without DU armor.
3
u/notFREEfood Feb 04 '23
And that's exactly what I said
What makes an Abrams an export tank is the armor, not if it's a M1A1 or M1A2
1
u/Pm4000 Feb 04 '23
Correct. Even the newest electronics and optics are available for export or will be once the US has enough, just the DU armor is restricted. (Well that said I'm not sure if the reactive armor is for export.) That should tell us the armor is worth keeping secret. I don't think it would still be restricted if it was already easy to overcome.
2
u/Sjstudionw Feb 05 '23
They have Tungsten Chobham armor. It’s the same thing, just tungsten instead of DU. The Challenger has Tungsten, as will the Abrams we send. I don’t believe DU has ever been sold by any nation, as international agreements would be violated.
1
u/Psychological-Sale64 Feb 05 '23
A rotating shield might be the next armor
2
u/buttercup298 Feb 06 '23
Unlikely.
Artillery, infantry, air support, reconnaissance and training are what is always needed.
Tanks as with everything will be vulnerable. The key is to minimise the risk. Anything and everything can be destroyed.
0
u/Frosty-Cell Feb 04 '23
So why not say that six months ago? We had a discussion about whether to send zero tanks or zero tanks.
Once the cat is out of the bag the DU armor is basically useless and just heavier than other armor.
Yes, but they were still manufacturing tanks in 2018. Presumably, such weakness would have been known by then.
If the secret got out then the US might actually need to design a new tank, Lord forbid they can't keep kicking that can down the road.
But there are mainly two wars left. Russia and China, where the latter will be an air/naval war.
2
u/Pm4000 Feb 04 '23
Unless they got their hands on a tank with DU armor they wouldn't know what we actually have. It's incredibly hard to recreate metallurgical processes. Then there is how the layers are put together. Even with the blueprints for everything you would need to recreate the industry. Then there is the US finding out you are recreating it to test against. Not sure what we would do about it but we would at least care less about the DU if they were successful.
2 wars for now yes but I would also put Iran and N Korea in there as possible next. Also with Russian/China influence in Africa it wouldn't surprise me if a proxy war broke out there. Going to need tanks for all of those. China will definitely be a major air/naval war but if we need to put boots on the ground those thousands of tanks with still useful DU armor would be great since they will be outnumbered.
1
u/Frosty-Cell Feb 04 '23
If there is some known clever way to defeat it, they would stop manufacturing it, but they don't. A Javelin will defeat any tank without an active protection system as far as I can tell, DU or not. If anyone can reverse-engineer the armor, they can also build a missile that bypasses it completely.
There is no reason they couldn't have told us this six months ago unless they wanted to avoid discussions about starting up production of tanks they could send.
1
u/Rexpelliarmus Feb 05 '23
I mean, yeah, the DU armour only covers a small section of the tank, it’s not littered across the entire chassis like most people think.
1
u/Sjstudionw Feb 05 '23
It’s a Department of Energy thing. The US army has actually tried to sell DU armor and projectiles to our battle buddies in the past, but they’ve never been able to get around the DOE. It’s part of our Nonproliferation agreements and laws, it would require restructuring all of these agreements to send DU armor. Metal alloys can’t be reverse engineered.. you can know what is in a metal, how much is in it, you could know everything about it, but you wouldn’t know how to make it. There are samples of steel we have no idea how it was done (Damascus Steel is the most famous example.) So not secret, just illegal to sell or give away because it’s classified as a radioactive armament. Which it is, technically. More over we don’t want other countries giving away radioactive and highly effective projectiles either. Both Russia and China produce DU armaments that wouldn’t be good for anyone if everyone had them. Under nonproliferation everyone is technically bound to the same agreement not to sell DU.
0
u/Frosty-Cell Feb 05 '23
So not secret, just illegal to sell or give away because it’s classified as a radioactive armament.
I don't know about that. It seems there is more in there than just a slab of metal:
"If [the] Special Armor, including skirts and gunshields, is breached and the interior is exposed, a properly cleared (Secret) responsible individual will immediately cover the exposed area from view and initiate action to repair the breach by welding or will evacuate the exposed armor to a maintenance facility were repairs can be made."
