Synopsis: The piece argues Ukraine has delivered a double-edged lesson: drones and modern anti-armor weapons can shred tanks, yet armored formations still help armies seize and hold ground when integrated with ISR, artillery, and combined arms maneuver. Against that backdrop, Britain’s Challenger 3 upgrade aims to sharpen lethality—most notably via a NATO-standard 120mm Rheinmetall smoothbore gun—while sustaining the fleet through a Rheinmetall-BAE partnership.
-The structural problem is scale. With only 148 Challenger 2s slated for conversion, the UK risks a tank shortfall in any major-power contingency, even if Challenger 3 itself is formidable.
Challenger 3 Tank Shortage Explained
Britain’s Challenger 2 tank has proven highly successful in Ukraine, as it has not only destroyed Russian T-90 tanks but also played a critical role in the advances made during the Kursk counteroffensive in an earlier phase of the war.
The performance of the Challenger shone an essential light upon what could be considered an “irony” of the Ukraine war; the successful use of drones, anti-armor weapons, and asymmetrical warfare has also been complemented by effective use of traditional Combined Arms Maneuver.
More traditional heavy artillery and mechanized formations have proven essential to both Russian and Ukrainian war efforts, and it quickly became clear that the arrival of armored vehicles such as Bradleys and tanks from the US and allied countries enabled Ukrainian forces to “take” and “hold” new ground in a way that more defensively oriented dispersed, dismounted, ambush-style anti-armor warfare could not.
Challenger 3 Is A Powerhouse in Short Tank Supply
These kinds of variables, on all sides of the tactical equation, have introduced lasting questions about the future combat value of tanks and heavy armor. The United Kingdom Ministry of Defence has decided to massively upgrade its high-performing Challenger 2 main battle tank into a “Challenger 3” variant, thereby improving the platform’s lethality.
The Challenger 3 incorporates a substantial upgrade to the Rheinmetall 120mm L55A1 high pressure gun, a weapon which the UK Royal Army has been testing in Germany.
The Challenger 3 is being built through a significant joint venture between two major defense companies, Rheinmetall and BAE Land Systems, and its main L55A1 120mm smoothbore Rheinmetall main gun is the same type that currently arms the Leopard 2A6.
An interesting essay in Army Technology describes the technological advances built into the Challenger 3 gun.
“The gun replaces the L30A1 120mm main gun fitted to the Challenger 2, which is unique among NATO forces in that it has a rifled barrel, a technique that spins the shell to improve accuracy and range,” the essay states.
Challenger 3 Force Size
The original fleet of British Army Challenger 2 tanks was cited at 227 vehicles; however, there have been maintenance and sustainment challenges with the fleet, resulting in fewer operational, ready or deployable tanks.
Challenger 3 Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Image: Creative Commons.
Challenger 3 Image Credit: BAE Systems.
An essay in Army Technology from 2024 stated that the UK only had 157 operational and ready Challenger 2 tanks.
This ready and deployable tank deficit might explain why the British Army is only planning to upgrade 148 Challenger 2s into Challenger 3 variants.
Therefore, despite the combat promise of Challenger 3 modernization, the British Army could easily find itself confronting a Main Battle Tank deficit in the event of major power conflict.
Deter Russia
While a force of 148 Challenger 3 tanks would be irrelevant, it seems insufficient to deter a potential Russian ground attack.
Although Russia has been immeasurably weakened due to the ongoing war in Ukraine, the country is reported by Globalfirewpower.com as having, at one point, as many as 12,000 tanks.
That certainly does not mean that many tanks are available, and an interesting Army intelligence report from last year found that Russia has “lost” roughly one-half of its active duty tank force.
Thousands of Russian tanks have been destroyed in Ukraine, yet Russia has historically been known for its ability to “mass” land power.
It would make sense if the British MOD were interested in greatly enlarging its tank fleet to prepare for the broadest possible range of contingencies.
Future of Tanks
This is particularly relevant in light of the two-sided, or somewhat contradictory, lessons from the Ukraine war. In one sense, the arrival of precision attack drones, improved ISR, and next-generation shoulder-fired anti-armor weapons such as the Javelin has “decimated” tanks in modern war.
Many have even raised the question of whether tanks were becoming obsolete, and the Marine Corps Force Design 2030 called for removing Abrams tanks from the Corps in favor of more drones, lightweight anti-armor weapons, and high-speed, maneuverable attack vehicles.
In yet another sense, however, tanks supported by sufficient ISR, drones, and long-range, high-fidelity targeting sensors have proven highly effective in Ukraine as well.
If properly employed and sufficiently fortified by drones, weapons, and supporting technologies, tanks can deliver massive “added value” in war by breaking through fortified defenses, challenging an enemy perimeter, and actually “holding” territory.
About the Author: Kris Osborn
Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Master’s Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
