Is the challenger 2 just not that good of a tank? it seems like its been in ukraine for nearly a year now with no combat action to its name. compare that to the abrams that has been killing armored vehicles on camera and you start to notice the lack of use the challenger has seen.
it looks /k/ino tho
ahhh your opinion negates the challengers mediocre combat record then
Are you moronic? The Ukrainians literally have talked about using it
>b-b-but videos
Lack of video does not mean it isn't being used, moron. We literally saw one blown up, meaning it was fighting.
>but unnamed Ukrainians talked about it
cope
No? Oleksandr Tarnavskyi, commander of the Tavria operational-strategic troop grouping talked about it. Saying "Amazing experience, both in training and in action".
Okay? We've not seen any videos of Leopards blowing anything up but we've seen dozens of them being destroyed, guess they're shit too.
>But what about Leopard!
Are you Russian?
You're samegayging this thread desperately and I'm explaining to you how things work. I don't know why you're so flustered or angry. You say there is no videos, so it can't be doing anything. The only videos we have of Leopards is them being blown up, ergo they're doing nothing too in your mind. You're being moronic. I can't believe I have to explain this.
>You're samegayging this thread desperately
By replying to you? I suppose you're samegayging as well then.
>The only real evidence of the Challenger seeing combat in Ukraine is it being blown up
Sad
useless without shells
There is a picture of one knocked out.
I am guessing bongs saw it in action. It got hit by an atgm and then bongs just asked to keep it in low intensity zones.
It's pretty admirable that the US has had the brad on the front had a platoon of them wiped up but didn't try to suppress anything and now we have seen one eat a tank and it just show it's the peak of cold war IFVs.
I think all counties need to just follow in the USs footsteps and just accept shit gets lost but it's better to see it getting used.
Based warrior tard.
>Ignores Iraq war
moron chama...
BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAP
Another thinly veiled warriortard thread
Drivers hatch area has comparable armor to other tanks, with additional armor on the sides of the upper front plate.
Its a tank with breasts. Very cute.
What blew up this time? An egg factory? Wonderwaffen plant? Delays? More leaked documents? Another company got blew up by Himars?
It's a pretty good tank except for one main issue. There's too fricking few of them. The UK sent about 10 over there which isn't really enough to do anything, compare this to the Bradleys where the US has sent 186 of them and climbing so they have the numbers to go zooming around killing mobiks and T-90s.
Not quite sure but I think the UK doctrine for future tanks is basically to have none of them. Cost wise I don't see the benefits to having tanks myself, I see it like how battleships with guns were phased out in favor of missiles carrying destroyers that are smaller, multi role and cheaper overall.
I like tanks, don't get me wrong, and its a good tank. Just not sure about the future of tanks, not sure if they got 20-30 years in them as a concept, not unless something new crops up that updates the paradigm.
its small numbers is what make it such a bad tank compared to other western tanks. lets be honest, the 14 sent to ukraine is enough to conduct limited combat operations. 31 abrams were sent and we are seeing them engage in combat
>The UK sent about 10 over there which isn't really enough to do anything
Be nice. That's over half of the UK's operational stockpile
They sent 18 you fart-sniffing mong.
We literally should have sent every single challenger we have and replaced them with Abrams.
You don't field the Challenger WT.
> compare that to the abrams that has been killing armored vehicles
In Ukraine? When?
>he didnt check the catalog
you are about to cope and then seethe
Tanks are done. They’re finished. It was possible to cope for a while over how Russians and Ukrainians are just incompetent — but that’s only just a cope. Whenever I ask /k/ what the actual tactical plays are for tanks in a battlefield saturated with ATGMs and loitering munitions the answer is ALWAYS just to park them away from danger until the threat has been destroyed by other means. If tanks can only be used when there’s no enemies than they’re USELESS. Literally USELESS. At least an APC or IFV can move troops around when not being destroyed; a tank can only just be killed. Tanks are strong against frontal threats, but virtually all threats in a modern battlefield will be top-attack or side / rear sniping. China has been mass producing a Javelin clone for a decade now — and there isn’t a tank on the planet Earth which can withstand a Javelin hit. Ukies and Russians are using tanks as direct-fire support trucks because they’re both desperate for any fire support they can get even if it’s vulnerable to being blown up. A T-55 is just as dead as a T-90M when a top-attack munitions lands on it.
>B-b-b-but muh Western survivability…!
So what? A M1A2 SEPv3 with full armor package will die all the same to a top-attack munition, the only difference compared to a Soviet shitbox is that the crew is much more likely to survive — but both tanks are knocked out.
it's crazy how every time a tank faces a threat and survives it, the threat was "incompetent". maybe tanks are useful and you're just having a hard time accepting that?
Chally is fine except for rifled gun which is getting replaced
so how come both Ukies and Russians are still fielding tanks in large numbers? and producing/requesting more of them?
meanwhile in 1973
>magachs destroyed by sagger ATGMs in the hundreds
>death of tank declared
>israelis change tactics a little
>suddenly, the tank is alive again
>two decades later the sagger is obsolete while tanks are still very much alive
You cry about top attack missiles while every reasonable nation is working on APS systems to counter them.
That's just something you made up in your own mind warrior-fart.
there is one very frequent poster in this thread, not using a vpn either? rush job?