Having tanks, even if not in sufficient numbers is still way better than not having them at all. Countries which dropped tanks, like Belgium and Netherlands are now trying to join MGCS as, from Ukrainian experience, there is obvious need for them. Czech is looking for 77 new tanks, Romania, Lithuania and even Estonia are planing to get at least one battalion of 50+ tanks.mrclark303 wrote: ↑27 Jun 2023, 08:51 The point being, our 148 Chally 3 will likely never fire a shot in anger, so why bother??
None of Vanguard class subs also never shot in anger, fortunately I would say. Still it does not mean UK don't need them.
Not really. It should be 58, with 4 squadrons of 14 plus two in HQ. But current situation is far from that, mostly due lack of operational tanks with both KRH and QRH basically a Type 35 regiments (3x11 + 2) and only RTR being at full strength.mrclark303 wrote: ↑27 Jun 2023, 08:51 Slight correction ( I might be wrong) the allocation of tanks is being reduced to 50 per Regiment..
It is based on contract value, and so far apparently it is still on budget. For example Norway will pay 1.79 billion euros for just 54 tanks. For 148 UK would pay significantly more. Considering that main reason of only upgrading 148 is lack of money (as the Army actually requested 180-190), it is hard to see how any other option would be viable.mrclark303 wrote: ↑27 Jun 2023, 08:51 Is the Chally 3 price based on the forecast cost, or the actual cost, let's face it, we don't have a great track record here!
Isn't it case with any other platform? Not that maintaining Leo 2 or Abrams fleet would be much cheaper either.mrclark303 wrote: ↑27 Jun 2023, 08:51 I'll wager the price ends up being 'way more' when they are all delivered.