Recent reports and observations have highlighted significant issues with the British Challenger 2 tanks deployed in Ukraine, particularly concerning their mobility in the challenging terrain. During a demonstration for British journalists from The Sun, a Challenger 2 tank, part of the 82nd Special Airborne Brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, became stuck in mud, necessitating evacuation. This incident underscores criticisms regarding the tank's design, with comparisons unfavorably contrasting it to the Leopard tank in terms of mobility. The Challenger 2's heavy weight, approximately 70 tonnes, and its power-to-weight ratio, with 1,200 horsepower compared to the lighter Abrams and Leopard tanks which boast 1,500 horsepower, are identified as key factors in its mobility issues. Despite its robust design, the Challenger 2's performance in the muddy conditions of Ukraine has led to skepticism about its effectiveness, with reports suggesting that up to 50% of all supplied British Challenger tanks are either destroyed or abandoned due to these mobility challenges. The cost of each Challenger 2 tank is around £4.2 million.
British tanks are designed for military trade shows but not for the battlefield? According to this Sun report the biggest ‘challenge’ for the ‘Challenger’ tank are ordinary puddles by Ukrainian standards. “It keeps getting stuck.” https://t.co/svAixCGD34
🇺🇦 UK’S £4.2 MILLION TANK STUCK IN UKRAINIAN MUD UK’s Challenger 2 tank repeatedly got stuck in the mud during a demo in Ukraine. "Even just on the training exercises, we've seen the main problem that the Challenger’s been facing here in Ukraine, and that [is] its mobility.… https://t.co/90nVGUtIeg
🇺🇦🇬🇧‼️🚨 The glorious Challenger tank! https://t.co/JCVZANKnSl
Tanks in Ukraine: “The crew invited The Sun to clamber aboard and we sat on the turret as the Challenger 2 roared over the countryside and its gun circled round the clock. But we soon saw what the soldiers meant about mobility when it sank into a bog.” https://t.co/zNevuopQqi
The good, old “invincible” Challenger 2 seems to be competing with the “unsinkable” British Navy for lols 😂 https://t.co/jLLpS6ou9a
Challenger weighs around 70 tonnes and has 1,200 hp. Abrams and Leopard weigh 60 tonnes and have 1,500 hp. So the problem is not absolute weight, even though Challenger is heavy, but the power to weight ratio. It means Challenger is less good at extricating itself from mud. https://t.co/IURwSSESbc
Ukrainians review the Challenger 2. “There are pluses and minuses with everything, and the minus is its mobility — its ability to manoeuvre across ground. They keep getting stuck in the mud because it is so heavy.” https://t.co/EMk1dnFbPF
🇺🇦🇬🇧⚡ The British Challenger 2 from the 82nd Special Airborne Brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces drowned in a hole during demonstrations at the training ground in front of British journalists from The Sun, who filmed the process of evacuating the stuck tank by another… https://t.co/NScWJcqjyd
🇬🇧🇷🇺⚡Reports that 50% of all supplied British Challenger tanks are either destroyed or abandoned. The British tank from my view is just a worse version of the Leopard tank, pretty much just a fat junk of metal. https://t.co/bfqUbzXtdq
The British Challenger 2 tank drowned in Ukrainian mud as predicted https://t.co/6v1I1581WO