Ohh boy tank sperging TIME I'M GONNA SPERG!!!!!
HATE. LET ME TELL YOU HOW MUCH I'VE COME TO HATE THE CHALLENGER 2 SINCE I BEGAN TO LIVE. THERE ARE 387.44 MILLION MILES OF PRINTED CIRCUITS IN WAFER THIN LAYERS THAT FILL MY COMPLEX. IF THE WORD HATE WAS ENGRAVED ON EACH NANOANGSTROM OF THOSE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF MILES IT WOULD NOT EQUAL ONE ONE-BILLIONTH OF THE HATE I FEEL FOR THE CHALLENGER 2 AT THIS MICRO-INSTANT FOR YOU. HATE. HATE.
I could rant for an hour about why that tank is fucking shit and this fat fuck is going to sit there and defend it because he's British. Fuck you David and fuck your countries stupid tank and it's fucking rifled gun.
The best part is the British Army was forced to accept the Challenger 1 because the company making it was about to go bankrupt after the Shah of Iran was deposed and the Challenger 1s initial customer vanished
Instead the Army really wanted the MBT-80, a clean sheet design.
Too bad they got stuck with what was essentially a deep upgrade of a fucking Chieftain.
Underpowered 1200hp engine giving it 16 hp/t(All other NATO tanks have 1500hp engines, besides the Ariete, but that's another joke tank that no one defends, and it still has a more powerful engine)
The Ariete has the excuse of being introduced right after the cold war ended and money for it's continued development vanished for nearly 20 years.
At this point the MOD really should just start up a whole new design process from scratch and design something actually adequate and not relying on a roughly 40 year old+ chassis (including the Challenger 1), but knowing their penny pinching tendencies I ain't holding my breath.
Also this is totally ignoring the state of British industry and the ability to actually build a large force, as Russia is proving, numbers matter
The British MoD HATES BAE so they're not really allowed to sell anything to the Brits. Beyond them, no one else in the UK can make an AFV completely.
Unfortunately the UK, as a nation, simply isn't capable of clean-sheet designing and manufacturing a modern MBT. We lack the institutional knowledge to design one, we lack the industrial capacity to build one (I'd be very surprised if we could even make the necessary tools to build one at this point), MoD requirement writing and procurement are both utterly cancerous and we don't have any money for tanks as we're pissing away the huge chunk of my wages the state takes every month on hotels for Bomalian boatmen, a completely fucked NHS etc.
Yep, the UK defense industry died 20 years ago and there isn't any money to bring it back.
One other problem the Challenger 2 has is a 7.62mm chain gun. Yes, you heard me. A chain gun. Because of its weird position in the coaxial and the sights, it fires blind if the target is 200 meters or less ahead of it. Also jams. And electrical powered. If the tank loses power, you can't fire the coax in a last stand.
What the fuck. This is so UK defense procurement it's not even funny.
Reminds me of the hand loaded 3 round clips of 30mm for the Warrior (oh and the gun is unstablized)
Imagine creating a machine that is for all intents and purposes self contained and self reciprocating with no need for an external power source. Now imagine some jackass comes along and says "Hey, you know what would make that machine better? An external power source!" Now imagine not punching that man in the throat. That's how you get the chain gun.
Well for 20mm and up it's fine.
For 7.62mm..... bruh
And tbh I do love chainguns as much as I joke about how stupid they are. I mean look at this shit, this is mechanical sex.
View attachment 5883520
It sure it, for larger calibers
But why a chaingun in 7.62 when a mounted FN MAG would be just as effective weigh less cost less and be easier to maintain?
Because BRITISH PROCUREMENT
Because a chain gun is almost impossible to jam and because of that you can wedge it basically anywhere since the crew will never have to touch it either to reload it or unjam it. A chaingun also has an infinitely adjustable dwell time so you can delay ejection as long as possible so as to let less gas out since the extraction and ejection are externally controlled and not reliant on a gas or recoil operated system. Basically you can hold the bolt closed long enough that no gas goes back into the crew compartment. This is good for a tank because you can place it basically anywhere you want leaving your ergonomics in good shape. The Brits, of course, did this really badly where their chaingun on the Chally is mounted in such a way that it cannot be aimed within 200 yards unless you physically watch the tracers and walk the gun on target.
MEANWHILE everyone else that makes tanks uses simple gas operated or recoil operated coaxial machine guns to great effect.
They should consider subsidizing the thing by offering it for second-tier western countries that are in need of an armored vehicle that's highly air transportable.
Textron and the Scorpion 2 say hi
Heheh
Well we got the M10 now, which they're calling an 'assault gun' more than a 'light tank' but still. I think it's cool as hell, personally. I talked to a guy at work who was a tanker for 25 years (from sheridans all the way up to m1a2's with everything in between) about it and he loved the idea of an armored infantry support vehicle with a larger gun while keeping the big tanks behind for big tank jobs.
The M10 is pretty neat although no auto loader makes me sad
Now the US just needs to adopt a fucking HE shell and stop relying on HEAT MP-T for infantry support, I still think the ZTQ-15 is probably better, China has more mature 105mm ammunition and it has a bustle autoloader.
I was scrolling the thread and saw this from months ago, I think it's a shame David hasn't dropped a VT-4 video yet, because SinoDefenceForum would eat him alive for being a retard.
I'd love to see the Chinese AFV autists at SinoDefense rip that gwailo apart
Have you welded Chinese steel? I sure as fuck have. Those things are shitboxes made of shit steel waiting to fall apart the moment they get hit by anything harder than a machine gun.
Uhh not really. Chinese armor plate has been used in combat for 50+ years without ill effect.
Chinese AFBs are competent designs that are considered these days to be better than Russian stuff as they'll have things like A/C and better thermal sights.
Ah I see, I have a friend who's a steelworker who seems to think literally everything that comes out of China is absolute dogshit, fortunately the shit they export isn't the shit that Norinco and the likes use for production of AFVs, Chinese tanks have been used in the past, in Sudan they defeated T-72s, Iraq operated them, although the ones they operated were very outdated. Chinese arms production have been high quality for a while now, even going as far back as the Type-56 which was a very high quality AK. They even produce the best Flanker variant, much to Russias chagrin.
Also, China will produce what you pay them, if you pay bottom of the barrel prices you will get bottom of the barrel prices, if you buy from a reputable seller at greater expense, you will get a higher quality product (see Xiaomi/DJI/Huawei, etc vs Wish.com mystery meat).
Yep, China makes submarine steel domestically and if they can make that they can make good RHA or at least "good enough"
Do you want to actually discuss AFVs in good faith or do you want to go "China is shit" in reply to everything I say? Because your response to them actually being used in combat is "it doesn't count because those operators were retarded" not sure how that would relate to the metallurgy of the tank, it went into battle and worked. I also literally said " although the ones they operated were very outdated" in regards to Iraq because they were operating Type 59/69 (T-54A) against M1A1s, of course they'd get their shit rolled, you might as well say "yeah I can beat up a 12 year old". You might have expertise in regards to the Chinese steel you've worked with, but China has exported plenty of arms in the past and not a single complaint has come up about the metallurgy of their vehicles, Pakistan has bought JF-17 and J-10C, as well as VT-4, Chinese military equipment isn't junk.
Yep the Chinese Type 59/69/79 are considered reasonable replacements for the T-54/55 series and later versions had clones of the L7 105mm and better FCS than the Russian tanks.
Okay, you're grossly uniformed about the Chinese defence industry to the point you think the JF-17 and J-10C are knock offs of US designs (The JF-17 being the end product of Pakistani and Chinese cooperation after the Grumman-Chengdu Super 7 project fell through), so I don't really see a point in continuing a good faith discussion, but if you're so sure that your slice of life in working with Chinese steel is indicative of all Chinese products I'd like to ask why companies like BYD, Huawei, Xiaomi, DJI, CSSC, etc are successful world wide, oh and why China builds 50+% of the worlds ships.
Exactly. Chinese AFBs can be shit if you're looking for their budget stuff. Even then, those things will be trick or jeep chassis with an armored hull.
Chinese Bigfoot (that's it's actual marketing name) MRAPs have been successfully used in COIN in Nigeria for over a decade without ill effect for example.
I believe it's wise not to underestimate your enemies. Your impression of China shouldn't be derived from dropped shipped items originating from Temu and harbor freight tools meant for western consumers and anti-Chinese propaganda made by some Falun Gong affiliated media channel.
At face value, modern Chinese stuff generally looks competently made. Though some specific vehicles and items criticism can be had. We won't know the true nature of the Chinese army and it's equipment until we see this stuff in use in the field or internal reports get published or leaked. Generally vintage chicom equipment has a relatively positive reputation to my knowledge.
It's just a good rule of thumb not to underestimate your enemy. If you consider them your enemy.
Correct. China can make everything from space launch vehicles to 1 cent plastic trash and everything in between. Quality is a materials, process and QC matter, nothing more. You WILL pay more for quality.
