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
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.
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.
@@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.
@@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.
@@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 However to not think our doctrine is completely outdated is naive.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.
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
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
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.
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
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
@@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.
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*
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.
@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.
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.
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
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.
@@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.
@@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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 :)
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
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
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
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.
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?
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
@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.
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
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.
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 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.
It's like the Vickers Mk.7 was the forbidden lovechild of a Leopard 2 and Vickers Mk.4. The leopard 2s family(Germany) didn't want their golden boy outshined by his bastard child so they did everything to shut it down and the Vickers Mk.7 who would've been the best in the world never got the chance to be.
![Twenty One Pilots - The Line (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XCz7WUotXs8/mqdefault.jpg)
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
hoi4 clone!!!!!!
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.
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.
well seeing as vickers... made the challenger 2... yea..
The Mark 7 really was a beast, such a massive shame that such sad fate befell one of the best tank ever made.
it evolved into challenger 1
@@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.
@@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.
@@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.
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
Just wanted to correct, the centurion did *not* use torsion bars. They used a modified hortsman layout
Correct
That's what I thought! The Brits just don't like torsion bars, almost non of their tanks us them.
Mostly because that the internal space we're taken horizontally. Tho not super cramped, still forces the tanks to be a bit taller
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
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.
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
Yeah, Chally was the worst MBT of modern times.
@@shaggingsin the Greek tank trials it was ranked the worst western tank.
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
@@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.
@@chost-059What drugs are you on
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*
It was Challenger 1, not 2
The confusion most likely coms from it being Challenger Mark 2, as in second model of the first Challenger tank.
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.
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.
No way MOD would take a design not full of problems
The Osorio project was a rare moment of pride for Brazilians. Great to see you mention it
I never realised Vickers was still producing tanks post WW2, thanks for the insight.
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
They still do, just not for themselves, for BAE. BAE acquired the company and the offices.
4:27 The centurion did not use torsion bar suspension, it used a horstmann type suspension
Agreed. It was the same on the Chieftain as well, using a Horstmann suspension.
beat me to it
Ah.. so you have not heard of the Oliphant. Interesting..
@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.
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.
A similar type Horstmann suspension was also used on the Chieftain tank.
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
Did not know they send the Leo to the US.
😂😂😂@@OneofInfinity.
@@OneofInfinity. Well they sent over the gun at least 😂
Well duh... its a tank... it doesn't exactly shoot hugs...
Germany is hypocrite nation,just like usa..
Massive shame that the Vickers Mk 7 was cancelled considering how goddamn amazing it was
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.
Really love the British tank design. Hopefully, someday British tank can have its new success overseas.
And our government doesn’t shut down the facilities that build them… yeah.
Bae defence systems sold the old Vickers holdings to rheinmetall of Germany.
@@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.
@@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.
The TSR2 the Harrier the jet that would have broken the sound barrier before America.
Our government cancels everything we do.
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.
Such a very British story... "We have a great product..... Sooo.... let's scrap it!"
At least in this case the British government weren't at fault
British only made garbage PERIOD 🗑
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.
I thought the FV301 was just another fictional tank from World of Tanks
The FV300 series did sort of get of the ground years later in the Guise as the Scorpion tank which was pretty successful
The Centurion did not use torsion bar suspension! It used a modified Horstman suspension system, basically bogies.
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.
Damn, Vickers could not catch a goddamn break. The mark 7 got the piss in the worst way.
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.
Not enough £ in the treasury. No longer able to afford anything.
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)
I love the Centurion, and to find out about these amazing designs was wondeful
The tank the Mark 7 beat was the Challenger, the first MBT of its name, Challenger 2 didn't exist until 1990.
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 :)
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.
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
Seeing people who thing there's just tons of made up stuff in WT hurts my snail owned soul
@@bjboss1119other than the ostwind 2… and the E100, and the tiger 105, and the panther II, and all 3 R2Y2s.
@@pliat congratulations you listed 7 vehicles in a game with over 2500
@@bjboss1119 sidam mistral is another one.
