Jump to content

Challenger 2 model question


Recommended Posts

Found the source of my info and it is correct the SB Pro CR2 is already modeled as the 74 ton combat weight

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=18881&page=4

Just scroll down to Ssnake post, the wiki must be out of date

It seems originally when released it was an error and modeled at the 62.5 tons but has since been rectified.

So CR2 commander are you suggesting a current 1200bhp engine and gearbox CR2 was compared to a MTU 1500bhp equipped CR2 and the original came out on top?

Whisky

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Off topic has anyone tried the the "Spin Tyres" demo? I advise you all too if you have not. While the graphics are good the terrain deformation and physics is just like nothing else. I am not often "blown away" by games any more as most just focus on amazing graphics which is impressive up to a point.....This on the other hand....:)

http://spintires.com/#!/demo

Dare I say "imagine that in SB Pro!!"

Whisky

The original demo came out around 2011, I backed their kickstarter when they put that up, it has been an interesting project to watch over the years.

@Darklabour: the 300 meters is a huge improvement from when the first demo came out and it was only in the dark and visibility was a few 10s of meters

Link to post
Share on other sites
@Darklabor: the 300 meters is a huge improvement from when the first demo came out and it was only in the dark and visibility was a few 10s of meters

I know. But still.

The technology looks promising, that's obvious. But it remains a post stamp sized area compared to an opened world engine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
62.5t is unladen weight. 64t with ammo fuel etc and full up weight with add on armour etc is a bit more!

Ref the CV12. That 1200bhp was when the engine control unit was the old DASCU. Its been upgraded the last few years to a new unit.

Believe it or not the CR2 has been trialled with a 1500bhp MTU. The CV12 CR2 was asked to slow down when doing X country comparisons.

Edit to add. I think the TN Brown gearbox had more to do with it than the engine.

hmm, so challenger 2 is actually 2 tonnes heavier than the CR1, and not just .5 tons heavier?

Link to post
Share on other sites
62.5t is unladen weight. 64t with ammo fuel etc and full up weight with add on armour etc is a bit more!

Ref the CV12. That 1200bhp was when the engine control unit was the old DASCU. Its been upgraded the last few years to a new unit.

Believe it or not the CR2 has been trialled with a 1500bhp MTU. The CV12 CR2 was asked to slow down when doing X country comparisons.

Edit to add. I think the TN Brown gearbox had more to do with it than the engine.

I read somewhere that it was only the Challenger 2E that received the engine upgrade to 1500 hp and all UK Challenger 2s are still at 1200 hp, is that true? If not, then when were UK CR2 engines replaced?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to make it clearer. No British CR2 have the 1500bhp engine. Just alluded to the fact the engines went head to head on CR2s. There has been a lot of trialing of new equipment for CR2 on the ATDU CR2s. Obviously not all have been taken to the Armys CR2, whether through cost or maybe a bit better than whats fitted but doesn't justify the new cost of replacing the older equipment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Challenger 2E was fitted with the europowerpack (MTU 883 with KA500).

The Challenger 2 is fitted with the CV12 and TN54.

The rumours about the new 1500hp engine had been around for a couple of years.

But to date, it's just unproven and definately wrong to my ears.

Here what the CV12 sounds like :

JC1mtAR5uK0

And here what the MTU883 sounds like :

dEP-ltelc9g

The MTU883 definately has a specific purr.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It certainly looks fearsome!!

I'm interested in all that electronic gear/various antennas on the rear of the turret, my guess is counter IED EW system.

No, Its for broadband connection, so that crew can access and update their facebook accounts ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, Its for broadband connection, so that crew can access and update their facebook accounts ;-)

Yup.

You only need that antenna fit in either Dorset or Wiltshire.

The reception is rubbish.

You need all that copper and fibreglass just to talk to your wingman.

:men_ani:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...