Military Review

Challenger 2: Advantages and disadvantages of the British tank, which is planned to be delivered to Ukraine

Challenger 2: Advantages and disadvantages of the British tank, which is planned to be delivered to Ukraine

In January of this year, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak promised to hand over to Kyiv Tanks Challenger 2. So far we are talking about 14 units.

Of course, the above quantity can hardly be called "commodity". A dozen and a half British MBTs globally for the Armed Forces of Ukraine will not change anything. But still, the question remains whether the Challengers will be able to deliver problems to the armored vehicles of the RF Armed Forces.

On the advantages and disadvantages

If we are talking about T-62M or even T-72B3 tanks, the Challenger 2 will have no problems with them. Another thing is the T-90M.

Of course, given the number of tanks Britain is about to supply, a one-on-one encounter is unlikely. But still, such a scenario should not be ruled out.

So, if we talk about maneuverability, then the Challenger 2 is much inferior to our tank. The Briton is almost 15 tons heavier than the T-90M, and therefore it is extremely clumsy. In addition, the T-90's crossroad speed is 50 km/h versus 40 km/h for the Challenger 2.

Another thing is armor protection. The Challenger 2 is one of the heaviest NATO tanks. Its hull and turret are protected by layered, highly classified Dorchester armor. It is possible to install dynamic protection ROMOR, as well as lattice screens. However, the Relict and Afganit dynamic and active protection kits for the T-90M somewhat equalize the chances of the vehicles.

As for the cannon, our tank has an advantage here, and then, in close combat. The bottom line is the automatic loader, which is in the T-90M and which the Challenger 2 does not have. As a result, it takes about 4 seconds to reload the cannon of a Russian tank, while manual loading of a British requires at least 8 seconds and depends on the degree of training and fatigue loader.

But at long range, the 120-mm L30E4 rifled gun mounted on the Challenger has no equal. The effective firing range of the HESH projectile from this gun reaches 8 km. But are there open areas of comparable length in the same Donbas with its countless agglomerations for this kind of actual tank shooting? Or are they planning to use his cannon in the version of self-propelled guns or conventional artillery?

In fact, the Challenger 2 will definitely not be an easy target for our tanks in the event of a direct collision. But there is no need to talk about any obvious advantages of the British either.

About stories creation of Challenger 2:


Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Iris
    Iris 14 February 2023 19: 18
    I haven't read it, but I do. We know better than anyone how to determine the taste of the color. There was not a single real fight between these two machines, everything is taken from advertising booklets, but the analysts have already piled on and crushed.
  2. Third district
    Third district 14 February 2023 19: 38
    It is not the shortcomings of these tanks that need to be discussed, but how to make sure that these tanks do not get to the front. Moreover, everything for this is there. There is not only one
    - political will. To send forest all the friends of the merchants.
  3. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 14 February 2023 19: 41
    All these "hooray-optimism" should seem to have diminished somewhat, but the adherents of "Kyiv-in-three-days" stubbornly continue to call black and gray.
    The situation can be described in a positive way only from the angle that our still superiority in the air gives us the opportunity to disable these machines. Otherwise, nothing good. The Western school of tank building continued the line of German logic (to some extent), in which the tank was considered as a highly protected precision weapon, and not a high-speed racer. Under the condition of qualitatively better reconnaissance and target designation (yes, even if they are equal), such vehicles in defense can become an EXTREMELY unpleasant surprise for our advancing forces, and their advantage in speed and maneuverability is to a certain extent leveled by mine laying and "javes" from the infantry.
    It is precisely as a means of strengthening the defense that these machines are as unpleasant as possible, and it is precisely in this capacity that their homeopathic (so far) quantities can already become an extremely inconvenient factor for us.
  4. Ezekiel 25-17
    Ezekiel 25-17 14 February 2023 19: 59
    The Shermans lost to the Tigers, but it was they who won.
    1. kot423
      kot423 14 February 2023 20: 08
      Quote: Ezekiel 25-17
      The Shermans lost to the Tigers, but it was they who won.

      Uh-huh ... After all, it was the mattress Shermans of the Second World War that won, but what’s there, it’s Sherman who ripped apart a column of tanks alone, they just painted the KV on it to disguise ...
      Py.Sy. Watch less Hollywood bullshit and read more history books...
  5. cold wind
    cold wind 14 February 2023 20: 03
    From the interesting South African "Armata" BM Falcon I or AB9C4:

    Abrams for this concept:

    1. Victorovich
      Victorovich 14 February 2023 22: 53
      I don't have to go far
      We open ZVO 1985 .... 1990 and there are descriptions with drawings of different tanks, which are not only R&D, but which are currently going through the stages of preliminary design with a discussion of the parameters required by the customer.
      There are crazy tanks and all kinds of anti-tank systems (even with a kinetic warhead).
  6. Thorvlobnor IV
    Thorvlobnor IV 14 February 2023 20: 41
    And what, we will not compare optical means of observation?
    And why is Challenger suddenly clumsy? Automatic transmission, 6 forward, 2 back, all as it should be for a sniper tank, whose task is to destroy armored vehicles and fortified firing points with direct fire, using modern aiming aids and a tactical information system.
  7. svp67
    svp67 15 February 2023 16: 05
    The effective firing range of the HESH projectile from this gun reaches 8 km.
    Yes, it has become scary. But it’s okay that these ammunition are powerless against the combined and multi-layered armor barrier, which is now EVERYWHERE installed on our tanks
    1. Dedok
      Dedok 17 February 2023 14: 53
      Quote: svp67
      which is now EVERYWHERE installed on our tanks

      on the upgraded T62 too ??
  8. Roman Efremov
    Roman Efremov 15 February 2023 16: 42
    He has one main drawback - too much weight (and a whole range of related problems). It is heavier than Abrams and Leopard 2.
    The second drawback - let's say, some specific design elements. The engine and gun (and shells for it), which are nowhere else, except in Britain. About Jordan (which still has this tank in service) is not worth remembering.
    1. Dedok
      Dedok 17 February 2023 14: 55
      Quote: Roman Efremov
      engine and cannon (and shells for it), which are nowhere else, except in Britain.

      what are you talking about?
      gun L7 - put into service by very many countries from the EU (NATO) .....
    2. Dedok
      Dedok 17 February 2023 14: 57
      Quote: Roman Efremov
      The second drawback - let's say, some specific design elements. Engine

      one of the best cars (NATO)
      compare the engine dimensions and weight with the dimensions and weight of our
      then compare the performance characteristics...
  9. 1erWahrheitsMinister_1984
    1erWahrheitsMinister_1984 16 February 2023 18: 40
    Ich kann nicht in Worte fassen, wie mich diese "Analysen" ankotzen!!!

    Man sollte sich lieber damit befassen, ob man das in einem atomaren
    Schmelzofen verkohlte Metall solcher Fahrzeuge noch weiter einschmelzen
    und zu Straßenlatternen verarbeiten kann, wenn man die menschliche Schlacke ehemaliger Feinde ausreichend verdampft hat...!!!
    SO and only SO kann man diese angelsächsische Pest sowohl in GB, als auch in den USA, Kanada und Australien ein für alle mal ausrotten...!!!!!

    Es muss endlich Schluss sein mit dem ganzen Gequatsche, oder will man
    anschließend die gleiche Diskussion bei den von den gleichen Dreckschweinen demnächst gelieferten Kampffflugzeugen führen?!?

    HIER Sterben russische Menschen, Soldaten, aber auch Zivilisten, diesem US/GB - Pack ist nichts heilig und deswegen müssen sie endlich ebenfalls zur Kriegspartei gemacht und atomar in ihren EIGENEN LÄNDERN spüren, was sie der Welt angetan haben,
    sonst hört DAS nie auf...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!