Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine

The floodgates have opened. To any vatnik crying that there's no "coalition". There it is, just like with the IFVs

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm sorry Challenger

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Shit tank

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    probably waited for soeone else to do it first aka poland

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Oh yeah I'm sure 2 tanks will stop the Russian army lmao
    NATO must be really desperate

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Cope and die I guess

      so
      were there rumors about ukrainians training to use challenger 2 tanks?

      my money's on Ukranian crews already training on them as we speak

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The first batch of crews likely already finished training. Just like with the Leo2s. The most epic sight to behold will be british and german tanks side by side thundering through the steppes with a Balkenkreuz painted on them in a video by some troll with a medley of Panzerlied and By Jingo in the background.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I live by Salisbury Plains.
        You are likely correct. Alot of Ukies being trained around here.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Good one.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thats rite comrade; its over for Hato 2 more weeks and garden gnomelensky will be hanged in kiev

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's 10 I think. But no 10 tanks wont make a difference. It's the dozens of Leopards that will stem from this political move that will make the difference

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      18 HIMARS were not supposed to do anything but here we are and the vatniks have yet to find a way to stop them from blowing their ammo depots and stopping offensive.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Meadow family of jammers does exactly this. Why do you think himars launches are so few and far in between, successful ones even more so? And why it's nearly always at night? It's coz the piece of shit won't fire unless GPS is available, and Meadow fucks that up so badly that they send ''everything'' to destroy one whenever discovered. And they only turn it off for night bombers because they do high precision automated bombing runs and need satnav coordinates.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That was meant to be italics formatting, not scare quotes.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >russia simp is a newgay
            What a surprise.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >the new shills don't even know how to post on PrepHole
            Do you ever wondered what happened to your predecessors?
            You should.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >multiple himars missiles struck a military hospital chock full of Russians
          >one fatality and one wounded
          I think their best result was killing half a dozen mercs which made the mistake of taking the top floors of the building, not the bottom ones, and had enough hubris to stay there for a month after learning that their location was on the hitlist.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Out of the 18 HIMARS sent to Ukraine, over 200 have been destroyed

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      i jejed

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The bigger picture is NATO being less afraid of sending heavy armour to Ukraine. There's less of an excuse for "muh escalation" now. Don't be surprised if Ukraine receives long range missiles this year now that more barriers are being broken.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        NATO is just desperate now that Russia adapted to HIMARS it no longer damages them.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >adapted to HIMARS
          >after over 600 died in a recent strike
          Nah, just pushing back everything out of range isn't a real adaptation as much as it is total submission.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            especially as the burgers could just send rockets with 3 times the range if they wanted kek

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >600 dead maviivka
          >75% fewer artillery strikes by Russia vs peak
          HIMARs still having intended effect

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Russia is a insect compared to NATO

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >adapted to HIMARS
          This is not an RPG, where you can gain “Resistance to HIMARS” perk after being attacked enough times

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's 10 I think. But no 10 tanks wont make a difference. It's the dozens of Leopards that will stem from this political move that will make the difference

      Brits can send somewhere in the region of 50 to 70 Chally 2's without affecting their regular army and still keeping a big chunk of tanks in reserve.
      >obviously that's just based on total numbers bought, no idea what condition their tank fleet is in

      A standard NATO armored battalion is 50 tanks. So yeah, a free armored battalion for Ukraine. Not going to change the outcome of the war, but a battalion of modern tanks is certainly going to ruin a lot of days for a lot of Russians.
      >potentially

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I can’t speak to the force structure of other NATO members but an American ABCT has about 86 M1s total, that’s 86 for the whole brigade, which consists of 2 armored battalions, 1 combined arms battalion and 1 Cav squadron. For now anyway until the new division structure is implemented. Point being at least for the US 50 tanks is well beyond a single battalions worth.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The MOD has already begun the upgrades to Challenger 3. I suspect the tanks sent will be the ones that werent due for upgrade.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Pretty much. Allows us to dispose of remaining ammunition without building new storage too. I think only 150 are getting converted so that means roughly 70 are up for grabs and I assume the ones sent to support Poland where they sent in their T-72s were actually for training Ukie tankers since there was little risk of Russia actually invading a NATO nation.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            meh I dont want us to send all the chally 2s we have. I want germany to release the leopard supplies, at least until we fire up some tank manufacturing. I'd rather send a token diplomatic gesture and retain some chally 2's in reserve

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Even sending a batallion is rather unproblematic when drawn from storage. The only short to midterm enemy that requires a sizeable tank fleet is already drawing T-62s from deep storage. Suwalki Gap is not happening.

              Sending Leopards makes more sense, though.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I think from the MOD they want data on how Chally 2 performs in a "modern" combat zone. Anyone whos been in UK armoured essentially has done nothing of note for nesrly 15years because all UK operations were counter terrorism. Throw some old Challys into the Bakhmut grinder, see how they perform then adjust doctrine and equipment from there.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I think from the MOD they want data on how Chally 2 performs in a "modern" combat zone.
                Why? The brits consider most of its fighting systems obsolescent and already address its outdated gun, ammo stowage and optics in Challenger 3 (unless Ukraine gets the TISP Challenger 2s that actually have modern thermal sights).
                At best they're hoping it does poorly and they can secure better funding for replacement because it adds an air of urgency

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Thats my point. Chally hasnt seen action since the end of 2003 and spent the few years after having rocks thrown at it by pissed off iraqis. The MOD wants data on its performance. The govt announced its going to spend billions on modernising the army so I suspect the Army wants money. Chally 2 data can do this. If it does poorly they can justify more money for upgrades. If it does well they can justify expanding the number of Chally 3s it has. Either way its a win win for the MOD.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Only 120 were earmarked for upgrade. 380-ish Chally 2s were built for the British. So... if they wanted they could send 150 tanks over.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They need some reserves though. Neither the UK or France really have the capability to provide significant tanks.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              If they keep 120 in storage they can send 50-70. Thats a lot of tanks.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Seems like it, going off the number of shills on here they are funding.

    • 2 weeks ago
      T-I-G-E-R-S

      >Loud and sound 2 HIMARS reference
      >Infinite (You)s
      Good one, anon

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I lel'd

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      grats on 100k for a 10k village i guess

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >2 tanks
      >still more than the amount of deployed Armatas

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Better than zero.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      okay that one got me.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >kek at the joke
      >kek again at the unironic replies
      well posted anon

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I read this post yesterday, and it was equally fun today. It has staying power. 9/10 would read again. Is this a new maymay?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >NATO must be really desperate
      If it really was, we'd be sending more. So I wish we were.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      top zozzle

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    so
    were there rumors about ukrainians training to use challenger 2 tanks?

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    inb4 those partners are Jordanians and it's Chieftains being sent

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This war becomes more like the Iran-Iraq War every day.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Good luck little Chally, make us proud.
    >Up the Guarrrrrrrrrrdddsssssssssss

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I hope it gets wiped out. Not because I think it's a bad tank but unless it's shown to be bad, we'll never spend money on a better tank.
      .

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    These things won't change thing. Porks are fucked up, no matter how many equipment Nato sends to them. No men anymore who are able to fight. Thousands of dead in Soledar, 900 surrendered to Wagner already.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >900 surrendered to Wagner already.
      I'm sure there's plenty of pics and vids on their telegram about this, no?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Soon enough there will be videos, check RSOTM Telegram channel tomorrow morning

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I can't wait

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Mucho obligado.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Can i see?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Prigozhin himself denied the mass surrender myth cope and seethe vatnik

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Thousands of dead in Soledar
      Yeah 70% of it are Russians lmao

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    too little too late, ukraine is back at a desperate and costly defense now, with no hope of ever going on the attack again
    russia on the other will only get stronger now, they hit rock bottom as a modern army but still avoided defeat against nato and now grow stronger and stronger as a mass infantry army

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > NATO
      By "NATO" you clearly mean "junior slavs armed with a small number of 1990's era NATO weapons"

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I thought defense was always easier than offense?

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Don't these tanks weigh like 70+ tons? They're just going to stuck in a spring mud if they are ever delivered. I even doubt that Ukraine will be able to send them east of Dnieper, because Ukrainian bridges are probably not engineered to endure such weights.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think they've tested this tank in mud at some point in its decade long development

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The ground pressure is the same as a t72

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Didn't the ropey Challenger 1 manage to kill like 200+ slavshit tanks in Iraq for zero losses? Surely against T-62's its gonna be open season

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes. (Although there were some mechanical breakdowns.)

