Those Leopard Tanks are totally awesome with their firepower and amazing accuracy. Well done, regardless of your nationality, thank you for your service.🇬🇧👍🏻🇩🇪👍🏻
I heard the government were considering replacing the Challenger 2 with Leopard 2... we'll see what happens when the outcome of the review happens shortly
Its always cheaper to upgrade current tanks than buying new ones. But if the challenger 2 isnt that versatile then... i guess it time to find a replacement
@@IDFVids Yeah true, it wouldn't surprise me if they go with the life extension kit on the Challengers - but there are benefits with choosing the Leopard 2. But my honest opinion is that they'll reduce the total number of MBTs, regardless of what option they choose. They won't scrap them like it was suggested in the media (even Defence Sec denied it), but they'll definitely reduce how many they're going to maintain I reckon
I have heard that but I think it's politically difficult and there's some suggestion that it has been rejected. The other suggestion is dumping MBTs altogether and concentrating on "cyber". I'm a programmer and when I hear that kind of thing it makes me cringe even if there is a certain amount of need for protection against such things, I think the threat of tanks is never going to go away.
A replacement would probably be on the cards - already the Challenger 2 is increasingly becoming the modern counterpart to the King Tiger Tank; with all those upgrades we've seen its mass balloon all the way up to 75 tons and there will come a day when further upgrades may prove to be unfeasible because of weight considerations and other factors
@@timmurphy5541 Yes I agree. As far as I can see, the advancement of Russia when it comes to tanks, is what is keeping the Government from scrapping them altogether. Don't get me wrong, cyber warfare is probably quite worthwhile looking into, but I definitely don't see the justification of dropping tanks, especially with Russian tanks nowadays.
Why? The British L11A5 120 mm rifled gun holds the longest battle kill in history. Fired from a Challenger 1 over a distance of 5,110 metres (3.18 miles)
@@1chish it rod is the maximum length it can be and it was fairly flooky where as smooth cost less to maintain and is now much more accurate and the rifling decrease the effectiveness for apfsds as it spins it
@@1chish APFSDS rounds don’t need rifling because they stabilise themselves. All you are doing with a rifled barrel is slowly wearing it down and causing the round to exit slower than a smoothbore would. We only keep them for the HESH rounds but even now there are variants you can fire using smoothbore.
@@1chish The normal firing range for the Leo 2 are 4-5km so i thing the germans did shoots over 5800m but they not recorded that cause not every country want to show what they can rly do...
I think the barrel replacement was too costly in the end so we are sticking with rifled for now. Originally and for a long time, rifled barrels were more accurate but nowadays, smooth is a better choice. More ammo, less barrel wear and stabilisation negates the need to rifle. That said, the UK hasn't had to go against advanced armour in combat since forever, so quiet how we'd stand up against modern Russian armour is anyone's guess. However, our troops training is second to none and that stands for a hell of a lot, plus challenger armour is amazing.
@@IDFVids yeah but using a rifled gun to impart spin and increase stability.....on a projectile that already has stabilising fins...... all you are doing is wearing away the rifling pointlessly and slowing the round down
@@meme4one we’ve only kept it mainly for the HESH round to USAir again soft targets, infantry and buildings but there is newer ammo available to deal with these
The only benefit rifled guns bring to tanks is the ability to fire HESH. The sabot rounds that Challenger 2 fires use slip obturator rings that counter the rifling, as apfsds doesn't do well with too much gyro stabilization. Rifled guns have considerably increased wear and in the case of Challenger 2, are very limited in projectile length, hence why LEP is getting the L/55A1 upgrade (with the potential for the RH130mm in the future).
Smoothbore has comparable accuracy due to fin stabilisation of rounds. Also since the Americans and most European NATO militaries are using tanks armed with smoothbore main guns it would seem like an oddity that the Challenger 2 isn't fitted with one
@@spdfatomicstructure I suspect the fact that other countries cannot machine a 120mm rifled barrel to the required accuracy affects their decision as well. Nothing wrong with a Challenger's accuracy as its longest kill in history proved.
I'm not an expert, but from what I can tell it would seem that rifling was indeed a major advancement for it's day, and served it's purpose well for the technology of it's time. But the development of so many new types of round and missiles, etc. mean that smooth-bore gives the ultimate flexibility for sending just about anything down the barrel. Including a big ol' cannonball. Come to think of it, I wonder if anyone's actually been tempted to try that?
![Ice On My Teeth - ATEEZ エイティーズ 에이티즈 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 241115](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/c-n92OgbbwA/mqdefault.jpg)
Those Leopard Tanks are totally awesome with their firepower and amazing accuracy. Well done, regardless of your nationality, thank you for your service.🇬🇧👍🏻🇩🇪👍🏻
🇺🇸👍🏻
i love the german camo
Thank you for your service god bless you 🙏🏻🇬🇧🙏🏻
What a beautiful tank
Exactly - British range which the Bundeswehr was always firing on, as the nearest range to Augustdorf.
Bring back Wolfgang!!!
Best navigator in the Rhine area. Could sniff out a hungry squaddie at 10km.
And a yellow handbag.
@@christopherbonnar9047 my first beer, happy memories 🇬🇧👊🏻
Tanks? Meh. A truck that sells pies? More time filming that please!
English GutTruck
I'm hearing ya brother!
