Marine Corps too is retiring its tank units despite the major contributions they made in prior conflicts. Military historian Max Hastings argued in an editorial in the Sunday Times against feeling “sentimental” about a weapon of war he says is just as much past its prime as horse cavalry in the World Wars. This context has undoubtedly helped energize the opinion that the British Army would be better of doing away with the expense of both the shrinking Challenger and Warriors fleets and their upgrades entirely.īroadly, the critique is that tanks are both too difficult to transport to the battlefield, and too vulnerable to modern guided anti-tank weapons.Īrmy chief Sir Mark Carlton Smith recently characterized tanks as a “sunset” capability versus “sunrise” technologies such as cyber and electronic warfare. The UK may award a contract to a BAE-Rheinmetall joint-venture, but the projected cost has risen from £400 million to £1.5 billion just as the British economy enters a new period of decline due to Brexit and the Covid pandemic. For the Challenger 2, that includes a new engine uprated from 1,200 to 1,500 horsepower, modern fire control systems, sensors and computers, and a more conventional 120-millimeter smoothbore gun that can use the same ammunition as the Abrams and German Leopard 2 tank. However, both the Challenger 2 and Warrior have not received the upgrades of their American and German peers, and now badly need them if they are to remain viable through 2035-2040. (Photo by PA Images via Getty Images) PA Images via Getty Images Marines move into Abu Al Khasib, a suburb of Basra in southern Iraq. An Iraqi Sentry Post that was booby trapped is blown up near a Challenger Tank as 40 Commando Royal.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |