The UK government has confirmed that it has no plans to supply Ukraine with additional Challenger 2 tanks, according to a written parliamentary response from the Ministry of Defence.
Responding to a question from Brian Mathew, Liberal Democrat MP for Melksham and Devizes, on whether the UK would send further Challenger 2 tanks, Luke Pollard, Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Ministry of Defence, stated:
“At present there are no plans to supply additional Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine.”
The UK originally sent 14 Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine in 2023, forming a combat-effective squadron that, according to the government, played a key role in encouraging other international partners to provide Western Main Battle Tanks to Ukraine.
While additional Challenger 2s will not be sent, the UK has recently committed to delivering more than 50 armoured and protected vehicles to Ukraine, including modernised T-72 tanks. These are set to arrive by the end of spring, adding to the over 1,000 armoured, protected, and logistics vehicles that the UK has previously supplied.
Pollard reiterated that the UK remains engaged with Ukraine to ensure that British military assistance aligns with Kyiv’s strategic needs, stating:
“We continue to work closely with the Ukrainian Government to ensure the capabilities we provide meet the priorities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.”
The UK remains a key military supporter of Ukraine but has so far chosen to focus on a wider range of military aid rather than expanding its commitment of Challenger 2 tanks.
Hopefully the penny has dropped we might actually need to keep at least 3 regts🤞
If they are not upgraded, there is no way.
Hopefully we’ll now upgrade the remaining Challenger 2s – we’ve still got around 200 so we should really upgrade them all.
Yes, even the French and Italian are upgrading and a whole swag of their current and Italy is ordering new Panthers. The UK should maximise what’s its got and not let things sit and rust. Not sure if buying some C1/2s back from Jordan/Kuwait (?) to upgrade is a good option to bulk out numbers?
*current MBT’s
[ 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐃𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐦 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐫 𝐖𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐔𝐬 ]
Start your career with us today and work from the comfort of your home! No skills or experience required—just your dedication and a desire to succeed. Receive your payments weekly or monthly, depending on your preference. It’s a great opportunity to kickstart your career, earn a steady income, and enjoy the flexibility of working on your own terms! So Hurry and
Get Started Now.”….. 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞/
As discussed on here many times, the Jordanian CR1’s won’t be going anywhere any time soon, that idea hit a brick wall. Oman is the only other source of CR2 ( not Kuwait) and AFAIK no moves have been made to repatriate their examples. The only other option is for the MOD to take up the offer from RBSL and invest in New Builds but that is very unlikely ATM..
We will only have CR3s from 2030 after FOC. We will not also have any CR2s in parallel.
I actually think Ukraine has more interest in CH2 than CH3 (that is if they were offered). CH2 can do something that CH3/Abrams/Leopard can’t. Though they would like a more powerful engine (but not if that meant they got a CH3). The problem with CH3 is they concentrated on how to defeat armour that the opposition doesn’t have.
What do you mean? CH2 do not have even an Anti infantry round while CH3 with new gun can.
Once again AlexS talking utter shite as HESH functions as anti infantry.
Alex, UKR has been very happy to accept our CR2s without any upgrade.
Jacko, then we will have to increase the CR3 order substantially.
I know but as been discussed before on here compared to buying a new tank they are very cheap for the money!
Ermmm How ? … These C3’s are re-builds of C2’s. I thought you of anyone here would know that. C2 production ceased decades ago, how do you see us producing more ?
Because the Turrets are new, and RBSL have stated that new build Hulls are a possibility if a customer is prepared to pay for them.
I think we should build new Hulls with any mods from Ukraine experience. Some production is better than none and the experience is vital to train new engineers etc. We should have a proper Armoured Division for Europe with 100% replacements in reserve.
Replica hulls will only work with new replica engines and replica gearboxes and other components to fit. That is an impossibility.
The only viable options is to adapt new hulls to currently being manufactured components (engines, gearboxs etc.)
Well they have a spare 70 hulls they are not converting so they could convert enough for 3 regiments after all that’s what we have now..they just need to convert them all it’s tiny money to do.
Jonno, I think Ukraine has shown we need a CH2 with a better engine (but that’s been known for decades). CH3 is heavier & has a less accurate gun. CH2 is already too heavy – so let’s make it heavier. Lessons being learned? More like plans already set in concrete. Don’t rock the boat. Ukraine obviously doesn’t know what it’s talking about. Wait till a real war starts. etc etc.
