Ukrainian tank crews have arrived in the UK to begin training on Challenger 2 Main Battle Tanks.

The UK will provide Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine alongside global partner nations – “demonstrating the strength of support for Ukraine, internationally”.

I reported last week that British Challenger 2 Main Battle Tanks will be in Ukrainian hands for use against Russian forces by the end of March, with Ukrainian troops beginning training on the tanks this week.

British tanks to be in Ukrainian hands by end of March

The information came to light after a Parliamentary written question was lodged. Rachel Hopkins, the Shadow Minister for Defence, asked:

“We also welcome the Tallinn pledge as an important statement of western unity and intent to provide Ukraine with the support it needs. The west is united and we move together at a vital moment for Ukrainian forces. We encourage the Government to continue to work with NATO and European allies to deliver the support Ukraine needs to face down Putin’s aggression. It is now our duty to make sure that Ukraine wins this war. Can the Minister say when he expects Ukrainian troops to begin their training with our Challenger 2 tanks, and when he expects those tanks, and the tanks being sent by NATO allies, to begin to arrive on the frontline?”

Alex Chalk, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, responded:

“I am pleased to say that training is expected to start next week on Monday. She asked when the Challenger 2 tank will be in theatre; the intention is that that will be at the end of March. Between then there will be a significant programme of training, not just for the tank crews who are to operate the vehicle, but for those who will be charged with maintaining it. I am happy to discuss that further in due course if questions arise.”

I talk about what the sending of tanks signifies here.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

68 COMMENTS

  1. Great news they are here to begin training. Hopefully the government decides another 14/28/42 tanks should be given ASAP so they can all arrive at roughly the same time. 14 is a start but not enough really.
    The uk current plans for upgrades leaves 80+ spare.
    Let the tanks do what they were built to do. Be free tanks, hopefully spare warriors are next on the list.

      • I’m making 80 US dollars for every hr. to finish some internet providers from home. I absolutely never thought it would try and be reachable anyway. My comrade mate got $13k just in about a month effectively doing this best task and furthermore she persuaded me to profit. Look at additional subtleties going to
        this article.. https://Americanliberty7.blogspot.com

    • More would be great, but I reckon just 14 would soon demolish the 1944 vintage T34s that Russia has just acquired from Africa 😆
      Apparently Ukraine organises it’s tanks in battalions of 31 tanks – hence the number of Abrams donated. So perhaps another 17 ultimately?

    • Now that the ball is rolling with tanks from several places, it would be a good gesture if we upped our commitment. As you say there are quite a few in reserve and I assume that those already committed are coming from there, to offer another company to get the numbers up to 28 would be a very positive move. It’s time we all stopped pussyfooting around with the Soviets and really fought fire with fire.

        • ✔️ ATACMS long range missiles asap

          Indeed, or Storm Shadow integrated onto their fighter aircraft. 500 km bunker busting missile with no export controls from other countries to worry about. 50 delivered against critical Russian infrastructure on/near Ukraine’s border on the eve of a combined arms counter-attack with all the Western tanks/other armour should be quite effective.

    • Agree. Apparently 31 Abrams corresponds to a Ukrainian battalion. We should be sending another 31 CR2s asap. We could then put pressure on Germany to send the same number of Leopards. With what has already been committed Ukraine could have 90 tier 1 western tanks to deploy by late March. If the promised US Bradleys and Strykers ( around 300 in total I think) can be got there the Ukrainians could mount one or two serious armoured spearheads.

    • I understood that those 80+ are for spares rather than as spares.

      That said it’s probably better to use them rather than keep them for the rainiest day.
      Also others have pointed out it’s much easier to fabricate spare parts as needed.

      • I wish the uk would just bite the bullet and either make new tanks or get a foreign tank.
        150 remade challenger 2 tanks might become a pain in the butt to operate at some point.
        A challenger 3 production line could see more export potential than pre 2022.

        • Hopefully the Chally performs well enough in Ukraine for a production line including domestic and export versions. Much more than what we sold to Oman for example.

          • As far as I understand it so far it’s getting a new turret, new sensors, engine upgrade, suspension tweaks among other items.
            If they took the challenger 2 hull design making small modifications where needed it should hopefully all work fine.
            Perkins still make engines, even a 1500hp version of the cv12.
            A cost comparison would at least be interesting to see. Using the experience gain to put into a new tank design.
            Germany has really shot itself in the foot with its leapord 2 restrictions. It’s still really hard to get an answer if new Abrams are made or if they are refurbished hulls.
            Most operators of soviet tanks will need replacements soon.
            If the government offered a 50/50 cost split with industry on development and brining to service standard it could help a lot. Really depends if industry wants to take part.

          • Problem with that is where is the money coming from. Either an increase is needed or something else would have to be cut. The defence budget is fully allocated and then some on top.

  2. All this optimism around the supply of our small batch of tanks with unique logistic issues along with the Leopards (it could be a wait for the Abrams) puzzles me.

    The extreme pressure for more tanks coming out of Kiev must surely imply that their existing stocks are depleted after starting the war with probably the best part of 2000 tanks and subsequently receiving several 100s more from former Soviet Union states last year.

    So the my question is what happened to all those tanks and secondly why will perhaps 100 to 200 western tanks be yet another game changer?

    • That may Western tanks are going to be extremely effective at kicking the door down on select parts of the Russian’s lines, that is obvious and shouldn’t need explaining. People like you seem to think that c.200 Western tanks will be spread evenly across the entire front.

      They Ukrainians clearly need armour for maneuver warfare once the weather turns. The hundreds of tanks they have captured from the fascists won’t hurt either, while presumably they have a lot of vehicles undergoing much needed deferred maintenance after a year of war

    • Even before the donation of western tanks, Ukraine currently has
      • more tanks than it started the war with
      • more tanks than Russia has in theatre

      So just as your prediction of an attack on Odesa from Kherson (just before the Russian retreat from Kherson) was hilariously wrong, so is your deduction about Ukrainian tank strength.

      Ukraine has quantity, adding Western MBTs add quality to this too. We’ve seen in previous wars how western MBTs tear though armoured brigades with Soviet-era tanks barely getting their paintwork scratched.

      • My personal Johnski favourite was Moskva has had a small self inflicted fire and has returned to port. That was a classic from a Putinbot when reality was she was a new artificial reef in the black sea.
        That one made me laugh so much I still need to go to the loo every time I think about it.

        • It’s funny coincidence that you mention the loo, because diarrhoea is what comes to my mind every time I see one of JohnInMosKva’s posts…

          • I will quote back to you your words from one of your posts yesterday, which seem to be entirely relevant.

            “Clearly debating is not your strong point, hence the decent into ad hominem attacks – which of course is always a sign you know you’ve lost.”

          • I won’t lower myself to debate with someone who thinks raping women and children is a valid tactic of war. Pointing out what a lowlife you are is not intended to debate, it’s an observation.

        • JohninMK (is it John in Magnitogorsk, not Milton Keynes) He must lap up those nightly talk shows that tell the Russian population that two strikes will sink the UK, and this time we will drive to the Atlantic with the lightest kick on the “Western Doors”. Go on John, you can tell us.

          • We are just a minor player that doesn’t warrant much comment. They regard only the US that matters as, along with the the rest of the World, they regard the West as being controlled financially by the US. Mind you Germany has generated a lot for the obvious reason of German tanks attacking Russians again.

      • Can you provide any evidence at all on your claims in the first para?

        Yes I, along with many others, got Russia’s plans wrong then and many other times.

        You need to get up to speed on just what kind of a war is being fought. You seem to be imagining that this one is like others in the past, it isn’t. It doesn’t matter which side they are on, tanks and other armour can’t “tear through” anything any more. Even with low airpower risk, there is too much out there watching and hunting them. This is an artillery/ATGM/drone, not armour, war. Think hi-tech WW1.