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes the 1st Armoured Division (UK) wiped out 300 Iraqi tanks in 97hrs they pretty much shoahd the entire Iraqi 46th Mechanised and 52nd Armoured Brigades. Plus they dabbed on 3+ infantry divisions from the Iraqi 7th Corps. Not sure how many other vehicles they blew up on their rodeo. The only tank that was considered a threat were the T72s used by the Republican Guard but they had already withdrawn. All in all they didnt take a single combat loss and the bigger issue was breakdowns because prior to the start of the war only 20-40% of the tanks were operational and the crews rushed getting them up and running.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Too few for a real use case, but set them up hull down on the Belarus border and free up some T-72s that might be doing that already.
    Hopefully Leo2 will come in enough numbers that they can be used in platoon level.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Didn't they liberate a whole oblast with a tank battalion?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Didn't they liberate a whole oblast with a tank battalion?

      15 tanks.

      The entire Kharkov offensive was the result of a breakthrough by 15 (fifteen) tanks. Thats it. They identified a weak point in the line, massed 1 (one) company of tanks, threw it at the line, the line broke, they then flooded the hole with lighter units who spread out in the rear and created chaos. The chaos caused a rout.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    give them atacams and tomahawks

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I really hope we don’t see the Ukrainians treat the challengers poorly.
    Tired of seeing t-72s used as howitzers, working alone and unsupported, or just plain being used like a hilltop bunker like it’s fucking Syria circa 2013.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The problem right now is that when the war started lots of volunteer groups formed, these then got official mandate to become battalions. These battalions then capture tanks and use them themselves. So, more often than not when you see one tank being used as a field gun, its in the hands of a volunteer battalion that has 3 tanks and dont quite know how to use them. The lack of uniformity and resource allocation aggravates me. It triggers the fucking shit out of me like you cannot believe.

      Every trophy should be thrown on a tank transporter and taken to a rear workshop, worked over, repainted and then distributed to tank units. If you create a volunteer battalion you're either infantry or moto. inf. STOP FUCKING LARPING.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't like this. We should give Ukraine our surplus stuff, but giving too much could pull us into the war. This is exactly how WW2 pulled USA into it. Germany fucked france up, then Brtitain started crying and begging. Then the Japanese attacked us cause we were sending military supplies to their enemies. I REALLY don't want to fucking fight for a government that hates me, throws shit down at me and cries about rights while trying to take mine away.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Then the Japanese attacked us cause we were sending military supplies to their enemies.
      No, it was because of the oil embargo because they were genociding the chinks

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >No, it was because of the oil embargo because they were genociding the chinks
        And the Japanese were right, FUCK China. China screws everyone over. You try to export your jobs to china, then the next month you get 6chinese knock offs of your product. You try to buy computer chips and the chinese government you can only have X inferior chips. China only cares about china, everyone else could burn and they would laugh.

        We should take the muzzle off Japan and let them deal with the chinese problem like they almost did the first time. At least Japan understands honor, integrity and even fair trade.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          America has consistently put its own interests first at the expense of everyone else. Weird thing to get butthurt about now.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Its almost exclusively Israel's interests though.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Our interest very commonly align with the interests of the greater global community, we practically police the world’s oceans for everyone’s benefit, including our own

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, I agree bratan. I am also a totally organic Westerner afraid of escalation and we should not support the woke Ukrainians,

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >they are nazis
        >they are woke
        Its like we are in February 2022 again

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Go volunteer for Ukraine and die in a ditch then. If my government forces me into a draft, I know which end my rifle will be pointing.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Country?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            United States of America.
            Why do you ask? I'm sorry, I just don't support CURRENT THING, I just don't. What's in it for my country?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >What's in it for my country?
              Uh oh, retard alert

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >What's in it for my country?
              if that's not abundantly clear already, then you might just be retarded or under-educated (a fact of life in the USA unfortunately).

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Spell it out for me like I breath through my mouth, cause I don't recall what being allied to Ukraine brought me and my country. Other than corruption, money laundry and backroom deals.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Besides anything else, the value of the dollar is largely underpinned by the US being top dog. Do you want your currency to be worthless? Do you want the cost of everything to skyrocket? Letting Russia rub it's cock and balls in Uncle Sam's face is a good way to do that.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The dollar was strong when Ukraine was part of Russia, though. Purchasing power of the dollar is super weak right now and that's due to inflation by our government, not Russia attacking Ukraine.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >purchasing power
                >inflation
                >by our government
                he's hopeless

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                are you capable of thinking on a longer timespan than a year? have a nice day you fucking idiot

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I don't recall what being allied to Ukraine brought me and my country. Other than corruption, money laundry and backroom deals.
                Source?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Most of what we send them is now a debt they have to repay. They are resource rich, with huge mineral and energy deposits.

                you would have to be an utter retard not to see what the outcome of a long-term investment in Ukraine would deliver.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Going half way around the world to Ukraine for mineral deposits
                >When Alaska is right in front of us
                Not a smart move.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                But you get to ruin the natural beauty of another country, not ours.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Watched a documentary on Youtube of this "town" in Alaska where almost all of the town's residents live in one building. Just because it's so cold and hard to get supplies to where they live.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Alaska isnt part of Europe, which is the primary market for Ukrainian gas. In the long term, a pro-Western Ukraine is profitable for everyone involved. It also fucking breaks Russia which has been a long time adversary of the united states (who has only stayed in the game because Europe needs their gas). Its in American interests to remain the hegemon. Remaining the hegemon is based, largely, on energy. Simple as.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Spell it out for me like I breath through my mouth
                D E A D R U S S I A N S
                E
                A
                D
                R
                U
                S
                S
                I
                A
                N
                S

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Disarming and humiliating your former geopolitical rival (currently a major threat if allied with china) for the cost of obselete equipement that would cost more to dispose of otherwise. With zero american servicemen lives lost, while gaining an ally who's population will be grateful to you for decades to come. This keeps the US' status as the world hegemon, allowing it dictate what happens outside of china (for now)

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                This war was never just about Ukraine.
                Appeasement isn't going to work any better today than it did in the 30s, so the problem ought to be nipped in the bud as soon as possible.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Russia would occupy up to Riga & Vilnius if it could, turn Germany into a 100% vassal and have France cowering. The Ron Paul isolationist types, can't foresee the ultimate financial cost of permitting that.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/5QdlrKr.png

                This war was never just about Ukraine.
                Appeasement isn't going to work any better today than it did in the 30s, so the problem ought to be nipped in the bud as soon as possible.

                >but if I'm not in Europe, how does this affect me?
                Remember that the whole world is supposedly rightful Russian clay. They're going to do this all over again as soon as they think they'll get away with it, and the most effective way to delay their inevitable next conflict is to cripple their military as much as we can in this one.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >I OPPOSE CURRENT THING
              Of course you do, as do many people in your obla- county.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >What's in it for my country?
              Dead Russians

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The complete destruction of the military potential, political credibility and economical strength of one of your primary geopolitical adversaries, for a bargain price. And this is *before* the versaille style assramming session that Russia is hellbent on getting to, as trying to wargame the current realistic outcomes results in everything being different levels of Russia getting violently sodomized, with the most gentle of these versions is a disgraceful retreat and selling Crimea to have reparations taken off the board.

              There is a reason the west's style of aid only seems to help Ukraine enough to create a gentle forward momentum for Ukraine when looking at it from a birds eye view, while still permitting localized Russian victories; they want Russia to continue this until it has to take whatever deal Zelensky give it, and then offer its sodomized asshole to the west as a peace offering while all its nationalized resources gets privatized and happen to see majority ownership in western hands.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Russians gets bombed - I laugh.
                Ukraines get bombed - I laugh.
                What's so hard to understand? Only time I take this stupid war seriously is when innocent civilians die, but Russia is getting back for it so it evens out.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >What's in it for my country?
              Killing communists and defending freedom for a people that actually WANT to be free.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Freedom is when you sell off your country to BlackRock.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >when your country is being blown to shit and you need billions, maybe even trillions of dollars to properly rebuild it after the war so go to the largest company that manages investments in the world to try get some money.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                is when you sell off your country to BlackRock.

                What's the alternative? Russia's decrepit kleptocracy? I'd pick the Wests globocorps over that any day of the week.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Relative to being genocided by the steppe mutt rapehorde, yes
                Nobody else to blame here but Russia (as usual)

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Into your mouth most likely, 4chanchud

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You don't even own guns fuck face.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Even though I do spend a lot of time on PrepHole and get constantly bombarded with retardation, once in a while there will be a post such as yours with such a misinformed shit take that you just slump back in your chair and fall silent.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      i agree i am from murmansk 56th state of RUSA and we must rescind our aggression lest we anger the mighty russo-american bear.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Much obliged for this insightful post. I totally agree we should stop escalating the situation we do not want to anger the bear.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Except Germany fucked up France AND Britain.. Hitler was just too honorable to let them retreat back over to Britain instead of destroying them when he had the chance. If you disagree you don't know your history.

        I just don't like that we are dropping even more of our tank numbers.
        We used to have tanks in the thousands now our current tank fleet is at 227 and will be reduced to 148 for Challenger 3's introduction.
        Sad, really.

        Da comrade I too live off wheat bread and vodka too! Come to my house we can share a dose of HIV!

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          yerp

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Retard. I guess you've never heard of the Battle of France, Dunkirk or Operation Dynamo. have a nice day.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I like that you people can't even comprehend someone would disagree so you assume they are the complete opposite and are against everything you are for.
          Lol I literally just said I don't like how small our tank numbers are getting, I say that as a Brit who wants a strong military and AFV presence.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I say this as a brit!
            Yeh u said that already, post passport vanya

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Except Germany fucked up France AND Britain.. Hitler was just too honorable to let them retreat back over to Britain instead of destroying them when he had the chance. If you disagree you don't know your history.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You're a fucking moron

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          read

          Retard. I guess you've never heard of the Battle of France, Dunkirk or Operation Dynamo. have a nice day.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I just don't like that we are dropping even more of our tank numbers.
      We used to have tanks in the thousands now our current tank fleet is at 227 and will be reduced to 148 for Challenger 3's introduction.
      Sad, really.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I'm from London Oblast and I also think we should not give the Hohols any more support. Once Putin sends his reserves then Ukraine will collapse, and he will come for Eastern Europe. I for one do not wish to die for Poland.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I am of the same thinking manners in this, that why NATO needs to not grow bigger as to not escalate this war. I want to keep drinking my cola in Alabama 🙁 All is understood.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Subtle.
        But I appreciated it. My eyebrow raised for a second.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >but giving too much could pull us into the war. This is exactly how WW2 pulled USA into it.
      Da comrade, I agree. I am Jack Daniels from Tennesee oblast, and I say - it was mistake to stop Hitler from genociding all 180 million soviet kacaps. Eastern lebensraum was a nazi legitimate security concern, and sleepy Roosevelt blindly walked directly into the mistake of ruining the world with churka communism.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Then the Japanese attacked us cause we were sending military supplies to their enemies
      Uh this post gave me cancer

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The US was isolationist and didn’t want to get involved, FDR and the elites were itching to join and kept pushing things as much as possible until Japan was forced to action and riled all the retards up.
      Conversely with the situation today where the retards have already been brainwashed into desiring a nuclear exchange with Russia

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Funny how no one is ever responsible for their own actions, no matter what it’s always them evil Americans manipulating everyone. have a nice day you 5th columnist bitch made gay.

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    SEND THEM ABRAMS FOR FUCKS SAKE

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They're likely already there

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    While challenger 2 is obsolete to modern western standards, it is still more capable than anything Russia has.

    I just hope the Ukrainians get the good western tanks like abrams and leopard 2.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >leopard 2.
      Confirmed already today. Abrams most likely soon; they're the last ones that haven't been announced yet

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >yfw Joseph Biden awakes from his slumber and commits 500 Abrams

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          If the US is only giving 50 Brads, I think 10 Abrams is the optimistic number unfortunately.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I can't wait to see that heavy pile of junk break down and get stuck in the mud before firing a single shot and then be destroyed by artillery.

      >your brain on ukrop pigger propaganda
      T-72, T-80, and T-90 are all good tanks and more than capable of going toe-to-toe with their western counterparts.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >with their western counterparts.
        so, the shermans??? Fucking western counterparts to T 72s lol lmao what is that even? A flintstones' car?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          M60 and Chieftain.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            well they ain't gonna be fighting against chieftans

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It isn't obsolete, it is dated though

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Challenger 2 smoking it's destined enemy at last
    I'm cooming

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ngl i hope the ruskies smoke them all just to see it blow up in the face of our smug politicians

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      more to destroy attitude never work. It's a force not to be reckoned with

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    In hindsight rusmorons probably shouldn't have tried to assassinate those people on British soil.

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I get that any tank is still a tank, and useful, hence why even T-72s can be useful in the right hands, but the Challenger 2 is an overweight underpowered two piece ammunition rifled barrel piece of hot dogshit

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It will probably be posted in an area where combat is less likely to free up other tanks like T-72s, T-64s, and T-80s.
      The Chally 2 can probably stand up to Russian forces but the small number will only strain an already burdened Ukrainian logistical system.
      Thankfully the Leopard 2 is common weapon among western and NATO arsenals so Ukraine can have much greater easing fielding and maintaining such systems.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Infinite k/d ratio just like its predecessor
      Challenger provokes cope amongst the weak like you.
      See you soon loser

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      HOW DARE YOU§§§

      It's three piece.

