urmomma158

alrite lets compare stats m. Lets amke this quick and easy

dalem

Doesn't matter - both excellent MBTs being driven by well-trained troops.

See how easy that was?

-dale

dave angel

echo Dalem's comment.

both - when taken with their crews - are head and shoulders above anything they are ever likely to meet in anger.

Tanks are usually rated on firepower, mobility and protection.
The Chally main armament is very good with plenty of potential to fire future natures. It can also do bombardments because of it's rifled gun. Split ammo is safer but takes longer to load than the M1 one-piece. The M1 smoothbore defeats anything at present but would need a longer barrel to get faster projectiles. Infantry suppression is woeful on the Chally whereas the US have a total of three MGs and may be fitting a remote weapon system for the commander.
The M1 wins hands down on mobility; it has a very powerful and reliable gas turbine which drinks like a fish but just goes on and on. Compare that to the train engine in the Chally. Chally can go much further on a tank of fuel, and even further with it's extra fuel drums.
The bow of the M1 seems invulnerable while the sides are are weak. numerous M1A1 were lost to RPG attacks and i saw a SDG chally2 that took 8 direct RPG hits and a milan hit and still fought on. the only chally lost was due to a blue on blue incident from another chally2 (and that was a mess). Chally has a questionable bow-hence the ERA-but has fabulous add-on Dorchester on the sides. You are more likely to survive a turret strike in the Chally due to it's split ammo stowage and it's electric gun kit; ie no hydraulic fluid to explode.
Hope I haven't missed/misrepresented anything as it's been a while since I've been near a tank.

(Nearly forgot; Chally has a boiling vessel. )


with thanks to ObnoviousJockGit and ArmySurplusSpecial for the technical gubbins....

__________________
before criticizing someone, walk a mile in their shoes.................... then when you do criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.

Officer of Engineers

Whichever one has the better salesmen.

__________________
Chimo

HistoricalDavid

Hm? The M1A1 is more analogous to the Challenger 1.

Both the M1A2 and Challenger 2 have successfully defeated dozens of RPG-7 rounds per tank.

urmomma158

dont forget the TUSK ERA scales that can be fitted on a M1A in addtion to the DU enforced 1st generation chobham the challenger got the longest range t2t kill at 5.1 km the M1A1 has engaged upto 4km. but chally only got the 5.1 km opportunity becasue the terrain was flat and conditions right. Rifled guns are more accurate and the longer barrel gives it more velocity but smoothbores are more detructive outright. Britaina nd india re the only 1's that still use rifled. Although smoothbores are less acuurates the M1A2 targeting makes up for it. The M1A has a C4ISR interface all combat data can be quickly relayed to other M1A2's,Strkers,Apaches,Super Cobras,F 18 E/F's, A10 's bomber etc and command &control. This allows the M1A2's to coordiante a lot more firepower than the challenger. STAFF although cancelled can give M1A2 extended range beyond conventional munitions to amek up for the Chally's slighly longer range.ANd a british capatain said the armor protection levels are similar(but thats without TUSK)> equal in most respects but theC4ISR gives the M1A2 an advantage.(calling in superhornets to launch mavericks at challys ays quite alot.

STAFF http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...tions/m943.htm
scrool down for TUSK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams
more TUSK http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...031005.00.html
C4ISR http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2002apbi/puzzuoli.pdf

SuperTrooper

The Challenger 2 is world famous for it's armour and as you may know the only thing what has been proven to destroy a Challenger 2 is.....another Challenger 2.The M1A2 Abrams can't last a single RPG round...or was that the earlier Abram model,The British sold some of the Challenger 2 armour to the US but i don't think they've put it on their tanks.

Weps

The M1A2 SEP has 150m of armor added to it's glasis, it has 450m of armor on the turret and hull. With TUSK it's a bad boy who's momma is out to lunch.
The M1A2 SEP has stopped multiple RPG rounds.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...round/m1a2.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1A2_Abrams

I'm not going to sit here and droll out all this info, we know specs, we are allies? Why on God's green earth are we squabling over this......again?

Both tanks have something very in common. The Chally was born from the MBT-60 program and the M1 from the MBT-70, both joint ventues in which the Germans helped. So basically samething different additions and requirments.

__________________

pdf27

No it wasn't - it's an evolved version of Chieftain developed for the Shah of Iran. When he was deposed, the UK found itself with a shiny new tank.

__________________
Rule 1: Never trust a Frenchman
Rule 2: Treat all members of the press as French

Weps

The Chally has alot of tech off the MBT-70 on it.

Triple C

There we go again... Super Trooper, do a little search on this board about M1A1 and RPGs. What you have just described is a common myth debunked to the Nth time on this and many other forum.

BTW, has any member of this board been inside both AFVs? If so, what differences stand out?

Shipwreck

LOL

__________________
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God" (Matthew 5:9)

tankie

it really comes down to the best crew in an evenly matched compotition .which of course , the chally 2 would win

__________________
TANKIE , WITHOUT WAX

pdf27

Like what? Name one item that can clearly and unambiguously trace it's ancestry from MBT-70 to Challenger 2 via Challenger 1.

dave lukins

Dave Angel ;longer barrel for faster projectiles" now i know what the wife means!!!lol.....I started on centurian 20 pounders in 66..through to Challenger,give me the cent anyday..ps.its not what you have its how you use it