Challenger 3: The New Generation of Main Battle Tanks | British Army

Equipped with world-beating technology, the factory fresh Challenger 3 prototype tank is the exciting next step in the UK's war-fighting capability.
#britisharmy #ukmilitary2024 #challenger3
Find us on:
www.army.mod.uk/
Twitter: / britisharmy
Facebook: / britisharmy
Instagram: / britisharmy
Blog: britisharmyblo...

[@Sam-tc8ic]

We only have two regular battalion sized tank units. That can not cut it any longer!

[@1234crevis]

That's why America and NATO got your backs!

[@Sam-tc8ic]

@@1234crevis I think I was wrong. We have 3 of 44 tanks in each

[@1234crevis]

@@Sam-tc8ic that don't matter cuz America has 5,500 tanks plus Natos tanks and we all are allies/friends here and we got each other!

[@LeeTillbury]

We're an island nation. Where we gonna get invaded from, the channel tunnel perhaps?

[@thomasw695]

​@1234crevis not good enough we can't spend everything on the navy

[@DSM6998]

Any anti drone capabilities, clearly one of the biggest threats to tanks currently

[@markhepworth]

Doubt they would be telling us..

[@myrants5836]

Totally agree. If anything the war in Ukraine has taught us is that tanks are incredibly vulnerable to drones. Especially if the hatch is left open. It's almost made tank warfare obsolete!

[@king_goose]

Doesn't look like the prototype shown has one yet, but there was a mention in the video of fitting an active protection system, presumably iron fist or trophy. These are hard kill APS. They are basically small missile launchers on the top of the tank that can engage drones and anti tank missiles and slower moving chemical rounds like HEAT-FS and HESH. The tank could also employ soft kill APS which works to disable the line of sight of a missile/drone by using electronic jammers or smokescreens. The black knight tank concept used the hard kill Iron fist APS so we can assume that challenger 3 will probably use it too.

[@StillAliveAndKicking_]

Yes, keep the hatches closed …

[@superspies32]

And does the track can prevent the tank drowned in mud? Or does it has any upgrades to prevent it collapsed any civilain bridges it crosses?

[@staryjaszczur]

Nice, but the UK should have 500 MBT. The same applies to Germany and France.

[@zamstig66]

as an island i think we should focus more on the naval and air aspect as theres less of a land based risk

[@staryjaszczur]

@@zamstig66 you are are not alone in NATO. You have continental duties too.

[@thomasw695]

​@zamstig66 we should atleast have 300 how can we do full military conflicts will low equipment

[@MrTangent-8]

​@@zamstig66 Well put, but a capable expeditionsry force is still needed 227-283 is what should be aimed for

[@Joe-rp8xn]

No point having loads of tanks if you don't have enough infantry or IFV's to support them.

[@Pesmog]

I think the Challenger 3 is now really no more than a stop-gap. It's become clear in the last couple of years that future MBT's need to be designed differently.

[@bobvance8017]

Yeah any serious MBT will need some sort of defence from drones

[@616CC]

An automated small caliber point defence cannon would work well I think, for aerial top down munitions and drones maybe 300 rounds

[@donutperson9027]

@@bobvance8017 The Active protection system also works on drones.

[@thanhnamnguyen5280]

@@donutperson9027 But most systems are still mostly around the tank, and ammo is still extremely limited. I'm banking on a miniaturized ciws system, down to .50 BMG or .338 NM, or even smaller if they can make composite casing and ammo works.

[@Mrtweet81]

Whats mountain bikes got to do with this?

[@jjsmallpiece9234]

Except 150 vehicles is nothing like enough. No allowance for combat losses. Try again order 600

[@Katsumoto0456]

Impossible, they're converting old challenger 2 hulls to challenger 3 and we only have 213 challenger 2s. If we start making new hulls we might aswell go with a clean sheet design not a challenger 2 with a German gun.

[@jjsmallpiece9234]

@@Katsumoto0456 Go for NATO compatibility and buy Leopards. The CH3 already has the leopard gun. We have finally dropped the insistence on rifled guns

[@7stormy334]

@@jjsmallpiece9234 If we bought German Leopards we could only use them in conflicts where Germany gives us permission as part of the contract. It's one of the main reasons most major countries want their own MBTs

[@jwadaow]

@@7stormy334 They would be built in the customer's nation using technology transfer. Other nations are replacing their tanks with new designs.

[@paper2061]

With what money?

[@JonathanGScott]

Only 150 tanks ???

[@1234crevis]

That's y nato and us in America are here to help!

[@whylie74]

yep and only until 2040 when it's supposed to be replaced, with less as usual.

