>we need a rifled gun to fire HESH!
>the spin makes the plastic explosive work better!
Ok why not make a fin stabilised HESH round that uses angled fins to provide spin?
Did they really sacrifice 15% of their muzzle energy just to use old ammunition stocks?
A smoothbore gun was planned but because a smoothbore would have been more expensive and the tank was being adopted after the cold war ended, when countries were keen to spend their "peace dividend" on other things. To be honest it was mostly lucky to not simply be cancelled as so many other defense projects in the West were in the 90s. Probably because there had already been huge development costs sunk into it.
As to why they originally used it? Well the rifled 120mm of the Chieftain was insanely good in the 70s and 80s.
We've had this discussion many, many times before.
Well its going to be smoothbore with chally 3
Same reason they store all of the propellant bags in the hull and have that fruity suspension, it's the most advanced tank of 1965.
>15% of their muzzle energy
Fin-stabilization also has downsides - increased drag, wind starts affecting projectile trajectory more.
I think part of it is that DU ammunition works most efficiently at more moderate muzzle velocities (relatively speaking) so they could get away with a slower shooting gun that something like the Rheinmetall L55, which is designed to get more performance out of Tungsten
How does lower velocity work better for a penetrator?
Depleted Uranium has severe diminishing returns above ~1600 ms, whereas Tungsten continues to perform well beyond 2000 ms.
It has to do with the material properties of DU.
Rounds don't impact tanks at those velocities unless you're point blank in which case the difference is meaningless.
No he's just retarded. The same DU or WHA round hitting a target at 1800m/s will penetrate more theb at 1600m/s.
This misconception comes from a graph that people can't read of an optimisation chart of constant 10MJ of muzzle energy and L/D 30 ratio.
To tack on, in the chart as muzzle velocity increases, the round becomes smaller to keep the energy constant at 10MJ, hence why at a certain point penetration "decreases"
Never said it would penetrate less just that there are diminishing returns.
Tungsten begins to outperform depleted Uranium at higher velocities, it gets more out of being fired faster.
>Did they really sacrifice 15% of their muzzle energy just to use old ammunition stocks?
They didn't. When it was introduced there really wasn't anything better. Remember Abrams was using the L44 gun with older ammunition. Leopard was a fair bit behind with round lethality.
It's only in the last 10-15 years that it's fallen behind, but still has enough to knock out any MBT at battlefield ranges.
Challenger 3 will be in service in a couple of years and that brings it up to date with the most lethal gun in NATO and a willingness to use DU rounds.
Better HE and HESH accuracy.
Seeing how this war is shaping up where tank on tak engagements are exceedingly rare, it wasn't a terrible decision honestly.
They're only swapping to a smoothbore to fit with NATO standards.
The challenger isn’t very good
Ah, it's one of your threads, of course it is.
Find a new hobby sperg
I mean within a week of first deploying to the front it was korneted and killed
nta, but come on tanks get blown up during wartime, thats something that will happen to every tank no matter the model.
Someone on here was saying the challenger was actually in combat since June. He couldn’t back up the statement so I didn’t believe him
Samefag elsewhere
Don't give it (you)'s it's not even human
it's been in a lot of combat, more than most other tanks, and this is the first time one got merked. Why do we have this repeating "weapon x got destroyed in a war, it's literally trash" shit over and over
It is like 30-40 years old and even then its based on a older design
But even the Challenger1 is newer than Abrams.
Challenger 1 is an updated Chieftain. It's miles apart from M1 Abrams.
Meh, it's pretty allright
If I remember correctly, they still had a shitload of old HESH shells for the Centurion and decided that the benefits of a smoothbore weren't worth the cost of disposal/replacement
You're probably thinking of the Chieftain. Centurion never had a 120 mm gun in bong service.
>3 piece ammunition
>manually loaded
Was it autism?
Just a small taste of bad domestically British design flaws in an armored vehicle. Armored vehicle design to the British is akin to pallet design of the russians
have a nice day fart sniffer
You must have me confused with someone else. Your post is off topic. We are talking about the challenger 2
Get fucked you revolting deviant
>https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/59471213/#59471213
you have been exposed and humiliated.
Does this guy live inside of your head
Your posting style is so noticeable you're easy to track down. have a nice day you degenerate. You're worse than a chud.
How much time did you spend researching things that can never be linked to anyone in particular? Does your therapist know? Do you think every argument you get into on PrepHole is this guy too?
Imagine dedicating this much time to defending a guy with a fart fetish that you're *totally not*linked to.
The fact you can't stay away and ignore it says it all, we're talking about you, you disgusting deviant. I hope you get bullied IRL you loser. Thanks for doxxing yourself, it's been hilarious warriorfart.
Took me like 20 seconds to respond to you. You on the other hand have been spending a lot of time researching a guy that got into your head. You literally can’t stop thinking about this dude and prove it everyday
Yet here you are defending a fart sniffer - because you personally attacked. have a nice day, it's the only way we'll leave you alone.
Get help.
In the days before super long rod APFSDS, it was advantageous to have muli piece ammunition on large tank guns.
The Chieftain for example originally used APDS.
It's less of an example British stupidity and more of an example of cheapskate behaviour, in not wanting to develop a new gun system.
The Challenger 2 is just a warmed over Challenger 1 at the end of the day.
sensible man
@Burp00589615
May 26
Replying to @Hambubger3 @DocStrangelove2
It’s garbage. The British suck at weapons design
sensible man
@Burp00589615
May 15
Replying to @sweetbaby2354 @upby500
Can you really fart on command? Do you have an OF
>Did they really sacrifice 15% of their muzzle energy just to use old ammunition stocks?
Someone in government probably got a nice little backhander out of it
That kornet managed to pop the turret a little bit. It’s sitting about 3 feet more forward than it should be. Managed to blow the hatches out too
Brutal
Hatch rings blown to another dimension
>3 feet more forward
Is this the cope you had dropped back too? Before you said it was a turret toss lmao
It is a toss, albeit a mundane one.
This is a turret toss retard... tourists i swear they get dumber by the day
No one is arguing that. The turret getting knocked out and forward is still a toss, just not a brutal soviet style toss
That's not a toss, that's more like a slight dislocation.
Well the picture confirms the turret is too far forward. What else besides a toss would explain this? It’s pretty clear the ammo detonated. You can even see the hatches were blown off
I always hate seeing western turret pops but atleast they don’t enter the stratosphere like soviet made tanks
What's the source on it being a Kornet? Everything i've seen so far has it as hit by large bore arty
A video was released of a kornet hitting the tank in question. Certainly not definitive that’s what killed it but it’s the only thing on video
>A video was released of a Kornet
Show me on that video how you know it was a Kornet not any other kind of projectile, you cant itsbjust speculation from the person who released the video.
Now show the rest of the footage that showed the ammo cooking off as a result of that hit, you cant because it cuts off short as usual.
Friends, it is clear to me that if some kind of catastrophic explosion did happen no DOUBT would the Russians have included it on the video, but they didnt. As per usual, its a hit then cuts off conveniently so they can run a narrative or save face because it didnt insta space orbit like the rest of Slav shit does.
>Show me on that video how you know it was a Kornet not any other kind of projectile
Are you saying it was something else, like an RPG-7?
Dont gas light me retard just answer the question.
Can you 100% confirm thats a Kornet?
Can you 100% confirm that hit caused the aftermath?
If not youre just a parrot
yeah there was a video of the tank going boom but you can't tell what it was that hit it. Also it was surrounded by dead abandoned vehicles. What I heard was it got disabled and the tracks were fucked up, and the crew bailed. The video looks like finishing off the chally after that
The crew making it out is completely unconfirmed. It’s not like the hatches were propped open, they were gone. That implies the hatches were closed when the cookoff happened
>Crew making it out is unconfirmed
As is the cause of the kill hit seen as how conveniently it isnt shown on the drone video.
At this point everything is unconfirmed saying anything is pure speculation based on bro trust me. Try not being a totally bro trust me, it makes you look petty.
Blown hatches does indicate that they were closed when the interior explosion happened but the crew could have evaced and just let the hatches slam shut
It's standard procedure for the loader, driver and gunner to close their hatches once they have gotten out. The turret is rotated to the side to allow easy escape of the driver (you wouldn't rotate the turret to a threat and not the hull).
Closed hatches after disembarking is always done, to keep the tank interior dry and warm/cold. To keep light discipline at night and to aid the fire suppression system/reduce oxygen to a fire.
You would think the only way they could blow off like that is if they were secured from the inside.
You think if the ammunition cook's off it makes a damn bit of difference if the latch is closed or not? The whole commander's coupola is gone, it's not just a hatch come off its hinge.
>Implies hatches closed
No it doesnt
Nah
It really does. Here’s an example of a cook off with the hatches open.
Well shit. Evidence that the hatches were closed is mounting
Replying to yourself is transparent and an idicator of schizo behaviour also it shows you have become emotionally invested in your opinion and are bothered about what people think of you on an annoymous forum. Take a walk champ.
This isn’t an effective strategy. It was said that hatches being blown off was an indicator that the hatches were closed and the photo posted of propped open hatches after a cook off lends legitimacy to that line of thinking.
See
And stop replying to your own post
here.
It would be nice to have a none samefagging conversation with you for once.
He made a new thread trying to force this narrative and got instantly btfod by an anons post. He deleted it straight after.
No it really doesnt, you have no clue what you are talking about and speculating what an explosion of what we dont know the cause was did to a vehicle in a random circumstance.
Also using a T72 as an example is a very bad way to go about arguing your case.
The point I’m arguing is that the hatches being blown off imply that they were closed. I provided proof of a vehicle that suffered an internal ammo detonation with the hatches still propped open even after the turret separated from the vehcile. You’ve provided nothing to the contrary.
>The point I’m arguing is that the hatches being blown off imply that they were closed.