      >t. challenger gunner.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Really? What is the third piece?
        I can only think of the Charge, and Projectile parts.
        Whats third?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Imbecile

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Primer (15 round magazine in the gun breach)
          Effectively a 50 cal casing

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            *10 round magazine

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The tanks or the amount isn't really all that important, what is important is that it's "breaking the precedent"
    No more excuses, let's see the Fulda Gap scenario play out for real.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yeah,you will get the usual cope post where brown hands will write bad shit about it(just like in the recent bradly/marder/amx threads.thats all they can do before they have to go back the mines/shitting streets.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Bradley Cope
        So people still take Pentagon Wars seriously? Or have they fully descended into the Sparky/Blacktail schizo level delusions shilling Burton and Sprey 24/7

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Rifled?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      For lesser accuracy, ironically.
      Modern sabot rounds produce their own spin so rifling the barrel actually has a reverse effect on accuracy and you will find that the M256 or Rh120 L/44 smoothbores are more accurate than the rifled barrel on Chally 2.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Less accurate
        >Rh120 L44 M256 superior
        > A Challenger with the callsign 11B fired at an Iraqi main battle tank from a distance of more than 5,100 meters – just above three miles – with an armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding-sabot round, the longest tank-on-tank kill ever.

        Wewwwww laaaaaad

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Anon, the Challenger was beat by the Leopard fucking 1 in CAT 1987 gunnery tests....

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >In total, British Challengers destroyed roughly 300 Iraqi tanks without suffering a single loss in combat. Patrick Cordingley, the commander of 7th Armoured Brigade, said afterwards that "Challenger is a tank built for combat and not competitions."
            Sorry the talent show didn't match reality 🙁

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The challenger, being rather old in tooth now, may well be one of the less capable tanks in nato as of 2023. But it's a slavshit wrecker. It's like an F-15 with tracks when it comes to actually popping slavshit turrets. The russkies have dragged out base model T-62's in huge numbers. Obviously it's just a political gesture to release a stockpile of Leopards which is where the real fun begins, but let's try not to lose sight of the fact that NATO's most out of date tank is still going to be useful against slavshit. If they send them up to the border with belarus they could hold back a formation of old T-72s and T-62s forever until the russkies manage to get air assets or artillery on them, and even then the russian shit is innacurate

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >A chally once destroyed a tank from the far side of the moon.
          And we mock the ruskies for believing their own propaganda.

          https://i.imgur.com/eQQtDkF.png

          Anon, the Challenger was beat by the Leopard fucking 1 in CAT 1987 gunnery tests....

          Sush you THE OTHER SIDE OF THE EFFING MOON I TELL YOU

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Help my Soviet smooth bore gun is winning! Just like its soviet steel hull

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Prince Harry's real Dad btw

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Modern sabot rounds produce their own spin

        They do not spin at all, they are fin stabilized, shot out of a smoothbore barrel. If the barrel is rifled, you use a slipping sabot, so the arrow spins slowly. This actually increases accuracy since it evens out aerodynamic asymmetries and also helps with sabot separation since the sabot is spinning very fast. The downside is that you lose a few tens of meters per second in muzzle velocity.

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Whats with the low effort posts coping about the Challenger like it wouldn't completely wreck any pos on that battlefield? Vatniks in overdrive? Dennis of his meds? Or just seething ex colonials posting while shitting on the pavement.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Well, I'm British, and I acknowledge that the Chally 2 is a particularly weaker tank in comparison with stuff like the M1 Abrams and Leo 2.
      Although, I would much rather be in my Chally 2 than an Ariete or T-72.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Weaker how? Which leopard 2? Which Abrams?
        I'd rather be in the tank that's never been lost before t.b.h.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Vatniks in overdrive? Dennis of his meds? Or just seething ex colonials posting while shitting on the pavement.
      isnt that just post 2016 4chan?

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >10 tanks are the wunderwaffen we need
    FELLAS, WE DID IT! WE RUINED PrepHole!

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >donate
      Funny way of describing lend-lease which as the name implies comes at a cost.

  28. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Challengers AND Leopards? Must be Christmas for them.

  29. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Are there any actual statements on this beside a twitter screencap?

  30. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Remember kids, not just T-72s throw their turrets!
        Hey angloids, you should have put blow out panels on this thing.
        What is it with European tanks beings so scared of blow out panels? Even the Leo 2 and Leclerc with blow out panels still store the majority of ammo in the hull.
        M1 Abrams is the only in service tank that has all ammo in blow out panel compartments (turret bustle, 6 round bin behind commander on floor)

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          literally a friendly fire incident, there's never been a challenger 1 or 2 fully lost to any combat, for about 200 ish slavshit tanks destroyed.

