cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/2358675

Archived version: https://archive.ph/XEFSj
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230905152812/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/05/british-challenger-2-tank-destroyed-in-combat-for-first-time-ukraine-footage-shows

No Challenger 2 has been lost in combat since it was first deployed in 1994, although one was destroyed in a friendly fire incident in Iraq in 2003. The record is partly because of the relatively small numbers built and their infrequent deployment.

  • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.ukOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    That was my takeaway from it.

    We’ve rarely been involved in wars where a main battle tank would be key - probably the Gulf War but we hardly met any opposition there. They are designed for the kind of situations you encounter in world wars (a similarly equipped strong dug-in opponent) and the invasion of Ukraine is the first time they’ve been deployed on a, if you’ll excuse the pun, challenging battlefield.

    I can see how they’d be useful in pushing through the layers of fortifications the Russians have thrown up in the south but they are also much more vulnerable. If a drone can call in a missile on your position then a main battle tank has to be carefully deployed with a lot of support and countermeasures or it’s a sitting duck. Just bunging the Ukrainians a few Challenger tanks might not be enough.