Jump to content

RYE FIELD CHALLENGER II TANK COMING SOON


TIGER HOBBIESLIMITED

Recommended Posts

If you check our Tiger Hobbies thread in about 10 min I will have the Parts Breakdown, so it looks like the TES version can be done not just Megatron.

 

At least we have got one, this and the Sherman Firefly are the first British Subject they have given us since we imported the first Rye Field in 2015, is it that long ago since RM5001 Tiger T early. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question.  Is there a defined "TES Fit" for CR2?  It was not deployed to Afghanistan, so there was no fit for that theatre.  The fit for a conventional war would likely be different to that for an asymmetric conflict.  IED jamming gear would be an obvious example.  I imagine there is a defined "TES Fit" for Estonia.  I believe that the "TES Fit" principle is to provide the equipment fit for the environmental and threat situation assessed to be appropriate to each operation.  With HEAT ammunition being commonplace and increasingly effective I can see the add-on armour packs always being used.

 

However, it seems likely that we will have a further evolution of Challenger in the foreseeable future - possibly including a gun change to the smoothbore.  There is talk of soft and hard kill DAS and next-generation lighter armour packs, and the RWS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The TES Theatre Entry Standard is the future of Challenger and more than one if been used for testing, link to film

 

AT 1.24 you see 4 of them lined up.

 

Yes I would have likes a current in service Challenger II as the first Rye Field issue, but I am not complaining, this is a great start, and will put Rye Field well up in the UK 1/35 AFV Market along with the Sherman Firefly coming in late Jan (about to be thrown on the boat, 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/12/2019 at 23:08, Das Abteilung said:

Question.  Is there a defined "TES Fit" for CR2?  It was not deployed to Afghanistan, so there was no fit for that theatre.  The fit for a conventional war would likely be different to that for an asymmetric conflict.  IED jamming gear would be an obvious example.  I imagine there is a defined "TES Fit" for Estonia.  I believe that the "TES Fit" principle is to provide the equipment fit for the environmental and threat situation assessed to be appropriate to each operation.  With HEAT ammunition being commonplace and increasingly effective I can see the add-on armour packs always being used.

 

However, it seems likely that we will have a further evolution of Challenger in the foreseeable future - possibly including a gun change to the smoothbore.  There is talk of soft and hard kill DAS and next-generation lighter armour packs, and the RWS.

Hopefully now the Election is done the Gov will make a announcement on this soon. The RBSL version looks and sounds a good upgrade. Fingers crossed.

49264282862_e168ecf99e_b.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spending large sums early on the armed forces might be seen as contrary to manifesto promises of money for everything else.  Need to deliver on some other good news promises first.  It has become traditional for new governments to commission a defence and security review, which would put everything new on hold.  Although this administration may not consider itself to be new and the previous one ended early.  When will the trials be completed such that an objective go/no-go/re-work decision can be made?

 

The large optics on modern AFVs always seem exceptionally vulnerable.  No sign here of the much-rumoured hard kill DAS, or indeed any soft-kill DAS either.  Engine HP was rumoured to be boosted to 1,500BHP, which I presume would also need a transmission upgrade.  Still a good sleek-looking tank.

 

Treasury were finally persuaded to sign off on the additional cost of the gun change on the basis of savings in ammunition costs. I wonder how the ammunition stowage has been organised for the 1-piece ammunition.  The test installation of a Rhenmetall gun in a CR2 15 years or so ago highlighted the difficulty of that aspect and was allegedly one of the reasons for not taking it forward then. How is gun - sight collimation for barrel droop achieved without a muzzle reference system?  Please tell me that someone doesn't have to leave the tank and fit a device to the muzzle rather than being able to do it from under armour as now. 

 

Does a gun change leave the Omanis and Jordanians in an difficult ammunition situation?  They both have Challengers, 2 and 1 respectively, with the rifled gun.  It seems unlikely that RO Glascoed can economically manufacture small quantities for them without UK business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This page from one of the Army newsletters offers a fair bit of info about the planned upgrade.

spacer.png

 

12 hours ago, Das Abteilung said:

The large optics on modern AFVs always seem exceptionally vulnerable.  No sign here of the much-rumoured hard kill DAS, or indeed any soft-kill DAS either.  Engine HP was rumoured to be boosted to 1,500BHP, which I presume would also need a transmission upgrade.  Still a good sleek-looking tank.

They mention upgrades to the 'powerpack', which to me means the transmission is probably included? It also sounds like Active Protection Systems will be an optional extra, rather than a standard fit.

 

A couple of other things - to my knowledge the turret redesign was mainly to allow single-piece ammunition to be stowed safely and in decent quantities. Regarding what you say about optics, I suppose it's something of a compromise, as nestling the optics further within the armour where they're more protected potentially creates weak points - whereas keeping them exposed like this means that even if they are penetrated, the tank will not be.

 

I've also spotted what appears to be the Muzzle Reference System on the side of the gun in some other images of the tank, so I think that answers that question.

spacer.png

 

Finally, coming to the actual decision, this article from a few months back says 2021, so I guess we have to wait until then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2019 at 9:22 PM, ivan-o said:

Megatron is only a one off technology demonstrator.

Megatron! Wow - What a fantastic name for a tank... I love it; one-off or not - "viciously powerful and brutally direct leader of the Decepticons...":goodjob:

Great to see the British Army deploying some new tech in the armour business. I wonder if it can transform into anything in disguise?

 

Rich

Edited by RichG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...