[@AIVINBIJU-h8j]

in addition to al;ready existing fleet which should bring the total upto 500

[@matthewwelch3007]

@@AIVINBIJU-h8jthe existing fleet consists of CH2 chassis of which there are 227, 148 will be converted to CH3 while the rest are retired. We will have a decrease of 79 tanks.

[@lightningleaf23]

@@AIVINBIJU-h8jnope not at all there is no such thing as the existing tanks. This new tank isn’t new it’s an upgrade of the existing tanks and they use the old hulls and convert them. 150 tanks pathetic

[@tonyjedioftheforest1364]

Great tank but only 150 is quite pathetic during these troubled times.

[@jtr549]

It's a stop gap, true next gen tanks don't have people in them.

[@karadan100]

There's no money. Our politicians gave it all away. :(

[@tonyjedioftheforest1364]

@@karadan100 that is a spot on comment, we give at least £8 billion a year away in foreign aid that we should be spending on our own defence.

[@louk597]

​@tonyjedioftheforest1364 But But But Turkey needs 680 millions of out tax payer money to build a new clean rail line in Turkey!!! Godamit!!

[@ln5747]

What troubled times? UK has probably never had fewer threats with NI and daft War on Terror over.

[@juleshorse9056]

Sorry, 150 is not a credible offer. As an ex-RAC/BAOR/Cold War soldier, with the UKR war we need an all arms division capable of war fighting at scale. 150 doesn't cut it.

[@jwadaow]

True.

[@bakersmileyface]

We also need to account for losses as well. Not every battle will be a victory.

[@just_one_opinion]

How you gonna get them to theater? Props fall off ships, where they suppoed to have missles you have treadmills... your towns are no go sharia zones or burned out filth....and you worry about getting more money to your LORDS and their corporations....

[@Mantiscular12]

Then you pay for Ukraine part then.

[@jtr549]

I think there's a realisation that current tanks are reaching the end of their usefulness, they still have a use case but air superiority and artillery is far more important, a tank vs an anti tank missile isn't very affective. The only other reason would be that the focus has shifted to the next gen tank which won't have a human crew inside it, which means it can have even more armour as they don't need empty space for a crew. By producing less of these old style tanks they can create more next gen tanks, which is where the UK has always been, we invented it in the first place.

[@pjhgerlach]

The BV (Boiling Vessel) is the most important piece of equipment of every Challenger. So I'm told... 😂

[@thegoat11111]

148 tanks is not taking our role in NATO seriously.

[@charliechuck1341]

as much a joke 150 is. our role in nato is primarily our navy.

[@ADB-zf5zr]

@@charliechuck1341 Which is nowhere near as strong as it needs to be.!

[@r200ti]

Which is a good thing, NATO is all about expansion and its expanded up to countries that can tear it a new one. We are best off focusing on the UK, not offensive weapons to be used in far away lands to fulfill the fantasies of the globalist freaks running us.

[@ExPraetorianGuard-dl1pz]

148 is pretty much enough considering its a new advanced tank, also why should they mass produce them? Its only necessary if they have a total war economy which they don't right now. 5hey aren't fighting any wars.

[@melvin9898]

Yes Quality should be top notch but let's not forget quantity too. Remember, Quantity is a Quality of its own.

[@exeverrr]

you sound like a communist, or maybe Russians were right all along

[@AndyG_MTB]

less than 150 tanks is silly. Have you heard theres a big f off war in europe?

[@Mantiscular12]

Big f off war? You make it sound like Julius Ceasar has concoquerd all of NATO.

[@light161_]

why should the uk be fighting everyone elses wars?

[@AndyG_MTB]

@@light161_ so we dont have to fight them on our own soil I guess

[@light161_]

@@AndyG_MTB And who is going to be invading the UK?

[@cluelessgod97]

How long until someone releases classified files on the WarThunder Forums? 😂

[@GR-zo6sm]

😂😂😂😂

[@kennethworkman4740]

There are a lot of stupid people out there.

[@__Wanderer]

Now order 10x the amount to have a realistic tank fleet for war.

[@ColinAnderson-j6s]

Penny pinch all the way 150 tanks won't last long ,is this government not taking notes of the war in Ukraine

[@LeeTillbury]

It is taking notes. Ukraine was invaded by it's neighbouring country on land by tanks etc. Great Britain is an island nation. Where are we going to be invaded from, the channel tunnel?

[@karadan100]

This government has no money. The conservatives have ruined this country.

[@louk597]

Nah to busy Sending Notes to Ukraine!!.