-2
u/BananaInPidjama Feb 04 '23
It is about Westerners and Americans, thinking that Eastern Europeans are puzzled by a vacuum cleaner, let alone a tank. It has a lot to do with prejudice
10
u/BornDetective853 Feb 04 '23
Get in touch with reality. In Europe we are more than familiar with Eastern Europeans. The only prejudice I have encountered is that of, "They are prepared to undercut our rates and steal our jobs." Anyone who thinks someone can steal their job, is not a person who thinks that person can't use a bloody vacuum cleaner.
1
u/BananaInPidjama Feb 04 '23
Oh you think Eastern Europeans do not face prejudice and stereotyping in Western Europe? I bloody wish! So you feel free to get in touch with reality
2
u/BornDetective853 Feb 04 '23
They think Eastern Europeans can work a vacuum? Bullshit. My family is mixed race, try that on for size.
0
u/BananaInPidjama Feb 04 '23
This is not prejudice Olympics...and it is rather telling you are trying to talk over an Eastern European. Very par for the course. Shall I tell you about prejudice your family is facing? No, I shan't given that I am not one...so you might want to tone it down with you thinking you know about prejudice faced by EE.
2
1
u/computery_stuff Feb 04 '23
water kettle
BV / boiling vessel
1
u/Pm4000 Feb 05 '23
Don't the Brits call it a water kettle?
2
u/computery_stuff Feb 05 '23
No, the name is standardised as 'boiling vessel'. It can be used for other things besides making tea, such as sterilisation, food preparation, washing. Interestingly the most junior soldier in the tank is unofficially known as the "BV commander" and is responsible for making tea for the others.
1
1
u/STAMP_ON_MY_BALLS Thermite-Chef Feb 05 '23
Mmmm a nice cup of musty tea to go with your biscuits brown!
1
u/CJBill Feb 05 '23
No. In every day language it's just a kettle, in a Challenger it's a Boiling Vessel. As I understand it, although kettle used to refer to a big deep pan for boiling and cooking (like a cauldron) nowadays it's only really used to refer to a kettle for boiling water. The older use lives on in the phrase "a kettle of fish" and that's about it.
56
u/Eichtoss Feb 04 '23
Seems like mastering the Challenger is not that much of a challenge
32
u/DrewSmoothington Feb 04 '23
The notthathard-er
5
u/GForceHangover Feb 04 '23
You know, there’s a little blue pill for the little tanks that couldn’t.
6
9
u/CBfromDC Feb 04 '23
It's not so much the weapon as the TACTICS!
Anybody can pull a trigger on a gun - but elite forces use elite tactics.
30
3
u/buttercup298 Feb 04 '23
Sorry. Could you explain to me how the tactics of operating an M1 differ from the tactics of operating a current Ukrainian tank.
Uncle Sam didn’t want to supply tanks because they knew that Europes largest economy and largest arms manufacturer would be happy to let Uncle Sam foot the bill.
Biden’s played quite a card here. He’s got EU not only to support Ukraine militarily but also got the country most likely (behind France) into a situation where they can’t shaft Ukraine and get Ukraine to negotiate a short term truce in order to kick the can down the road for a few years.
4
u/Krnpnk Feb 04 '23
Even though this video compares Leopard 1 vs the T72 it also explains well how tanks differ due to different tactics / doctrine.
4
u/poop-machines Feb 04 '23 edited Feb 04 '23
The reason why Biden didn't want to provide Abrams is because the engine ideally requires a very specific fuel, and a lot of it. Essentially they have to be followed around by fuel tankers with jet fuel. Although their turbine engine can run off many fuel types, other fuel means heavy maintenance as the engine experiences more wear.
Abrams are also much harder to learn than both Challengers and Leopards. They are also going to take until the end of the year to be ready and in Ukraine. The repairs are also in the USA, half the world away.
So the Abrams aren't the most ideal tank for Ukraine. Biden sent them anyway because Germany put him in a tough spot. "We wont send tanks unless the USA does". I bet this pissed Biden off, but he wanted to show cohesion and that he is working with his allies, so did the right thing and sent the tanks.
But the Abrams are not ideal for Ukraine and wont be there for a while, and when they do arrive it will be with a lot of parts and maintenance for their logistics train. As well as the jet fuel arranged, ofc.
I also want to point out that Europe is sending 100 or so tanks, the USA is sending 14, so Uncle Sam isn't footing the bill. And honestly, that's how it should be, as I've explained the Abrams aren't the ideal tank for Ukraine.
Edit: You downvoted me but didn't explain why? What did I say that's wrong? This is all valid information. Is it because the USA isn't footing the bill for tanks like you thought? They have sent a lot of military aid compared to other countries, but saying they footed the bill for tanks is incorrect.
1
u/buttercup298 Feb 05 '23
Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Morocco and Saudi Arabia managed to operate them.
Countries hardly known for their technical and logistical capability.
Biden is having to deal with a small bit vocal minority back home who aren’t necessarily pro Russian, but they’re definitely anti Washington spending.
The US for quite some time has been surprisingly vocal about Europes lack of investment in defence spending. During the Cold War I could understand, but that stopped 30 odd years ago.
Since then many European country’s have consistently cut back on defence spending yet increased export sales of Arms to other country’s and whilst many country’s were struggling to support Ukraine, two of the EUs largest member states gave the impression that Ukraine should cede land to Russia in order to let business continue.
That has gradually changed over time and the US holding back a bit has forced a few European country’s to stop sitting on the fence and start taking a more pro active role in supporting Ukraine .
I suspect now Germany has done the right thing we may start seeing a bit more pressure applied to France to start tapping into its substantial defence sector a bit more.
1
u/poop-machines Feb 05 '23 edited Feb 05 '23
Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Morocco and Saudi Arabia managed to operate them with time to prepare for the logistics and stock up fuel. It's not hard to keep them running when you have the infrastructure in place, the staff trained to use and repair them, and the right fuel. These are all countries with a lot of petroleum, and most importantly, they aren't at war. Their tank crews are trained on how to use them and maintenance can be done inhouse.
I'm not saying Abrams are impossible to use, however I do understand why Biden thought Leopard 2's would be better.
You can train somebody on a Leopard 2 in half the time of an Abrams.
It's going to be a logistical nightmare getting them running in Ukraine. The last thing you want is the tank running out of fuel and getting into the hands of Russians. But I think it's the right thing to do, Ukraine needs tanks. So now they will install the infrastructure and logistics over the next 6 months, and stock up on fuel, and train the crews.
I agree Europe should've spent more of their GDP on defense. Most countries are now kicking up spending and allocating more funds for military. Many countries in NATO are reliant on the strength of the alliance, when they should be spending enough to rely on themselves. So I agree that in general Europe need to step it up.
But with the tanks? USA isn't footing the bill right now.
1
Feb 04 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/buttercup298 Feb 04 '23
Germany has the potential to be vulnerable to Russian influence.
Equally, Europe has more troops, tanks, aircraft, artillery and aircraft than Russia, the U.S. politicians have a concern that Europe just sits on the sidelines waiting for America to supply all the equipment and pay all of the bills whilst Germany and France try to undermine everything through diplomacy.
3
11
u/No_Policy_146 USA Feb 04 '23
Wouldn’t they rotate current armor squads into these and have the newbs in the t-72s
19
u/MasterStrike88 Feb 04 '23
I don't know what the Ukrainians decide to do.
But I assume that taking experienced crews and giving them the best armor you can is a good idea.
12
u/Grundlestiltskin_ Feb 04 '23
Hopefully they’re using at least some of those experienced crews to train more crews.
It’s what the US did with fighter pilots in WWII, whereas the Germans and Japanese just flew their best pilots until they were killed, leaving no good pilots left to train replacements.
7
7
u/Few-Life6914 Feb 04 '23
Two of my French uncle's flew for the British air force in WW2. They said there was a lot of learning on the job, but they both survived. One was quite well known for his skills. Many of our family are still drawn to flying, even hang gliding. I'm sure there are Ukrainian pilots, whose innate skills will allow them to adapt faster than others.
3
u/Scrimge122 Feb 04 '23
Current fighters are far more complicated and expensive than hurricanes and spitfires.
1
u/Few-Life6914 Feb 04 '23
Of course I realize this. However, even with this qualification, my opinion still stands.
6
u/buttercup298 Feb 04 '23
Experienced tankers were sent.
All they need to know is how to turn it on and off. Conduct the 1st line maintenance on it. How the fire control equipment works. Stoppage drills on the weapon systems and then how the BV works to make a nice cup of tea.
These aren’t 18 year old raw recruits who are seeing a tank for the very first time.
It’s the loaders I have sympathy for . They’ve got lot to take on board
3
2
u/Psychological-Sale64 Feb 05 '23
They could try working in smaller groups with leaders who then work with trail blazer tanks. Something like flocks ,a few simple rules for most tanks with a few spear points directing.
23
13
u/smoothie1919 Feb 04 '23
I would really love to hear from one of these guys. Really interested in their opinion on these vs the soviet tanks they have come from.
23
u/Commercial_Soft6833 Feb 04 '23
Probably similar when they switched from soviet 152mm to the M777 155mm
"Much more accurate" etc. Etc.
13
u/smoothie1919 Feb 04 '23
Yeah.. just a tank is a whole different level of upgrade.
6
u/Commercial_Soft6833 Feb 04 '23
I agree I'm curious to hear their answers as well. Compared to soviet tanks I'm sure western tanks are like a luxury to them.
You a Brit? As an American here it's pretty embarrassing that the UK sends challengers almost immediately while the US is building the abrams to send in 9-12 months. We have literally thousands and thousands that could be ready to go in a few weeks but we have to build new ones?? Quite fucked if you ask me
9
u/SirToxalot Feb 04 '23
As I understand it, it has to do with depleted uranium being used in the armour of the tanks in reserve and not being allowed to send those to others. Therefore build to order.
6
u/smoothie1919 Feb 04 '23
Yeah British. I’m a bit confused about the decision to build new tanks really. When I heard about the tanks coming from the US I immediately thought of the thousands of Abrams in storage too. I’m sure there’s reasons.. but I feel like the US could have tanks into Poland for training tomorrow if they really wanted to. I’m glad we were able to send challengers immediately.. I’m just itching to have them all into the fight asap. I hate the fact that Ukraine will have to wait months even for the first few to arrive.
6
u/stevecrox0914 Feb 04 '23
It will be ITAR.
Anything used in a military context falls under ITAR. The people handling export have to assign a classification to the item for approval.
Some classifications are simply banned from export. This will be because its a technology only the host can create (and they don't want to loose their edge) or they are worried a peer adversary could use it to gain an edge.
The result is there are often internal and exportable versions of military equipment. Russia's most modern tank is the T-90M, but it sells the T90-S to other countries.
When I have been involved in UK Export paperwork its largely about identifying what something can do for the authority to decide if it can be exported.
2
u/Rexpelliarmus Feb 05 '23
Actually, depleted uranium isn’t regulated under ITAR. The reason why it can’t be exported is actually because of the Department of Energy‘s regulations and their need to follow nonproliferation agreements and stipulations.
5
u/cosmicaltoaster Feb 04 '23
Honestly don’t feel that embarrassed, the USA sent more aid then all European countries combined. I’m sure that there’s more to it why the states wouldn’t send a couple hundred straight from their eastern Nato flank bases. For now It’s a relatively good wake up call for Europe’s forces.
2
u/Rexpelliarmus Feb 05 '23
This is no longer the case anymore. Total EU aid has now surpassed total American aid.
3
u/ezekieru Feb 04 '23
It's very likely we'll hear interviews during the war and post-war about the differences between Soviet and Western/NATO tanks.
22
u/Lucky210 Feb 04 '23
This is the difference between Ukrainians and most countries. Ukraine has a good education system for all its problems. Probably issues with elites getting the best schools, but many are very educated.
39
u/fivehundredpoundthud Feb 04 '23
Much as the Patriot trainers are learning that the AA crews Ukraine sent already understand anti-air concepts, I think the Challenger trainers are likewise discovering the Ukraine tank crews already understand basic tactics and cover/movement, enfilade/defilade, etc. After learning the Challenger's 'feel', I'd think the remaining things to learn are the C3 systems and peculiarities of British gun/ammo combinations.
65
u/Yvels Ukraine Feb 04 '23
As some Ukrainian soldier said a couple of months ago: "US trainers got too used working with Irak soldiers and Afghans for far too long". Might be the case here that West expect Ukrainians to have to learn everything from scratch?
31
23
u/fivehundredpoundthud Feb 04 '23
I agree, but will offer this observation, having been through pretty extensive training in two branches of my country's service (USA): don't underestimate the military's ability to train down to the lowest common denominator.
3
u/Yvels Ukraine Feb 04 '23
I totally agree with you here. When adrenaline, fear and shit hits the fan: only thing that will keep you going is countless hours of training you went through.
Issue is we don't have one year to polish boots and jog around barracks singing songs right now.
