Challenger 2 Tank How it Works - with Chobham Armour and Iron Fist

[@Aitelly]

Imortant Notes from our Audience The Community is great here. 1) "Qasim Mir" It’s important to note regarding driving is that the steering is geared. Meaning with each gear there is a different turn radius, so if you want to do a tight turn you must change down a few gears to be able to do it. Another thing is the steering tillers only control where the front of the tank is pointing. Meaning, if going ahead and you want to turn right, you must ‘come right stick’ pulling the right lever, but, if you’re reversing and you want to turn right you must ‘come left stick’ and pull the left lever. It would be good to touch on the tank’s suspension. Unlike other NATO tanks using torsion bars, Challenger 2 uses hydro pneumatic suspension. The British don’t like suspension that is mounted inside the hull on MBTs so you will never find a British tank with torsion bars. Before on Centurion and Chieftain they had Horstmann suspension. Challenger introduced the outside mounted hydro pneumatic which was easy to service but also performs better at springing and dampening than torsion bar. 2) "Qasim Mir" The firing procedure for a Challenger 2 engagement is as follows (as far as I know): Commander or gunner will acquire the the target: ‘A fin, a tank!’ (‘Fin’ means APFSDS) Operator will load the the relevant round Gunner when he’s brought to target by the commander and adjusted aim will shout: ‘ON!’ or ‘ARMED!’ Idk😳 Operator will report: ‘LOADED!’ Gunner will fire: ‘Firing!’💥 When the round hits, gunner will say: ‘Target!’ If the commander is satisfied with the damage he will reply: ‘Target stopped!’ End of engagement.

[@muhammedeminkomurcu1040]

Hello, when will Turkish subtitles come to your videos. Because there is no Turkish subtitles even in the automatic translation section.

[@qasimmir7117]

Thank you for sharing my information.

[@seha6391]

I LOVE IT THIS ARMOR IS STILL CLASSIFIED AND THIS VIDEO IS BULLSHIT IVE SEEN A BROKEN ABRAMS TANK SKIRT And holy SHIT Chalanger is a slow shooter I could load off a round on an Abrams less than a round every 3 seconds

[@Xyb3rTeCh]

Please also do one content for the South Korean K2 Black Panther. Thanks!

[@zhufortheimpaler4041]

Short correction here: 1. Challenger 1 still used the same Horstmann Suspension as Chieftain. 2. The shown weight of the different MBT´s and especcially Challenger 2 are false. Challenger 2 without TES (Theater Entry Standard armor addons) weights in 62.5 metric tons, with TES it weights 75-76 metric tons. Leopard 2A7V and M1A2 SEP.V3 weight in at about 66 metric tons. 3. The L30A1 rifled 120mm L/55 gun is exclusively used by the Challenger 2 (L11 rifled 120mm L/55 gun is the predecessor on Challenger 1 and Chieftain). No other NATO partner uses this gun. Leopard 2, M1 Abrams and Ariete use variants of the RH120 smoothbore 120x570mm L/44 or L/55 gun, Leclerc uses the GIAT CN-26/52 gun, a 120x570mm smoothbore gun with 52 caliber lengths. 4. The Enforcer RWS is not regularly mounted on Challenger 2, even in TES configuration. This was added for the "Street Warrior" upgrade for urban combat. Only one Squadron was fitted out like this. 5. Black Knight, aswell as the other LEP Prototypes were in the end not procured and canceled. The described Challenger 2 would not be used in reality, the regular Challenger 2 does not feature a RWS nor an APS system. 6. The Incident where a Challenger 2 was hit by a Milan ATGM, the Milan used was a Milan 1 ATGM from 1972, wich was sold to Irak in 1982-83 by france. The Milan 1 ATGM had a single HEAT Warhead with about 350mm RHAe Penetration. This was indicently less penetration capability than the RPG-7WN and RPG-7WR used by iraki forces (wich had about 500-700mm RHAe penetration) This is btw not an example of exceptional survivability. If you throw a waterballoon at someone and another one filled with solid ice at another person, you wouldnt say that the person hit with the normal waterballoon is exceptionally tough because he can take the hit. CR2 is a late 1980´s design with armor thickness representing that. 350mm HEAT Penetration wont penetrate the frontal armor and would likely struggle with the side armor too. Similarly the RPG´s have 500-600mm penetration, that wont do much to the front, at the side this would also be likely not enough to penetrate. This would be also the case for Leopard 2A5 and later versions aswell as M1A2 Abrams versions. Other, more modern ATGM and RPG´s, like 9K135 Kornet ATGM with estimated 1200mm Tandem HEAT Warhead would seriously threaten Challenger 2, as it did with Leopard 2 and M1. 7. one also has to mention that the steering tiller system is quite outdated and anachronistic on a vehicle that entered service in 1998, while basicly all other NATO MBT´s from 1978 onwards used steeringwheels and more user friendly controls. 8. in comparison to other NATO MBT´s the Engine of CR2 is quite underpowered and both offroad and on road topspeed of CR2 is about 10-15km/h slower than the competition in both areas. 9. Major Con: Neither Ammunition nor Spareparts are in production for the last 10+ years, the Vehicle itself has basicly no export and is out of production since 2006. This turns the Cr2 into a logistical trap

[@gustafmannerheim9720]

You miss the most imprtant part, the very core and soul of this tank and all british tanks, the tactical tea maker.

[@jac627]

That tea reference is so hackneyed

[@super_morto]

Chally of the woods approves.

[@mkvenner2]

The tactical tea maker was in the Challenger 1. The Challenger 2 has a boil water unit that can do more than make tea but is mostly just used for tea

[@davidbridge5652]

As an English man I would be offended if it didnt have one

[@super_morto]

@@davidbridge5652 I can tea bag you if you want?.....

[@catlee8064]

One of the few channels which actually point out its 3 part ammo....Well done.

[@Aitelly]

Thank You

[@Maurizio4672]

tu saresti il nobile Staminchia?

[@Gu1s]

Кто-то этого не знает😂😂😂?

[@qasimmir7117]

It’s important to note regarding driving is that the steering is geared. Meaning with each gear there is a different turn radius, so if you want to do a tight turn you must change down a few gears to be able to do it. Another thing is the steering tillers only control where the front of the tank is pointing. Meaning, if going ahead and you want to turn right, you must ‘come right stick’ pulling the right lever, but, if you’re reversing and you want to turn right you must ‘come left stick’ and pull the left lever. It would be good to touch on the tank’s suspension. Unlike other NATO tanks using torsion bars, Challenger 2 uses hydro pneumatic suspension. The British don’t like suspension that is mounted inside the hull on MBTs so you will never find a British tank with torsion bars. Before on Centurion and Chieftain they had Horstmann suspension. Challenger introduced the outside mounted hydro pneumatic which was easy to service but also performs better at springing and dampening than torsion bar.

[@Aitelly]

Thanks for the beautifully written notes. Learned a lot today

[@Aitelly]

We have Credited you for this insightful comment.

[@danhodson7187]

HAS to have good suspension or the crew might spill their cuppa!

[@qasimmir7117]

@@danhodson7187 Indeed. Tea is vital for victory.☕️

[@Nouta-j8d]

Great read. My dad spent his career transporting challengers and other vehicles nice to have a good insight into it all.

[@movieviewing]

I always wondered how challenger was different from abrams you hear all the time about abrams blow out panel or how it drives. These vids are great very informative and gets straight to the point of how the tanks works that can’t get from a google search easily. I look forward to all the future vids.

[@Aitelly]

Next Russian T90M Autoloader

[@deven6518]

Can't get from a Google search easily? Lol

[@zulfanirich7594]

still a coward in ukraine 😂😂

[@Maurizio4672]

ora hai capito perchè gli abrams bruciano che è una meraviglia?

[@fleshtearer9454]

First Challenger was destroyed today

[@gustaafpeeters6173]

In reality, in Ukraine they are kept at the behind the lines on demand of the British, the front is "not safe enough" I wonder what's the point for sending them.

[@Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ]

Now we know why.

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

@zz_mike-hawk_zz True challenger ii lost undefeated in Ukraine against a powerful atgm, only the Abraham m1a2 remains to be seen in action and performance.

[@Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ]

@@overdrivelzma.9219 I have made a video about it, it you want to check it out.

[@stanmil5495]

Send them back then, talk about biting the hand that feeds you

[@henm3000]

and that the reason for Merkava 4 b the best tank in the world. The Merakava's Marching to the battlefield, and know how came back home safely

[@HideeyeeL]

Amazing what engineers can achieve when it comes to weaponry 💥

[@Aitelly]

yes

[@linuxuberuser]

Imagine if engineers were hired to build space ships that ran on rocket-less propulsion. It's already been done.

[@komisiantikorupsikoruptord6257]

​@@Aitelly 2:20 The Soviets made their bridge capacity 45 tons so that when western tanks passed, the bridge would immediately collapse

[@thenoblecat536]

So basically, they designed this tank all in defend stat, the attack is based on the elite crews from British

[@Aitelly]

Please Subscribe 🤘

[@mathijeba5375]

Ok

[@mathijeba5375]

How does a mig 29 work plzz

[@Aitelly]

@@mathijeba5375 Ok after we are done with the T90 Russian tank Autoloader Mechanism

[@nuclearwarhead9338]

@@Aitelly please make a video explaining the Fly-By-Wire for unstable aircrafts.

[@johaneslerius9943]

Oke dokey👍👍👍😁😁😁

[@yereverluvinuncleber]

A positive you failed to mention is the suspension that allows better cross country performance than its competitors even with higher power engines. Coupled with easier repair to the external suspension units when damaged in combat, whereas battle damaged welded torsion bars in the Leopards and Abrams require back to base, torsion bar torch-cutting, disassembly, removal and repair.

[@Uga-booga]

Wow! What an amazing machine. Excellent video.

[@Aitelly]

Thanks for the comment

[@Ernest-jr]

I am Russian, and I can barely speak English. Much less be polite. First of all, thank you very much. 1. The coaxial chain gun looks much simpler, single barrel. It has features important for a close tank. 2. English tanks are one of the narrowest today. Even in comparison with the Soviet ones. The thing about railroad overpasses. Some decisions of this tank have to do with the width. 3. The hydraulic automatic transmission does not disengage the clutch, but reduces the power of one of the tracks. 4. The Challenger can still fire at a large downward lean angle, which increases its heavy turret. It has relatively high ground clearance, a smooth bottom, and mine protection. This, too, increases the height. 5. The suspension of this tank is unusual: compact and adjustable (located on sides, not on the bottom, which reduces the height of the tank). That is why the tank can withstand unprecedented overloading of the hinged protection. 6. The inclined multilayer armor barrier refracts (as in optics) the shock front of the penetrator many times. This leads to its defocusing (as in optics). In practice it looks like the penetrator is crumbled, by dissipating the energy to fluctuate the layers.

[@Aitelly]

@ Ernest Awesome point of view

[@Ernest-jr]

@@Aitelly I was trying to present facts, not opinions. There are too many opinions around.

[@robertpatrick3350]

Point 5 the suspension system has inspired the new South Korean tanks and it will become more prevalent. Point 4 British tank designers have long valued being able to have a large depression angle, this has proved extremely valuable to them in many conflicts eg Korea and to the Israeli’s where the Syrian forces were at a significant disadvantage.

[@kallanr360]

"I can barely speak English" delivers a seminar of information on the tank concisely. Please never learn English properly, you will make us look bad.

[@andypandy9013]

The Mk 4 was not just the first British Tank, it was the first Tank anywhere. To keep them secret before they were first used in World War One they were described as "Mobile Water Tanks", or just "Tanks". The name stuck. 😃

[@JoshEastham]

I wish I discovered this channel earlier. Every time there is a country show I never get to go in the challenger because the queue is too long. So it is nice to know how the internals, and periscope work etc

[@Onigatana]

This video is extremely helpful for someone that wants to 3D model a game ready tank with an Interior and physicalized damage. Thanks for this video.

[@shouri-j]

I am very happy to see that your video quality is developing. Hope you get more subscribers soon . ❤ from 🇮🇳.

[@Aitelly]

Thanks Better Video as we try to recruit more people

[@mongoliandude]

I'm glad you're talking about the Challenger 2 here and not the "Challenger 3". The UK government isn't fooling anyone that what is merely upgrade suite is a new tank.

[@k-ron7403]

Well it’s an entirely new turret, gun, firing system, self defence system, new armour and new engine. So i would hardly call it a light upgrade. It will do nicely and certainly better than anything potential foes have. Just need more of them

[@1maico1]

The only thing the same between the II and III is the chassis. The gun is switching to smoothbore.

[@jpracing893]

@@1maico1 Even then it's been changed, the lower Glacis has been up armoured on a chassis level not just add-on, the tank uses 3rd Gen Chobham called Farnham and has add-on armour like the Challenger 2 TES had called EPSOM which is upgraded from current standards (This is how we'd send tanks into battle with the add-on armour) So the Chassis has had a lot of work done, not forgetting APS has been confirmed, specifically Trophy.

[@edandaniels3922]

really useful. I am about to break into an armored division's HQ and steal a tank and this is going to be helpful. appreciate the info!

[@Aitelly]

thanks

[@Grimnir_x]

Can you grab me one while you're there?

[@hb_main1471]

the up armoured variant you show is actually pushing 85 tonnes

[@paulmatthews2175]

no it isn't, the full TES version is 72 tonnes

[@GeneralThargor]

You forgot it's most important feature, the water boiler so you can have a nice cup of tea after the battle.

[@Aitelly]

Yes. We thought everyone knew about it

[@D1shortfatoneat00.19secconds]

Kettle you silly billy

[@XIXjlo]

@@D1shortfatoneat00.19secconds boiler vessel

[@TheJoyofSix]

During the battle, dear boy

[@njathifrancis]

Thanks! I've been having trouble firing my Challenger tank

[@Harvy500]

Chobham armour = developed by DERA ( Defence Evaluation Research Agency) British army department in a village called Chobham in Surrey south east of England. I lived there for 15 years.

[@yurkofess3825]

They call "Chobham" most composite NERA armour variants, including non-British. Actually, part of Challenger2 armor plating and APS - made in Israel.