[@davlos-0855]

Where is Lazerpig when you need him

[@toma3025]

I'm surprised the MoD hasn't stooped to getting him to do their PR already.

[@bobnewhart4183]

- Beautiful like nothing else .. !!! ... however ... 150 tanks will NOT finish the "near - peer" job 'on top' .. !!!

[@schnitzel_enjoyer]

T14 armata and challnger 3 will have epic stealth battles, nobody will be able to spot them 🔥🔥🔥

[@paulbritton3893]

150 tanks !!!! Uk pushing the boat out

[@light161_]

why would we need more than 150 tanks? Waste of money

[@trevorhart545]

If the MoD has insufficient funds for at least 500 then Q. How many civil servants will we need to SACK to pay for these. We are at least 1 Million over stocked with Civil Servants so when will that CUT be announced? That is a minimum of £50 Billion that can be transferred a year to a needy cause. AI can remove another Million that will help?

[@davidpowelson4817]

You couldn't upgrade the lights? You know better lights exist.

[@peterwait641]

Side light/ indicator lights fill up with water when jet washed lol

[@smouncy2359]

How did we go from one of the most powerful armies during ww1 and ww2 to this

[@whylie74]

labour torie labour torie labour torie, that's how.

[@jjsmallpiece9234]

Tories wanted to fund tax cuts, Labour to fund social programmes

[@ashleygoggs5679]

Becuase we had the longest ever peacetime in european history. there was signficantly less wars from post world war 2 then the same time pre ww 1. Such an age in peace causes people to not want to join the army which means armies all around the world have reduced numbers of soldiers. As an island nation we are under less threat then those of poland or germany who can be attacked via multiple scarios such as land, sea and air, uk however can only be attakc by sea and air. meaning we have had to worry less about russian aggression then mainland europe. Politicians however really havnt helped in the slightest.

[@Katsumoto0456]

@@ashleygoggs5679 That old saying, "if you want peace, prepare for war"

[@peterchapman4729]

Historically and geographically our place is as a maritime power not a continental one. Continental land wars are bloody affairs as WWI showed, by WWII we'd learnt that lesson and whilst we played our part on land the balance was more naval and air.

[@joeloiacono8850]

i can't that guy seriously while his wearing that hat

[@thewomble1509]

Get your head out of your back end and look into the history of that hat.................................

[@mickleblade]

It might not be about fashion but he's right, it does look silly

[@joetidy9160]

Say what you like about the British army, but we certainly have the best hats.

[@Oxley016]

Not enough men, not enough gear but at least we've got some canny hats....

[@peterwait641]

Now like uniforms made in China lol

[@Mantiscular12]

​@@Oxley016hats look bent

[@Oxley016]

@@Mantiscular12 you look bent

[@markdavies9636]

150 tanks should last you a month! in battle!

[@light161_]

Its a good thing we arent involved in any

[@carrickrichards2457]

Two Challenger3 regiments! Thirty three Infantry battalions. 14 Artillery regiments. 75,000 regular personnel, 56 Generals, 720 Colonels and Brigadiers (not including civilian equivalents).

[@matthewbaynham6286]

So they have 150 tanks on order. Currently the US has 5000 M1 Abrams main battle tanks. France has 406 AMX Leclerc main battle tanks. Finland has 100 Leopard 2A6 and 100 Leopard 2A4, (yes, Finland has a total of 200 main battle tanks despite the country having a population of 5 million compared the UK population of 70 million). Sweden has 12 Strv 121 and 110 Stridsvagn 122, (That's a total of 122 main battle tanks despite the country having a population of about 10 million.) Poland has order a total of 1600 main battle tanks with K2 Black Panther as well as M1 Abrams and some Leopard 2. Whilst their old tanks PT-91 Twardy and the T-72 are either still in service or being donated to Ukraine. So back the UK 150 main battle tanks is absolutely pathetic, such a small amount of tanks really makes the UK military a second rate fighting force.

[@friedchicken4326]

(yes, Finland has a total of 200 main battle tanks despite the country having a population of 5 million compared the UK population of 70 million) UK doesn't share a huge land border with a potential aggresor. Perhaps you have forgotten that we are an island nation? Does Finland have such a navy as us? Did you study geography at school?

[@matthewbaynham6286]

@@friedchicken4326 the Royal Navy isn't that big any more, there has been a bit too many cost cutting measures. Britain bearly has enough ships to escort one of it's aircraft carriers, and Britain can't sail both of it's carriers without other nations stepping in with additional ships to escort. Which is fine at peace time but in the event of war, other countries might be a bit too busy to escort Britains aircraft carriers.

[@friedchicken4326]

@@matthewbaynham6286 in the event of a war, allied nations come to our aid. Have you heard of NATO?

[@fi-ranmsansame]

It's a great tank, and I hope Japan chooses it to replace their aging Type 10 tanks.

[@light161_]

Stop warmongering

[@Meringueatan]

When I grew up I wanted to go in a challenger 2 😔😔😔

[@Aendavenau]

You still can, Challenger 3 is an Challenger 2 with a few German upgrades.

[@brocks9500]

good tanks, but 150 units??? what happened to adapting to a changing world? absolutely ridiculous

[@Aendavenau]

They dont have 500 Challenger 2 tanks to slap a few german upgrades to and rename them Challenger 3 and the 200 they have are old and tired. This is an 50 year old tank after all. The least worn downs are getting the German upgrades (what few there are) and the rest are used for spare parts.

[@JCJW101]

Why are the lights off a 1960's kit car, surely they can use brighter and much smaller ones that would be more resilient in combat?

[@captainbuggernut9565]

Just the one is it?😂 Must be all that superior technology that means we only need a 148. Doesn't Ukraine get through that many in a month? Honestly its embarrassing. They have done the same to the navy as well. The American coastguard has more manpower. As for being next gen, its a recycled Challenger 2.

[@Fjprints]

shut up Russian bot.

[@apexbuilder0171]

Most countries mbts are mods of previous ones take the Russians for example with the t90 being a slightly better t72 or the abrams or different leopard 2

[@light161_]

Has Russia invaded the UK? No? Then shut up

[@isaacbarwood6361]

UNLIKE EVERYONE ELSE JUST COMPLAINING, I'd like to say its clear the upper frontal plate has received an extra layer which is atleast an improvement! (despite the still, glaring driver port and lower frontal plate weakspots. Also its worth noting that its received mountings for an independent machine gun which could possibly hint at an anti drone weapon of some sort. ( I would suspect it is, given the lessons the foot soldiers appear to be being taught about anti drone warfare) Finally, its also good to hear confirmation of an active protection system of some sort. However, it is rather a shame how outdated (protection-wise) the hull remains- especially when compared to other western counterparts like the leopard 2a7- we INVENTED THE TANK - cant we do better?

[@gorkarullan]

Why do you keep lying to people? It's just an Improved Chalenger 2, same chassis, same engine, same turret... the only thing you change is the cannon, from the Rifled cannon to the smooth cannon to use the same one as the Leopard. With this cannon you barely keep up with the new Leoparts, because you also use the short caliber. You ruled out the 130mm cannon, even the 125mm, to avoid spending money, you ruled out the new Rheinmetall turret. And you haven't even considered improving the engine plant... it's a crappy car. In reality, YOU ARE NOT GOING TO MANUFACTURE a single tank, you are only going to recondition the ones you already have. I don't understand why you think everyone is stupid. And on top of that you have left Europe and Rheinmetall is going to charge you more... you are shabby

[@willfletch5871]

We have enough challly 2 in service and mothballed to do 285 challenger 3. That’s enough for 4 armoured regiments or 12 armoured battle groups and a couple of training squadrons. This is a must if the British Army is considered a serious player.

[@7stormy334]

What about combat losses? no use to have 4 regiments and all of them at half strength part way through a war. Realistically the only way to get a larger number of regiments would be to build more Challenger 2 chassis.

[@MrTangent-8]

That 150 never accounted for attrition rates lol

[@Aendavenau]

They are old and worn down, doubt you find 285 chally 2 in good enough condition, and then what? There are no spare parts and the factories who made them are long gone.

[@peterwait641]

less numbers some were scrapped a few years ago!

[@willfletch5871]

@@peterwait641 You are correct. 386 entered service. 226 were kept for the 3 regular armoured regiments and 3 sabre squadrons were kept for the Royal Wessex Yeomary and training. 75 were and still are mothballed and the rest scrapped and cannibalised for spare parts.

[@king_goose]

it looks great and should serve as a potent and modern adversary for any enemy who may fight us. The addition of the new sights and active protection system make it second to none, however i have a few questions. First off, we all know that we could do with more of them, that probably wont happen but it would be nice to have 300-400 ideally. However, if we did need to build more, do we still have the infrastructure and capability to build challenger 2 chassis as we can obviously build the turrets but to make new tanks we would need chassis too, can we still build them as i heard that the place where the challenger 2s were built has been shut down?

[@veblen674]

Vickers MBT building facilities in Leeds and Newcastle are both long gone.

