Challenger 2 vs Leopard 2 A6. It's been long speculated and requested so in today's experiment, simulation gonna find out which tank is better. Both tanks are expected to see action in Ukraine so let's see, if the British or German tank is going to come out victorious. As a reminder, this epic film was done in CM Shock Force 2, a game series considered one of the most realistic strategy games out there for enthusiasts. This was a 30 vs 30 scenario.
That said if you enjoy epic short cinematic then don't forget to leave a LIKE! Combat Mission
► Quality Playlist: • ARMY CONVOY AMBUSH - V...
►Become a Member: bit.ly/2Ztf7c9
►Follow WarfareGaming: / warfare11gaming
►Official Merch: shop.spreadshirt.com/warfareg...
this isnt accurate, a leopard 2 commander would take a ridge, make his shot imediately use the tank mobility to fall back, avoiding get shot, and relocating... this statical positions shoting each other are not representative of a tank battle in modern warfare.
- a tactical advantage would have been not to bunch up tanks in one blurb, put to place them in a semi-circle, on a ridge and not to move towards enemy force. The side that would have used this tactic - would have won.
The start really felt like an eternity to destroy a tank
Yeah
shows how well made they are.
Abrams vs Leopard 2 next ?
Thank you, you used the challenger 2 for once.
Sorry but this is highly inaccurate, the challys armour alone would defeat anything thrown at it by the leopard, and the idea the challys main gun would be used up close is laughable, whoever put this tripe together has no real world tank experience. And to show that pathetic score at the end? Its cobblers, in fact any bundeswehr panzer officer would tell you so. They know what they're leopards can do, and they know how formidable the challenger is, 1 was dangerous, 2 is lethal and now chally 3 is on the way, the black knight will be an eye opener.
The fact that Ukraine is to "spearhead the offensive" with Challenger 2's "proves" the Generals see it that way!
Piña va piña viene los muchachos se entretienen. Se agradece el video Maestro. 👍😀
Wish for Abrams vs Challengers vs Leopards soon
Russians will be facing them both!
Не факт что они вообще дойдут до фронта
@@user-rb4hn6km7hThat’s cute…Russia is weak and it’s being proven
@@user-rb4hn6km7h but they will soon. Ukraine has lots of Leopard 2s.
@@kristelvidhi5038 если она их и получит, то очень тупо проебет
Good target for russian Kamikazee drone kaboom
accuracy of rifled guns vs faster smooth bores. faster shells superor to accurate shells.
Smoothbore guns are accurate too, they literally fire *fin stabilized* projectiles, with using stabilising fins to increase accuracy. This makes rifled guns useless.
@@xAlexTobiasxB Until you see what a 120mm HESH round can do.
Both vehicles have shoot on the move capabilities! Why are they stopping like WW2 style?
Only as accurate as the person inputting data. Challenger has longer distance fire capability. Unlikely scenario of head on attack.
But significantly less penetration power, because of the low muzzle velocity. Because of that the Challenger 2 has problems to penetrate modern armor.
Unrealistic because all of these tanks strike and kill with the first shot, but a funny animation 😀
They did hit with the first shot, but that doesn't mean all hits penetrate the armor instantly. Some parts of the front armor are very strong, so the front turret can absorb some hits. And yes it is unrealistic for another reason, because NATO tanks don't engage each other in the first place, let alone in such a plain conditions
Nice video. Wich soundmod are u using? Thx
HQS 5.0
Can you do a video with 15 Challenger 2's and 15 Leopard 2's against 30 T-90 tanks?😀
K2 black panther vs m1 abrams please
How is that possible challengers has more armor especially up front leopard doesn’t
Leoapard 2A6 has also very good front armor too, the Challenger only has better protected sides wih the use of additional add-on armor coveing the sides meant to protect against *missiles* and *RPGs* Then again the Leopard 2 can also be equipped with add.on armor protectin the sides too, some countries already using this kit for their Leo 2 tanks such as *Singapore, Indonesia* and *Turkey*
It is not about the amount of Armor but the Quality.! Chobham / Dorchester Armor on the Challenger 2 is said to be twice as protective as conventional armor steel, ( currently the best armor ). Whilst the Abrams has a similar Armor Steel as provided by British MOD designers,,, it is still not up to the Challenger. The Leopard is ordinary armor with explosive sections but overall it is not in the class of Challenger OR Abrams.
@@1arritechno Nonsense, if the Leopard 2 had "ordinary" armor as you say, it would weigh over 100+ tons you fool The Leopard 2 does in fact have modern composite armor too similar to the challenger and Abrams, and in fact even superior, as the leopard 2 was actually the first tank in the world utilizing modern NANO technology components to increase the strength of the armor. Spoiler: not even the challenger 2 had such advanced NANO technology in the armor, only the new Challenger 3 upgade will finally get upgraded with NANO tech armor too beginning in 2024, but the Leopard 2A6 already had this technology since 2004, decades before the Challenger 3 or Abrams got it. So no, the challenger 2 did not have the best armor anymore by today's standards. In fact even the Russian T90M already has better armor strength using the new RELIKT racive armor + the passive composite armor behind it, which gives the T90M similar or even superior armor protection than the Challenger 2. Yet another tank that has even better armor is the Ukrainian Oplot M / BM Oplot. It lliteray uses tiny EFP elements (Explosive Formed Penetrator) inside the reactive armor called "Nozh" (meaning "knife") it's the same EFP elements that are usually found in anti-tank missiles to penetrate armor of tnaks to destroy tanks, except in this case the EFP elements inside the Nozh armor are actually used to defend the tank, by destroying the incoming APFSDS darts instead (tank gun ammunition), so the armor can destroy any projectile by simply "cutting" the dart in pieces like a knife, wich gives the BM Oplot definitely the best kind of armor protection of any tank in the world. But there are currently not many BM Oplots in active service, only Thailand got 49 of those tanks from Ukraine, but the Ukraine itself doesn't have the BM Oplot yet because it is too expensive. However the Ukraine wants to start producing this tank now in more numbers starting this or next year, with the help of western financial support, so at leat now it can finally produce this expensive tank in more numbers soon
다음편은 K2 VS ZTZ 99 부탁드립니다.
Does anyone know how do I make chasing camera and other camera movements like in his videos in CTA editor?
Need to learn to use the functionality of the editor camera
@@warfare11gaming the camera feature is in the editor itself? thanks for answering
Name game pls
I have serious doubts it would go that way, the C2 is a tougher tank than the L2.
Also would have the first shot its current gun can out range the lepord by alot and it would use the squash head round first at that range
Nah it's just a game
Fehler in der Simulation! 1. Wenn man teilgedeckt wirken kann, macht man das. Hier fährt man über die Hügelkuppe - das ist Unsinn. 2. Der Leo II ist in der Lage aus voller Fahrt zu schiessen, deswegen würde man nie im „Schiesshalt“ stehen bleiben und sich nach Schussabgabe sofort in die Wechslstellung begeben.
Next time, do Polish PL-01 vs Russian T-14 Armata.
polish crap
that's weird thats never happened in warthunder 🙂
“It’s over Ana… oops, Leopard tanks, I have the high ground” Thankfully both MBTs are on the same side.. Let’s see what they can do against Russki armour
I want WarfareGaming to make a video called, the US Invasion of Venezuela by the US Armed Forces.
Like a story in WW II 😅
Yes the Szenario ist Bullshit for Modern Tanks. The Leo dont need to Star to Fire hey World stay moving the most time its a Hit and run Tank. This a Little kid work. Neuer waschen the Exercises of the Bundeswehr.
Which variant of leopard are you using in the video ?
Leopard 2A6
Challenger 2 is the only western MBT to remain undefeated in combat !!!
it never faced modern weapons anysway (except one time when it was hit by a RPG-29 in 2007 which DID penetrate the frontal armor, woundng the driver). Soon it will be facing more modern weapons such as the Kornet missile, when it gets used in Ukraine. This will be the first time that it will be tested against modern anti-tank weapons.
@@xAlexTobiasxBwhen has the leo 2 seen combat?
@@_sgtbash only some old Leopard 2A4 versions (from 1986) saw limited combat in Syria during Turkish operations in 2016. Of course the old tanks were not well protected against missile hits to the vulnerable side flanks (thes had no additional upgrades), so a few Leopards were destroyed by modern powerful missiles including Kornet and Konkurs (the Challenger never faced such powerful missiles yet) Indeed the modern Challenger 2 TES with the new side armor upgrade (very thick skirts since 2009 upgrade) would have performed better in this situation. However there are also upgraded Leopard variants with equally thick side protection too, such as the Leopard 2 Revolution used by Singapore and Indonesia (since 2013). Turkey also learned their lesson the hard way from the 2016 combat and started upgrading their Leopards with new modern side armor protection in 2020 to increase the vulnerable side protection against missile attack. And now the newest Leopard 2A8 and Challenger 3 versions will receive APS in the near future that can shoot down missiles to protect the tanks even more effectively against missile attack.
problem: artillery, mortars, missiles, smart munitions are causing all of the damage and creating the most casualities, as high as perhaps 80 percent. because of cheap surveillance drones, loitering munitions and real time reconnaissance provided by unmanned drones, most of the time the tanks and armored fighting vehicles are detected and hit before they can close the distance with enemy main force units- especially for the ukrainians, since the russians dominate in the volume of these weapons. a challeger 2, leopard 2, and m1 abrams are just as vulnerable to artillery and top attack munitions as a t-72; the battles need not play out like this with tanks moving up to their firing lines and start blasting, in fact they probably won't
Video games don't show the real truth of who the winner will be.