          The chanllenger series is currently 200:0 against russian tanks, suck a dick.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You can see the blowout panels in the fucking picture, retard

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Wrong. The Challenger 2 does not have any blow out panels of any kind.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/NgqnStG.png

      https://i.imgur.com/u8Homzv.jpg

      Remember kids, not just T-72s throw their turrets!
      Hey angloids, you should have put blow out panels on this thing.
      What is it with European tanks beings so scared of blow out panels? Even the Leo 2 and Leclerc with blow out panels still store the majority of ammo in the hull.
      M1 Abrams is the only in service tank that has all ammo in blow out panel compartments (turret bustle, 6 round bin behind commander on floor)

      >25 March 2003: A friendly fire ("blue-on-blue") incident in Basra in which one Challenger 2 of the Black Watch Battlegroup (2nd Royal Tank Regiment) mistakenly engaged another Challenger 2 of the Queen's Royal Lancers after detecting what was believed to be an enemy flanking manoeuvre on thermal equipment. The attacking tank's second HESH round hit the open commander's hatch lid of the QRL tank sending hot fragments into the turret, killing two crew members. The hit caused a fire that eventually ignited the stowed ammunition, destroying the tank. This is only Challenger 2 to be destroyed on operations.
      >August 2006: An RPG-29 capable of firing a tandem-charge penetrated the frontal lower underbelly armour of a Challenger 2 commanded by Captain Thomas Williams of The Queens's Royal Hussars south east of al-Amarah, southern Iraq. Its driver, Trooper Sean Chance, lost part of his foot in the blast; two more of the crew were slightly injured. Chance was able to reverse the vehicle 1.5mi (2.4km) to the regimental aid post despite his injuries. The incident was not made public until May 2007; in response to accusations that crews had been told the tank was impervious to the insurgents' weapons, the MoD said "We have never claimed that the Challenger 2 is impenetrable." Since then, the explosive reactive armour has been replaced with Chobham Armour and the steel underbelly lined with armour as part of the Streetfighter upgrade as a direct response to this incident.
      >6 April 2007: in Basra, Iraq, a shaped charge from an IED penetrated the underside of a tank resulting in the driver losing a leg and causing minor injuries to another soldier.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So it's still undefeated.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >2003
        >hurt by its own so thats a loss
        Friendly fire always happens and proves nothing than the platform can kill its own platform. That makes the T-72 even more laughable as it's getting killed by T-64s and 30 year old RPGs.
        >RPG-29 did an unlikely bottom pen and killed noone
        Damn. What a chad tank. Imagine having an RPG designed to penetrate the actual plating causing a relatively minor issue and the tank able to withdraw under its own power.
        >IED penetrates bottom of a tank
        How big? Was it a hand grenade in a tin can or a 203mm artillery shell? Subsurface IEDs have disintegrated Russian equipment of the same era. I think a leg and some scratches is small potatoes compared to watching a tank reach orbit because someone managed to tap the turret with an RPG-7.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >proves nothing than the platform can kill its own platform
          Given the nature of the kill it doesn't even prove that it can pen its own armor

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/NgqnStG.png

      https://i.imgur.com/u8Homzv.jpg

      Remember kids, not just T-72s throw their turrets!
      Hey angloids, you should have put blow out panels on this thing.
      What is it with European tanks beings so scared of blow out panels? Even the Leo 2 and Leclerc with blow out panels still store the majority of ammo in the hull.
      M1 Abrams is the only in service tank that has all ammo in blow out panel compartments (turret bustle, 6 round bin behind commander on floor)

      did you really samefag 3 photos of the same friendly-fire destroyed tank from 3 angles

  31. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It'll be interesting to see their survivability against more modern munitions than Iraq. The turret faces are impenetrable obviously, but these things will likely be getting hit with atgms and arty.

  32. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What happened with the hundreds of modernized Soviet tanks that NATO sent before?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I vaguely remember reading some article that said that only so many tanks can be refurbished at a time by whoever is sending them, so they’re getting sent in small batches over time

  33. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Based, FSB shills on suicide watch.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I know nothing really about tanks, but the fire extinguishers caught my eye. Would Russian tanks have those or lesser concern for crew safety.

  34. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >10 tanks
    >one singular company's worth of tanks
    >closest formation was soviet tank company (10 tanks)
    >frontage of 800~ meters
    L
    M
    A
    O

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Brits recognise that it won't change much by itself. The whole point is to put their head above the parapet first and shame German into providing Leo2.

