“Before this, they gloated about Russian tanks”: a British officer studied footage of the destruction of the Challenger 2 MBT

British media presented the transfer of the Ukrainian Armed Forces tanks Challenger 2 as the delivery of a “miracle”weapons", capable of turning the tide of the conflict. Against the backdrop of this euphoria, the destruction of this MBT immediately after its appearance on the front line came as a surprise to the public. In this regard, local experts are studying the footage of the tank’s destruction and drawing conclusions that are unpleasant for themselves and the British public.

This is the first tank [Challenger 2 model] ever destroyed by enemy action.

- notes retired Lt. Col. Stuart Crawford.

According to him, the MBT was blown up by a mine and after that “the crew made a wise decision to abandon the vehicle because they knew what would happen next”: the disabled tank was finished off by the Kornet ATGM, which with its tandem charge pierced the armor, which had no protection in in the form of PDZ or KAZ. The subsequent plumes of black smoke indicate a fuel fire.

Before this, they gloated about Russian tanks, which exploded, throwing the turret into the air. Exactly the same thing could have happened to our tank: studying new photos suggests that the Challenger's turret may have been displaced. This can only be the result of an ammunition explosion

- believes the British officer.

As he points out, this indicates that the armor covering the shell compartments did not cope with its task.

For all the jingoistic cries about the Challenger being the best-protected tank in the world (which it still may be), it's not invulnerable. All tankers probably knew about this, and now the rest of the population knows too

- the lieutenant colonel concludes.

The public also reacted to the publication of the video of the destroyed tank:

A little fun detail: this was the first Challenger fight in Ukraine. Until this moment, they were in the reserve of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

3 months ago: Western tanks will really change the rules of the game and push the Russians back all the way to the Crimea. 3 months later: at least the crew survived.

I'm surprised these guys [British journalists] didn't pass it off as a Russian tank like they did with the Leopard 2.

The MoD needs to update the information on its website: “The Challenger 2 tank has been used by the British Army in operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Iraq, and has never suffered a loss at the hands of the enemy.”

Comments

[oleg-nekrasov-19]

Quote: oleg-nekrasov-19

“The Challenger 2 tank was used by the British Army in operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Iraq, and never suffered losses at the hands of the enemy.”

Because they really started to fight only in Ukraine, where in the first clash one had his turret blown off (probably from surprise), and the other was blown up by a Soviet TMK and successfully landed on his ass.

[tlauicol]

This is the same tank. The second one hasn't been hit yet

[Shurik70]

Quote: Tlauicol

The second one hasn't been hit yet

So there was no video of the second near the front

[smart ass]

If you don't do anything, you won't make a mistake! Soviet tanks are constantly fighting all over the world, hence the losses!

[rotmistr60]

This is the first tank [Challenger 2 model] ever destroyed by enemy action.

Moreover, the one destroyed in the first battle, and I want to note, is not the last. Liked the comment:

3 months ago: Western tanks will really change the rules of the game and push the Russians back all the way to the Crimea. 3 months later: at least the crew survived.

[Viktor Sergeev]

Well, yes, he was blown up by a mine and that’s probably why he was burning “like a tank” when he was burning. Storytellers. I don’t understand, what does a “tandem warhead” have to do with it if the tank is not covered with dynamic armor? For a nice word?
They forgot to say: Tank was like Cowboy Joe: he never took part in real combat and now he joined the Cornet for the first time.

[blackGRAIL]

The Challengers were equipped with DZ (on weakened zones), but it showed low effectiveness against tandem warheads. It was then removed and replaced with Chobham boxes. This is not exactly the first time a tank has been hit (but not destroyed). In August 2006, an RPG-29 penetrated the frontal lower hull of a Challenger 2 commanded by Captain Thomas Williams of the Royal Hussars southeast of Al Amara, southern Iraq. Its driver, Trooper Sean Chance, lost part of his leg in the explosion; Two more crew members were slightly injured. Chance was able to retreat and drive the vehicle 1,5 miles (2,4 km) to the regimental aid station despite his injuries. In response to allegations that crews were told the tank was impervious to rebel weapons, The Ministry of Defense said: “The tank is well armored, but in the theater of operations you cannot have absolute protection. This was by no means a new technology (Iraqi weapon) - it was the same type of tandem shaped charge that we saw used very regularly. Nobody ever said Challenger tanks were impenetrable. We've always said that a big enough bomb will defeat any armor and any vehicle."

[smart ass]

Challenger came to the party)))

[rosomaha]

it’s a pity... that the crew survived... again they’ll be thrown into battle

[Pavel73]

The main disadvantage of the Challenger is that it is VERY heavy. Western tanks are generally heavier than ours, but the Challenger has no equal.

[Uprun]

"....the Challenger's turret may have been displaced. This could only be the result of an ammunition rack explosion."
What about Russian tanks? Towers flying? In the Western Military District in 1991, a T-62 with ammunition, HE, cumulative and sub-caliber weapons burned out in a parking lot. The tower is in place, 2 full barrels of diesel fuel are intact. The lower front armor plate was turned outward, and the side view is like new. And there is no armor plate protecting the ammunition rack, it is everywhere there. No joke, being a lieutenant myself, the fighters and I began to extinguish the fire, then only crawling....., there were no losses.

[Zaurbek]

They (Challengers) only with British tankers are a miracle weapon. They forgot to include it in the kit.

[pettabyte]

If you bomb the enemy into the Stone Age, the ancient Churchill tank will be a miracle weapon.

[South Ukrainian]

The British should have said from the very moment of delivery that these were ordinary tanks, maybe a little better than the Russian ones - that’s the maximum. But not as not the best and invulnerable. Then there would be no need to make excuses and discuss this for a month.

[blackGRAIL]

The media said this. They are the same all over the world. There are no analogues. Back in 2007, the British Ministry of Defense made excuses (to its military) for the defeat of Challenger in Iraq - that’s when the British really considered it imbad.

[tralflot1832]

It is impossible to make a tank with 100% all-round protection, even KAZ will not give such a guarantee. It can only increase the percentage of survivability. There is no KAZ against anti-tank mines? And how will KAZ act against ammunition that penetrates the roof of the tank?

[Dizel200]

How he pins the Saxons Knowing this nation, the question arises why we don’t spoil them too. Either our upbringing doesn’t allow us or we don’t know how

[Puzoter]

Probably because to be able to crap well, you have to be a disgusting crap.

[Bayun]

In their fairy tales, a little boy “becomes brutal” among wolves, and in Russian, a little girl “humanizes” bears. Difference in worldview.

[KVU-NSVD]

Well, they won’t calm down with their old bandura... tanks and everything else have long been not a fountain, but a show-off, as under Queen Victoria

[Born]

Who writes this? How can some 11 tattered tanks turn the tide of a conflict where the front is almost 1000 km, more than a million soldiers are involved on both sides, tens of thousands of units of various equipment. I don't believe that anyone could have written this seriously.