Challenger 2 - Big tank, big gun, hi-tech. However, unlike its peers, it is relatively slow (up to 25mph - or was that kph? - only compared to the 35 of the Abrams and the Leo). Its 120mm gun is of the rifled variety, not smoothbore, thus less muzzle velocity theoretically and not compatible with US ammunition. However, it is British and because it is so, I love it hehehe

Also has Chobham armor (2nd generation) which basically makes it the BEST PROTECTED TANK IN NATO.

So what if it isn't compatible with US ammo? as if the whole world should follow the footsteps of that country that in my opinion is waaaaaay tooooooo proud. (I'm being honest here. Not that I hate them it's just that they're too proud)

On the contrary, the Leopard 2A5/A6 and the M1A2 are arguably the best protected tank in NATO. The Leopard 2A5/A6 has probably the same laminate armor as the Challenger II and M1A2. The Leopard 2A5/A6 and Abrams also has the advantage in speed. You may have forgotten that the Abrams has Chobham armor, the later ones with improved Chobham (I heard the Yankee Chobham is somewhat different from the British Chobham) and DU armor to boot.

Logistics. You don't want to fight a war where your allies use a different kind of ammo. Those using the M256 / L30 gun can easily share their ammunition to each other. Thus, if a German Panzer unit is running low, it can share with a Dutch, Belgian, French, and American unit. Whereas the Brits would be using their own rifled ammunition. It's not a question of pride, it's a question of common sense. Same ammo means less logistics hassles. Everyone uses the same bullet, shell, etc. Besides, other NATO members have no choice: their biggest member is the USA, without which, NATO as a deterrent against the Warsaw Pact would've crumbled. "So what?" Hmph. Smacks of someone being proud now, isn't it?
BTW, if you want pride, then look at the British. Why do you think the Challenger II was fielded? National pride and jobs, not technical advantage. They could've upgraded the Challenger I with a smoothbore 120mm gun as used by the Germans and Americans, or simply bought the Leopard 2A4 which scored better in the results when the UK was looking for tanks to buy. Yet, it opted to manufacture the Challenger II because the MOD and the British people would raise hell on why the BA is using a German tank, as well as keeping people employed. The British taxpayer paid more in the end with the MOD's f*cked up procurement which is one reason why a BA colonel noted for giving a darn good speech before the Iraq war recently resigned . Now, who here has national pride?

I really don't know any specifics but Discovery channel says so & I don't think they're wrong considering that the channel is an American company. #:-) #:-) #:-) #:-)

The logistics part has a point but the British being more proud than the Yanks is quite not true. Yes they have national pride & stuff w/c makes them really arrogant but ask any political analyst, political science student, historian, or any plain old normal citizen who watches world events & all of them would say that the Americans are indeed tooooooooo proud of themselves. It's too obvious to be denied TOMAS! #:-) #:-) #:-) they think they can police the world eh?

Their hardware is excellent but their friggin' FOREIGN POLICY looks as if it came straight from HELL!!!!

I think SE Asian nations use Western equipment, like Singapore (I think) has something called a Stingray, a light tank made by Cadillac Gage for export. It's small, but packs a punch, and is more reliable than Soviet tanks.... Also easy to upgrade and maintain.... maybe just the thing for us too!

The Japanese have the Type 90 - great tank, but there's not much on it. It looks a lot like the Leopard 2. Their Type 89 IFV is also pretty nifty, but again there's not much on it. South Korea has the K1A1 - a homegrown tank that looks a lot like an M1 - and the KIFV, essentially an upgraded M113. North Korea has mostly Cold-War vintage tanks like the T-55 - but they sure got lots of 'em!

China makes its own tanks - its first few like the Type-59 and -69 were cheap copies of Soviet tanks, but their latest Type 96 and Type 98 are world-class vehicles.

India has the Soviet T-90, and the Pakistanis have their own Al-Khalid tank...

Chinese tanks are basically Soviet-era copies. But their latest has the world's first battlefield combat laser AFAIK. The laser's purpose is to blind the eyes of infantry, particularly ATGM units.

Rumor has it the latest Chinese tanks will have 140mm guns. If they do pop out, be ready to see L55 armed or even 140mm armed Abrams, Challengers, Type 90s, and others.

Lasers intended to blind Infantry? won't that be like giving away your position?

The K1A1 looks like an abrams with steeper angles.

The Chinese tanks are Russian copies.

Lasers intended to blind Infantry? won't that be like giving away your position?

I think Germany already thought of that............

To illustrate: a regular APFSDS (i.e. not the special 'Silver Bullets' used by the Yanks) fired from an L55 has the same penetrating power as a Silver Bullet fired from the M256. This is due to the increased muzzle velocity of the long gun.

You can only do so much with longer guns and better ammunition, so they decided to go for larger calibres like the 152mm rumored to be used on the T-95 and Black Eagle, or the 140mm for the Chinese.

L55? is that the gun on the Leo 2A6?

152 mm & 140 mm guns are on the way? So I guess they'll be using autoloaders.
Just think of it, a regular main gun that is almost as large as a howitzer..........that's huge

Regarding lasers:

High intensity lasers can actually be used to blind infantry. The problem with our concept of the laser is that when we think about lasers we think about Star Trek and Star Wars. NO, it doesn't work that way.

Lasers are unidirectional beams, unlike the light bulbs that we know of that are usually omnidirectional. While when you flash your light bulb the light radiates and goes everywhere, lasers travel in an absolutely straight line. So unless you're the person being targetted by the laser, you won't see its source. Game over.

Smoke actually gives away the position of the laser. Try this experiment at home with your bangketa-bought laser pointers: while the beam is on, puff smoke or powder or whatever along the expected path of the beam. The beam will become visible. I think you've seen that in movies already. That will be the only way one can figure out the general direction of the beam without being the target.

In general, only visible lasers (lasers in the visible spectrum) could damage the retina. High intensity infra-red and ultra-violet lasers won't blind you, but they could probably burn you or make you infertile.

A similar weapon, albeit not a laser, was described in Tom Clancy's "Debt of Honor." A bazooka type shoulder mount holds the main body of the weapon, which characters John Clark and Ding Chavez snuck into a hotel room labeled as photography-related lighting equipment, near the Tokyo International airport where Japanese (the antagonists in this particular novel) AWACS refuel. While the AWACS comes in a landing run, Clark simply points onto the cockpit of the plane. The pilot goes blind and loses control, crashing on the runway. I wonder if the Chinese weapon described above will be that effective.

Anyone here spotted that built Leopold at Lils Parksquare, pretty nifty job, whoever the modeler is, did to the kit.

What I actually meant about revealing your position is different from the Star wars concept. If a soldier stands somewhere & gets blinded by the laser, the guy near him (if there is a guy near him) would most likely see him & will also most likely get a general sense from where did the laser came from (north, south, east, etc......). And if the soldier gets blinded, he can still use the other eye to point out where he thinks the beam came from (unless he was blinded in both eyes of course). I hope I made myself clear.