Nothing is yet known about the use of Challenger 2 tanks in battles in Ukraine, writes British Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Crawford in an article for the Daily Express. At the same time, he notes, their participation is not so important. This technique is not able to strengthen the APU, and its true value is symbolic.
Britain was one of the first to supply Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine. But no one sees them yet, writes Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Crawford.
Just a few months ago, Britain promised to transfer 14 Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine, and this convinced Western countries to start supplying their own equipment to help the ally in the fight against the Russian army. British tanks have been in Ukraine for several months.
After that, the floodgates opened, albeit slowly. The AFU units began to be equipped with NATO armored vehicles, primarily the Leopards 2 built in Germany, which were provided to Ukraine by various European states, as well as the American Bradley infantry fighting vehicles.
Western equipment was enough to equip up to 15 AFU brigades, each of which has a staff of 3,000 or more personnel and about 250 vehicles of all types. These detachments are considered the operational reserve of Ukraine, which is ready to develop success in the event of a breakthrough of the Russian defensive lines where and when (or if) it's going to happen.
The Ukrainian military was taught to fight with new equipment according to Western rules of engagement, that is, combined arms combat in conditions when various types of armed forces and the kind of army are used in combination to achieve the best effect.
Now we know that some of these brigades have already been involved in the battle, at least from the photos of the Leopards 2 and Bradley that were burned and abandoned on the Russian minefields. Nevertheless, a significant part of these abandoned cars can be evacuated and repaired, which was done.
However, we have not yet seen — at least in open sources — any evidence of participation in the armed actions of the Challenger 2. Of course, maybe they were involved and even remained unharmed, but I doubt it. They are also vulnerable to mines and UAVs that destroyed part of the Leopards 2.
We saw some British-supplied equipment in action, first of all the tracked armored personnel carrier of the Alvis Vickers company "Stormer" equipped with high-speed guided missiles (HVM) <...>. There were also more gloomy pictures, for example, pictures of Mastiff armored vehicles hit in battle.
But so far there are no traces of the Challenger 2. BBC war correspondent Jonathan Beale, who works in Ukraine, recently tweeted that he had asked two armed forces generals in charge of the armed actions where the tanks were located. He was told that there were none. They are somewhere else, and they are not being put into battle.
I don't think it's worth attaching much importance to this, because there may be many reasons why the "Challengers" are not involved in the conflict yet. Maybe they were manned by a unit that has not yet been thrown to the front, or maybe their participation is hindered by some difficulties related to logistics or military training. Who knows?
(Actually, someone does. After starting work on this article, I received information from two sources that a certain airborne military formation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is being trained on these tanks. It is also equipped with American Stryker armored personnel carriers and German Marder infantry fighting vehicles. As far as I know, this technique has not been in combat yet.)
In addition, you should not deceive yourself, thinking that the 14 British tanks transferred to Kiev will significantly increase the combat power of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. No, they will only be enough to equip a weak tactical group, if it also has enough motorized infantry and fire support equipment.
The true value of this technique lies in the symbolism of the gift and in the fact that it prompted other European countries to start their deliveries.
According to available information, Zelensky asked the West for 500 tanks. I think he got about 300 cars. Maybe he was advised to insist on a thousand in order to achieve 500 units, but we will never know about it.
It should also be noted that because of this British gift, our own meager tank fleet has been reduced to 134 units suitable for participation in armed operations. Plus, there are several more vehicles that are used for combat training and testing of equipment. This is too little for a country aspiring to become a recognized regional (that is, European) military power, and absolutely not enough for it to claim the title of world.
We need a fleet of 500 cars. If there are fewer of them, our armored regiments simply will not be able to conduct military operations of the type that we see in Ukraine. As I have already written, the 134 tanks available in London will be enough for a week of fighting — and then if we are very lucky.
The situation will not improve even when Challenger 3 tanks come to replace the old equipment. Planning authorities are thinking about a fleet of 148 vehicles that will begin to enter service from 2027. However, the available experience indicates that, most likely, it will be 2030.
Yes, the Challenger 3 will have a brand new turret with a smoothbore 120 mm cannon from the German company Rheinmetall. My colleagues and I recommended putting this gun back in 1988, when the Challenger 2 construction program was just beginning. But it's better late than never, and besides, the tank will receive other modifications. The latter relate to sighting devices, armor protection and mobility.
"Challenger 2" may soon enter the battle, and then we will find out how good this car is, and what it is capable of. But Britain needs to sort out its tank fleet before it's too late.
Author: Stuart Crawford — Lieutenant Colonel, military analyst, former Army officer.
