Receive an Amazing New Player Pack, only available for the next 30 days! Play Call of War for FREE on PC or Mobile: 💥 callofwar.onelink.me/q5L6/zu29nrrw
@The_Gabinator6 ай бұрын
hoi4 clone!!!!!!
@kewlwarez Жыл бұрын
Two things: that's the Challenger 1 the Mk 7 was tested against, with the Challenger 2 actually taking some inspiration from the Vickers design. Second, missing in this story is the Vickers Valiant, somewhere between the mk 5 and mk 7.
@RedWrenchFilms Жыл бұрын
You’re correct about the first part! I managed to really get confused when discussing challenger. But “Valiant” was just a later nickname for the Mark 4.
@datcheesecakeboi67456 ай бұрын
well seeing as vickers... made the challenger 2... yea..
@teodor9975 Жыл бұрын
Just wanted to correct, the centurion did *not* use torsion bars. They used a modified hortsman layout
@lukefriesenhahn8186 Жыл бұрын
Correct
@commandoepsilon4664 Жыл бұрын
That's what I thought! The Brits just don't like torsion bars, almost non of their tanks us them.
@teodor9975 Жыл бұрын
Mostly because that the internal space we're taken horizontally. Tho not super cramped, still forces the tanks to be a bit taller
@dannyzero692 Жыл бұрын
The Mark 7 really was a beast, such a massive shame that such sad fate befell one of the best tank ever made.
@neko222svo Жыл бұрын
it evolved into challenger 1
@Rempai420 Жыл бұрын
@@neko222svoChallenger 1 was already in service the same year. The Vickers MK.7 would have most likely been the building blocks towards the Challenger 2. However it didn’t incorporate mobility due to our doctrine not changing since WW2 thanks to delusional old men in charge of the military.
@johnharro242411 ай бұрын
@@Rempai420 Silly comment, our tank focuses are on gun and armour, unforunately when focusing on those two things, it's very hard to achieve the third of speed. But those two focuses have proven to be very useful regardless, and work well with our mechanised infantry.
@Rempai42011 ай бұрын
@@johnharro2424 Silly comment, The American Abrams has all three. It uses Dorchester like us. Has better ammunition and has a 1500hp gas turbine which makes the tank achieve over 40mph off road. You could even say the Leopard 2A7v has all three too. I am in the British army and don’t get me wrong, I love the Challenger 2. However to not think our doctrine is completely outdated is naive. Also in my personal opinion from gunning in the Warrior and working along side the rest of the ground forces, Britain only has two decent ground vehicles. AS-90 and Challenger 2. Foxhound, Jackal, coyote and Mastiff are all nice troop carriers but they were all made with fighting terrorists in mind and not conventional warfare.
@JustARegularTank9 ай бұрын
the germans see that leopards failed so they just screwed the thing up to make their tanks the best. Imagine if the Leopard 2A4 and the Vickers Mk 7 were friends and they just know this news lol
@greystash1750 Жыл бұрын
The confusion people are having in the comments are that before the CR2 existed, Challenger 1 marks are listed in documents as Challenger I, II and III. When it says tested against Challenger 2 it most likely means Challenger 1 Mk2
@norfangl34807 ай бұрын
Yes. The Challenger 1 was referred to as just the Challenger at the time because the concept of a "second Challenger" didn't exist yet. The Challenger 2 itself was originally just an improvement of the Challenger 1. Also fun fact, the Challenger was originally called the Cheviot.
@twitchbeppingson9611 Жыл бұрын
It’s the challenger 1 that got smashed in trials, the challenger 2 is from the 90s and supposedly ‘incorporated’ all the extremely good tech but that clearly didn’t happen
@shaggings Жыл бұрын
Yeah, Chally was the worst MBT of modern times.
@coiler3927 Жыл бұрын
@@shaggingsin the Greek tank trials it was ranked the worst western tank.
@chost-059 Жыл бұрын
The challenger 2 is among the worst western MBT's, it's still most likely better than the Ariete C2 but now you could even argue that the new C2 ariete has superior mobility
@HJDore Жыл бұрын
@@coiler3927 that, again, was challenger 2, specifically the export specification Challenger 2E, that competed in the Greek tank trials. The trials shouldn’t be taken at face value however as the German firms KMW and Rheinmetall had already bribed the Greek defence ministry into choosing leopard 2, amongst other platforms, prior to the trials.
@arcroyal1258 Жыл бұрын
@@chost-059What drugs are you on
@alm5992 Жыл бұрын
5:47 "It could also swim. Something Centurion could not do." Vickers tank: "Come on in, the water is fine!" Centurion: *touches water with track, screams for mom and drives away*
@hubert23911 Жыл бұрын
It was Challenger 1, not 2
@Wanys123 Жыл бұрын
The confusion most likely coms from it being Challenger Mark 2, as in second model of the first Challenger tank.
@bb-6359 Жыл бұрын
4:27 The centurion did not use torsion bar suspension, it used a horstmann type suspension
@rokuth Жыл бұрын
Agreed. It was the same on the Chieftain as well, using a Horstmann suspension.
@m26a1pershing7 Жыл бұрын
beat me to it
@rat_king- Жыл бұрын
Ah.. so you have not heard of the Oliphant. Interesting..
@bb-6359 Жыл бұрын
@rat_king- he clearly said centurion, not Olifant. Yes the Mk1b Olifant used torsion bar suspension, but that's essentially a completely new tank and not a Centurion that he was referring to. The earlier Olifants, which were just upgraded base centurions, still used horstmann type suspension. The base Centurion used the horstmann type suspension throughout its service life.
@ADudOverTheFence1 Жыл бұрын
4:30 "Like Centurion it used Torsion Bar Suspension". A bit pedantic but Centurions used an upgraded of Hortsmann Suspension, meaning it had bogies instead of torsion bars. Just a minuscule detail.
@rokuth Жыл бұрын
A similar type Horstmann suspension was also used on the Chieftain tank.
@gusgone4527 Жыл бұрын
The Mk7 would be an excellent starting point for a Challenger 2/3 replacement. Over to you Pearson Engineering. Design a new hull for mass production.
@braccereve9271 Жыл бұрын
No way MOD would take a design not full of problems
@DOSFS Жыл бұрын
Really love the British tank design. Hopefully, someday British tank can have its new success overseas.
@holdencross5904 Жыл бұрын
And our government doesn’t shut down the facilities that build them… yeah.
@simonmonk7266 Жыл бұрын
Bae defence systems sold the old Vickers holdings to rheinmetall of Germany.
@PeterMuskrat69689 ай бұрын
@@holdencross5904 Yeah, I don't ever think the Brits are gonna have a successful export tank. They can barelt afford to just keep buying tanks for their own armored force... and every big new purchase or upgrade the numbers get reduced even more. Gone are the days of having well over 500-600 tanks ready to go, now they can barely keep less than 350. Pretty sad.
@samd10329 ай бұрын
@@PeterMuskrat6968politicians decide every 2 years to cut defence costs, then realise oh wait the military is understaffed and underfunded let’s make a recruitment drive. Rinse and repeat you got an underfunded military which shrinks every other year.
@tonyclough98449 ай бұрын
The TSR2 the Harrier the jet that would have broken the sound barrier before America. Our government cancels everything we do.
@rockatansky13058 ай бұрын
Very interesting film, as i worked for Vickers, thru late 60's, 70's and early 81.and remember these models being built, certainly was an interesting time for me, untill late 81 and the Shah was deposed, VA lost the Chieftain order, and I lost my job.
@eliomarlacerda6943 Жыл бұрын
The Osorio project was a rare moment of pride for Brazilians. Great to see you mention it
@joecal97 Жыл бұрын
That tank the VIckers mk 7 is facing off against in the picture is a challenger 1 not a challenger 2. You might've been confused by the fact it is a mk II challenger 1. The Challenger 2 is noticeably different looking than the challenger 1. in every regard.
