It' supposedly the same one and if it is and that's after all the target practice the Russians did then some parts are salvageable. I still think the MOD should send a replacement.
So its true NATO stuff seems to hold up well compared to the thing infront of it with no turret at all.
The engine fire must have been super hot for the deck collapse in like that.
Whats the PrepHole opinion after this? Mine hit then the atgm after? Looks like the tank infront was in position to tow it out.
I know it’s the same tank, but from a different angle, which was posted by Ukrainians this time.
I’m not saying it’s a different one, what I’m saying is that by the logic of some of these retards, a destroyed tank can only be
1) unconfirmed due to insufficient evidence
2) be called thousand-angle propaganda
Now you're just changing the subject. If people were saying "here's another shot of the Challenger wreck for confirmation" then that just clears things up. But taking a fuckton of pictures at different angles and then even claiming it's different tanks is where it becoming pure cope propaganda.
that'd make sense if the 'additional pictures' weren't called 'IS THAT ANOTHER CHALLENGER' with full knowledge that it was, in fact, another angle
back to the mass grave you go comrade
>Challenger gets damaged >Images start appearing on the internet >State news reports the story before anyone else >Literally zero debate about the vehicle getting knocked out
Wtf are you talking about? It was confirmed pretty much immediately to be one, even before vatmorons started pretending each camera angle was a new tank.
I just remember one guy denying it, he then just stopped posting, so no.
Oh, btw, I am holding Ukrainians to Russian standard, just remember that Moskva was an accident and only 5 people died.
I’m not CERTAIN it isn’t the same tank. It COULD be the same tank but recorded by a different Ukie driving down the opposite direction from the first Ukie recording. That’s possible — but I think unlikely due to other vehicle(s) present in the vicinity of this one. Still not proof of anything of course. But if you’re FLAT OUT denying the possibility of this being a 2nd Chally2 kill you’re not acting in good faith.
This is the same CR2 as seen before, large crater behinds confirms the mine strike and this video confirms the crew escape before it was later targeted when empty.
> video confirms the crew escape before it was later targeted when empty
You would like that but no such confirmation exists. The hatches being blown off is an indicator that the crew unfortunately didn’t make it
>ukranian self reporting of unknown quality
I didn’t say it wasn’t reported just that it wasn’t confirmed
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Head of the British army and the BBC all confimed it too.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Conflict of interest. Their word isn’t worth much when defending British gear is their objective. You need actual proof
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
The crew returned to London under their own power. No you can’t see them
Post their bodies
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
[...]
[...]
At this point you are just intellectually dishonest.
[...]
>reported in combat since June
No proof >reported crew survived
No proof
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes, you are intellectually dishonest.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Not at all. You’re just coping
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Does anyone else around here sees it this way beside you? Oh, it's only you, what a bummer.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I speak on behalf of everyone when I say we all blindly follow the bbc
idk why you are getting so upset. It is true that the crews survival hasn’t been confirmed
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>n-o, you m-ad
This is supposed to show you weren't a dishonest gay from the start?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Surely this response will make up for your lack of proof
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
What i'm doing here is showing everyone what an insufferable gay you are and how shitty your intentions always were, all i have to do for that is let you speak.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
The only thing I said is the crew survival was never confirmed and that the British media and government isn’t a reliable source on the matter due to the conflict of interest.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
I agree with him. also, you're a fag
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes. I concur. We must not question the reporting of the BBC. Perhaps they have no vested interest in the performance of the challenger. I believe them
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
indeed comra- I mean pardner, we should only use trustworthy sources like RT
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
I just don’t believe it unless I see it on video. I’m not going to take some defense analyst defending his national tanks word as gospel
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
And the autistic repetiton of mentioning it for hours.
And your pathetic samefagging.
And the proofstering.
And the shitposting.