        This is the discussions on here about the future role of tanks, as well as helicopters, made real.

        • Yes but I’m not providing them to an apologist for rape and cold blooded murder if civilians.

          Hilarious you think I need to get “up to speed on just what kind of a war is being fought” yet you admit that you keep getting Russia’s plans wrong!
          You’re obviously up to speed but going in the wrong durection 🤣

          If tanks and armour as so useless, why did Russia base its entire invasion of Ukraine on using them? Only later to revert to WW1 style artillery bombardment when their tanks were massacred by their idiotic tactics, and the use of Javelin/NLAW.
          Speaking of which, if Russia had Javelin/NLAW then I might be concerned but they don’t, and even if they did they’d probably screw up with more idiotic tactics.

          As for Russian artillery, given they have to do area bombardment to hit anything, so long as Ukraines tanks don’t bunch up like Russians ones, then they should be ok.

          Iranian drones? Well they’re getting swatted out of the sky daily now, more get downed by the Ukrainians than ever reach their target.

          As for airpower, you can’t provide CAS from another country and at the moment the Russian Air Force is too frightened to fly into Ukrainian air space. If they do attempt to provide CAS there’ll be more aircraft downed than tanks destroyed.

          BTW pretty sure Ukrainian armour tore through Kharkiv and Kherson, routing the Russians orca in the process. The speed of those collapses were phenomenal, possible new Guineas World Records 🤣

        • John’s fishing again ! He’s trying to goad someone who might have some up to date knowledge of western tanks to spill something . Tricky sort is our Johnny boy !!

        • Your knowledge of military SOPs both at strategic and tactical level continues to be as limited and vague, as your previous 12 months of propaganda predictions. Give yourself a tea break troll farm boy!

    • If you have to ask that question, then you’ll never know. Which isn’t really surprising in your case.

      You do seem very exorcised over the NATO standard MBT’s being supplied to Ukraine, you’ve been very busy with your deflection and misinformation. Intimidated by the probability of more Ukrainian advances??

    • JIMK wrote:

      “”All this optimism around the supply of our small batch of tanks with unique logistic issues along with the Leopards (it could be a wait for the Abrams) puzzles me.””

      Not only does the supply of heavy armour to the Ukrainians afford the ability to surpass the capabilities of Russian armour, but it sends the message to the Ukraine, that they are not alone.
      JIMK wrote:

      The extreme pressure for more tanks coming out of Kiev must surely imply that their existing stocks are depleted after starting the war with probably the best part of 2000 tanks and subsequently receiving several 100s more from former Soviet Union states last year.

      No it doesn’t, the current crop of armour that the Ukrainians are fielding are exactly the same vehicles that they are facing, which means they just as vulnerable to top attack ATGM . The supply of Western armour mitigates a lot of that vulnerability seeing as Moscow does not possess a top attack ATGM such as Javelin/NLAW, which will afford the Ukrainians the ability to advance into Russian occupied areas at less risk than what the Russians are capable of.
      JIMK wrote:

      So the my question is what happened to all those tanks and secondly why will perhaps 100 to 200 western tanks be yet another game changer?

      Depends how they use them, and if used in conjunction with supporting arms (something the mighty Russian Army has failed to achieve) The Ukrainians should be able to punch their way through Russian defensive lines. 

      • Thanks Farouk.

        I suspect that the last thing that Ukraine thinks is that they are alone. The continuing flood of money and equipment should prove that.

        But I’m not sure why there is such a strong view here that a brand new, totally updated T-90M is surpassed by the old Challengers and Leopards. Or that the T-90M and the T-72B3 (2022) are in any way exactly the same as Ukrainian vehicles. Probably the best tank there, a near equal to the T-90M is the Ukrainian T-84BM Oplot that was better than the T-64BM2 Bulat.

        https://i.servimg.com/u/f12/20/35/00/30/t-8410.jpg

        As to ATGM, the Kornet seems to have been pretty effective against both Leopards (Syria) and Abrams (Yemen) so I assume the Challenger too. The Russian tactic seems to be to use artillery guided shells and long range helicopter launched missiles with squad ATGM as a backstop. It worked very well for them when facing the attacks of the UA in Kherson in the summer.

        I agree that it all depends on how they use them, gut also how familiar the crew is with them. In the past few months we have seen very little Russian armour in action, due in part to mirrored vulnerability to artillery but also as the Russians continue to be not trying to move forward much, seemingly preferring to let the UA come to them. The best example probably being Bakhmut which is slowly being out flanked..

        • JIMK wrote:

          “”But I’m not sure why there is such a strong view here that a brand new, totally updated T-90M is surpassed by the old Challengers and Leopards. “”

          What a lot of people (especially the media and social media wonks) fail to recognise is the huge disparity between Russian and Western MBTs. (Note the Chally 2 is not old, out of the 5 NATO tanks it is the youngest brought into service in 1998)

          As mentioned before the Russians under Khrushchev ended their love affair with heavy tanks (IS2-IS10) The T54/55 was seen as medium tank and the T62 was simply an extension of that line. The T64 when it came out allowed the Russian army to circumnavigate the ban on heavy tanks by placing the main gun of a heavy tank on a vehicle smaller than the T55/62. The T72 which followed is simply a cheaper (and less problematic at the time) tank than the T64 but based on the chassis of the T64. The T80 is directly based on the T64 and the T90 is based on the T72.

          Now here’s where things become interesting, the T64 is a smaller than the T55/62 family primarily to the use of an autoloader, that allowed the crew to be reduced to 3. The problem there was in order for that autoloader (and subsequent iterations of it) the ammunition it requires is placed around the bottom half of the turret and any penetration of the hull can lead to catastrophic detonation.

          The Russians realised from 1982 (Lebanese war) that the T72 was vulnerable from APFSDS (in this case the Israeli M111 which in itself was an improved version of the US 105 mm M735 APFSDS) rounds. So they started fitting Explosive reactive armour (ERA) onto their armour, in which to try and increase the protection on their smaller main battle tanks. But and a big but, in 1991 (and 2003)  Iraqi tanks fitted with ERA proved unable to stop APFSDS rounds (in a large number of cases with the round going in one end and going out the other) Moscow took note and tried to improve their ERA by fixing a metal plate on top of their ERA which when activated pushes the plate into the round, underneath the boxes is placed rubber which is designed to impede the round further. Which is where NATO decided to bypass such armour by designing top attack weapons where the weapons targets the weaker top armour.

          Lets not forget the ergonomics between Russian and Western tanks. Due to the small size of the T64/72/80/90 Soviet doctrine during the 80s was that nobody taller than 5 foot 4 could be tank crew (yup Soviet tanks are really small inside)  then there’s the paucity of vision slots for tank crews, which doesn’t afford them the situational awareness required for them to not only do their job, but to stay alive on the battle field.

          Western Tanks are much larger and roomier inside, affording comfort and a better work environment than that found inside Soviet tanks. As a rule Western tank crew are afforded more numerous and much superior vision slots. The electronics fitted are also of a much higher calibre than that found inside Russian armour. And then theres the kicker.
          Russian T64/72/80/90 tanks come in between 41 to 45 tonnes in weight. A Challenger 2 comes in between 65 Tons and 75 Tons. That means a lot more armour  and a lot more armour than found on Russian tanks Have a butchers at the pictures below of :
          1)    T62 Larger than a T64/72/80/90 and a Challenger 1
          https://i.postimg.cc/RCs0H6hX/17758471-10155190730395842-7021919653899445680-o.jpg
          2)    M1 Abrams and a T72
          I’m not saying that the T90M is pants, but when it comes to the big three NATO tanks:
          A)    Leopard 2 (A5 onwards)
          B)    Challenger 2
          C)    M1A2
          It is heavily outclassed in every field going.

