Black Night Challenger 2
Discussion
I'm intrigued, does this keep us 'competitive' (should the MoD go for it) in the world of MBTs?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYf1249jbY
Certainly looks impressive, but then it would in a manufacturer's video, wouldn't it...?
On a similar note, but shouldn't they have used this on the promo video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHlODWd4GeM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYf1249jbY
Certainly looks impressive, but then it would in a manufacturer's video, wouldn't it...?
On a similar note, but shouldn't they have used this on the promo video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHlODWd4GeM
It looks primarily like a tech refresh, modern vetronics and crew interfaces. I don’t think it’s getting anything different in terms of primary weapon, or upgraded transmission.... so maybe no more lethal, just easier to use and linked into the battle space...
Difficult to play top trumps with main battle tanks. The trade offs between speed, firepower, range, protection, accuracy, reliability, weight are quite complex I would imagine.
Difficult to play top trumps with main battle tanks. The trade offs between speed, firepower, range, protection, accuracy, reliability, weight are quite complex I would imagine.
had ham said:
Exactly, what is important now? Are comms more important than guns, does that make it a more effective weapon - I'm guessing it does......?
Comms allow fewer resources to locate, call up support, and deal with a specific threat which is fine when you are fighting people in iraq but when Ivan comes charging over the border with 10,0000 tanks, i do think more guns wins the day !Edited by had ham on Friday 5th October 06:00
Ceeejay said:
It looks primarily like a tech refresh, modern vetronics and crew interfaces. I don’t think it’s getting anything different in terms of primary weapon, or upgraded transmission.... so maybe no more lethal, just easier to use and linked into the battle space...
Difficult to play top trumps with main battle tanks. The trade offs between speed, firepower, range, protection, accuracy, reliability, weight are quite complex I would imagine.
There is a separate programme looking at the power pack - "Heavy Armour Automotive Improvement Programme"Difficult to play top trumps with main battle tanks. The trade offs between speed, firepower, range, protection, accuracy, reliability, weight are quite complex I would imagine.
The whole project is massively overdue. Huge amounts of money have been pumped into UOR platforms at the expense of development on current in service vehicles.
As a military force, we're now feeling the pain as we convert back from years of counter insurgency operations and re learning manoeuvre warfare with kit which has seen little to no development or improvement for the last 15 years.
I was lucky enough to get the opportunity to command an Abrahams M1A2 sep and it was light years ahead of what we currently have in terms of night capabilities and electronic suite.
As a military force, we're now feeling the pain as we convert back from years of counter insurgency operations and re learning manoeuvre warfare with kit which has seen little to no development or improvement for the last 15 years.
I was lucky enough to get the opportunity to command an Abrahams M1A2 sep and it was light years ahead of what we currently have in terms of night capabilities and electronic suite.
Edited by DuncsGTi on Friday 5th October 14:34
Edited by DuncsGTi on Friday 5th October 14:37
had ham said:
Would love to hear more about that experience?
No problem. I was attached to the 1-163rd Cav Montana national guard as part of an international exchange program. The trip coincided with the units confirmatory exercise at the national training centre at Ft Irwin, CA.
The brigade level exercise was comprised of a week of live fire followed by 2 weeks simulated battle against an opfor brigade. My American hosts were fantastically receptive to me, gave me a tank and crew and completely integrated into one of their companies.
British tactics and doctrine are very similar to American when it comes to armoured warfare but probably most interesting to me was the difference in approach to training. As an NCO in command of a CR2, I am given huge mission command to achieve whatever objective. The US approach seemed a lot more scripted and managed with dry runs down range before going live.
DuncsGTi said:
No problem.
I was attached to the 1-163rd Cav Montana national guard as part of an international exchange program. The trip coincided with the units confirmatory exercise at the national training centre at Ft Irwin, CA.
The brigade level exercise was comprised of a week of live fire followed by 2 weeks simulated battle against an opfor brigade. My American hosts were fantastically receptive to me, gave me a tank and crew and completely integrated into one of their companies.
British tactics and doctrine are very similar to American when it comes to armoured warfare but probably most interesting to me was the difference in approach to training. As an NCO in command of a CR2, I am given huge mission command to achieve whatever objective. The US approach seemed a lot more scripted and managed with dry runs down range before going live.
Thanks for that - that would have been a very interesting experience, I'm sure. I was attached to the 1-163rd Cav Montana national guard as part of an international exchange program. The trip coincided with the units confirmatory exercise at the national training centre at Ft Irwin, CA.
The brigade level exercise was comprised of a week of live fire followed by 2 weeks simulated battle against an opfor brigade. My American hosts were fantastically receptive to me, gave me a tank and crew and completely integrated into one of their companies.
British tactics and doctrine are very similar to American when it comes to armoured warfare but probably most interesting to me was the difference in approach to training. As an NCO in command of a CR2, I am given huge mission command to achieve whatever objective. The US approach seemed a lot more scripted and managed with dry runs down range before going live.
I've heard similar before re: American training - do you think this has an impact on their ability to cope with changing/dynamic battlefield conditions in the 'real world'? And is that approach due to the sheer scale of their military machine - it's easier to deploy en-masse and retain control I would guess....?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff