Challenger 3 The Best From NATO

Challenger 3 is here, ladies and gentlemen, and it is… well, it is good. If you watched my Challenger 2 lap video, this one will not be too different, but I just want to say some things I failed to mention in that one and follow up on what was said about Challenger 3. Okay, so first of all, I think that changing the designation from Challenger 2 something-something to Challenger 3 is a much better idea. It's more simple and rolls off the tongue much better. If you have been following the Challenger saga in the past year or two, you would know that there were two competing systems, one from BAE and one from Rheinmetall, which was joined up with BAE, and the Rheinmetall one was chosen, which is a better choice in my opinion. The Challenger is finally ditching the old L30 rifled gun and replacing it with the best 8-10 gun in service, the L55A1. Currently, only Leopard 2A7 and Challenger 3 have this gun in the entire world, and it improves on the already existing L55 by being able to sustain higher pressure and thus is able to fire more potent ammunition, like the possible new German ammo, but for now, it is most likely going to use the German DM-63 APFSDS ammunition, and the new programmable ammunition is also stated to be part of its loadout, so most likely something like either the American AMP or German DM-11, which is great, this is indeed going to make the tank far more versatile than it used to be. The fire control system is also great, it has 3rd generation Orion thermals from Thales for both gunner and commander, which is a drastic improvement over Challenger 2, which only has late 3rd generation thermal for the gunner, and that's it. The fire control system also has the automatic target detection and automatic target tracking, which is what the best fire control systems in the world have. They call it the most lethal tank in NATO, which is not 100% true, since Leopard 2A7 has pretty much the same gun and comparable fire control system with the same capabilities, so technically it is, but it shares the most lethal spot together with the Leopard. Now, it is lethal, but how well is it protected? Well, we don't have much details on that, the turret was redesigned and apparently got improved protection, which should be enough for modern warfare, but the biggest issue with the tank is that it still uses the old Challenger 2 hull, the protection there would probably remain the same, and even if it was improved, which I seriously doubt it was, you still have the same weak spots, most notably the driver's viewport and around it. The theater entry standard can still be applied to this vehicle, so the lower front plate might not be the issue, but the driver's viewport, yeah, not a good thing. Other improvements in protection include the long-awaited blast door protection for the ammunition. Challenger 2 has two-piece ammunition and has the charges placed in not-that-well-protected containers all around the hull, which still pose a risk. German DM-63 and DM-11 also have a new charge that has extremely low chances of catching fire and exploding when hit by enemy projectiles, so if they use both of those types of ammo, that would be a big plus for the crew's safety. But the biggest issue about the protection is the lack of any kind of active protection system, no hard-kill, no laser warning receivers, nothing. The weak spots on the hull wouldn't be that problematic even in the slightest, only if the tank had an active protection system, which is something a lot of NATO countries are looking into right now. Abrams tanks are already receiving Trophy hard-kill systems in full swing, Germany is also looking into it and it had been confirmed to come, although I'm not sure about it because as it seems for now, it completely destroys the look of Leopard 2, just look at the poor thing. I certainly hope that they look into some hard-kill system in the near future, because by the time they fully adopt the tanks, that is by 2030, the hard-kill APS will become a norm, and Challenger 3 might no longer be the cool kid on the block. Now, the mobility. The suspension is said to be improved, to make the tank more stable during movement and thus increase the accuracy on the move, but the engine remains the same 1200 horsepower engine, but with the improved cooling. And one pretty wild claim has been made during its presentation, the maximum speed has been stated to be 60 miles per hour, in normal units, that is close to 100 kilometers per hour. I'm not entirely sure, but they must have made a typo or something and mistook the kilometers per hour for miles per hour, because as I said, the engine is the same, transmission is the same, only the cooling has been improved, and the Challenger 3 is 1 ton heavier than Challenger 2, not lighter. And in the official British Army document, the maximum speed of Challenger 2 is stated to be 59 kilometers per hour, so let's say that the cooling slightly improved the engine, so we got 60. 100 kilometers per hour is completely impossible, especially if we also consider the theater entry standard. The current Guinness world record is 82 kilometers per hour achieved by FV101 Scorpion, which is a far lighter vehicle than Challenger 3. So yeah, I'm pretty sure they mixed the miles for kilometers on this one. At the end, Challenger 3 is a pretty decent tank, especially because of its firepower. Now, the protection is mediocre, but I seriously hope that they will look into adopting some kind of active protection system in the near future. It would both save the weight, since the theater entry wouldn't need to be applied, and negate the weak spots on the front hull. That would be all. If you like my content, you can consider supporting me on Patreon, or just leave a like on the video or subscribe to the channel if you're new. Thanks for watching, and I'll see you all in the next video. Have a nice day.