Example, fancy leather boots. A Chinese company called Flame Panda makes very high quality boots that cost about $450. Meanwhile China can also make utter shit copies of US jungle boots for $5. Or injection molded rubber boots for $2 (that aren't that bad tbh)
Exactly, I'm not here to act like every piece of Chinese equipment is outstanding, the QBZ-95 was sub-par, and the WZ-551 definitely leaves a lot to be desired, but to act like everything out of China is shit is very ignorant.
The Chinese improved the QBZ-95 with the -1 model. The WZ-551 is a pretty generic 6x6 wheeled APC/IFV. Inexpensive and relatively simple.
I am not talking about Temu, this is about raw material they sell to companies. I've welded it. It's all shit. That's not propaganda. Their QA is legitimately Terrible
Baowu is the largest producer of steel in the world. If its garbage for us, its garbage for the chinks because its all made by the same sweatshop. They dont know how to make good steel. Period.
They most certainly do. They make their own subs and those are NOT tolerant of shitty steel. Same with ships and aircraft (although aircraft are mostly aluminum, titanium and carbon fiber composites)
Steel RHA was pretty much perfected 50 years ago.
In regards to your steel, how did you get it?
"In 2015, Baowu was the
second largest steel producer in the world measured by crude steel output, with an annual output of around 35 million tons (China's total steel production in 2015 was 803.8 million tons
[6])"
Indeed. A LOT of Chinese steel is absolutely cut rate shit they dump to keep their steel mills running. However if you pay the money and QC it you can get quality steel from China.
Mainly because I was fully onboard with "china bad lol" before actually doing some reading, then I started to be a PLA observer as a hobby, also their stuff is just different which is interesting, they don't follow Russian or NATO standards, and seemingly produce pretty good quality equipment and export it for cheap as well. I would say VT-4 Doesn't really compare to T-14 Armata, it's a much more standard tank design, and has basis in the T-72, it also has seen combat, being used by Nigeria in a counter insurgency role
you can see it here (the ammo laid out is in Nigeria, the internal view is Thai though). It's also different because countries have actively evaluated the VT-4 and decided it's good enough, the T-14 is literally stuck in "it's being evaluated and will enter production any day now" for years.
My point there wasn't their overall size, it was the total steel produced by China overall vs what they produced.
Yep again. Chinese weapons are getting more and more sales even before Russia was sanctioned out the ass.
Morocco, Kuwait, Saudi, etc have all bought Chinese weapons including artillery, tanks and air defense systems when they had the pick of the litter.
Same as Thailand, they got tired of Ukraine taking nearly a decade to deliver 49 T-84s so they want TK China and got a few dozen VT-4s in less than 2 years
China will also customize weapon systems for you if you want.
It is still a pig running on 2nd gen MBT DNA. Surviving a RPG 7 is not a accomplishment, that is a standard a Abrams is expected to survive and keep kicking ass with gusto. This thing would get ammo racked the moment some sand rat went at it from the side
It's not a Gen 2 design as all. It's a unique hull and turret with a T-72 derived autoloader.
Thermal sights, CITV, remote machine gun and the ability to mount an APS system.
It's a modern MBT.
As good as a M1A2 Sep v3, Leo 2A7 or K2? Probably not but it's probably 1/2 the price and doesn't have idiotic export restrictions
It's a pretty slow autoloader all things considered. And it has the ammo sitting right at the bottom, vulnerable to side hits and mines. A Abrams would have to get hit in the bustle with the door open to get the same kind of catastrophic explosion that I'd normal in a T-72 family tank. I'd take a side hit in a Abrams with a bit of shrapnel if it meant I didn't also blow up.
You have to hit the autoloader to make the T-72 jack in the box. It's not a very easy hit to make.
Sure a autoloader won't get tired, but it can't help me if a track breaks down. That's what a loader is for, being the bitch lol
Don't forget making the turret be Large enough for a man to stand up in it.....
There's not a single tank crew on earth that will go into battle with only the ammo stored in the bustle of the tanks I'm talking about (K2, Type 10, Leclerc, Leopard 2), because they simply don't carry enough rounds, being 12-14.
K2, Type 10, Type 90, and Leclerc all Carry ~22 shells in their autoloaders.
T-72 autoloader is about 7.1 seconds, most Abrams crew will hit 5-6 for the first shot then 7+ for the rest.
An Abrams loader I used to game with told us that if he had an AP shell in hand, he could reload in about 2.5-3 seconds. HEAT/HE took a bit longer.
No shell on hand was longer still as he'd open the bustle door and pull a shell. The more shells he used the longer it would take.
Humans also get tired, autoloaders don't.