And how you can't convince anyone.
etc
That's "just" what you did.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
You’re attributing other posters to me. kek you’re unwell
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
That’s my point. I’m not arguing that the crew is dead, just that their escape hasn’t been confirmed
Warriorfart, is that you?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
You are really not good at maintaining your own position.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>reputable news outlet says they survived but have no proof >pathological liars say they're dead, but have no proof
both sides may have a vested interest in their version of the story, but that doesn't make them equal m8.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
That’s my point. I’m not arguing that the crew is dead, just that their escape hasn’t been confirmed
Is this post supposed to discredit the BBC or you?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>pls ignore the latest bbc scandal >it’s trustworthy!
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>bongs named their most reputable news agency after black penises >they wonder why no one takes them seriously
see
[...]
Warriorfart, is that you?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
I also see it that way
I agree with him. also, you're a fag
The only thing I said is the crew survival was never confirmed and that the British media and government isn’t a reliable source on the matter due to the conflict of interest.
As i said, all anyone has to do, is let you talk and discredit yourself with what you say and then actually do.
Go on, entertain us.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
I also see it that way
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Not at all. You’re just coping
>I speak on behalf of everyone when I say we all blindly follow the bbc
idk why you are getting so upset. It is true that the crews survival hasn’t been confirmed
Surely this response will make up for your lack of proof
Rough day, warriortard?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
the challenger loss hit him pretty hard
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>ukranian self reporting of unknown quality
I didn’t say it wasn’t reported just that it wasn’t confirmed
I’m sorry I don’t see how a crater is proof that the crew escaped
At this point you are just intellectually dishonest.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
The crew returned to London under their own power. No you can’t see them
Could that have only been achieved with a fast cook off? Or could that also have been achieved by a slowed cook off? The damage to me seems to indicate a fast cook off to move something as heavy as a turret and pop a cupola, but no secondary explosion is seen during the Kornet footage? I think it's an important question to ask, because the difference between a fast and a slowed cook off means if the crew were still occuyping the tank (I don't think they were) would they have had time to bail? I was of the initial opinion they would have, but now I don't think they would.
No use speculating. We likely will never know the full details. Unless video emerges of the crew escaping there’s always going to be an asterisk next to this particular incident
I'm not saying it 100% wasn't. I'm saying the picture shows no sign of it. If it was hit by a kornet like some like to claim there should be a big hole in the side and it's likely to be in the side that the turret is facing.
We’ve gone from never been destroyed in combat to the crew might have survived if you believe believe this BBC article or this retired British tank commander talking head
[...]
I honestly had no idea the BBC was state funded media
>in an desperate attempt of saving the situation warriorfart still hazed by huffing his own farts starts with a classic: samefagging
This is really all you got, isn't it? You have no real hobbies? No one that cares about you? Do you think this whole thing will end well for you if you continue with this self absorbed gayry?
No cap my zoomer friend. There are people in this thread hailing the bbc as a respectable news organization despite the fact it is a government funded entity
No cap my zoomer friend. There are people in this thread hailing the bbc as a respectable news organization despite the fact it is a government funded entity
>I’d venture to guess most people didn’t know the BBC was state funded
Yeah, who would've thought that the British Broadcasting Corporation that's only been broadcasting the national news for the UK government for just short of a century would be state funded?
In other news, who'd have expected the White house Press office is a mouthpiece for the government! I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you. who wouldda thunked it?
News just in, sun discovered to be hot. More on this breaking story at 11.
>So you understand why the BBCs reporting on the challenger survivors is being scrutinized.
Given it was being reported that the crew were unharmed by other english-language newspapers which are not state funded, (like the Guardian), 24 hours before the BBC published articles on it... No, your "scrutinizing" appears to be nothing more than idiotic.
The original Ukraine press releases were reporting the crew escaped long before anyone in the west was aware of it having happened.
Yes, every crew should be just pulled off the front lines and paraded in front of the cameras for the benefit of your personal mental health problems.
at which point you would move the goalposts and start going "iS thAt tHe ReAL CrEw?" or something along those lines.
They could provide fucking footage of them, in the tank, being hit, and climbing out and you would decry it to be "crisis actors" or "false footage" or whatever other idiotic line you'd use to discredit this, and continue your unhealthy obsession with trying to get some sort of imaginary one-upmanship on your current subject of obsession.
So no, you dont get to see the crew, you dont get to move the goalposts another time, you get to whine like a fucking bitch, again in another 34 threads about this one single incident that doesnt impact on your life in any way at all, but which you fixate upon. Get help, you sad cunt.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
> Yes, every crew should be just pulled off the front lines
It’s not like they have another tank to man. Would be funny if they put them in an infantry role like you suggest
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
> They could provide fucking footage of them, in the tank, being hit, and climbing out
No I would accept that. I’ve seen a lot of video of troops escaping armored vehicles. I haven’t seen any from this particular challenger though
Are you still the same guy who was going on about it from the start?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
If it's Warriortard then yes probably, he has an unhealthy obsession with shitting on bong gear as though he has a personal interest in it.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
True, only 14 tanks were sent afterall. They can’t be short on crews
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
> They could provide fucking footage of them, in the tank, being hit, and climbing out
No I would accept that. I’ve seen a lot of video of troops escaping armored vehicles. I haven’t seen any from this particular challenger though
You are replying to warriortard, just look at the post you are plying to and his answer to your post, by now one can't even view him as an autistic person, describing him as an automaton which can only make posts circling around and back to few certain topics is probably more correct.
>if you do not pay, and they decide you are watching TV you need a licence for, they can start court action against you. The court can issue a fine of up to £1,000. This will show up on your criminal record. You will also have to pay the TV licence on top of the court fine.
just don’t get caught nigel
The point were it could have been perceived as trolling past years ago, at this stage everyone is just trying figure out how severe your mental illness is.
No retard
Turret goes pop.
THE ANGLES
I REQUIRE MORE ANGLES
It was the Ukrainians who filmed this video though: https://twitter.com/Sprinter99800/status/1700631689314111696?t=O04qRKgLb_7Fk8UpnB2GUw&s=19
If it's meant to be the same Challenger where are Its burn marks?
out of frame from the angle you stupid gay
it's clearly brown in the OP. Like your skin
yep it's the same chally
It's obviously a T-90M :^)
Ah so we really are getting the “50 angles” treatment with the challenger too, I’m not even sure what to feel anymore, pitty?
Even the DoD boomers know about this
https://nitter.net/DefMon3/status/1669421337629151255#m
Bring in the next wunderwaffe.
MOAR ANGLES
Fucking hell it actually turret tossed?
no that's a bradley they did this to
ah alright, but tbh seeing pictures of the Chally it does seem the turret disconnected from the turret.
Definitely not a Challenger. Look at the barrel.
autist
I know you are but what am I?
BOOM, ROASTED
>XAXAXAXAXAXAXA
>10 CHALLENGERS DESTROYED!
SAME IMAGES FROM MONTHS AGO FUCK FUCK FUCK I HATE THIS WEBSITE
>6 pictures of destroyed "tanks"
>actually an IFV from multiple angles
looks like M1 Abrams... US sisters did we get too cocky?
Get with the times.
Saved.
It' supposedly the same one and if it is and that's after all the target practice the Russians did then some parts are salvageable. I still think the MOD should send a replacement.
turret facing same direction and same detached fuel tank
3 HOURS LATER AND WE GOT ANOTHER ONE TOVARISCH
SEE HOW ITS FACING A DIFFERENT WAY
This one is the same one already burned and fucked. But we will see more C2 destroyed. That's what tanks are supposed to do.
So its true NATO stuff seems to hold up well compared to the thing infront of it with no turret at all.
The engine fire must have been super hot for the deck collapse in like that.
Whats the PrepHole opinion after this? Mine hit then the atgm after? Looks like the tank infront was in position to tow it out.
Looks like artillery got him, IMO
Looks pretty repairable, tbh.
I'm downgrading this "Challenger Destroyed" bit to "Challenger damaged".
Do the challengers they sent not even have the armor kit?
Not the good stuff. Replaced before delivery. The Abrams will be the same.
See
and
I know it’s the same tank, but from a different angle, which was posted by Ukrainians this time.