@propellerknight6334 Жыл бұрын
Massive shame that the Vickers Mk 7 was cancelled considering how goddamn amazing it was
@dondouglass6415 Жыл бұрын
Such a very British story... "We have a great product..... Sooo.... let's scrap it!"
@norfangl34807 ай бұрын
At least in this case the British government weren't at fault
@loneranger53495 ай бұрын
British only made garbage PERIOD 🗑
@bertoltb13 Жыл бұрын
I never realised Vickers was still producing tanks post WW2, thanks for the insight.
@SweetVids20109 ай бұрын
They made them in Newcastle upon tyne up till 2012 they were still open after BAE took them over there still is a challenger outside the gates
@thatonelocalauthority28095 ай бұрын
They still do, just not for themselves, for BAE. BAE acquired the company and the offices.
@3452te Жыл бұрын
There was a saying we used to say, "that something so damn good, doesn't tend to last." Meaning, a vehicle like the Mk7 that has so much good quality, performance and reliabiliy would be hated by others. And this tank has so much opportunity to be used in the British Army. Heck, i could see that this would have some crazy upgrades and modifications if it were to be used. Even a modernization kit for this tank would be insane.
@betreiber4001 Жыл бұрын
Germany didn’t tighten export laws because the Leo2 lost a competition. Our export laws were tightened after an investigation had shown German tech was being sent to countries and organisations carrying out human rights violations
@OneofInfinity.9 ай бұрын
Did not know they send the Leo to the US.
@stuartgmk9 ай бұрын
😂😂😂@@OneofInfinity.
@Macintoshiba5 ай бұрын
@@OneofInfinity. Well they sent over the gun at least 😂
@firefly98385 ай бұрын
Well duh... its a tank... it doesn't exactly shoot hugs...
@mark_dauz13 күн бұрын
Germany is hypocrite nation,just like usa..
@jwenting Жыл бұрын
Another problem with the Mk.4 was the very fact they used Chobham armour. Chobham was top secret, and exports highly regulated. Thus many potential customers would be barred from receiving the tanks by the UK (and US, as they too have a say in the matter when it comes to exporting Chobham) government. By now early variants of Chobham are allowed to be exported, a change that was made among other reasons to allow the export of tanks to Ukraine.
@mandoprince1 Жыл бұрын
The Centurion did not use torsion bar suspension! It used a modified Horstman suspension system, basically bogies.
@gilfrancisjeno.panchoanime9675 Жыл бұрын
I thought the FV301 was just another fictional tank from World of Tanks
@paulsnell534 Жыл бұрын
The FV300 series did sort of get of the ground years later in the Guise as the Scorpion tank which was pretty successful
@Gewehr_367 ай бұрын
Fun Fact : during mid 80s Thai Army considered to procure new light tank to replace or supplement M41 walker bulldog. Many company submit their vehicle into the competition such as Leopard 1, AMX-30, Vicker Mk.3, SK-105, Stingray, TH-301(which later evolved into TAM) All MBT such as Leopard 1, AMX-30, Vicker Mk.3 were quickly eliminated as the Thai want Light Tank and during testing Stingray was found to be much more suitable for Thai need. In the end Stingray were chosen.
@pellefishermans Жыл бұрын
Your videos keep being great! Lots of interesting info, lots of images, no unnecessary stuff and you tell it very well. Keep going, you’ll hit 500k before you know it :)
@KingofBirTawil Жыл бұрын
I love the Centurion, and to find out about these amazing designs was wondeful
@petersaunders5808 Жыл бұрын
Damn, Vickers could not catch a goddamn break. The mark 7 got the piss in the worst way.
@Toolbod Жыл бұрын
I remember seeing an article in Tank magazine in the early 80s about a Cheiftain 900 variant. I wonder what happened to it. It looked like an amazing concept.
@binaway Жыл бұрын
Not enough £ in the treasury. No longer able to afford anything.
@thewomble15094 ай бұрын
They received little interest because apart from the Chobham armour there was nothing new on the tank. It was basically just a twenty year old vehicle that had gained a reputation for being slow and unreliable (even though two variants of the RR CV12 engine were offered)
@TrajectoryT Жыл бұрын
This isn't the first time the german government got salty over their designs losing. Remember, these are the guys who vetoed the universal adaption of the P90s into standard NATO use because it was winning over the MP5 Edit: MP7, not MP5
@merobo5066 Жыл бұрын
MP7
@knoll98129 ай бұрын
Just business. USA did worse with getting NATO rifle ammunition standardized to a size that was wrong for decades and mist wars. Britain tends not to be a player as they don't know what they want to promote
@IcebergEater101 Жыл бұрын
I saw these tanks in WT and thought they were some made up crap. Very informative and good video man! I have ZERO idea, why youre a small channel.
@fazsum41 Жыл бұрын
Yeah they were never really a widely known tanks but one of them did end up being license built by India. In fact far more Vickers MBT 1 were built by India then Chieftain tanks used by Britain, Iran still uses the Chieftain tanks
@bjboss1119 Жыл бұрын
Seeing people who thing there's just tons of made up stuff in WT hurts my snail owned soul
@pliat9 ай бұрын
@@bjboss1119other than the ostwind 2… and the E100, and the tiger 105, and the panther II, and all 3 R2Y2s.
@bjboss11199 ай бұрын
@@pliat congratulations you listed 7 vehicles in a game with over 2500
@pliat9 ай бұрын
@@bjboss1119 sidam mistral is another one.
@l3w1scal11 Жыл бұрын
Talks about challenger 2 shows multiple pictures of challenger 1
@SnakePliskin762 Жыл бұрын
Thank you,first time i'd heard of the mk7 and it's tragic it wasn't produced.
@geraldl33playz79 Жыл бұрын
A video on all the Object tanks that the Soviet Union has made would be cool.
@questionmaker5666 Жыл бұрын
The tank the Mark 7 beat was the Challenger, the first MBT of its name, Challenger 2 didn't exist until 1990.
@Ghent_Halcyon Жыл бұрын
Ain't no way that they just did a Cursed Tank Simulator and it actually worked.
@kevinfinn6598 Жыл бұрын
The Centurion used Hortsmann suspension, not torsion bars.
@TJH1 Жыл бұрын
Isn't that the Challenger 1 in the competition images with the Mk.7, not the Challenger 2? I thought the Challenger 2 came later and incorporated much of the Mk.7's tech?
@saxon215 Жыл бұрын
The rear lights kept falling off...
@bremnersghost948 Жыл бұрын
Used to love getting the Train into Leeds and going past ROF Leeds/Barnbow Tank Factory as a lad.
@patrickm.4754 Жыл бұрын
Sounds like the hull cracking issue of the Stingray. An interesting tank in itself.
@mozzalid33 Жыл бұрын
It was the Challenger 1 it faced off against easy to tell by the total difference in the turret design. You've got that very wrong. Challenger 2 turret is way more boxy as that's the only real way to build it due to the Chobham or Dorchester armour depending on what you want to call it.
@lavrentivs9891 Жыл бұрын
Centurion used Horstmann suspension, not torsion bar. So that is a point that differed between the Centurion and Vickers Mk.1.
@SayakMajumder2 ай бұрын
Late for the party but yea ... that's CR1 not CR2 but imho, the video could've ended with the CR2 (and maybe even CR3?). The late 80s Chieftain Replacement Programme saw Vickers participate with the 'Improved Challenger', which would later be inducted as the Challenger 2.
@a_catfish5180Ай бұрын
Imagine having to tell your boss “yea so we kinda flipped it….”
@MrHws5mp Жыл бұрын
There was another weird sale for the Vickers MBT: Tanzania bought a handful of the armoured recovery vehicles, despite not using the gun tank, for some reason.
@Landrew06 ай бұрын
My dad talked about the Vickers crawler-dozer, which had no oil pan, and sprayed oil on the ground everywhere it went. It was not a success.
@korana6308 Жыл бұрын
Not true, Soviets did copy it at first, but that design idea did not evolve into anything. The main Soviet tank design was of BT series and later T34 tanks.
@B-A-L9 ай бұрын
Basically everything that Britain invented it eventually gave up manufacturing, including trains, passenger ships and jet airliners...
@markwilliams961 Жыл бұрын
Great film, but the Mk7 section......is not a CR2, but a CR1!
@RedWrenchFilms Жыл бұрын
Yes Mark unfortunately I got confused! The last test with a group was against C2, but the first couple were against C1.
@cjthebeesknees Жыл бұрын
The dominant economic and political company’s use every resource within means to acquire, consolidate the market and buy out other/rival corps.
@justyouraveragehuman4069 Жыл бұрын
Great video as always! These vickers tanks are some of my favourites:)
@rockatansky1305 Жыл бұрын
Great to hear that, I served my apprenticeship at Vickers Armstrong from 65 to 80, when the shah was deposed orders were lost and a lot of people were made redundant myself included . Looking back I feel i was privileged to have worked for such a great company.
@TC-qd1zw9 ай бұрын
The real reason BAE. I lived 100 yards from the factory and my paternal grandfather and father made guns for them at Elswick, Newcastle works. The Chieftain from Scotswood works was sold out by the UK Government
@WellWisdom.9 ай бұрын
May Vickers and the Mark 7 rest in peace. T_T
@George_M_ Жыл бұрын
Hey I saw one of these, one of the later failed MkIII I think, at the former tank museum in my area. Cool tank. Most modern western tank they had, if less impressive than the IS3, ballistic missile launchers, etc. Edit: Ah, no, it was that "Mk6" light tank!! Recognized the funky hull instantly. God knows how Littlefield got it. Must've been during the BAE cannibalization. Similar to how he got the Soviet stuff from Russia.
@ps1_hagrid_gaming517 Жыл бұрын
Another interesting video about an interesting tank series❤
@nicholasburns79709 ай бұрын
The Challenger was built by Vickers. Vickers was bought by BAE systems and BAE are building the Challenger II.
@datcheesecakeboi67456 ай бұрын
vickers also built the challenger 2 in the middle of its turn over to BAe, but techinally vickers did design and build the challenger 2
@luizviniciusvieiraalexandr49795 ай бұрын
very good video, but what a shame the mark 7 never got his wings to fly I belive it was foul play and favoritsm. Idk why people keep pushing the chally 2 to be a "superior tank" when it lost badly to the Mark 7, its sad to see such a good tank going to waste.
@datcheesecakeboi67455 ай бұрын
Vickers made the challenger 2
@dierare5 ай бұрын
Pretty much everything you said about the mobility of the Mk.7 is actually the Leopard 2 hull, which is quite funny. Britain can build a good tank, when they use a good hull with a proper engine...
@mosesracal67586 ай бұрын
The cracking problem on the hulls of the Mark 4 reminds me of the cracking problems the Thais had with their Commando Stingray Light Tanks but it was because the Thais were doing competitions with them as to who can manage the longest air time on the vehicle. Quite funny lol
@tasjan9190 Жыл бұрын
Hey, don't know if you have but you should cover Eugene Stoner's cannons he designed for the US military!!
@martinsmith9054 Жыл бұрын
Only tanks approved by the political cartel of the country concerned will be accepted. That's why the US has the M10 Booker instead of the Swedish CV90/120.
@RedXlV Жыл бұрын
It's insane that the CV90 wasn't even *in* the competition, when it was clearly superior to all of the competitors.
@LauchlanMcdonald Жыл бұрын
@@RedXlVbecause BAE put in the m8 instead
@RedXlV Жыл бұрын
@@LauchlanMcdonald Presumably they though using an American design would give them better odds of winning.
@martinsmith9054 Жыл бұрын
@MrZXrage granted they have production and supply chains to think about. Personally though I think the CV90/120 is a kickass design ahead of it's time. It would not be stuck in the Ukraine mud like the Leopard, Challenger and Abrams will be.
@tigersympathiser2265 Жыл бұрын
I was confused to see the Challenger I referred to as the Challenger II, even with the similarities between them, otherwise entertaining video, always a shame the Army decided to not opt for any of these vehicles.
@ravenclaw89759 ай бұрын
Thank you for the excellent mini-documentary on this series of tanks. It's a shame that the MK-7 didn't go into production. Politicians are fools: TSR-2, Avro Arrow and Fairey Delta 3 come to mind.
@geoffsokoll-oh1gq Жыл бұрын
I remember that the Indian tanks were the first tanks to successfully use a fully stablized main gun in the 1971 war.
@johnray73118 ай бұрын
At minute 4.30, the narrator states that the Centurion had torsion bar suspension. This is a big mistake. The Centurion had the Horstman suspension system which is totally different. Centurion did not, repeat did not have torsion bar suspension.
@thomaspickard4138 Жыл бұрын
Absolutely awesome video! 👌
@jester5ify Жыл бұрын
You keep saying Challenger 2 when showing Challenger 1, and Challenger 2 didn't enter service until 1994.
@AlexRoivas4 ай бұрын
The thing about the Osorio. A ton of parts came from Europe, as you say the turret was british, 120mm was French and so on. Only the hull was Brazilian. Even if Osorio won it would be a nightmare to order all the parts from Europe to assemble in Brazil and then send to SaudinArabia plus probably what happened to the Vickers MK7 would have happen to the Osorio, countries get salty your tank is better than their and they tighten the export laws on weapon parts. RIP Vickers
@exoticdachoo0079 ай бұрын
The Mark 4 part really makes me wonder what kind of professional you need to be to flip a tank like that. Like I understand tanks flipping when they fall off slopes and such but off of a truck?
@scatmanpro5 ай бұрын
So you've got a tank that literally beats everything of its time with ease (tanks that are still used today), but has never been built in large quantities... Thats an absolute shame
@ushikiii Жыл бұрын
Had no idea Kenya had some vicker mk 3 tanks, awesome. I mean any tank for an East African nation is a good tank, Kenya's neighbooring nations don't exactly have the best militarizes.
@veselindimov307 Жыл бұрын
If only Vickers had designed a hull, similar to the Leopard 2's! The world would've been flooded with Vickers, not Abramses, Leopards and Challengers.
@alexturnbackthearmy19079 ай бұрын
Nah. It would still be T-55/62/64/72 with clones.
@thewomble15094 ай бұрын
Challenger was/is a Vickers design...................................
@arthurbrax65619 ай бұрын
amazing video sadly I become depressed while watching it. The UK did have amazing engineers and an amazing defense industry that the post Empire UK just couldn't fund.
@thralldumehammer Жыл бұрын
Right combination of parts, beats everything else and no sales because Germany said no hulls. Seems about right😢
@jonsouth1545 Жыл бұрын
it's criminal that Vickers are no longer making tanks imagine the export sales we could get in Ukraine etc. Mk 7s would dominate Ukraine etc.
@patriciomassun Жыл бұрын
great video, as usual! congrats
@michaelhowell2326 Жыл бұрын
I feel like an idiot for having to ask this, but isn't welded better than cast armor?
@scrivania_sburrata Жыл бұрын
It is
@ar0568 Жыл бұрын
It is better protection wise but cast armor is cheaper, easier and faster to produce. Instead of paying a welder (not cheap) to weld the turret into shape piece by piece, just pour steel into the turret cast in one go.
@ansgaryeysymontt7155 Жыл бұрын
It all depends on metallurgy available. There were times when cast was better. Now welded is way to go.
@micahfrempong16009 ай бұрын
Near the end he kept on saying chsllenger 2 when he was really talking about the challenger 1
@TheFlamingTrain Жыл бұрын
At 14:11 you mislabelled a challenger 1 as a challenger 2.
@aceofhearts573 Жыл бұрын
MBT 80 looked cool. Sadly there was no money to make it so we got the Challenger 1 instead
@thewomble15094 ай бұрын
Not just about money. A lot of the tech that was planned for MBT80 was tested and found to be "immature" , i.e. not ready for service. C2 incorporates some but not all of the fully developed systems that were originally meant for MBT80.
@USSWisconsin3 ай бұрын
I absolutely love the vickers mk. 1. Looks so good
@anselmdanker9519 Жыл бұрын
Great presentation 😊 Thank you.
@knoll98129 ай бұрын
I think problem is that Britain coukd not support two tank makers. Nowadays struggling to gave one. Pity as a lot of good designers snd technicians.
@norfangl34807 ай бұрын
You could probably pin the blame on the Iranians for going through with their revolution.
@datcheesecakeboi67456 ай бұрын
well vickers isnt a tank maker.. and they made the challenger 1 and 2
@RedXlV Жыл бұрын
Too bad Vickers didn't just make a knockoff of the Leopard 2 hull for the Vickers Mk 7. Similar what OTO Melara did with the Leopard 1 hull for their OF-40 tank, exported to the UAE. It was *totally* not a copy of the Leopard 1A3 (which OTO Melara was already building under license for the Italian Army). The hull despite looking like a Leopard 1 was different enough in all dimensions to be legally distinct, so Germany was unable to object. Or hell, even if that wasn't an option, just putting the Vickers Universal Turret on the Challenger and replacing the engine with an MT883 would've made for a vastly better version of the Challenger 2.
@HJDore Жыл бұрын
Considering The challenger 2’s turret is essentially a further development of the universal turret in everything but aesthetics you’ve practically described the challenger 2E there.
@RedXlV Жыл бұрын
@@HJDore I still don't understand why the British Army never used that engine upgrade. Not even on Challenger 3.
@HJDore Жыл бұрын
@@RedXlV the simple answer is money and the fact challenger already has an engine capable of 1500hp. In the case of challenger 2 it was because the MOD had to trim everything down due to Defence budget cuts brought about by the end of the Cold War, there was no chance they’d clear powerpacks retailing at £2 million a piece for a fleet of ~400 vehicles in such a climate when the CV12 worked for a fraction and still had plenty of growth potential.
@letaitam73846 ай бұрын
well, Centurion use boogie with three-boogie per side, not torsion-bar
@keithdurose7057 Жыл бұрын
The Challenger 3 is supposed to be an international tank. Britain, France and Germany contributing to it.. So perhaps the Vickers mark 7 would e the cheapest and most affordable solution. All research and development being already done?
@eva0012 Жыл бұрын
i love your channel man, keep it up!
@crossl4055 Жыл бұрын
So the mk7 had the same fate as the EE-1 Osório, an good tank, better than many of the ones of 1st world nations and still was an failure at exportation because other nations dont wanted an fighting vehicle at market that was better than their ones
@zeroyaka42 Жыл бұрын
NEW RED WRENCH VIDEO LETS GOOOO
@edfrancis712 Жыл бұрын
cheers fella
@PurpleRhymesWithOrange Жыл бұрын
What's that car that has the Vicker's label in the image at 6:48?
@lyn-jhonosia89819 ай бұрын
I want a Vickers MK 7 RC model
@williamshine1346 Жыл бұрын
Excellent video, thanks.
@jakubszymanski55069 ай бұрын
So what was "The Reason Vickers Stopped Making Tanks"? I watched the video, but I didn't see the explanation to the title.
@RedWrenchFilms9 ай бұрын
The failure of the Mark 4, 5, and 7 essentially closed their tank factories.
@jakubszymanski55069 ай бұрын
@@RedWrenchFilms Ok, undertood, thank you. But Vickers also produce Challenger, Challenger II and other tanks, so I thought that video will included them as well, to show whole picture. Anyway, thank you for video, it was very intresting. I didn't know about tanks that you discuss.
@deskmat9874 Жыл бұрын
Now world of tanks wants to know your location
@rewanolrwngow Жыл бұрын
Good tank! Did well for India
@alpacaofthemountain8760 Жыл бұрын
NOOOO Rest in peace Mrk 7
@kstanni875 ай бұрын
Germany probably decided it was "too perfect"
@LucasGator2 Жыл бұрын
Can you make an video talking about the EE-T1 Osório?