The entire coupola is missing you idiot. Do you think the blast that did that cares if the hatch is open when it's only secured with an inch wide handle?
Noted. Everything i said still stands. Your speculating and using a T72 as an example. This is retarded, one reason why is that the Challenger turret is significantly heavier than a T72 turret.
Challenger also contains a lot more ammunition too. Still barely moved the turret.
Based on what? There are no hatches left on the wreck, they were blown off. The fact a t72 tossed it's turret and hatches with it doesn't mean anything.
It means that hatches don’t get blown off when they are propped open. And that stands until you present evidence to the contrary. I’m not just going to take your word for it
Go huff a fart you degenerate. Does it eat away at you knowing that you doxxed yourself? You seem like a pretty dumb guy so that's probably par for the course.
Oh shit
You’re right I take the people who posted the videos word for it. A projectile definitely hit it. The day before the video was released a group claiming to have the video was saying it’s a kornet. The fact that they released the video when they said they would leads me to believe it was a kornet
>Friends, it is clear to me that if some kind of catastrophic explosion did happen no DOUBT would the Russians have included it on the video, but they didnt
That’s entirely possible. It’s also a possibility that the ammo didn’t detonate instantly and the crew taking the video thought it was a better idea to leave the scene rather than continue to film
I’m inclined to believe the kornet story as well. When I saw people posting about a video being released the next day I wrote it off but when the video got posted i figured they had something real this time. It’s not like a kornet isn’t capable enough to pen a tank as long as it hits it. The warhead is pretty big
The tank hit a mine which started afire in one of the rear fuel tanks. The tank was abondenedand later hit by a lancet drone.
Also you can't tell anything from those photos.
>hit by a lancet drone
>no lancet footage,
Doubt [x]
Also the tank wasn't on fire when it was hit by something big (either 152mm HE shell or Kornet ATGM).
Why is every thread remotely mentioning UK armor/equipment filled with turboseething ? I am not a bong but I have never seen this much whining about a specific country's military
pride I guess.
Warriortard confessed his fart fetish to a British girl and she laughed in his face. He's now so beat up about it he makes regular anti-British threads.
Its just one seriously ill troll thats pent up about something Britain did to him
Although it’s a fat piece of shit, it sure is fucking gorgeous
longer range, more accurate, infinity of ammo, HESH better as direct fire artillery support for infantry, only had to be good enough to merk slavshit.
HESH ammo has now all been lobbed at T-55s, so they're getting rid of the rifled guns and getting normal ones
Because rifled barrels are better than smooth bore barrels?
Riddle me this, why does the video of the Challenger cut when it gets hit?
Because there is no secondry explosion and no fire which they find awkward. That's what happens when you shoot an already disabled tank.
Warriortard when did you realise there was some hating wrong with you? Fart sniffing isn't normal.
>Ok why not make a fin stabilised HESH round that uses angled fins to provide spin?
Many very intelligent guys have asked the same question.
The answer is the same reason why the French opt again and again to design and use weaponry thats out of the norm: Some dumb-ass form of contrarianism
>Hurr them dumb germans and americans adopt a 120mm smoothbore
>Stronk indypendynt Brytain don't need no dirty Huns and Burgers to tell us whats good.
Fite me: Bongs were never good at tank design. Every single one of their tanks was made to fight previous wars, not future ones.
Matilda II would've been one hell of a tank in WW1
Cromwell and Comet would've been great tanks early to mid WW2
Centurion would have dominated the late WW2 battlefields
Chieftain came just in time when ATGMs came around and were able to wreck even the thickest RHA plates. More forward-thinking nations opted to design smaller and more nimble tanks instead of making sluggish behemoths that could still be penetrated with ease.
And it goes on and on. Bongs cannot design a tank with future in mind to save a life.
>dumb-ass form of contrarianism
Opinion discarded. Just go and read something about the subject for 5mins, that's all it takes to not be a retarded baby.
>Fite me: Bongs were never good at tank design. Every single one of their tanks was made to fight previous wars, not future ones.
That's... uhm... remarkably true actually.
Because it still works. There's no capability gap between a rifled 120 and a smoothbore 120.
and today OP stopped sucking cock for just long enough to learn that, even in NATO, different countries have *gasp* different doctrines and approaches to those doctrines.
There was no doctrinal reason, purely institutional inertia
It's a .55 calibre gun you retard it isn't like we got a .44 and rifled it.
>warriorfart thread
S to spit
British place a premium on accuracy.
They tend to believe that hitting the enemy is important.
what is that decal
update: apparently it's a mouse
I thought it was some weebshit at first
It's a Jerboa mate. Emblem of the 7th Armoured since 1940.
>it's a mouse
It's a rat - the desert rats
Doesn't the upgraded or future version of this actually come with a German-made smoothbore gun?
Did Its turret really pop?
Yeah, popped back towards the engine deck and over to the right track.
The only reason it didn't go orbital is that Challenger 2 has blowout panels in the form of the ~1 tonne commander hatch assembly