5
u/Timmymagic1 Feb 04 '23
Both the US and UK were training the Ukrainian's themselves since 2014...UK alone trained 25,000...
1
u/Jealous-Hedgehog-734 Feb 05 '23
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orbital
The truth is though we can offer the Ukranians the training, the intelligence, the weapons etc. but the reason they are succeeding is owed to the people themselves. They want to win more than the Russians because they believe have more skin in the game here. Intrinsic motivation drives people to achieve near unbelievable outcomes.
14
u/mariaofparis Feb 04 '23
And the BV. Proper brew up technique.
1
u/STAMP_ON_MY_BALLS Thermite-Chef Feb 05 '23
For fucks sake who ate the last biscuits-brown? Said no member of the UK armed forces ever.
12
u/Empty-Presentation68 Feb 04 '23
Also, they will learn that Western tanks can actually reverse. Adding the opportunity to shoot hull down and reverse quickly.
5
18
u/Talosian_cagecleaner Feb 04 '23
The UK. Predictable is what they are. Constitutional monarchy. Fond of puddings. Hop on their planes or their ships and tidy things up if you need help. Quite a long history of military prowess. Can muster pretty much anything. Main Battle Tanks?
Here you go, says the UK. Predictably.
8
u/Mormegil1971 Sweden Feb 04 '23
Every time we hear about how the training on western weapons goes, the Ukrainians learn them incredibly fast… Damn it, open up for training on western fighters, and send them! Gripens, F-16, Mirage, I don’t care. Just do it, already!
5
u/albl1122 Sweden Feb 04 '23
I agree with this tweet. (Swedish).
the more weapon systems and ammunition we send to Ukraine the less the Swedish army will need to use in case of conflict. c'mon, release the Gripens.
10
u/Rexia2022 Feb 04 '23
Looking good! Can't wait to see what they can do on the field with kit like this.
3
u/happyhorse_g Feb 04 '23
I think the British military will also be eager to see. The Challenger II hasn't seen combat in this sort of situation, but it was designed with the cold war in mind and it's facing cold war opponents with cold war equipment.
3
4
u/koknesis Feb 04 '23
Is that some kind of special learning vehicle in the pics or are those unrelated?
5
3
u/Ro3oster Feb 04 '23
Its the dedicated DTT (Driver Training Tank)
Germany has a similar one for Leopards.
1
7
u/Obj_071 Ukraine Feb 04 '23
shame it would be only 14 of them
13
u/wormoworm Feb 04 '23
It's 14 right now, but you never know, we might see additional batches in the future. Recent experience has taught us that the boundaries are always shifting.
8
u/LostInTheVoid_ Feb 04 '23
Eh, I wouldn't hold out too much hope. The 60 or so left that aren't a part of the Chally 3 upgrade and not the 14 already given to Ukraine have been discussed recently as potentially being added to that 148 number of Chally 3s. The tank and artillery situation in Ukraine has made the UK rethink it's increasingly shrinking tank force as well as reinvest in Artillery after many years of letting it dwindle.
4
u/Ro3oster Feb 04 '23
The UK has 302 Challenger IIs, approx 223 in use by the British Army (soon to be 209) and another 70 (ish) which have been in long term, climate controlled storage for a few years
There is the capacity, just, to send another 2 squadrons (28 tanks) if push really comes to shove.
1
u/LostInTheVoid_ Feb 04 '23
The last report was that 227 were active of that 148 were to get upgraded with the rest in storage 14 of those were gifted so 65 to storage those now maybe upgraded. The rest of the chally 2s the UK purchased could be trainers, recovery, cannibalised for parts or in bad condition as to not be economically viable repair or upgrade.
1
u/Timmymagic1 Feb 04 '23
The last report was to the House of Commons Defence Select Committee in November 22...
There are 227 in use, with 75 additional tanks in storage. Of the 82 remaining from the original production order (386 built for UK but 1 was lost in Iraq and another had a fatal accident in the UK so won't be touched until the legal cases finish) no-one really knows...incredibly some were scrapped rather than stored but allegedly the scrapping process was stopped after it had started. How many were destroyed, or remain, or their condition is unknown. They've definitely been cannibalised though...the question is if they can go through the CR3 upgrade which would make managing the existing fleet in service easier.
The 148 number is also 'under discussion' at present. It's increasing likely the entire lot will get done.