Does anyone know how well the Challengers have performed in Ukraine?
The Daily Mail had a YouTube video on this subject few months ago
A cliche but Google is your friend .
Not well in the mud. Too low and getting stuck. Great for sitting still and hitting from a far but on the move. Not so good off roads etcc, which considering that’s what they were designed for. Not great.
Again it’s what you watch! One crew got stuck another went across the same field with no problems. All these videos are made by people with an agenda ie Brit stuff is crap etc but in the main the Ukrainians don’t seem to have a problem with them.(apparently)
Additionally there’s “off road” and “off road” in Ukraine. During the Rasputitsa it doesn’t matter if you have a CR2, T72, or whatever. You are going to bog in.
During the 2 mud seasons you essentially cannot operate in the field without bogging down..it’s one of the reason Russian and soviet tanks are so light and small ( 40 tons) but even they big down in the mud season. That’s why it’s essentially gone to static warfare in ukriane..as soon as you hit one of the two mud seasons your offensive is over..To be very clear 60-70 ton western MBTs were never designed to fight in Eastern European mud..which is essentially impossible undertake manoeuvre warfare in..they were designed for Central European mud..which is completely different.
J, I know of one occasion when a rookie driver bogged a Chally in, in front of media. Henceforth a welter of stories about the tank being underpowered etc. There seems to be a huge anti-CR2 lobby out there, many comprising Russians and Americans.
They were used in a static manner in Ukraine up to July last year acting as sniper tanks firing from woodblocks. They deployed of course into Kursk which was an offensive. The crews love them, and there are several videos to that effect. They are no heavier than the most recent M1A2s.
But working well for what Ukraine is using them for. They worked out they were more accurate & longer ranged than any other western tank. Yes they are not the most mobile but if you can hit when the opposition can’t, who cares.
DJ, CR2 has superior suspension to Leo2 and Abrams. It can therefore do the same speed cross-country as Leo2.
Hopefully that means they will be converted all the 213 challenger 2s we have.. personally I would ask to swap the 11 challenger 2s left in Ukraine for some nice leopard 2s so we can have them back and then convert all 224 to challenger 3 and keep 3 regiments of MBTs as the core of 3 heavy brigades.
Defo upgrade as many Challenger IIs to IIIs as is feasible, and supplement with M1s from the US. Easier integration and more commonality than Leopards, and may also be political useful.
Matt, we don’t want M1s. Complex to operate two tank types. Abrams is a burden to support. Very maintenance intensive and thirsty on fuel. Would have to increase REME and RLC support significantly. Many Abrams over the years have been destroyed in combat or very seriously damaged so its survivability is suspect. However more modern versions are better than older versions in that respect. Many are reluctant to buy American as they are no longer a reliable ally and technical partner.
“Many Abrams over the years have been destroyed in combat or very seriously damaged so its survivability is suspect. ”
In how many combats M1 have been vs how many Challengers?
Where have M1s been deployed where CR1/2 haven’t been alongside them?
Alex, certainly M1s have been in more combat engagements than CR2. But I was not comparing the two. Is it acceptable that so many M1s have been destroyed or seriously damaged just because they have had more encounters?
“Is it acceptable that so many M1s have been destroyed or seriously damaged just because they have had more encounters?”
Of course it is.
M1 had probably 10000x more encounters with enemy vs Challengers. Hundreds were sold to Iraq, Saudis.
M1A2 is a much better tank overall than CH2.
“Where have M1s been deployed where CR1/2 haven’t been alongside them?”
Iraq(outside UK S.Iraq occupation zone and for much longer time till today, Iraq owns them), Afghanistan, Yemen. The point is itself irrelevant. They could be side by side and numbers be like 100 vs 1.
You can run your car for a week on what it takes to just start a M1.
The problem is that the USA can no longer be trusted.
We’re deep enough in that quagmire already, without digging ourselves in Further.
Additionally to what Graham said: Why do you think anything about the M1 would equate to more commonality?
Leopard 2 is made by the same company that makes Cr3, M1 isn’t. Leopard and Cr3 use the same fuel. All three use the same ammo. L2 and Cr3 have the same gun, M1 has a different variant…
Jon, as you say there are only two armoured regiments in FS, so you would have to fix that first.
Chairman Starmer 🐹🦄🌈 has no more to give.