I heard the government were considering replacing the Challenger 2 with Leopard 2... we'll see what happens when the outcome of the review happens shortly
Its always cheaper to upgrade current tanks than buying new ones. But if the challenger 2 isnt that versatile then... i guess it time to find a replacement
@@IDFVids Yeah true, it wouldn't surprise me if they go with the life extension kit on the Challengers - but there are benefits with choosing the Leopard 2.
But my honest opinion is that they'll reduce the total number of MBTs, regardless of what option they choose. They won't scrap them like it was suggested in the media (even Defence Sec denied it), but they'll definitely reduce how many they're going to maintain I reckon
I have heard that but I think it's politically difficult and there's some suggestion that it has been rejected. The other suggestion is dumping MBTs altogether and concentrating on "cyber". I'm a programmer and when I hear that kind of thing it makes me cringe even if there is a certain amount of need for protection against such things, I think the threat of tanks is never going to go away.
A replacement would probably be on the cards - already the Challenger 2 is increasingly becoming the modern counterpart to the King Tiger Tank; with all those upgrades we've seen its mass balloon all the way up to 75 tons and there will come a day when further upgrades may prove to be unfeasible because of weight considerations and other factors
@@timmurphy5541 Yes I agree. As far as I can see, the advancement of Russia when it comes to tanks, is what is keeping the Government from scrapping them altogether.
Don't get me wrong, cyber warfare is probably quite worthwhile looking into, but I definitely don't see the justification of dropping tanks, especially with Russian tanks nowadays.
Challenger 3.....👀🇬🇧🇩🇪👊🏻
I like big cats and cannot lie.
b prepared not scared!!!
Amazing .
We need this gun for British challenger
Why? The British L11A5 120 mm rifled gun holds the longest battle kill in history. Fired from a Challenger 1 over a distance of 5,110 metres (3.18 miles)
@@1chish it rod is the maximum length it can be and it was fairly flooky where as smooth cost less to maintain and is now much more accurate and the rifling decrease the effectiveness for apfsds as it spins it
@@reubenjackson7829 I got as far as 'fairly flooky'. 🤦♂️
@@1chish APFSDS rounds don’t need rifling because they stabilise themselves. All you are doing with a rifled barrel is slowly wearing it down and causing the round to exit slower than a smoothbore would. We only keep them for the HESH rounds but even now there are variants you can fire using smoothbore.
@@1chish The normal firing range for the Leo 2 are 4-5km so i thing the germans did shoots over 5800m but they not recorded that cause not every country want to show what they can rly do...
So will the challengers be getting smoothbore gun or are we still going to continue using HESH rounds?
Challengers can fire apfsds.....
I think the barrel replacement was too costly in the end so we are sticking with rifled for now. Originally and for a long time, rifled barrels were more accurate but nowadays, smooth is a better choice. More ammo, less barrel wear and stabilisation negates the need to rifle. That said, the UK hasn't had to go against advanced armour in combat since forever, so quiet how we'd stand up against modern Russian armour is anyone's guess. However, our troops training is second to none and that stands for a hell of a lot, plus challenger armour is amazing.
@@IDFVids yeah but using a rifled gun to impart spin and increase stability.....on a projectile that already has stabilising fins...... all you are doing is wearing away the rifling pointlessly and slowing the round down
@@meme4one we’ve only kept it mainly for the HESH round to USAir again soft targets, infantry and buildings but there is newer ammo available to deal with these
best of briten 'mobile off-licence'
Kinda apsurd that in 2020 there is a military training area smack in the middle of Germany, where the Germans barely entered...surreal.
Isn’t the challenger 2’s gun more accurate because it’s rifled or is the smooth bore better
The only benefit rifled guns bring to tanks is the ability to fire HESH. The sabot rounds that Challenger 2 fires use slip obturator rings that counter the rifling, as apfsds doesn't do well with too much gyro stabilization.
Rifled guns have considerably increased wear and in the case of Challenger 2, are very limited in projectile length, hence why LEP is getting the L/55A1 upgrade (with the potential for the RH130mm in the future).
Smoothbore has comparable accuracy due to fin stabilisation of rounds. Also since the Americans and most European NATO militaries are using tanks armed with smoothbore main guns it would seem like an oddity that the Challenger 2 isn't fitted with one
@@spdfatomicstructure I suspect the fact that other countries cannot machine a 120mm rifled barrel to the required accuracy affects their decision as well. Nothing wrong with a Challenger's accuracy as its longest kill in history proved.
I'm not an expert, but from what I can tell it would seem that rifling was indeed a major advancement for it's day, and served it's purpose well for the technology of it's time. But the development of so many new types of round and missiles, etc. mean that smooth-bore gives the ultimate flexibility for sending just about anything down the barrel. Including a big ol' cannonball. Come to think of it, I wonder if anyone's actually been tempted to try that?
Challenger 2 tanks are soon going to get 130mm smoothbore with the ammo more more accurate then the gun.
That range must be returned to Germany.
How dare they use the NAAFI. The British Black Panther is better.
I smell Blitzkrieg on the horizon XD
Alles zum Verglühen bestimmt. Verteidigt uns lieber nach innen.
wieso? gibts es böse Menschen nur im Innern?
How far Britain has fallen from building the first tank to use against Germany and now they use their former enemies tank funny year 2020
Challenger 2 better
Meh. Bold statement
K?
Only Oman bought them so ..... most people don't seem to agree.
@@timmurphy5541 if it’s just me then so be it
Don’t worry we’ve proved we have better equipment than Germany a few times
The hoc valley concretely harm because soil laterally glow upon a second-hand mask. filthy, tart description