[@famalam943]

That’s cool…. I’m sure all 4 of them will really make us a military powerhouse

[@jamesmarshall8681]

Doesn’t matter how good it is, those numbers are a joke.

[@light161_]

Why would we need more than 150 units?

[@BillyCrabtree-ob6py]

I hope they still have THE most important thing a British tank should have: The ability to make cups of tea incase Nigel and Gertrude get Thirsty on the battlefield.

[@MrJonny6688]

It's a modified Challenger 2 lets face it.. can't call it a new tank because it's not.. god we are so cheap in the UK.

[@ralpha112233]

It's not just a "modified Challenger 2" it's a completely new tank. The turret, engine, drive-train, armour, electronics, and survival system are new. It only looks like the old Challenger 2. If you want to see a similar upgrade look at the upgrade life of an Abrams. Still looks almost the same when first introduced in the 80's.

[@jwadaow]

@@ralpha112233 It uses the hull from Challenger 2.

[@ralpha112233]

@@jwadaow So. All of the hulls of M1's are refurbished. It is possible to use old parts to build something new.

[@MrJonny6688]

@@ralpha112233 no that's not how a new anything is created there is no new design process taking place it's just taking the old chassis and bolting on some new bits and calling it new when it's clearly not new!. It's a combat and survivability upgrade package. The fact the entire project is called Challenger 2 LEP (life extention programme) and you can upgrade old challenger 2's pretty much spells it out for you lol 🤷‍♂️. It's not a new tank it's just replacing obsolete components and then calling it a Challenger 3. It's why this program has been actioned over say designing and creating a NEW tank from scratch because that is horrifically expensive and takes around a decade. Like i said it's not a new tank lol i don't know how much simpler to put it for you.. it's just an upgrade package given to existing Challenger 2's for a cost saving over building a NEW tank and also is an excuse for closer ties to Nato by using a different gun and Nato standard ammunition and having the Germans do it for us it's all political aswell. The US does it with their Abrams except they have a different designation for each upgraded version. But still an Abrams tank just an improved version 👍 don't be fooled by the '3' moniker!. It's not the next in the series it's a fancy dancy 2! Not a new tank lmfao you have no idea what your talking about clearly... you obviously don't work in manufacturing do you?. Don't be fooled by the propaganda and don't get your information from Wikipedia or Janes lol 👍.

[@JZ094]

No more colonial income mate that's probably why

[@Jin-Ro]

For the first time in 1,614 years the UK lives in the most peaceful part of the world. Can't help wondering what we'd use it for in the years ahead. I prefer an isolationist approach to future conflicts. Not our problem.

[@TheKeirsunishi]

I'm confused as to why they wear camo but have high vis jackets on; do they want to be visible, or not?

[@andyonn9283]

😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@nickd2664]

Some higher up has a serious issue with safety... the running joke the PT belt the US Army has taken to the level of stupid insanity. Don't get caught without it.

[@alastairwallace6153]

shows what you know about the army. not much.

[@everTriumph]

They may be Army, but they are within a factory complex of a civilian firm. All civilian H+S standards apply, no exemptions.

[@haeleth7218]

Looks like a seriously lethal and awesome tank but why only 150? At minimum, the UK must have 1,000 of these things especially the way things are in the world at the moment.

[@DanielShaw-c1y]

Cause were an island and a small one at that plus the UK has always had a powerful navy no point having 1000 tanks if nobody can invade you cause of how powerful your navy is

[@JZ094]

Uk navy is a joke now

[@AlecBlanc-mm4sv]

​@@DanielShaw-c1y😮

[@SolarErazer]

​@@DanielShaw-c1y you are naive you think those tiny ships will help 😂

[@nathanielwhite8769]

Excellent news, but ideally the Army could do with circa 448 Challenger 3’s in order to equip 1 full strength Heavy Armoured Division Comprised of 3 Heavy Armoured Brigades each with 2 Tank Regiments of 56 Challenger 3 MBTs each plus 2 remaining Regiments for Reserves and Training. 148 is simply woeful considering the Heavy Armour Losses being inflicted on both sides in Ukraine. With current funding commitments, I sure hope not, our Armoured Forces get deployed into active combat any time soon or in the distant future!

[@light161_]

Why should be fight Ukraine's wars for them? Stop being a doormat

[@nathanielwhite8769]

@@light161_ Yes, absolutely. We shouldn’t be fighting Ukraines Battles for it. Look where that kind of foreign policy albeit in a different context, got us in Iraq and Afghanistan! Cheers.

[@rjds1800]

It has a brew kit right? That’s all that really matters tbh, can you get a brew when locked down?

[@hoplophobia7014]

How many are you going to actually get, 20? 24?

[@s0lthe3rd86]

At least more than than what the Russians were able to make with their T14s anyway.

[@hoplophobia7014]

@@s0lthe3rd86 lmao

[@MrTumnus1987]

We really need more MBT’s! Challenger 3 is looking good but 150 isn’t going to cut it at all.

[@Vyper1290]

How about build 1k or more

[@Katsumoto0456]

213 max, they're converting old chal2 hulls to chal3

[@MrTangent-8]

We're only getting 150

[@SamFBM]

WE NEED MORE OF EVERYTHING C'MON BRITISH ARMY OUR STOCKS ARE LIKE 30YRS BEHIND THAN WHAT THEY SHOULD BE

[@mitchdaytonam3]

400 chally 1s 227 chally 2s 148 chally 3s …. I can’t wait for the 20 or so chally 6’s we’ll field in 2050. 👍🤦‍♂️

[@MyLittleMagneton]

2050? That's when we start designing the 4s

[@mitchdaytonam3]

@@MyLittleMagneton probably just being facetious to make a point wasn’t I lad, what do you reckon? 👍

[@MyLittleMagneton]

@@mitchdaytonam3 I got that based on "20 tanks", but 2050 kind of beats point as that'd really good.

[@mitchdaytonam3]

@@MyLittleMagneton ah righto, you were ok with me being sarky about the number of tanks, but not the year… gotcha. 🙄

[@MyLittleMagneton]

@@mitchdaytonam3 Well yea, they'd be doing an insanely good job with those two numbers.

[@GlennDavidson]

Britain entered WW2 in 1939 with 143 tanks. Britain produced over 27,000 tanks through 1939 to 1945. The first UK government order of Centurion Mk2 in 1945, just after the end of WW2, was 800 tanks. Take from that what you will. This is a first order of 150 modern MBTs when not on a war footing, for something at least 3 generations more complex and effective. If you're buying while still in "peace-time" on paper, there's at least one big decision among many: pay to stock-pile and maintain large amounts of armour? Or order small batches that can be iteratively improved based on new information?

[@TemplarKnight-i9q]

Make Britain GREAT AGAIN !!!

[@light161_]

We can start with leaving NATO

[@Domini_k]

I remember when some individuals said the UK wouldn't need tanks anymore, how wrong they were. Also, we should be on a war footing we required greater numbers and more soldiers.

[@Mohul06]

onlyy 150??? the UK isnt even a naval powerhouse anymore, and MoD has totally given up with the army. pathetic

[@light161_]

We don't need that many. Russia isnt at war with us

[@LupusGelos]

We had over 900 Chieftain Tanks when those were built. Now, presuming no more cuts, we're getting about 150 of these....

[@Notwokeever]

nothing a £39.99 Drone (made in China) couldn't stop in its track's

[@grekiki]

40$ drone won't do much.

[@teeengelke7275]

Nice little projectile trap with that depressed bit on the front lol

[@headmonk3930]

I thought the same trap point trouble is most here are oblivious to a drone being the kamikaze projectile that's the major threat

[@JohnDoe-rh8tp]

Former colony (USA) long time listener, first time writer, you islanders sure know how to make a beautiful tank, can’t wait to see it lob hesh!

[@DrPandemiczZ]

Thank you so much for sticking with British made! Remember we invented the tank there for we should lead the legacy with great engineering such as this, Britaina roles the fields! ❤️🇬🇧🫶🏼

[@salman501]

Another one stuck in the past.

[@DrPandemiczZ]

@@salman501 How the Challenger 3 is very real, so is the Bradley and American tank made with the British, we can talk about our amazing history as much as we desire, idk what the problem is.

[@zhufortheimpaler4041]

@@DrPandemiczZ Challenger 3 is just a fixed Challenger 2, that got fixed by the germans again

[@EricTViking]

Well said 👍

[@AethelwulfOfNordHymbraLand2333]

Wrong. Challenger 3 is almost entirely produced by Rheinmetall--a German company.

[@pr248]

I am gonna get a Challenger 3 tattooed on my face!

[@AlexLee-dc2vb]

you should be adopting the Leopard 2 and sending all of your Challengers to Ukraine. NATO needs to standardize.

[@thomaswilkinson6101]

The British public is ready for huge increases in our Military budget. One thing is clear, we need: MASS artillery, MASS drones, MASS ballistic missiles and MASS Air Defences.

[@kencollins6324]

We have zero dedicated drone units. Near zero air defence. Less than 60 SPG artillery guns and very limited offensive missile capability. But thats not the worst of it. We have NO production surge capability, we don't make the components, we are reliant on imports and we have no stockpiles. And you forgot EW systems, we have none of that either.

[@jwadaow]

@@kencollins6324 You understand the issues better than the incompetents in parliament. It's probably safe to say no missile capability aside from whatever tomahawks are in stocks.

[@alastairwallace6153]

@@jwadaow and how do you know that exactly.

[@milospurgeon385]

Finally the best Main Battle Tank in the world is here. Been waiting a while for this.

[@peterwait641]

Abrams Alison gearbox is much stronger than TN 54.

[@happymonkey7068]

Until it's in a battle.

[@apistodiscus]

It really isn't the best. The British delusion continues

[@AllMightyKingBowser]

You misspelled Leopard 2A7V very wrongly my dude

[@AethelwulfOfNordHymbraLand2333]

The T-80BVM is the best MBT in the world.

[@WeatherMan404]

cant wait for some redditor to leak classified documents on war thunder how challenger 3 is the best tank ever

[@autisticdrone.]

Terrible music, Terrible silly thunderbird hat. Those sights that they rely on can be destroyed by a drone, no protection on them.

[@kindnuguz]

I'm happy to see these roll off the production line (As an America). Beautiful tank I do hope more armor in back like a plate over the engine is being looked at. Auto loading now? I think

[@soundfx68]

"Unlike Russian-designed tanks, which employ an autoloader, the Challenger 3 will feature a crew of four including the commander, gunner, loader, and driver." No to Turret Tossing, huge design flaw of Russian MBT.

[@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617]

Disappointing in the extreme, I hope this is a stop gap measure.

[@jarraandyftm]

Nobody cares if you’re disappointed. You in RAC? Or even the Army?

[@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617]

@jarraandyftm typical, the sheep will argue away every bad decision. The reason the military is in the state it is, is partially people like you arguing away very clear and obvious mistakes and failures.

[@jarraandyftm]

@@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617 do you serve?

[@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617]

@jarraandyftm I was barred due to Autism. I am, however, a geopolitical and military analyst and historian. I have studied Ruso-Ukrainian War extensively. This is not a new tank it's a variant of Challenger 2. The Challenger 2 has been proven in Ukraine to be obsolete and vulnerable in the extreme. Yes the active protection system will improve its survivability, but it's a half measure. It's need both a new engine and weight reduction. Turrets and hulls need reshaping on the roof to be more angled like the floors to give more protection against loitering muntions and top attack ATGMs. Still has a manned turret and the crew are not in an armoured compartment. It's also of the last generation while the US, French, Germans and Chinese are all working on the next generation that will be 15-30 years from now at which point we will be back at square one. May aswell admit this is a stop gap messure and a true next generation tank is being developed. They need 1-2 tanks per infantry company under Company and Brigade command levels within Divisions rather than at the division level as they cannot operate in any more than two's anymore. Meaning they need a lot of them.

[@TwtchFlexes]

​@@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617 "barred for autism", yep, that tracks

[@OneAndOnlyKJx]

Do they not see how much equipment is required in Ukraine? It doesn't matter how good your tank is if you don't have enough of them, it won't make a difference

[@MarkRoss-md2bh]

Rinse and repeat stick new toys on old frames and the men and women make it work no matter. Only for us to sell it or scrap it in a few years. Plus that wet wipe with a poncy beard. Recruitment that desperate. God help us

[@LawrenceReitan]

So you think thousands of people behind all of this are stupid or what? Stop judging things you have ZERO idea about. People should be more humble and acknowledge that their opinion counts very little, especially when they have no idea of all the reasons and logics behind something. Pathetic to say the least

[@fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617]

@LawrenceReitan that's the problem. These are designed by committees and to a budget. They are not designed to be the best they can or should be.

[@biffmuncher23]

All of these military experts in the comments say we have too few tanks. Quality is the priority, and MBTs won't be of any use during a full-scale European war with nobody left to man them...

[@paulamatos4947]

Hi, I was here first

[@ratchet2505]

in chat you were!

[@paulamatos4947]

@@ratchet2505 yeah

[@peterellwood8267]

Nice presentation. Need more, need plenty more. Stuff the Cyber stuff, Boots on the Ground make a difference. Let us hope that C3 Delivers

[@brownb2vid]

Ok so what happens when a track is blown off with an anti tank landmine? Sure you've got armour everywhere on the body but an enemy doesn't need to destroy a tank to make it useless, just stop it going anywhere. Maybe I've missed the point, and tanks aren't used near minefields.

[@LeeTillbury]

Have you time travelled from 1915 dude?

[@martingriffiths9851]

All Ican say is „FAB Virgil !“ GJ Telford & co.

[@ALCOR_46]

That feather on the berret and the shear number of units got me chuckling. I hope they are better than the M1A1 on the field. Wouldn’t want to see it displayed somewhere

[@wellingtonnorthjunction3911]

I live down the road we’re they are upgrading challengers and my mum works next to it and she can hear them being tested

[@namefinder]

In light of recent events, every major power in Europe needs more tanks. Sometimes democracy needs to show its teeth.

[@Laurencemardon]

Did I see one on Red Square for the big May parade?

[@chopper7352]

Challenger 3 looks & sounds like a solid piece of kit for the British Armoured units. However, 148 is not enough. It wasn't enough in a world pre War on European soil (Ukraine) & it certainly isn't enough now with the full knowledge of what Russia is up to...& we still have other hotspots to contend with...or will with the next decade.. Going from 447 Chally 2's to only 148 Chally 3's is a massive reduction & if Britain is drawn into any conflicts the small amount of Chally 3's will certainly hamstring Britain. I'm sure it wasn't the Military that chose to greatly reduce the numbers, it 100% was a political decision. The only problem with that is Politicians don't fight wars...but they do have a track record of either starting them or at least not making the right decisions to prevent them. Give the Fighting Forces the tools to do the job...& in the right numbers...not a token amount that will be attrited below 100 'serviceable' vehicles very quickly if/when things go 'real hot'.

[@scale_model_apprentice]

I agree that not enough tanks have been ordered. But I will say that the tank looks sleek. Look at modern uprages of the Abrams compared to base models, the tank has become massive!

[@BOOGERBOY1]

I hope the government and army are producing thousands of these tanks , it's what our country needs

[@ZZZ333]

Full camp with high vis vest is a paradox

[@LandAnchor]

As I’m sure many of the troops know, too few are being delivered. Same with the navy and air force. Quality is great but quantity helps also.

[@smithyerdannyboy]

Here come the tank experts who have no experience working on tanks 😂

[@informedchoice2249]

Cheap n cheerful option. Still kickin ass I imagine.

[@thewaywardgrape3838]

Budget cuts means they'll be shouting 'Boom!', instead of actually firing.

[@georgejackson4105]

The Ukrainians didn't use the Challenger 2. They said it was overweight and underpowered and kept getting bogged down in the mud! We need something new and a lot of them!

[@jbkgjbkg]

0:23 Always remember to carry a dust rocker on your hat in case you need to do some last minute dusting.

[@bennewnham4497]

About time. British army never wanted Challenger - we wanted Leopard 2 - which would still be the better option, but at least we have the right cannon that's compatible with the rest of NATO.

[@AcidVFR400R]

its amazing how the new challenger 3 hulls just magically appeared yet no foundry is making any ... or is it because they are using old challenger 2 / chieftain hulls and modifying them, they will be lucky if they have 40 actual tanks

[@fragfmgill]

nice, but will we have enough to make a difference?

[@Thor_Asgard_]

Calling it Challenger 3 is stupid ^^ its a Challenger 2V2 and nothing more. Still and amazing tank, love it.

[@papalazarou7880]

We have 220 Challenger 2 tanks with 150 being upgraded to 3 and the remaining 70 being scrapped. But… really we should be keeping the 70 Challenger 2 tanks as they’re still great. 150 x Challenger 3 Tanks 70 x Challenger 2 Tanks Ideally though we really need 500 x Challenger 3 Tanks.

[@r200ti]

The 2 was called invincible until the Russians saw it. We going to big this one up the same? Easy fix tho, just stick to using it against farmers and dont go attacking the bear on its own turf.

[@suicidalbanananana]

Looks great! Hope it does everything the British Army wants! 👍 A counter argument to all the "only 150 tanks" comments below: We don't really know yet what this thing is capable off, like with most new military equipment half the specs are still unknown until it shows up on a battlefield, for all we know it does already come with a very effective anti-drone system, which would explain not needing as many spares 🤔

[@jtr549]

I wonder if Russia realises how much we learn from how the older challenger tanks are fairing in UA to develop the next generation.

[@Surv1ve_Thrive]

Re drone comments: I think it will have the best electronic suite available. Jammers, detection and ability to shoot some down. Plus a cage system ready to be fitted as an option. If not ...

[@dangal9366]

With drones, the battlefield is changing rapidly. Not sure what that means for the future of tanks.

[@astrayp01]

The only problem standing in front of tanks is government budget.