Thank you,first time i'd heard of the mk7 and it's tragic it wasn't produced.
Used to love getting the Train into Leeds and going past ROF Leeds/Barnbow Tank Factory as a lad.
Talks about challenger 2 shows multiple pictures of challenger 1
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
MP7
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
Sounds like the hull cracking issue of the Stingray. An interesting tank in itself.
A video on all the Object tanks that the Soviet Union has made would be cool.
The Centurion used Hortsmann suspension, not torsion bars.
Ain't no way that they just did a Cursed Tank Simulator and it actually worked.
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.
Centurion used Horstmann suspension, not torsion bar. So that is a point that differed between the Centurion and Vickers Mk.1.
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.
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?
The rear lights kept falling off...
Great film, but the Mk7 section......is not a CR2, but a CR1!
Yes Mark unfortunately I got confused! The last test with a group was against C2, but the first couple were against C1.
Great video as always! These vickers tanks are some of my favourites:)
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.
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
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.
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
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.
Imagine having to tell your boss “yea so we kinda flipped it….”
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.
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...
Another interesting video about an interesting tank series❤
The dominant economic and political company’s use every resource within means to acquire, consolidate the market and buy out other/rival corps.
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.
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.
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.
I remember that the Indian tanks were the first tanks to successfully use a fully stablized main gun in the 1971 war.
The Challenger was built by Vickers. Vickers was bought by BAE systems and BAE are building the Challenger II.
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
Basically everything that Britain invented it eventually gave up manufacturing, including trains, passenger ships and jet airliners...
May Vickers and the Mark 7 rest in peace. T_T
Absolutely awesome video! 👌
MBT 80 looked cool. Sadly there was no money to make it so we got the Challenger 1 instead
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.
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.
Saw the Mark 3M being demonstrated to the Malaysians at Bovington in 96. Always wondered if any got ordered
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?
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
great video, as usual! congrats
Hey, don't know if you have but you should cover Eugene Stoner's cannons he designed for the US military!!
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.
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.
Vickers made the challenger 2
Near the end he kept on saying chsllenger 2 when he was really talking about the challenger 1
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.
Nah. It would still be T-55/62/64/72 with clones.
Challenger was/is a Vickers design...................................
At 14:11 you mislabelled a challenger 1 as a challenger 2.
Great presentation 😊
Thank you.
The Vickers Mk. E was an export favorite, seeing use in armies like China, Finland, Russia, Poland and a lot of other countries.
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
i love your channel man, keep it up!
Right combination of parts, beats everything else and no sales because Germany said no hulls. Seems about right😢
NEW RED WRENCH VIDEO LETS GOOOO
I absolutely love the vickers mk. 1. Looks so good
You keep saying Challenger 2 when showing Challenger 1, and Challenger 2 didn't enter service until 1994.
What's that car that has the Vicker's label in the image at 6:48?
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.
Excellent video, thanks.
cheers fella
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.
It's insane that the CV90 wasn't even *in* the competition, when it was clearly superior to all of the competitors.
@@RedXlVbecause BAE put in the m8 instead
@@LauchlanMcdonald Presumably they though using an American design would give them better odds of winning.
@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.
Can you make an video talking about the EE-T1 Osório?
cool video man
I want a Vickers MK 7 RC model
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
well, Centurion use boogie with three-boogie per side, not torsion-bar
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.
You could probably pin the blame on the Iranians for going through with their revolution.
well vickers isnt a tank maker.. and they made the challenger 1 and 2
The story of the mark 7 sounds like a tragedy. Like romeo and juliet ;(.
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.
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.
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.
@@HJDore I still don't understand why the British Army never used that engine upgrade. Not even on Challenger 3.
@@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.
It's like the Vickers Mk.7 was the forbidden lovechild of a Leopard 2 and Vickers Mk.4. The leopard 2s family(Germany) didn't want their golden boy outshined by his bastard child so they did everything to shut it down and the Vickers Mk.7 who would've been the best in the world never got the chance to be.
NOOOO
Rest in peace Mrk 7
Vídeo excelente! Muito interessante🌟