Por blindaje es algo más superior el challenger pero por el sistema de amunicionamiento del arma principal es más efectivo el Leopard, el Challenger se tiene que aminicionar con el proyectil separado de su carga de propulsión
Because a rifled cannon for a tank, it's rubbish. A smoothbore cannon is good
Noice 😀
I want to see challenger vs Russia T90
The simulation shows absolutely zero tactics. The guys with the better reach would start firing, the other guys would try to bridge the distance, possibly making several beelines. I don't presume to know anything about modern tank warfare, but this can't be it. It makes no sense at all for the tanks to stop moving. Once both sides engaged on a plain without any cover - would anyone do that? - any tanker with a will to survive would move sideways, accelerate, break, behave as crazy as possible, anything but stand around and make targeting easy for the enemy. Lots of effort was put in to the development of these tanks to allow them to fire while moving.
In theory, in a head attack like this in open ground, Russian tanks would be firing missile at longer ranges! Looking at the conflict in Ukraine though, tank on tank battles are very rare!
The open ground in Eastern Ukraine is covered in hills and forest,those missiles are useless
Which game is this ❤
Combat Mission Shock Force 2
Т-90 victory😂🎉
Imagen if you are on that betefild whit your gun
На самом деле этого никогда не будет. Леопарды и Челленджеры в руках воинов ВСУ будут работать против орды вместе и согласованно.
Тебя могилизуют, и ты будешь гореть в леопарде где-то под Бахмутом
What is the name of this game?
Combat Mission Shock Force 2
@@warfare11gaming thanks man, and your videos are great!
BEST LEOPARD-2 GERMANY👌
Kv-1 KV-2 Vs M1A2
Why would you for such a video on these times? Why not have a mix of both fighting Russian vehicles ???
Where is the execution of Russian soldiers at the beginning of the video, or 2 Abrams at the end of the video?)
es war sicher
Challenger 2 is not that weak. It is even stronger than Leo 2, and use a better 120mm main gun.
Name?
Combat Mission Shock Force 2
แล้วรถถังกระป๋องของจอมอสูรย์ปูตินจะรับไหวหรือเปล่า โป้งเดียวฝาชีลอยเลย
wrong simulation the British tank is the best armored in the world.
Challenger 2 has more frontal armour , Leapord 2 is lighter , l think it would be a draw for sure .
No that's not true. Challenger has a huge weak spot in the front hull, the big open gap where the driver's hatch is, completely revealing the turret ring. There is no armor at all. This is big disadvantage for Challenger, because any hit on this part will result in a penetration isntantly. At least the Leopard doesn't have such a big open gap in the hull front. The only part where the Challenger 2 is indeed better armored is the sides obviously, as it uses very thick add-on reactive armor covering the sides, which gives it better protection against missiles. Then again, the Leoaprd 2 can also be upgraded with additional add-on armor for the sides too, some countries already use this add-on armor for their Leo 2 including *Turkey, Indonesia* and *Singapore*
@@xAlexTobiasxB what about the huge shot trap under the mantlet of the Leapord 2 turret? That's a huge weak spot on top deck by driver if round deflects downward👇.
@@nighthawk8053 Shot traps don't exist in modern armor. The APFSDS projectile will penetrate the first layer of the armor anyways, it can not be "deflect" because modern projectiles are 1700 m/s at this Hypersonic speed metal becomes almost liquid. So that means the projectile will go inside the armor package anyway, but the armor arrangement is designed to "stop" the projectile inside the package, by gradually slowing it down with each metal plate (there are several layers of metal plates spaced behind each other inside the package, like a sandwich), until the projectile has finally lost its kinetic energy ("dissipating energy"). The big armor wedges on the Leopard 2A5/A6/A7 turret offer very good protection. Besides the gun mantlet is a weak spot on literally any tank anyway, not only the Leopard. Challengers and all other tanks will have a disabled gun as a result if the projectile hits the mantlet, but at least the crew may have a chance to survive the hit if the gun mantlet absorbs the hit.
@@xAlexTobiasxB there is not just metal plates there's ceramics and other materials sandwiched to make the armour. Its actually classified on most modern battle tanks . Yes a shot can be deflected at long range even today . Challenger still has longest kill ever in Iraq war at around 4,800 meters.
@@nighthawk8053 the other materials are meant to stop the HEAT jets from Missiles and RPGs mainly, but have less effect on actual solid APFSDS darts, this is where the metals plates matter most to stop a solid metal dart projectile. Anyway, the point still stands, there is no shot trap in modern armor because modern projectiles don't bounce anymore like they did in WW2, back then a single armor plate angled at some degree was enough to stop most projectiles because the ammunition used in WW2 didn't even have that much penetrating power anyway (less than 100-150 mm only) compared to modern projectiles penetrating over 500-800 mm armor (which equals to over 300 mm of solid angled armor at 60° which doesn't exist on modern tanks, because no tank in the world has over 300 mm solid armor, only mutliple thinner plates layered/sandwiched instead, which means that the first layer is not thick enough to completely stop modern rounds from penetrating the first layer. This means that moden KE projectiles with their extreme kinetic energy will always penetrate at least the FIRST layer of the armor arrangement, but how deep it can penetrate through the other armor plates depends on the arrangement of the armor design itself. This means that ricochet by default doesn't exist anymore, because the first outer plate of the armor is not even think enough to completely stop a round form entering the armor arrangement. There was only one exception during the cold War, for example when the Abrams and Leopard were deisnged in 1978, the upper hull front didn't have any composite armor, but only one single plate around 40-50 mm thin but angled at extreme angle 82° (almost horizontal) in this case the older Soviet Cold War rounds would have trouble penetrating the plate because of the extreme angle, so the round would ricochet. But this was only true for the older Cold War era rounds form the 1970's that didn't have enough penetration anyway (only around 300-400 mm penetration Power) so a single plate 40-50mm thin angled at 82° was enough to stop most projectiles back in the 1980, at this time deflecting still worked because projectiles back then were not as strong as modern projectile today. And even in that case it's still not considered a shot trap, because the round would just bounce off the upper hull front and go into the strong turret front armor which would absorb the rest energy of the bounced round (which aleady lost a lot of potential energy at that point so it's not a threat for the strong turret armor). But modern rounds that can penetrate over 700 mm will easilly go through even extreme angled upper hull front plate of the Abrams because it is only around 70mm thick (the latest M1A2 version), which is simply not enough to stop modern rounds anymore, even though it is still angled at very high degree. Afterall there is only so much a thin 70 mm plate can resist, it has physical limits at some point. There is this term called *"overpen"* or *"overmatch"* , basically it means that modern rounds have so much energy that they can easilly penetrate even extreme angled plates, if the plate is not thick enough (anything under 100mm simply doesn't suffice to stop modern rounds anymore, doesn't matter the angle) they will just go straight through Also keep in mind that modern rounds consist of multiple segmented pieces, so it's not just one single solid rod anymore but instead 2 or even 3 segments of rods, so if the first tip breaks, the other segemtns will still continue to travel a straight path throguh the armror. So even if the first tip deflects upon hitting the angled plate, the other segments behind it will push through and hit the already damaged part of the armor plate (the same spot that was already "softened up" by the first tip) and the other segments behind it will then penetrate the alreadey weakened spot in the amror. Similar to how Tandem HEAT charges work by hitting the same spot twice.
Yes, I agree with the result. The Rheinmetall 120 smoothbore cannon is better and more accurate than the Royal Ordnance L30 from the Challanger 2. The Challanger doesn't stand a chance and that's why the Americans have installed the Rheinmetall 120 in their Abrams. But, yes the Challanger is not bad, its a good tank!
Try a smooth bore shot gun against a snipers rifled Gun ;;; then think again. The Challenger Tank Gun holds the record for a distance kill - way beyond the range of Abrams or L2 in the real world. The Challengers Gun is more than capable of sending its projectile through a Leopard Tank & out the other side. Most of the hits by a Leopard at a distance wont penetrate the superior armour of the Challenger ; this Video is just fiction. Going over to smooth bore is all about Standardization of NATO weapons ( a Rifled Gun is also too expensive to make ).
@@1arritechno the L30 can shot at long distances but has significantly less penetration power, because of the low muzzle velocity. Thats the reason why the Challenger 2 has problems to penetrate modern armor. To increase the fire power of the Challenger BAE Systems installed a german L55 gun in 2006.
T54 vs leopard 2
reality big deferent in the game
10/10 english for a Russian supporter 🤡
Красивая бойня
Your tanks will end up like these lol
@@markolysynchuk5264 скули
who knows the challenger 3
LEOPARD 2, especially 2A7, is much better thak than Challenger tank.
'Challenger tank', yeah there's 3 of them bud.
German technology
A head on type of scenario would be an easy win for Challenger 2 with its superior Armor, but in a real fight where strategy is applied Leopard 2 has the advantage. This should be an easy win for Challenger 2.
Not really, the Chr 2 is probably a little bit inferior to the Leo 2A6 in terms of firepower and frontal armor, as the Challenger has a big weakspot in the front (the big open gap in the middle of the hull where the driver's hatch is, the turret ring is exposed without protection) which is a big disadvantage in a frontal duel against enemy tanks. And also the Chr 2 has slower reload speed since it uses 2 piece ammo, so the loader has to load 2 pieces before the gunner can shoot, which increases the reload time. But the Chr 2 is superior in another category: against enemy infantry, thanks to the additional add-on armor covering the sides, which gives the Challenger better protection against missils or RPG's (and this is a more important role in real life, because most of the time tanks engage infantry with missile and not tanks)
Yeah not how it happens. Open terrain the leopard twos have won The run and gun contest consistently for years. No tank sits there and fires while sitting still in open terrain with no cover.
Have my doubts this is that accurate to be fair; Chally has only ever lost one and that was Blue on Blue from behind. It's 99% impervious from the front. In fact the only thing that we know to be able to kill a Challenger tank is a DU shell. And only NATO use those; and even then only from behind.
Deutschland engineering 💪🇩🇪
Cringe
Also the Leopards are just naked amor, where as the chally has the additional streetfighter package on. Still i consider the L2 as lighter amored overall, esier to produce and to maintain. Thats what germany learned from ww2.
I doubt the L2A6 is lighter armored than the C2, but I agree that the are the best compromise of firepower, armor, mobility and O&M.
I think the russian turrets have to pop straight up 100' or so every time they're hit. That'd be spectacular. And more realistic tank explosions. Nice work otherwise!!
Iran-China coalition is the best way to defeat US political, economic and military doctrine against Iran and the Resistance Front
Динамики не хватает , а так бой отличный !! Но только не думайте что хоть один Натовский танк докатится до передовой ) Они просто сгорят раньше .
The Leopard 2 have much more mobility, better optics, gun is more powerfull.... so there is no reason that the Challenger could win.
Jb 888
Challenger has better armour
Challenger has better armor and longer range gun
Was für ein Blödsinn. Zu viel Iron hart gesehen? Keine Ahnung wie der Challenger eingesetzt wird. Der Leo ist ein Hit and Run Tank. Er würde in Bewegung bleiben und unter der Fahrt feuern und nicht Männchen vor dem Challanger machen. Warum schau ich mir so einen Amateur-Blödsinn eigentlich an.
Yu khe yu khe ok ok yen yen yen
What about a sino - russian border conflict?
Nonsense
War thunder Russia and Germany as well as the Americans are the big nations
🙏🇺🇦
bs
Currently, Russian weapons are the best weapons in the twenty-first century, especially the T-90 tank, the T-14 Armata, the Su-57 and the Mi-35.
You've gotta be fucking kidding. Like; really fucking kidding.
Pass me that glue you're sniffing
@@ryanelcock948 fr lmao whatever hes having i want some
The T-90 certainly not as this is just a better T72, which kept many of its flaws. Armata never made it out of fantasy land and MI-35 is just an export version of the old MI-24. So no, they are not. I have to admit though that I don't have a clue about the SU-57.
@Ronaldo Trumph 11 Su-57s have been built. 3 lost in accidents. They're a joke compared to western fighters. Russians consider the 5th gen whereas compared to a western aircraft, they're a 4th-4.5th gen.
Lol bias, totally unrealistic
The best weapons in the twentieth century are German and Soviet. The two most powerful armies in the twentieth century in Asia are the Japanese army and the Soviet army. In Europe, the German army and the British army.👍🇩🇪🇯🇵🇬🇧🇷🇺
The best weapons in 20th Century were NEVER Soviet and most of the German technology was over engineered and not practical in its application. First half of 20th C was Britain - Second half of 20th C was the USA . Remember the first Tanks were invented & deployed during WWI by the British. The USA in WWII , could mass produce all forms of Military Weapons on a Scale greater than any other Country in history.
LEOS brauchen nicht stehen bleiben, um zu Schießen. Also schon mal schlecht gemacht.