I’m not saying it’s a different one, what I’m saying is that by the logic of some of these retards, a destroyed tank can only be
1) unconfirmed due to insufficient evidence
2) be called thousand-angle propaganda
Now you're just changing the subject. If people were saying "here's another shot of the Challenger wreck for confirmation" then that just clears things up. But taking a fuckton of pictures at different angles and then even claiming it's different tanks is where it becoming pure cope propaganda.
that'd make sense if the 'additional pictures' weren't called 'IS THAT ANOTHER CHALLENGER' with full knowledge that it was, in fact, another angle
back to the mass grave you go comrade
>Challenger gets damaged
>Images start appearing on the internet
>State news reports the story before anyone else
>Literally zero debate about the vehicle getting knocked out
Wtf are you talking about? It was confirmed pretty much immediately to be one, even before vatmorons started pretending each camera angle was a new tank.
>Literally zero debate about the vehicle getting knocked out
lol
I just remember one guy denying it, he then just stopped posting, so no.
Oh, btw, I am holding Ukrainians to Russian standard, just remember that Moskva was an accident and only 5 people died.
It’s not damaged it’s destroyed
>another angle of the same tank
It's getting the leopard 2 treatment huh
The way the hatches are blown off indicates they were closed when the ammo cooled off. Here’s a reference photo of a cookoff with hatches open
Unfortunate if true. The crew was never confirmed to have survived this
I’m not CERTAIN it isn’t the same tank. It COULD be the same tank but recorded by a different Ukie driving down the opposite direction from the first Ukie recording. That’s possible — but I think unlikely due to other vehicle(s) present in the vicinity of this one. Still not proof of anything of course. But if you’re FLAT OUT denying the possibility of this being a 2nd Chally2 kill you’re not acting in good faith.
Its the same, unless you dont trust your eyes?
Do you get paid more for using caps, Ramesh ?
Kek
Impossibru! not my heckin Challegarinos!
>it's totally a different one *~~*~~))
This is the same CR2 as seen before, large crater behinds confirms the mine strike and this video confirms the crew escape before it was later targeted when empty.
> video confirms the crew escape before it was later targeted when empty
You would like that but no such confirmation exists. The hatches being blown off is an indicator that the crew unfortunately didn’t make it
The hatches aren't blown off, they are intact in the video. Unless you think the tank in the video is still crewed?
Ahhh ok I haven’t seen the video with the hatches in tact. I’m going off of
I saw a thread recently showcasing different examples of tanks with their hatches still in tact after suffering a catastrophic ammunition detonation
You were listening to a fart sniffer
What do you mean? I didn’t see the video with thatches in tact but otherwise the information was fine
It wasn't warriorfart you were clutching at straws. have a nice day, you're no longer welcome here.
Woah I gotta see this confirmation. So far all I’ve seen is hopium
AT mine crater right before the tank halted.
I’m sorry I don’t see how a crater is proof that the crew escaped
UA confirmed the crew escaped
That isn’t confirmation. I also saw UA sources claiming that challenger was headed back to port under its own power
It was already reported that the crew escaped. Try harder.
>ukranian self reporting of unknown quality
I didn’t say it wasn’t reported just that it wasn’t confirmed
Head of the British army and the BBC all confimed it too.
Conflict of interest. Their word isn’t worth much when defending British gear is their objective. You need actual proof
Post their bodies
>reported in combat since June
No proof
>reported crew survived
No proof
Yes, you are intellectually dishonest.
Not at all. You’re just coping
Does anyone else around here sees it this way beside you? Oh, it's only you, what a bummer.
>I speak on behalf of everyone when I say we all blindly follow the bbc
idk why you are getting so upset. It is true that the crews survival hasn’t been confirmed
>n-o, you m-ad
This is supposed to show you weren't a dishonest gay from the start?
Surely this response will make up for your lack of proof
What i'm doing here is showing everyone what an insufferable gay you are and how shitty your intentions always were, all i have to do for that is let you speak.
The only thing I said is the crew survival was never confirmed and that the British media and government isn’t a reliable source on the matter due to the conflict of interest.
I agree with him. also, you're a fag
Yes. I concur. We must not question the reporting of the BBC. Perhaps they have no vested interest in the performance of the challenger. I believe them
indeed comra- I mean pardner, we should only use trustworthy sources like RT
I just don’t believe it unless I see it on video. I’m not going to take some defense analyst defending his national tanks word as gospel
And the autistic repetiton of mentioning it for hours.
And your pathetic samefagging.
And the proofstering.
And the shitposting.
And how you can't convince anyone.
etc
That's "just" what you did.
You’re attributing other posters to me. kek you’re unwell
Warriorfart, is that you?
You are really not good at maintaining your own position.
>reputable news outlet says they survived but have no proof
>pathological liars say they're dead, but have no proof
both sides may have a vested interest in their version of the story, but that doesn't make them equal m8.
That’s my point. I’m not arguing that the crew is dead, just that their escape hasn’t been confirmed
>reputable news outlet
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/bbc-disinformation-correspondent-accused-of-lying-on-her-cv/
Is this post supposed to discredit the BBC or you?
>pls ignore the latest bbc scandal
>it’s trustworthy!
see
As i said, all anyone has to do, is let you talk and discredit yourself with what you say and then actually do.
Go on, entertain us.
I also see it that way
Rough day, warriortard?
the challenger loss hit him pretty hard
At this point you are just intellectually dishonest.
The crew returned to London under their own power. No you can’t see them
You can’t see anything difinitive in this picture. The crew might have made it out we just don’t know
Same one. Interestingly it shows no signs here of being penetrated.
The dark circle on the hull under the turret looks like a penetration
The bit under the turret is the turret ring. It's not sitting on the hull correctly.
Could that have only been achieved with a fast cook off? Or could that also have been achieved by a slowed cook off? The damage to me seems to indicate a fast cook off to move something as heavy as a turret and pop a cupola, but no secondary explosion is seen during the Kornet footage? I think it's an important question to ask, because the difference between a fast and a slowed cook off means if the crew were still occuyping the tank (I don't think they were) would they have had time to bail? I was of the initial opinion they would have, but now I don't think they would.
No use speculating. We likely will never know the full details. Unless video emerges of the crew escaping there’s always going to be an asterisk next to this particular incident
The OP picture isn’t clear enough to declare that the tank wasn’t penetrated. Just pointing that out to any lurkers who might not understand
I'm not saying it 100% wasn't. I'm saying the picture shows no sign of it. If it was hit by a kornet like some like to claim there should be a big hole in the side and it's likely to be in the side that the turret is facing.
Do you think we will see the challengers pulled off of the front lines after the cook off?
Probably not. Just use up the remaining 13
It can’t be understated how quickly the first challenger was killed since it’s deployment to the frontline last week
Someone had said they have been on the frontlines since June but it couldn’t be corroborated and the poster was outright dismissed
We’ve gone from never been destroyed in combat to the crew might have survived if you believe believe this BBC article or this retired British tank commander talking head
>bongs named their most reputable news agency after black penises
>they wonder why no one takes them seriously
>Warriorfart a known fan of dicks instantly thinking of dicks when discussing BBC news
Shocker
I honestly had no idea the BBC was state funded media
>in an desperate attempt of saving the situation warriorfart still hazed by huffing his own farts starts with a classic: samefagging
This is really all you got, isn't it? You have no real hobbies? No one that cares about you? Do you think this whole thing will end well for you if you continue with this self absorbed gayry?
This dude is unhinged
This little bullshit is all you have in life? How long are you already doing this to yourself?
>in an desperate
ESL retard detected
>BBC
>that cover photo
when did the British become such cucks
Around the late 1700s
This has to be cap. The British wouldn’t call their media trustworthy if it was state funded through a mandatory television tax
No cap my zoomer friend. There are people in this thread hailing the bbc as a respectable news organization despite the fact it is a government funded entity
Is this really all you have in life?
Why are you even still here?
>Post another angle
why do they keep doing this
This is where warriortard won the argument. I’d venture to guess most people didn’t know the BBC was state funded
Fart-fetisch attention whores that write "notice me" tweets to Elon Musk don't win at anything, especially not at life.
>I’d venture to guess most people didn’t know the BBC was state funded
Yeah, who would've thought that the British Broadcasting Corporation that's only been broadcasting the national news for the UK government for just short of a century would be state funded?
In other news, who'd have expected the White house Press office is a mouthpiece for the government! I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you. who wouldda thunked it?
News just in, sun discovered to be hot. More on this breaking story at 11.
So you understand why the BBCs reporting on the challenger survivors is being scrutinized.
How much of your current life time is wasted on posts like these?
>So you understand why the BBCs reporting on the challenger survivors is being scrutinized.
Given it was being reported that the crew were unharmed by other english-language newspapers which are not state funded, (like the Guardian), 24 hours before the BBC published articles on it... No, your "scrutinizing" appears to be nothing more than idiotic.
The original Ukraine press releases were reporting the crew escaped long before anyone in the west was aware of it having happened.
>Given it was being reported that the crew were unharmed
May we see this crew
may we see the bodies?
Burden of proof lies with the people making the claim that the tank crew survived. There’s just no proof
I think I'll take the word of the BBC over that of some lying ziggers
Me too. They would have no reason to cope about it.
You are going on about it for hours in a very unhealthy manner, do you have any mental illness? No normal person would go on about it for so long.
Yes, every crew should be just pulled off the front lines and paraded in front of the cameras for the benefit of your personal mental health problems.
at which point you would move the goalposts and start going "iS thAt tHe ReAL CrEw?" or something along those lines.
They could provide fucking footage of them, in the tank, being hit, and climbing out and you would decry it to be "crisis actors" or "false footage" or whatever other idiotic line you'd use to discredit this, and continue your unhealthy obsession with trying to get some sort of imaginary one-upmanship on your current subject of obsession.
So no, you dont get to see the crew, you dont get to move the goalposts another time, you get to whine like a fucking bitch, again in another 34 threads about this one single incident that doesnt impact on your life in any way at all, but which you fixate upon. Get help, you sad cunt.
> Yes, every crew should be just pulled off the front lines
It’s not like they have another tank to man. Would be funny if they put them in an infantry role like you suggest
Are you still the same guy who was going on about it from the start?
If it's Warriortard then yes probably, he has an unhealthy obsession with shitting on bong gear as though he has a personal interest in it.
True, only 14 tanks were sent afterall. They can’t be short on crews
> They could provide fucking footage of them, in the tank, being hit, and climbing out
No I would accept that. I’ve seen a lot of video of troops escaping armored vehicles. I haven’t seen any from this particular challenger though
You are replying to warriortard, just look at the post you are plying to and his answer to your post, by now one can't even view him as an autistic person, describing him as an automaton which can only make posts circling around and back to few certain topics is probably more correct.
>I…it’s warriortard
>focus on that instead of the hilarious fact that the British state news agency is doing damage control
>an automaton which can only make posts circling around and back to few certain topics
he does appear to be a very damaged individual, given the way he posts.
Disingenuous way of putting it, it's literally optional and akin to paying for certain TV channels. Try again
>if you do not pay, and they decide you are watching TV you need a licence for, they can start court action against you. The court can issue a fine of up to £1,000. This will show up on your criminal record. You will also have to pay the TV licence on top of the court fine.
just don’t get caught nigel
They changed it to publically funded after the BBC complained.
What’s surprising is how much more vulnerable the challenger is compared to the leopard
How you continue with the same shit right after you woke up is no surprise though, warriortard.
What?
The point were it could have been perceived as trolling past years ago, at this stage everyone is just trying figure out how severe your mental illness is.
God I hope challenger 3 doesn’t store ammo with the crew ands blowout panels
This legitimately isn’t healthy
It’s true. The challenger 2 stores ammo in the hull with the troops. And the tank lacks blowout panels. Those are 2 pretty unsafe features.
Wait what? Why would they sacrifice crew safety like that? What’s the gain?
They really just didn’t know any better and weren’t able to predict what kind of features a modern tank needs
Equiptment gets destroyed in war? Oh man...
That’s fine as long as that equipment does something meaningful. Sadly, the challenger is only known to have been destroyed in Ukraine.