[@MrT-LFC]

Stumbled upon the video. Now hooked. Excellent work!

[@Aitelly]

Awesome of you thanks 🙏

[@fredsas12]

The combat weight of the Challenger is is actually 75 metric tonnes. The training weight of the tank is the standard 63 tonnes. For comparison, the combat weight of the M1A2 Abrams with TUSK is 68 metric tonnes.

[@Verezart]

T-72 is a Russian tank. Ukraine uses Soviet T-64.

[@rockrock8706]

Challenger 2 is lovely and is the most beautiful MBT in the world

[@qasimmir7117]

Indeed she is.

[@ДмитрийКутнов]

Да , красивый...Только поэтому на него и соблазнилась одна страна в мире , кроме Англии.

[@pieterveenders9793]

After the Leopard she's definitely one of the most beautiful.

[@ghost_of_Iran]

@@rockrock8706 جون

[@ghost_of_Iran]

جون

[@chrisyoung9653]

the challenger 2 just won a NATO tank competition last week. leopard came 2nd and abrams 3rd

[@zulfanirich7594]

still a coward in ukraine 😂😂

[@chrisyoung9653]

@@zulfanirich7594 no need to use the good tanks yet. any old tank will do against poor wee russia and their egg cartons🤣🤣🤣

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

@chrisyoung9653 Already tested it against a professional army, Challenger lost the undefeated were 2 units lost out of 10, I don't think UK will give him more units.

[@chrisyoung9653]

@@overdrivelzma.9219 no they were only given so Germany would send leopard 2s. Worked great

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

@chrisyoung9653 It only remains the Abraham M1A2 to make their combat debut in Europe and see if they better withstand a high intensity war, I think France will never send its Leclercs.

[@dfgdfg_]

Beautifully animated 🔥

[@Sebastian-S]

My previous favorite was the L2 A7, but I would take this anyday.

[@chrissandi9613]

Fantastic! Have just discovered AiTelly channel. It's absolutely great, with so much interesting and informative engineering and technical detail. But - vitally - you explain everything clearly for mechanical thickos like me.

[@616CC]

Dorchester armour refers to the reactive armour package that’s added on, chopham armour is the built in armour

[@JohnMcMahon.]

This channel is exactly what I’ve been looking for. Thanks 👍

[@loadapish]

U plannin on stealing a tank?

[@JohnMcMahon.]

@@loadapish 😊

[@jacinthenricoso352]

Next is a t-34

[@pato8798]

yes

[@valera5689]

Merkava MkIV

[@caligas1735]

@@valera5689 no next any ww2 tank

[@jacinthenricoso352]

Yeah ww2 tanks were not mentioned in all of the videos

[@idk_wat_to_name_this]

@@jacinthenricoso352 bruh the kv1 was mentioned

[@nothingspecial6925]

So, we have absolutely no idea what its Dorchester armour comprises off. The only reference we have is we know what Burlington arrays No.1 to 4 looked like, which were in fact bulging plate technology using plastic and steel. However, that technology was patented in 1962 and Dorchester is a much newer and advanced development from the Burlington arrays and like how the Germans dropped the bulging plate armour design in their B-Tech armours and started using ceramics in newer armours in C-Tech and the US went with using depleted Uranium in some way with is HAP and NGAP armour over the bulging plate armours in its early BRL armours, it's likely Dorchester has moved onto incorporating more advanced material arrays. However, despite what most people say, there is absolutely no available information that gives us an idea of what Dorchester is made off. I'd be lying to say it didn't bug me to see the composite armour animated right in the front within the 100mm steel plate armour but I know its just for education purposes.

[@LordOfLight]

"....the Mark IV. The first battle-tested tank made by British engineers......". In fact the first tank made by anyone anywhere. Called a "tank" because that was the code word for it while under development and the name stuck.

[@nordic0815]

Spot on… The tank was originally named land ship by British Military in WW1. The name "tank" was initially a code name to maintain secrecy and disguise its true purpose by making it appear to be a water transport vehicle for bringing water to the troops at the front line. Extra Facts: Challenger 2 (CR2) tank can also set a smoke screen by the injection of diesel fuel into the engine exhausts. The secret weapon of any British Armoured Vehicle BV. A boiling vessel (BV) is a water heating system fitted to British armoured fighting vehicles that permits the crew to heat water and cook food by drawing power from the vehicle electrical supply. It is often referred to by crewmembers as "the most important piece of equipment in a British armoured vehicle".