          • You are simply playing to his wishes for snippets of information that might be useful. I’d simply say…lets see my dear Johnski…lets see if your vaulted T90 stands a cat in hells chance when the sabot rounds start flying.

          • With regards to explosive reactive armour (ERA). Newer armour piercing fin stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) or Fin for short. The dart part of the sabot, has become in effect a two piece dart. Where the shorter first section of the dart is sacrificial and has been designed to specifically activate the tank’s ERA. Thereby leaving the second longer part of the dart an unimpeded view of the tank’s armour.

            The majority of Russian/Soviet T-series tanks have become overly reliant on ERA. Which is a cheap and lower weight option of armour to defend the tank. However, once this is gone it is then left with the steel primary armour. The T-series do use composite armour. That uses a mix of steel plate arrays, rubber, air and in greater quantities ceramics (T90M). However, to defeat a Fin round’s long dart. You really need spaced armour, that over-matches the length of the dart.

            A lot of these darts are over 650mm long. So in effect you would need an air gap between the spaced armour of at least 700mm., with more being preferable. This distance is critical. As the first armour to be penetrated imparts a yawing force on the dart. So that when it hits the second part of the armour. It hits at a more oblique angle. Which means the line of sight armour thickness has increased. So hopefully there is enough “thickness” to stop the remains of the dart.

            The reason that spaced armour works better that solid or arrays. Is due to the velocity of the Fin. When it hit the armour. The speed interaction means the tank’s armour acts more viscous in nature, as it is generally a softer material (hardened steel) than the dart, which can be depleted uranium (DU) or a tungsten alloy.

            The DU dart has a better self-sharpening attribute when it passes through armour compared to a tungsten dart. Although South Korea have now developed a tungsten dart that can also self sharpen. Performance wise the heavier DU dart will still outperform the lighter tungsten one.

            This is something I witnessed during Guif War 2. Where Iraqi T72s had their turret armour ripped apart by Fin rounds passing through. With a neat hole straight through the steel arrays in the turret cheek next to the main gun, supposedly the thickest part of the tank’s armour. I won’t describe what was found inside. Which is best left alone!

        • JIMK wrote:

          ”As to ATGM, the Kornet seems to have been pretty effective against both Leopards (Syria) and Abrams (Yemen)”

          The Leo 2s which Turkey lost at the battle of Al Bab was primarily due to poor tactics (Due to the purges the dictator for life carried out on the military ) Also the Leopard 2s Turkey uses are the A4 which was built between 1985 and 1992. It main remit was to face the masses of the Warsaw pact tank armies, and so its main armour is at the front (Hence the slab front) with weaker armour at the sides and rear. That weakness was rectified in the A5, A6, and A7 variants. The videos I have seen of Leopard tanks heading towards Poland on trains reveal A5 onwards.

          As for Abrams in Yemen having trained (And worked alongside) Arab armies, Not only are they of a lesser quality than the ones used by the US (All US armour are fitted with DU armour) but the quality of Arab soldiers isn’t anything to write home about,

          Yes the threat of missiles is real and the Russians do have a lot of them. Which is where tactics, training and the use of combined arms comes in. As I mentioned above , it’s something the Russians haven’t perfected, which might explain why so many videos can be found of lone Russian tanks going off into the FEBA (Not a smart move)

        • JIMK wrote:

          “but also as the Russians continue to be not trying to move forward much, seemingly preferring to let the UA come to them. The best example probably being Bakhmut which is slowly being out flanked..”

          To be fair, the bunfight around Bakhmut is nothing to write home about from the Russian POV.. The entire area in front of the city is flat and Moscow has been at the coalface there since the 1st of August 2022. That is 6 Months.

          Allow me to put that into perspective, Russia with a huge advantage in men, and equipment over the Ukraine has spent more time trying to take 1 city than
          1) It took Germany to take Poland and Western Europe combined.(11 Weeks)
          2) It took Russia to defeat Finland during the Winter War (3 Months)
          3) it took Isreal to defeat the Arabs (7 countries) in 1967. (6 Days)
          4) It took India to defeat Pakistan as a nation in 1971. (13 days)

          Since the 1st of August Moscow has expended an inordinate amount of time, effort, men and equipment to take Bakhmut. If they take it, it will set a new standard in pyrrhic victory’s anybody who tries to claim it is something to brag about is a fool and yiu yiu know what they say about a fool and his life…easily parted, which sums up the Russian attempt to take Bakhmut.

        • You know everytime you say thanks to someone I get the nasty feeling you think they have divulged some info useful to putins rabble!

        • Chortle. What a fool. The facts are undeniable Chally 2 has faced Russian tanks before and destroyed hundreds of them for zero loss. T90 isn’t available in huge numbers but isn’t going to prove a problem. Getting hit by a sabot round from upto 5 miles away will lead to the Russian tanks…your tanks…cooking up.
          Lets see if you think the T90 thoroughly modern Ruskie tank is as good as you say shall we Johnski. Answers on a postcard from the Kremlin coming soon.
          Russia my dear Johnski is like a spoilt brat, they want and expect everything to go their way without any consideration that the enemy you’ve chosen to invade, murder, rape, loot and pillage might just be playing to a different hymn sheet.
          You started the war. You’ll have to forgive the Ukranians for finishing it. Their way. On the battlefield. With Western and allied nations support. You don’t like it. Tough.

          • The issue you have to face is that this war is not like previous wars. In particular it is, as I have said, very unlikely that there will be tank on tank battles other than in very low numbers. The tank is up against ATGM as its main enemy.

    • You don’t seem to have much of a feel for tank tactics, John. The super heavy Challengers will be used much as knuckle dusters to the face in a bar brawl. The lighter Ukranian tanks, combined with infantry, will then swarm over the downed body and force a breakthrough. The local Russian infantry will then feel themselves flanked, and run.

      • Spot on John, I don’t and you are right, it will, to a great extent, be down to tactics. For Ukraine’s sake I hope you are correct. In their favour is that it is estimated that there are a greater proportion of tank crews still surviving compared to say infantry (so a lower proportion ob conscripts) and some of those are now here in the UK for intensive training.

    • One of the reasons Ukraine pushed for tanks so hard is once they are supplied it allows the push to move onto more sought after weapons.

    • OMG gutted I missed this conversation, a few days late not much to chat about, but, what garbage your lips flap. Quality western tanks, added to the quality crews with the most tank experience of any nation since WW2, equals absolute disaster and death for your fav scumbag invaders from Nazi Russia. You bump your gums with so much desperate propaganda and nonsense you have been for quite some time, and continue to be, the site joke. Come on troll farm boy, you and esteban are the sad and desperate losers we love to laugh at, cheers.

  3. I do wish the f-ing idiots at the MOD would stop with the media stories like this and concentrate on their full time job

  4. On Sky News today it seems the US General going public about the state of the UK armed forces especially the army has struck an accord more than any of our general staff have. Probably because they seem to only go public about the perilous state of our armed forces after they have retired and left their politically sensitive gravy train posts.
    Seems BW has made it clear to Sunak and Hunt/ bean counters at the treasury that the revision of the integrated defence review is going to mean the Army especially is going to need to be sorted out.
    It’s going to cost billions, but is long over due. Just a pity none of the responsible people in the MOD are accountable for the years of blundering, ineptitude and wasting of billions £ of taxpayers money with little to nothing to show for it.
    All we have had since the mid 1990s are cuts, cuts, cuts. That has to end, the military need to be drastically increased in firepower, uplifted in personnel numbers by 10-15k for the army and recapitilised in equipment. Crucially supply chains for spare parts, repair and ammunition need to be secured and sovereign delivered. That is probably the greatest lesson from the Ukraine war…resilience and endurance Vs peer opponents.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here