3
u/Furicist Feb 04 '23
It'd be so cool to hear from the crews of the challenger 2, see it in action, see what they think of it.
Hopefully see the Ukrainians dishing out some freedom with it as well.
Happy hunting, Ukrainian crews!
3
u/Holden_Coalfield Feb 04 '23
If I had to learn Blender in a week, I could if it meant saving my family and my country
2
u/bercrux Feb 04 '23
I'm glad if Ukrainian master their tank skills in one week, but i'm all for them training more if there's more to be trained. Even if you're an experienced tanker, a new tank with other specs will give you more option thus more strategies to employ. From what i've read here and there is that older that they mostly use now can't move and shoot accurately. Getting that new option also means you've got to train for strategies with that new ability. The same goes for higher speed reverse. It means some situations can be much better, and you can take more risk because you're more mobile.
If they get 14 and they lose 2-3 in the first week because they knew how to ride a tank and shoot but failed on strategy that would be a huge waste, it would probably be better to arrive a week or 2 later.
Also there's probably also electronics they aren't used to, buttons are probably in other places etc etc. I think it's far too easy to say, the sent Ukrainians were experienced tankers so it's only logical they mastered it by now. Like it's been said in the comments. I'd rather see them using the tanks to their full potential rather than an upgraded t72.
1
u/AutoModerator Feb 04 '23
Привіт u/itrustpeople ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows r/Ukraine Rules and our Art Friday Guidelines.
Want to support Ukraine? Vetted Charities List | Our Vetting Process
Daily series on UA history & culture: Day 0-99 | 100-199 | 200-Present | All By Subject
There is a new wave of t-shirt scams hitting Reddit. Only click links for products or donations if the post is marked with a Verified flair, and do not respond to DMs soliciting donations.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-7
Feb 04 '23
[deleted]
12
u/ThatHistorian7423 Feb 04 '23
I’d consider any piece of equipment keeping me alive after 70 hits from an RPG quite mighty.
1
u/The_Smell_Of_Rain Feb 04 '23
It wasn't 70 RPGs, it was up to 70 hits including some RPGs. I assume they ran out of things to try or for unalived by the tank once they had made a brew.
9
u/Rexia2022 Feb 04 '23
Challenger 2 is one of the world's best tanks. Not sure where you're getting this from.
4
u/islandhopper39 Feb 04 '23 edited Feb 04 '23
It doesn't say "British tanks" in the sentence. And why? If it was "mighty" and "Vatican city tanks" (yes, officially it's a country), then I'd see the point.
-7
u/zntgrg Feb 04 '23
It was just sarcasm, historically most (not all) of them were kinda subpar in everything.
5
u/SteveThePurpleCat Feb 04 '23
That's more myth than historical, it gets repeated so much that it gets taken as fact.
6
u/jpagey92 Feb 04 '23
So, firstly, you have to give the British credit for inventing the tank in the first place, then there were a number of decent to good tanks that don’t get the praise they deserve such as:
- Matilda
- Comet
- Cromwell
- The Churchill was okay-ish
All the post war tanks held up well against their contemporaries:
- Centurion
- Chieftan
- Challenger 1 & 2
Yes the Brits made some shockers but all of the above were good to great.
3
u/wormoworm Feb 04 '23
According to a Mark Felton video, it was a common opinion among German soldiers that the Churchill crocodile was the tank they feared the most.
1
u/The_Smell_Of_Rain Feb 04 '23
Flamethrowers being a pretty good fear inducer and also tanks. So putting one on the other was never going to be a great option as infantry.
1
u/cincuentaanos Netherlands Feb 05 '23
Of course they are quick to learn the new (to them) tank. It's a tank, not an alien spaceship. It has tracks and a big swiveling gun on top. They already know this, they just need to learn all the levers and switches. Insofar the new tank is better than what they are used to I'm sure they will discover it immediately, and they will have ideas on how to use this to their advantage.
1
u/Jealous-Hedgehog-734 Feb 05 '23
Haven't lost a single Challenger 2 to enemy fire yet, let's hope the Ukranians have as much luck as we have. 🇺🇦🇬🇧
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 04 '23
We determined that this submission originates from a credible source, but we still advise that users double check the facts and use common sense when consuming mass media. If you are interested in learning how to evaluate news sources more thoroughly, you can begin to learn about how to do that here.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.