[@MyScotty7]

My favourite tank,beautiful

[@TheRyujinLP]

Slight correction on how the "Chobham" amour works: It's basicly a hollow steel box with the primary feature of the armour is it's NERA array, those aren't plastic armour plates but rather a form of Non Explosive Reactive Armour (or NERA) that uses a synthetic polymer (artificial rubber) not plastic. These work just like the ERA blocks, the have a thick plate of armour with a block of "rubber" behind it with a backing plate of thinner steel behind it. The round hits the front plate, compressing the rubber stores that energy like a spring. Once the rubber is compressed to a critical point, it releases that energy and "pops out", slamming the front plate into the projectile or HEAT jet. Now NERA isn't as effective as ERA but it's biggest pro is that it can be used safely in a confined space (you can't use ERA inside of a block of armor for obvious reason) and it doesn't blow itself up so it can take several hits before failing. To make up for the fact that a single plate isn't that powerful, they are stacked in a array of several NERA modules with enough of a gap between them that they won't take each other out when they go off. Modern version of this armour (such as next generation special armor on the Abrams M1A2 variants or Dorchester for the Challenger II) are a bit more complex, though I'm only going to be vague here.... this stuff is classified after all and I don't want to go to jail. These add plates of High Hardness steel to the back of the armor and in the more modern version of the armor, advanced ceramic/steel composites in front of the NERA array (you can tell which have them because the armor sticks out more to accommodate them). DU is used as well, but usually only in the turret checks (at lest with the Abrams. They did experiment with using it in the hull but it was found to not be worth the extra weight and cost since the type of weapons that tend to be used against the hull are already stopped well enough by the armor it has already), there is some neat stuff with how it's used but I can't really go to deeply into that. The NERA arrays have also been updated with some pretty exotic stuff, the material used acts more like a reusable explosive (like I said, it's pretty crazy stuff) which of course brings the NERA closer to ERA in power. It's also now placed in the armour at odd and counter intuitive angles (they're not placed following the slant of the armour). The reason for this is that they found by changing the angle the round hits, it can change the direction the round moves after hitting the array and is usually set so that it directs the attack upwards so that it punches through the roof of the armour instead of going deeper into the tank.

[@HeroBudu]

Your videos never fail to amaze me

[@Aitelly]

Thanks 👍

[@markjosephbudgieridgard]

Wow thanks another excellent video..... 👍 Mark from UK..... The home of the challenger 2

[@billyponsonby]

Remarkable work. Excellent!

[@Aitelly]

Thanks 👍

[@shavedchimp2050]

Another detail, with a full system the gunner does not correct for wind and elevation. Elevation is calculated at the point of lasing and acquiring the range to the target. Windage is calculated via data from the MET sensor mounted on top of the turret. Only when all systems have failed does the gunner have to resort to manual correction. Great video though, brought back memories. 👍

[@seiftahawy54]

The British touches are always mind-blowing

[@richanghalz]

Im obsessed to your channel.

[@Aitelly]

we love you Guys so much. Thanks!

[@yanayana5408]

Great video, fantastic animation, top notch narrative.

[@HIFLY01]

I like the commander and gunner animation. They looked more alive than other videos

[@Aitelly]

Thanks

[@Aitelly]

Thanks- we try our best

[@skwal5464]

to know how it work you just have to ask on war thunder forums and wait until someone give you classified document

[@kallanr360]

Underrated comment.

[@cjaydustie1867]

Love this video! Great detail and information. Can’t wait to see if you have videos on other MBTs after I finish this!

[@AZAZEL8881]

Thank you to the channel, interesting information) Thank you to Great Britain for helping in the fight against aggression!

[@Diomedes1]

Things I learned today: the Brits basically have to put some sort of a rifle clip to ignite the Challenger 2´s main gun 😄 Yeah looking forward for the T-90M animation 👌

[@Aitelly]

🙏 thanks 👍

[@Kohagaan]

And the Leclerc tank animation too 👍

[@DH.2016]

Amazing to think that the Chally's main gun shares, in effect, a 3 component ammo system with the likes of a rifled musket in the American Civil War some 130 years earlier with the latter's ammo consisting of a cartridge with powder, a Minie ball and a percussion cap.

[@kizzyp2735]

@@DH.2016 ...the reality is though its no slower than single piece tank ammo.

[@GeoPoliticsCommentry]

"Its not how it works Its how it burns" -Chadimir Poutine 2023

[@lIlyTnik]

"Cornet" has already burned two Challenger 2 tanks.

[@redactedagentdataexpunged9431]

Wheres the 2nd Challenger 2 corpse then?

[@stevea2909]

Great work as always! Dang, that tank is a beast! Watching your videos,I'm gaining a bit of knowledge, you know what they say about that.

[@rishi7629]

Please do other lesser known tanks like Oplot, Al Khalid etc, SR-72 etc.

[@timoonnovi]

Mistake on 1:54. T-72 is a russian tank (T-90 prototype) which is produced on Urals manufactories and is presented in a very small amount in the ua forces, while the main ukrainian army tank is T-64 made in Kharkov.

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

T 90M Provy3 vs T 84 Oplot. This encounter will never happen Ukraine does not send its oplot to the front only owns 10 units.

[@thyresias194]

Good job guys, please Leclerc tank !

[@facts9538]

No one has ever destoryed a Challenger 2. I wonder if Russia can be the first to destory a Challeneger 2 in battle. I hope this is not the case but if it is, It shows the level of skill the british army have when using the Challenger 2

[@hushpuppykl]

It has been … by another Challenger 2, friendly fire 😬

[@Scourge762]

@@hushpuppykl only the British have destroyed one

[@Robin-sf3gk]

But in how many battles has it been yet compared to the Abrahams, Leclerc and Leopard?

[@facts9538]

@@Robin-sf3gk Does the fact it hasn't been destoryed bother you? Just wondering why you take my comment ( about a single tank ) and turn it into your own so you can compare. I don't know how many battles, i dont think any goverment is going to tell us the true number. But enough to known it's the best performing tank in Nato. But seeing as you wanted to compare tanks. Can you name a single tank from any other country that has in a single battle been hit with 15+ RPG's plus bullet, granades ect And still drove away? I don't know how many battle i dont think any goverment is going to tell us the true number. But enough to known as the best performing tank in Nato.

[@Scourge762]

@@Robin-sf3gk the challenger has seen much more combat than the leclerc and leopard

[@adi_s6]

Bro Can you make a detailed video like this on a apc(armored personal carrier) maybe Boxer

[@RTankist]

T-72B it is much more used by Russians than Ukrainians also because Ukrainians do not operate T-72B3 obr.2011 (the one in the video), Ukrainians use more T-64BV

[@mikeymikeFType]

Challenger 2 just came out on top of a recent NATO exercise beating Leopards and Abrams etc

[@raf9826]

Yes this was really impressive, I wonder how great the Challenger 3 will turn out to be if they did this well with the Chally 2.

[@Robin-sf3gk]

Why is nobody mentioning the french Leclerc here?

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

In the real war with a regular and competent army challenger lost undefeated in Ukraine by the employment of a laser guide ATGM.

[@이혜경-i6l]

The challenger tank has a rifled gun but the ammo you showed was a piercing fin stabilized discarding sabot that is used on smooth bore gun

[@nikolapilipovic3884]

Amazing animations! Very informative! If you guys don't mind leaving references to the litarature on which you are basing your work, that would be fantatistic!

[@NotTrenchify]

6:35 The Challenger 2's Chobham armor is much thicker. The weld on the side is the outermost steel plate covering the chobham armor.

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

The chobham armoured challenger ii variant was sent to Ukraine or it was an old version destroyed by the 0rcs russians...

[@gunshipzeroone3546]

What a great video you have done here very easy how you explain information in this video great video graphics love it. Just to let you know, not long ago, the USA wanted this classified armour for the USA tank's so both the uk and us did a deal to share the technology as the uk got some technology on the us submarine technology so ONLY the USA and UK are the only tank's to have this armour.

[@Aitelly]

Thanks for the support and Feedback notes

[@макслюлюкин]

you are writing absolute nonsense.firstly, the world's first tank with composite armor was built in the USSR, the T-64.Secondly, the spaced armor in the forehead of the tower of several dozen armor plates with air gaskets and other materials is not a privilege of the USA and England.This has been done on the T-90 in Russia since the 90s

[@gonzomuse]

@@макслюлюкин He didn't say "spaced" armour or "composite" armour. He was referring to Chobham armour specifically, which was used on the Challenger 1 and shared with the US for the M1A1. Dorchester is the upgraded Chobham variant on CH2, while the Americans developed their own variant for the M1A2.

[@LucasGator2]

Fun fact: only one Challenger 2 MBT was ever destroyed, which was on a friendly fire incident. Also, will you make a video on the japanese Type 90 or Type 10?

[@krok226]

Уже нет. Теперь мы точно знаем что горят челенджеры точто так же как и другие танки.

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

As it seems that the Challenger II lost the undefeated in Ukraine as the tank that was not destroyed by an enemy army are 2 units lost.

[@PA-gn4fi]

@@krok226not as bright and hot as those Russian jack in the boxes “tanks”. That shit must really burn hot and melt skin to the bone but then again they are Russian soldiers so nobody cares 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@LucasGator2]

​@@overdrivelzma.9219 this comment was made 4 months before that Challenger 2 was destroyed. I couldn't predict that it would be destroyed.

[@HesFoset]

Being a loader in a tank crew sucks. So you don't have any special features, all you have to do is load the right ammo quickly. When your tank is in battle, you are the most important member of the crew, but unfortunately you are never remembered. In my country's war 60 years ago, a T-34 crossed incredibly steep mountains and got behind our opponent and cornered him. Members of the tank crew were declared heroes, but the presence of the crew member who served as a loader was not mentioned in the monument built for them. If it weren't for him, the tank wouldn't even be able to fire, but it was forgotten. Likewise, this is happening not only in us, but all over the world. I heard that crew members operating Abrams tanks in the Middle East were fighting each other to avoid taking the Loader role.

[@shavedchimp2050]

If memory serves me correctly, the safety switch on the GCP does not isolate the firing circuit it only isolates the Gun Control Equipment ie. turret movement, same for the Commanders Safety switch. The Loaders Control Panel Safety switch does however isolate the Firing Circuit and the GCE.

[@qasimmir7117]

The firing procedure for a Challenger 2 engagement is as follows (as far as I know): Commander or gunner will acquire the the target: ‘A fin, a tank!’ (‘Fin’ means APFSDS) Operator will load the the relevant round Gunner when he’s brought to target by the commander and adjusted aim will shout: ‘ON!’ or ‘ARMED!’ Idk😳 Operator will report: ‘LOADED!’ Gunner will fire: ‘Firing!’💥 When the round hits, gunner will say: ‘Target!’ If the commander is satisfied with the damage he will reply: ‘Target stopped!’ End of engagement.

[@BurningSovereign]

Mostly accurate. Not bad

[@qasimmir7117]

@@BurningSovereign What is the true firing procedure for Challenger 2 and the phrasing?

[@BurningSovereign]

@@qasimmir7117 You've added a lot of variables, will attempt to clarify on certain things. "Commander or gunner will acquire the target: 'A fin, a tank!'" I don't know why you added the "A" to both of those. The easiest way to think about it is as; once the target is identified, an ammo nature is announced, followed by the target. Example is: Fin tank HESH BMP COAX Men. I'm on my phone so ill do each part individually

[@EngineerGram]

Amazing animation ❤

[@Aitelly]

Thanks 🙏

[@Audi2Gunz]

As much as I love Tanks, I love me some Mighty-Mo! Hope to see some ships!

[@Aitelly]

Coming soon after we are done with Autoloader

[@shouri-j]

I was waiting for your new video.😊. Please, upload next video faster. Please, upload video on 🇮🇱Merkava Thank. ❤ From 🇮🇳.

[@neilgriffiths6427]

"Some" don't call Chobham armour Dorchester armour - Dorchester is an upgrade to Chobham, they aren't the same thing.

[@axnnaandmikeyplayz5044]

can you please do t-90 next

[@Aitelly]

Yes T90M the latest version

[@GyanPrakash]

It runs on TEA 😂

[@jackmears8017]

Finally, the challenger 2 !

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

It's a pity that Challenger II lost the undefeated in Ukraine to a semi-professional regular army.

[@apple64z]

Challenger 2 Tank How it Works: It's on the side of the road. It burns very much. It smokes a lot.

[@1maico1]

Hit a mine. The crew bailed and sometime later it took a hit from a Kornet. Any tracked vehicle will be immobilized by ATMs. It was noticeable there were no armour modules fitted, they have not been supplied to Ukraine.

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

@1maico1 The Kornet is very powerful drill 1200 mm of composite armour, it would also have drilled the armour module.

[@reaperiscomingforme]

Should have told warthunder maybe the challenger would become a better tank love your videos guys

[@АлександрГуренков-и8у]

В мультфильмах он очень хорошо себя показал, как покажет себя на поле боя... Ну если только в него залезет министр обороны англии... Ну может быть, хотя это не точно. Но вот мультик можно смотреть часами

[@bathanhvo1772]

The tank lacks the ultimate feature of emergency turret extraction system of russian tank.

[@maksshapovalov413]

HA funny kid, Most of the videos were Ukrainian T70 and T80 tanks of the Soviet era, the upgraded t90M withstood the blow of NLAW and Javelin, the crew survived but the tank was disabled.

[@ДмитрийКутнов]

Зато присутствует аварийная система принудительного извлечения погибшего экипажа

[@Lipi19821]

we had seen many western tanks with poped turret...its not only soviet thing😮

[@HaydenLau.]

@@Lipi19821 Western tanks don't keep ammo in the turret

[@ДмитрийКутнов]

@@HaydenLau. 10 немецких Леопард 2 в Сирии не имели боеукладки в боевом отделении , а башни у них сорвало . Как , так?

[@BurningSovereign]

Few things wrong but still a very impressive video over all.

[@Powerof7even]

Few things wrong, refuses to elaborate, leaves.

[@thewomble1509]

@@Powerof7even There are quite a few errors in the vid. Obviously the tank expert didn't spot them..............

[@zeljkoobradovic2198]

Very good explanation and animation of the tanks. But the question....since when do Ukrainians produce tanks?

[@Aitelly]

Soviet Era tanks

[@ЛевЖарков-й9з]

​@@Desmond-mk1mv Украина производила Т-64 на Харьковском заводе

[@pavlo_koliadenko]

1:57 Russia is relying mostly on T-72B3, not T-90 And the Ukrainian tank fleet is comprised mostly of T64BV, not T-72

[@blackmantis3130]

He is comparing the modern versions being used not the frequently used .

[@viceralman8450]

They were relying on as they have lost 510 of them, or 37% of their fleet.

[@pavlo_koliadenko]

@@blackmantis3130 there is nothing modern really about T-72 in comparison to T-64. And the most modern Ukrainian tank is T-84 Oplot, again not T-72. T-72s were barely operational. If you like their indices - there were also T-80s in Air-assault brigades since like 2017.

[@pavlo_koliadenko]

Tbh, this is just bad quality of content, too many minor issues. I decided to unsubscribe.

[@Kurzula5150]

6:03 If you want to make this realistic, you should have the crew drinking tea at this point.

[@overdrivelzma.9219]

It reminds me of the ST Gloriana girls academy from the "Girls und Panzer" series, they served and drank tea inside the British tank.

[@davidwhite9159]

Correction: The first tank to ever go into action wasn’t the Mark IV but the Mark I on 15 September 1916 on the Somme.

[@Aitelly]

MARK 4 was the first battletested tank meaning .it destroyed two German A7V tanks

[@xfxox]

Survived 70 RPGs? Stop the cap!

[@damedusa5107]

I’m not sure where you got the weights from, or maybe you took information from a specific version, but CH2 tend to be much heavier than that. Info is incorrect on that. But the rest? Well it’s an incredible video. Well put together.

[@OdinBain]

It's clearly AI generated text, lots of the data/facts are wrong or missing

[@damedusa5107]

@@OdinBain possibly I can’t keep up with technology, it’s amazing people can use AI to do whole essays on subjects.schooling gets easier

[@金陵副将马国成-o3k]

this is really nice video ,please more

[@Aitelly]

But we did not get any views 😔

[@jaymac7203]

Dont forget the brew making facilities 🍵 😭 lol 😂

[@awatt]

☕

[@mufizz6000]

They really improved so much

[@looseyourzlf]

lower profile still hard target it's not obsolete brother. top attacks are hard for all not just soviet era tanks.

[@contingency9]

You have demonstrated why chobham/dorchester armour is the best in the world. You did'nt explain how it works and your animation of a shaped charge impacting the hull was incorrect. Simply because you don't know how it works because it is still top secret. However your description of reactive armour was good though reactive armour is common knowledge. Overall a good simple narrative of a very complex weapon system.

[@nothingspecial6925]

Unfortunately, this video not the tank's feats truly give that impression. Fact is, Challenger 2 hasn't faced nearly as potent weapons as Leopard 2 and Abrams has. MILAN is barely half as effective and deadly as the Kornet for example, and Challenger 2 has never been hit by such potent ATGMS like Kornets that have shown to easily knock out other tanks. It just hasn't seen nearly as much combat experience to truly give us a scope of its armour ability, and only that is capable of stopping highly obsolete RPG and a subpar MILAN that wouldn't fare much better at taking out most modern tanks. But here's the kicker, Challenger 2's Dorchester armour is over 30 years old and the tank hasn't had a majour internal armour upgrade since. The British MoD actually stated during the Chieftain replacement trials the M1A2 Abrams with HAP-2 (2nd gen DU) would be on par with Challenger 2 and since then the Abrams has had 2 MAJOUR armour upgrades. Challenger 2's armour is excellent, but it just can't be the best. It's 2 generations old at this point.

[@Culeeeee]

Could be worth to mention that one of the cons is the rifling of the gun, which slows down the sabbot rounds (so less penetration power) but are neccesary for HESH rounds which are less effective because of explosive reactive armor. I think they are considering going smooth bore for their next challenger version.

[@MrAnonymousme10]

I love how the tank's maid gun reminiscent the 18th century cannon.

[@Hespro]

That's very very informative

[@Aitelly]

Thanks 🙏👍

[@prudentiatech]

Hai, is Aitelly a company or just an individual..

[@Aneesh-Roy444.]

I give a solid like 👍🏻 for this wonderful fantastic and simply understandably explained awesome 😎 animated British Challanger -2 video...!

[@Aitelly]

Thanks

[@ShiratoHana]

you missing boiling vessel, A boiling vessel is a water heating system fitted to British armoured fighting vehicles that permits the crew to heat water and cook food by drawing power from the vehicle electrical supply. It is often referred to by crewmembers (not entirely in jest) as "the most important piece of equipment in a British armoured vehicle"

[@mirag2168]

❗❗❗Два танка "Челленджер" уже уничтожены воинами российской армии.

[@nonpolite]

70 rpg shots is impossible. Crew probably got scared of monkeys with aks, backed off and stuck. So they hid in their tank under "heavy" 7x62 fire

[@ramzaj5163]

It seems to me that this is a lie about hitting 70 RPGs). In recent events, he burned down from a single hit by a Cornet ATGM. And he became famous only for burning for 3 days.