Challenger tank is shit

Give me an RPG and a tunnel to hide in. I'll impregnate the bitch.

No you won't.
Have you ever seen a leclerc from the back?

Attached: no homo.jpg (640x427, 75.22K)

Have you seen one from underneath?

I'm sorry Frenchie; I don't have X-ray vision. I still see no proof that your expedient surrender vehicles have even armor distribution.

Battle of 73 Easting.

Well there is an escape hatch under it that's for sure.

You can always IED it, no problem. You can IED anything.
Explosive and shovels are cheap.

Have you ever used an RPG facing up?

If a french men want to blow up a T-55 crewed by shitskins he uses a ERC-90 sagaie.
Anything else is a waste of resources. (French AMX-10 RC did the same against Iraq at a smaller scale, obviously. Does it mean an AMX-10 RC is equal to a M1A1? Or that the Iraqi were really really really shitty?).

Leclerc is actually the most modern, well armed, and well protected western tank. Which is pretty sad considering both Chinks and Russians came up with newer tanks after it.

That's only true up until the early cold war actually, which is why TDs and assault guns were still viable back then. Biggest predator of tanks today isn't another tank, it's a RPG, ATGM, bomb, a cluster bomb, an artillery shell, a missile, and an airborne autocannon. Even IFVs and stationary AT guns claim more tanks than other tanks.

All around protection helps you a lot more today.

The only major "tank vs tank battle" of the last 50 years was gulf war, where the enemy was stationary and using his tanks as pillboxes, which were underarmored and shooting training ammo

And daily reminder that pic related is more resistant to ATGM than a fucking chobham armor.

Attached: chicken-wire-plant-cloche-xl.jpg (500x500 550.43 KB, 77.81K)

...