Holding one of the huge rounds of ammunition used by the Army’s upgraded Challenger 3 tanks, I can tell you one thing: they sure are heavy.
The one in my hands is nearly 2ft long and weighs about 20kg. I’ve avoided the embarrassment of trying to pick up the 30kg variant.
The gun on the Challenger 3’s new turret is so powerful that it can fire these rounds at targets three miles away – further than any other tank in the world – and destroy them in one hit.
The hulls are recycled from Challenger 2s made in the 1990s. But they are being completely stripped down and rebuilt with cutting-edge technology for their four-person crews. I’m not allowed to look inside because the designs are classified.
Some experts question whether tanks are still useful in the age of drone warfare. However, at the Defence Vehicle Dynamics event in Bedfordshire this week, officers insist the 148 machines will be worth their £5.4m price tags.
Exploding reactive armour
Major Colin Macintyre, who fought in tanks during both Gulf Wars, has been overseeing trials of Challenger 3 at the Army’s Bovington and Lulworth bases in Dorset for 18 months.
“If I had to go to war again for my country, the only tank I would go in is Challenger 3 – and that’s not bullshitting you,” says Macintyre, 60. “The new armour on this tank is the best in the world.”
Indeed, personnel explain that if its “explosive reactive armour” is hit by enemy fire, this immediately triggers an outwards blast to deflect and degrade the incoming munition before it can penetrate the tank and harm its crew.
Another officer, Major Joseph Murray, says Challenger 3 spots threats such as rocket-propelled grenades and automatically fires protective countermeasures to disrupt them with clouds of shrapnel.
The shell I’ve been holding – painted blue to thankfully show it’s a dummy – is a fin-stabilised discarding sabot, intended to destroy enemy tanks.
“The top bit comes away to reveal a very sharp dart,” says Murray. “It’s really hard and dense, and really fast, to punch through armour. This one is made from tungsten and cobalt.”
So why do some experts believe, despite all this technology, that tanks are already obsolete?
‘Tanks still a battlefield necessity’
Challenger 3 was ordered in 2021, months before Vladimir Putin ordered Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Since then, however, the advancement of drones has radically changed how wars are fought.
One of Ukraine’s top generals recently admitted his forces were making “virtually no use” of armoured vehicles, including Challenger 2s donated by the UK, as they are too vulnerable to drone attacks.
In a recent interview with The i Paper, retired US general David Petraeus – who commanded allied forces in Afghanistan and Iraq – said tanks are now “find it difficult to survive“. He believes the UK should take the “revolutionary” step of “not just giving drones to a tank unit, but actually replacing it”.
Yet Macintyre firmly believes Challenger 3 will be “a necessity on the battlefield”, insisting: “I couldn’t imagine the British Army without tanks.”
“Everyone’s talking about drones,” he says, “but a tank has a presence on the battlefield like no other vehicle. It’s got the ability to destroy anything that’s in front of it, to take ground that a drone cannot take, for the infantry to come up and hold the ground with us, and then go forward.”
No anti-drone equipment – yet
Nick Berchem agrees. He works for RBSL, the partnership between BAE Systems and German firm Rheinmetall, which is producing Challenger 3, and was deputy director for the programme until recently. He previously served in the Army for 32 years, with tours in Iraq and the Balkans.
I’m surprised when he points at Challenger 3 and admits: “There’s nothing on this tank that’s specifically designed to counter drones, because when we designed it, that wasn’t a thing.”
Isn’t that an oversight?
Other systems could “easily” be installed on Challenger 3, Bercham says, such as radar and AI software to detect drones. But so far, the Army has not requested any, and if they are ordered now, it would delay delivery.
The officers do not seem concerned, though. Murray explains other armoured vehicles, such as the new Boxer, will be fitted with anti-drone technology to fight alongside Challenger 3 and protect it. This means the tank can focus on other threats.
War with Putin is ‘more likely than ever’
Another armoured vehicle on display at the UTAC Millbrook track in Bedfordshire is Ajax. It has been plagued by faults, making soldiers sick from noise and vibration during tests.
The Army believes the problems have been solved and trials resumed in April.
But there have recently been concerns that upgrades to the Challenger 3 gearbox, which makes the turret turn, could push back delivery of the tanks – scheduled for next year – until 2029.
Berchem is confident the gearbox won’t cause any delays. He says speculation has been “frustrating”. Overall, he said the programme has been “really quick”.
He has wider concerns about the Armed Forces, though. “As a country, we need to massively up our defence spending, if we’re going to be at war with Russia in the next five years.”
Berchem fears that a conflict with Putin’s military is “more possible now than it was ever when I was serving”.
Simulator training ‘increasingly helpful’
There are also concerns about training cuts for tank crews. Challenger 2s were due to conduct live fire drills and another exercise with Apache helicopters, but these are among “non-essential” sessions cancelled recently due to budget pressures.
Luke Pollard MP, minister for defence readiness and industry, says money must be rationed to spend on programmes such as Challenger 3. He argues that after years of cuts by previous governments, funding is also needed to buy ammunition and recruit more soldiers.
Asked by The i Paper how training cuts could be justified to tank crews expected to fight in harsh and dangerous conditions, Pollard acknowledged that training inside real vehicles and using their guns remains important, but said “synthetic” sessions using simulators are becoming increasingly helpful.
“That means you can deliver more training faster,” he said. “You can fire more times in the synthetic environment, more cheaply than you can in the live firing environment, which helps you hone your skills.”
The Ministry of Defence says a £15bn investment over the next four years will “deliver the best kit” and is “increasing warfighting readiness”. It will mean military spending rises to 2.7 per cent of GDP, “the biggest increase since the Cold War”.
Unfortunately, no amount of training or new technology can eliminate the hardships endured by tank crews at war, as Macintyre sums up from his desert experiences.
“It’s living in the filth that you’re in all the time,” he says. “It’s combating the heat you’re subjected to and living with the cold at night. You’ve got no washing machines. It’s the repetition of the rations. It’s the tiredness of constantly being on guard.”
In those respects, tank warfare hasn’t changed much since the UK’s Mark I rolled into action 110 years ago during the Battle of the Somme. But top officers insist Challenger 3 isn’t yesterday’s weapon.
People ignore its capabilities “at their peril”, Berchem said. “When you need it, nothing else will do the job of a tank.”