      Note that Germany has to give permission to countries using the Leo before they can send theirs to Ukraine. Either Poland has sought such permission or they announce the hand over anyway and dared Germany to refuse them.

      There are only a couple hundred Challengers in service, which the bongs obviously need to keep for themselves. compared with thousands of Leo2s throughout Europe. Unlocking that potential is the point int providing Chally 2.

  35. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's a nice gesture, but the replacement rate for lost Challengers is 0, as they stopped building them 20+ years ago. It's not a sustainable commitment, Germany needs to put in some actual effort and send Leo 2s, they must have a lot in storage.

  36. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How long does it take a to train a tank crew well enough on a certain tank to trust them with operating and maintaining the vehicle in a combat zone? Weeks, months?

    CoD players, nerverserveds and fat retards need to shut the fuck up, I'd like to hear from people who know what they're talking about.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      6 months for optimal with a solid amount of hours on exercise
      >t.yorkshire regiment

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Finnish army instructor in news said that for leopard is two to six months depending how much experience the trainees have.

        >around 6 months

        So by the tanks could be in Ukraine before anybody can operate them?
        IF the war isn't over by then?
        And assuming they start training TODAY?

        Sounds kinda bad tbh.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >So by the tanks
          *by the time

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nobody is expecting the war to end before next Christmas anymore. They need to decide on sending tanks in the next couple weeks so Ukraine can use them in the summer.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ukrainians have been training in the UK since a month since it was apparent Russia couldn't organise a decent offense.
          As I said above, there's a fair amount of Ukrainians in the bases around Salisbury Plains, which is where alot of tank/artillery testing takes place.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            tbh its probably mostly arty.

            [...]
            >around 6 months

            So by the tanks could be in Ukraine before anybody can operate them?
            IF the war isn't over by then?
            And assuming they start training TODAY?

            Sounds kinda bad tbh.

            Having said that they are probably going to get experienced tank crews from ukraine and train them up in how to use the western tanks. Already having experience should dramatically shorten the learning time period. So the tanks will probably take a couple of months to get to the front, but realistically the earliest they can be used anyway is in the summer as the spring is mud season.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Is that for a complete greenhorn? How much of that is the theory behind tank combat vs actually training on using the tank? What if they pull from experienced tanker crews?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Finnish army instructor in news said that for leopard is two to six months depending how much experience the trainees have.

  37. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >The floodgates have opened
    >10 tanks
    Symbolic numbers don't open floodgates, anon. Scholz isn't waiting for allies to send tanks based on empty symbolism, he doesn't want to be the asshole responsible for the Ukrainian tank fleet. America just has to announce sending 100 tanks, the Ukrainians can put them in storage and ignore them if necessary, but 10 won't cut it because 10 tanks are as good as 0 tanks when it comes to sharing the responsibility and that's what Scholz cares about.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >sharing the responsibility and that's what Scholz cares about.
      Scholz has spent the last 12 months grasping at any excuse to do as little as possible. This isn't new behaviour.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If that's doing as little as possible a lot ig countries have catching up to do.

  38. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    *LOUD BUZZING NOISES*

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the shaheeds aren't guidable after giving the coordinates at launch so they're useless on moving targets

  39. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The situation on the front is that bad, huh?

  40. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm looking forward to the tears when challenger gets some confirmed kills and some anti-challenger poster starts seething like they did Starstreak

  41. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I bet that novichok caper isn't so funny anymore

  42. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Overweight tank with obsolete gun.

  43. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >US currently designing Abrams replacement
    >UK currently putting out RFIs for new tanks after Challenger 3 is out
    >Both expect something in the late 30s
    >Both have nearly identical operational and strategic requirements
    >Both share practically everything else

    So, what are the odds are we going to see a joint UK-US Tank program?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >, what are the odds are we going to see a joint UK-US Tank program?
      Pretty low because the brits have nothing to offer

  44. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So the jokers from belarus gonna face those spanking new brigades with amx-10s, bradleys, and challys in the 2023 offensive huh. Good luck to them.

  45. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >The floodgates have opened
    Is this the globohomo version of "gloves coming off"?

  46. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I wonder if Gaijin headquarters has already been contacted to give all the leaked challenger info to the russian army.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I'd be amazed if the world's glowie gangs didn't already have a guy or two each lurking their forums

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        what is it about war thunder that made autists literally sabatoge their own country to get an edge in a game they whine about hating all the time, the challenger is still one of the worst top tier tanks.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >the challenger is still one of the worst top tier tanks.
          Which is accurate.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *