Simulating the Challenger 1

[Kyle Harmse]

Hi all,

A question for you all: How would I go about simulating the Challenger 1 in SB? My knowledge of that tank is a little on the weak side, sorry, so bear with me

I'd start off with the Challenger 2, due to the very broad similarity it has with its predecessor in terms of armament and armour layout. From there:

1) what should I 'nerf' in the scenario editor's damage section? Commander's TI, I assume for one. Did the CR1 have an independent commander's daysight though?

2) Do you guys reckon that a BM-42M vs a CR2 adequately simulates the *odds* of a BM-32 killing or damaging a CR1?

3) Should I "crank everything up to 11" by giving OpFor the best ATGM they can carry, or even simulate AT-5s with TOW-2As?

I'm trying to suss out the merits and/or issues of the CR1 as a fighting machine in general, if anyone has two cents (British army vets' cents count double ) to add.

Thanks in advance

[Tacbat]

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=19290&highlight=challenger+1

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=20617&highlight=challenger+1

[Panzer_Leader]

My assessment, after studying the Challenger 1 as closely as any sane man who never served in one should (it's an emotional favourite of mine, not sure exactly why), is summed up here: http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showpost.php?p=260091&postcount=6

I've backed my conclusion by using the CR2 with L23A1 ammunition as a CR1 proxy in my 'Combat Team Flank Attack at Hamelin 1990' scenario here: http://www.steelbeasts.com/Downloads/p13_sectionid/268/p13_fileid/2581

Is it perfect? No. Is it as close as I think we can get with current version of Steel Beasts? Yes. Can you have fun pretending it's a CR1 while shooting up Soviet T-64Bs? Hell yeah! :gun:

[Kyle Harmse]

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=19290&highlight=challenger+1

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=20617&highlight=challenger+1

Thank ye kindly sir, my search-fu is weak clearly :c:

My assessment, after studying the Challenger 1 as closely as any sane man who never served in one should (it's an emotional favourite of mine, not sure exactly why), is summed up here: http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showpost.php?p=260091&postcount=6

I've backed my conclusion by using the CR2 with L23A1 ammunition as a CR1 proxy in my 'Combat Team Flank Attack at Hamelin 1990' scenario here: http://www.steelbeasts.com/Downloads/p13_sectionid/268/p13_fileid/2581

Is it perfect? No. Is it as close as I think we can get with current version of Steel Beasts? Yes. Can you have fun pretending it's a CR1 while shooting up Soviet T-64Bs? Hell yeah! :gun:

Reading some of your posts, its clear that the CR1 is close to your heart PL

Some general impressions of the CR1 (if I may be so bold):

1) It has quite a good armour layout, without many obvious weak spots EXCEPT for the driver's hatch, which appears to be a big channel through the glacis plate into the heart of the tank Any CR experts (Panzer Leader, I'm looking at you :-P) here that can tell me why its laid out that way?

2) Firepower is okay, given the constraints of a rifled 120mm. The L23 (any relation to the DM23 perchance???) doesnt look like its going to quite cut it (pun intended) against say a T-72B or T-80BV, buuuuuut HESH looks pretty good at causing mission ending hard-kills.

3) FCS is a major issue, from what I've read, in that it can be accurate but slow and awkward to use from a gunner's point of view. CAT trials anyone? I do know the Brits didnt exactly luck out in the offending competition but it is an interesting data point.

4) Mobility is a big improvement on the Chieftain, though the CR is a tad on the heavy end and 1200 hp doesnt compare that well to the 1500 hp of the Honeywell turbine or the MTU piston.

[Gibsonm]

Well from memory CR1 came last in the first CAT it competed in.

Then they did some work and it became a lot better

[Guest Killjoy]

Thank ye kindly sir, my search-fu is weak clearly :c:

Reading some of your posts, its clear that the CR1 is close to your heart PL

Some general impressions of the CR1 (if I may be so bold):

1) It has quite a good armour layout, without many obvious weak spots EXCEPT for the driver's hatch, which appears to be a big channel through the glacis plate into the heart of the tank Any CR experts (Panzer Leader, I'm looking at you :-P) here that can tell me why its laid out that way?

2) Firepower is okay, given the constraints of a rifled 120mm. The L23 (any relation to the DM23 perchance???) doesnt look like its going to quite cut it (pun intended) against say a T-72B or T-80BV, buuuuuut HESH looks pretty good at causing mission ending hard-kills.

3) FCS is a major issue, from what I've read, in that it can be accurate but slow and awkward to use from a gunner's point of view. CAT trials anyone? I do know the Brits didnt exactly luck out in the offending competition but it is an interesting data point.

4) Mobility is a big improvement on the Chieftain, though the CR is a tad on the heavy end and 1200 hp doesnt compare that well to the 1500 hp of the Honeywell turbine or the MTU piston.

Float like a Butterfly and sting like a depleted Uranium spitting Bee!!

[Kyle Harmse]

Float like a Butterfly and sting like a depleted Uranium spitting Bee!!

But have a jaw capable of taking the odd hook you're bound to take

[hoggydog]

Good Defensive positioning can go along way in keeping that glass jaw away from your opponent.

[Kyle Harmse]

Good Defensive positioning can go along way in keeping that glass jaw away from your opponent.

Certainly! Hull down, or with hull oblique to hostiles, certainly helps. The Leo and Abrams also have vulnerabilities in terms of their hull layouts, and the same general principles seem to apply. Point is, good defensive positioning is critical to keeping any tank alive

[Tacbat]

Which is great, until you have to counter-attack.

[Panzer_Leader]

Well from memory CR1 came last in the first CAT it competed in.

Then they did some work and it became a lot better

Yes, CAT87 I believe. That resulted in changes to the internal layout (not visible externally) that produced the Challenger 1 Mk 3, the final variant.