军事专家警告：英国新一代挑战者 3 坦克还没服役就已过时
正文翻译
Britain’s Challenger 3 Next Generation Tank is Already Obsolete, Army Expert Warns
军事专家警告：英国挑战者 3 新一代坦克还没服役就已过时
The Challenger 3 main battle tank currently under development to equip the British Army may suffer from obsolescence before it even enters service, according to a recent assessment published by former British Army officer and prominent defence commentator Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Crawford. Although questions have been widely raised regarding the sufficiency of the tank program, in particular its very small planned procurement numbers of 148 vehicles, Crawford’s assessment highlighted serious deficiencies with the capabilities of the vehicles themselves. The Challenger 3 has been developed as an enhanced derivative of the Challenger 2 that entered service in the 1990s, and “may represent the final iteration of a now obsolete design philosophy,” Crawford noted, adding that “current generation of Western main battle tanks, Leopard 2, M1A2 Abrams, and now CR3, are increasingly seen as too large, heavy, costly, and vulnerable to justify further development along traditional lines.”
英国陆军正在研发的"挑战者 3"主战坦克可能在服役前就已面临过时风险——这是前英国陆军军官、著名防务评论员斯图尔特·克劳福德中校最新评估报告提出的警示。尽管该坦克项目（尤其是仅计划采购 148 辆的极小规模）的合理性已广受质疑，但克劳福德的评估着重指出了坦克自身性能存在的严重缺陷。作为 1990 年代服役的"挑战者 2"坦克的升级版本，"挑战者 3 可能代表着已过时设计理念的终极形态"，克劳福德特别强调："当前西方主战坦克——豹 2、M1A2 艾布拉姆斯以及如今的 CR3——正因其体积庞大、重量超标、成本高昂且防护脆弱等缺陷，越来越难以证明延续传统发展路线的合理性。"
Threatening the survivability of the fleet, only 60 active protection systems are being procured to be shared by the vehicles which Crawford noted appears to pose considerable risks when considered the lessons learned from the Ukrainain theatre regarding the difficulties such vehicles face with survivability. Regarding mobility, Crawford observed: “The tank also retains the 1,200 hp engine of its predecessor, Challenger 2, criticised by Ukrainian operators as underpowered for its weight. If CR3 [Challenger 3] approaches 80 tonnes in full combat configuration, questions remain over its mobility and whether British Army recovery and bridging assets can handle it.”
威胁到车队生存能力的是，仅采购了 60 套主动防护系统供车队共享。克劳福德指出，考虑到从乌克兰战场吸取的教训——此类车辆在战场生存上面临的困境，这种做法似乎带来了相当大的风险。关于机动性，克劳福德评论道："该坦克仍沿用其前身'挑战者 2'的 1200 马力发动机，乌克兰操作人员批评其动力与重量不匹配。若'挑战者 3'全战斗配置下接近 80 吨，其机动性及英军现有救援架桥设备能否应对仍存疑问。"
“The traditional three-crew turret layout is outdated when autoloaders and remote turrets are widely available,” Crawford added, noting that future tanks “are likely to follow Russia’s T-14 Armata model, with crews enclosed in armoured capsules within the hull. This approach reduces the vehicle’s profile and weight.” China’s new Type 100 main battle tank unveiled on September 3 was a notable example of this, and was designed to prioritise crew protection, lightness and high mobility with a design widely considered to have responded to the prevailing trends seen in the Ukrainian theatre. The Type 100’s example, even more so than the T-14, is expected to be followed by future tank designs.
"传统的三人炮塔布局在自动装弹机和遥控炮塔已广泛应用的当下显得过时，"克劳福德补充道，并指出未来的坦克"很可能会效仿俄罗斯 T-14'阿玛塔'的模式，将乘员密闭在车体内的装甲舱中。这种设计能显著降低坦克的外形轮廓和整体重量。"9 月 3 日亮相的中国新型 100 式主战坦克就是典型范例，其设计以乘员防护性、轻量化与高机动性为优先考量，被普遍认为顺应了乌克兰战场上呈现的主流趋势。比起 T-14，100 式的设计理念更有可能成为未来坦克的蓝本。
Crawford’s assessment highlighted the significant advantages which Soviet, Ukrainain and Russian tanks have had over their Western counterparts, observing: “There is a strong case for a shift towards smaller, lighter, and cheaper tanks in the 45–50 tonne range. Such vehicles could feature remote turrets, crews in protected hull compartments, balanced armour coverage, and extensive use of APS and counter-drone defences.” This weight range encompasses all currently service Soviet and Russian tanks, where Western tanks typically weigh between 70-80 tons. Crawford’s arguments regarding the vulnerability of Western tank designs has been strongly supported by observations of the performances of the American M1A1 Abrams and German Leopard 2 in the Ukrainian theatre. Both types began to take heavy losses almost as soon as they began to see combat, and by early June 2025 the Ukrainian Army was assessed to have lost 87 percent of the American sourced tanks with 27 of the 31 vehicles destroyed or captured, while most of the Leopard 2 fleet had been taken out as early as December 2023.
克劳福德的评估凸显了苏联、乌克兰及俄罗斯坦克相较于西方同类型号的显著优势，他指出："有充分理由转向 45 至 50 吨级更小、更轻且成本更低的坦克。此类战车可配备遥控炮塔、乘员位于防护性车体舱室、均衡的装甲覆盖，并广泛使用主动防护系统和反无人机防御系统。"这一重量范围涵盖了所有现役苏俄坦克，而西方坦克通常重达 70 至 80 吨。克劳福德关于西方坦克设计脆弱性的观点，从美制 M1A1 艾布拉姆斯和德制豹 2 在乌克兰战场的表现得到了有力佐证——两款坦克几乎投入战斗后便迅速遭受重大损失。截至 2025 年 6 月初，乌军评估损失了 87%的美援坦克（31 辆中有 27 辆被毁或缴获），而豹 2 坦克群早在 2023 年 12 月就已大部损失。
After summarising the program’s shortcomings, Crawford concludes: “That raises a strategic question: where does Britain go after Challenger 3? Some argue that with such limited numbers, the UK might be better leaving the tank business altogether. Others contend that a smaller, more affordable design could restore credible mass. NATO allies face similar dilemmas as they plan successors to Leopard 2, Abrams, and Leclerc.” He argues that joining the joint pan-European MARTE tank program could provide the best means forward, as “British firms could contribute to protection systems, optics, powertrains, and suspension, potentially securing both industrial participation and domestic manufacturing.” To make this argument, he reiterates that “Challenger 3 may serve as a capable stopgap, but it embodies a design philosophy already nearing obsolescence.”
在总结该计划的不足后，克劳福德得出结论："这引发了一个战略性问题：英国在挑战者 3 之后该何去何从？有人认为，以如此有限的数量，英国或许应该彻底退出坦克业务。另一些人则主张，采用更小型、更经济的设计可以重建可信的规模优势。北约盟国在规划豹 2、艾布拉姆斯和勒克莱尔的继任者时也面临类似困境。"他提出加入泛欧洲 MARTE 联合坦克计划可能是最佳出路，因为"英国企业可以在防护系统、光学设备、动力总成和悬架方面作出贡献，既保障产业参与度，又能维持本土制造能力。"为佐证这一观点，他再次强调"挑战者 3 或许能作为有效的过渡方案，但其体现的设计理念已濒临过时。"
Beyond Europe possible alternatives not noted by Crawford could include joining the South Korean K3 program, as the K2 it is being developed to succeed is currently considered the most capable NATO-compatible main battle tank in the world setting a strong precedent for success. Japan and the United States, which are other leading potential partners, are not known to have taken similar steps towards developing new generations of main battle tanks.
除克劳福德未提及的欧洲替代方案外，另一个可能选择是加入韩国 K3 坦克项目。作为 K2 黑豹的继任者，K2 目前被公认为全球最具战斗力的北约标准主战坦克，这为 K3 的成功奠定了坚实基础。而同样具备合作潜力的日本与美国，迄今未见类似的新一代主战坦克研发动向。
Britain’s Challenger 3 Next Generation Tank is Already Obsolete, Army Expert Warns
军事专家警告：英国挑战者 3 新一代坦克还没服役就已过时
The Challenger 3 main battle tank currently under development to equip the British Army may suffer from obsolescence before it even enters service, according to a recent assessment published by former British Army officer and prominent defence commentator Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Crawford. Although questions have been widely raised regarding the sufficiency of the tank program, in particular its very small planned procurement numbers of 148 vehicles, Crawford’s assessment highlighted serious deficiencies with the capabilities of the vehicles themselves. The Challenger 3 has been developed as an enhanced derivative of the Challenger 2 that entered service in the 1990s, and “may represent the final iteration of a now obsolete design philosophy,” Crawford noted, adding that “current generation of Western main battle tanks, Leopard 2, M1A2 Abrams, and now CR3, are increasingly seen as too large, heavy, costly, and vulnerable to justify further development along traditional lines.”
英国陆军正在研发的"挑战者 3"主战坦克可能在服役前就已面临过时风险——这是前英国陆军军官、著名防务评论员斯图尔特·克劳福德中校最新评估报告提出的警示。尽管该坦克项目（尤其是仅计划采购 148 辆的极小规模）的合理性已广受质疑，但克劳福德的评估着重指出了坦克自身性能存在的严重缺陷。作为 1990 年代服役的"挑战者 2"坦克的升级版本，"挑战者 3 可能代表着已过时设计理念的终极形态"，克劳福德特别强调："当前西方主战坦克——豹 2、M1A2 艾布拉姆斯以及如今的 CR3——正因其体积庞大、重量超标、成本高昂且防护脆弱等缺陷，越来越难以证明延续传统发展路线的合理性。"
Threatening the survivability of the fleet, only 60 active protection systems are being procured to be shared by the vehicles which Crawford noted appears to pose considerable risks when considered the lessons learned from the Ukrainain theatre regarding the difficulties such vehicles face with survivability. Regarding mobility, Crawford observed: “The tank also retains the 1,200 hp engine of its predecessor, Challenger 2, criticised by Ukrainian operators as underpowered for its weight. If CR3 [Challenger 3] approaches 80 tonnes in full combat configuration, questions remain over its mobility and whether British Army recovery and bridging assets can handle it.”
威胁到车队生存能力的是，仅采购了 60 套主动防护系统供车队共享。克劳福德指出，考虑到从乌克兰战场吸取的教训——此类车辆在战场生存上面临的困境，这种做法似乎带来了相当大的风险。关于机动性，克劳福德评论道："该坦克仍沿用其前身'挑战者 2'的 1200 马力发动机，乌克兰操作人员批评其动力与重量不匹配。若'挑战者 3'全战斗配置下接近 80 吨，其机动性及英军现有救援架桥设备能否应对仍存疑问。"
“The traditional three-crew turret layout is outdated when autoloaders and remote turrets are widely available,” Crawford added, noting that future tanks “are likely to follow Russia’s T-14 Armata model, with crews enclosed in armoured capsules within the hull. This approach reduces the vehicle’s profile and weight.” China’s new Type 100 main battle tank unveiled on September 3 was a notable example of this, and was designed to prioritise crew protection, lightness and high mobility with a design widely considered to have responded to the prevailing trends seen in the Ukrainian theatre. The Type 100’s example, even more so than the T-14, is expected to be followed by future tank designs.
"传统的三人炮塔布局在自动装弹机和遥控炮塔已广泛应用的当下显得过时，"克劳福德补充道，并指出未来的坦克"很可能会效仿俄罗斯 T-14'阿玛塔'的模式，将乘员密闭在车体内的装甲舱中。这种设计能显著降低坦克的外形轮廓和整体重量。"9 月 3 日亮相的中国新型 100 式主战坦克就是典型范例，其设计以乘员防护性、轻量化与高机动性为优先考量，被普遍认为顺应了乌克兰战场上呈现的主流趋势。比起 T-14，100 式的设计理念更有可能成为未来坦克的蓝本。
Crawford’s assessment highlighted the significant advantages which Soviet, Ukrainain and Russian tanks have had over their Western counterparts, observing: “There is a strong case for a shift towards smaller, lighter, and cheaper tanks in the 45–50 tonne range. Such vehicles could feature remote turrets, crews in protected hull compartments, balanced armour coverage, and extensive use of APS and counter-drone defences.” This weight range encompasses all currently service Soviet and Russian tanks, where Western tanks typically weigh between 70-80 tons. Crawford’s arguments regarding the vulnerability of Western tank designs has been strongly supported by observations of the performances of the American M1A1 Abrams and German Leopard 2 in the Ukrainian theatre. Both types began to take heavy losses almost as soon as they began to see combat, and by early June 2025 the Ukrainian Army was assessed to have lost 87 percent of the American sourced tanks with 27 of the 31 vehicles destroyed or captured, while most of the Leopard 2 fleet had been taken out as early as December 2023.
克劳福德的评估凸显了苏联、乌克兰及俄罗斯坦克相较于西方同类型号的显著优势，他指出："有充分理由转向 45 至 50 吨级更小、更轻且成本更低的坦克。此类战车可配备遥控炮塔、乘员位于防护性车体舱室、均衡的装甲覆盖，并广泛使用主动防护系统和反无人机防御系统。"这一重量范围涵盖了所有现役苏俄坦克，而西方坦克通常重达 70 至 80 吨。克劳福德关于西方坦克设计脆弱性的观点，从美制 M1A1 艾布拉姆斯和德制豹 2 在乌克兰战场的表现得到了有力佐证——两款坦克几乎投入战斗后便迅速遭受重大损失。截至 2025 年 6 月初，乌军评估损失了 87%的美援坦克（31 辆中有 27 辆被毁或缴获），而豹 2 坦克群早在 2023 年 12 月就已大部损失。
After summarising the program’s shortcomings, Crawford concludes: “That raises a strategic question: where does Britain go after Challenger 3? Some argue that with such limited numbers, the UK might be better leaving the tank business altogether. Others contend that a smaller, more affordable design could restore credible mass. NATO allies face similar dilemmas as they plan successors to Leopard 2, Abrams, and Leclerc.” He argues that joining the joint pan-European MARTE tank program could provide the best means forward, as “British firms could contribute to protection systems, optics, powertrains, and suspension, potentially securing both industrial participation and domestic manufacturing.” To make this argument, he reiterates that “Challenger 3 may serve as a capable stopgap, but it embodies a design philosophy already nearing obsolescence.”
在总结该计划的不足后，克劳福德得出结论："这引发了一个战略性问题：英国在挑战者 3 之后该何去何从？有人认为，以如此有限的数量，英国或许应该彻底退出坦克业务。另一些人则主张，采用更小型、更经济的设计可以重建可信的规模优势。北约盟国在规划豹 2、艾布拉姆斯和勒克莱尔的继任者时也面临类似困境。"他提出加入泛欧洲 MARTE 联合坦克计划可能是最佳出路，因为"英国企业可以在防护系统、光学设备、动力总成和悬架方面作出贡献，既保障产业参与度，又能维持本土制造能力。"为佐证这一观点，他再次强调"挑战者 3 或许能作为有效的过渡方案，但其体现的设计理念已濒临过时。"
Beyond Europe possible alternatives not noted by Crawford could include joining the South Korean K3 program, as the K2 it is being developed to succeed is currently considered the most capable NATO-compatible main battle tank in the world setting a strong precedent for success. Japan and the United States, which are other leading potential partners, are not known to have taken similar steps towards developing new generations of main battle tanks.
除克劳福德未提及的欧洲替代方案外，另一个可能选择是加入韩国 K3 坦克项目。作为 K2 黑豹的继任者，K2 目前被公认为全球最具战斗力的北约标准主战坦克，这为 K3 的成功奠定了坚实基础。而同样具备合作潜力的日本与美国，迄今未见类似的新一代主战坦克研发动向。
评论翻译
Britain’s Challenger 3 Next Generation Tank is Already Obsolete, Army Expert Warns
军事专家警告：英国挑战者 3 新一代坦克还没服役就已过时
The Challenger 3 main battle tank currently under development to equip the British Army may suffer from obsolescence before it even enters service, according to a recent assessment published by former British Army officer and prominent defence commentator Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Crawford. Although questions have been widely raised regarding the sufficiency of the tank program, in particular its very small planned procurement numbers of 148 vehicles, Crawford’s assessment highlighted serious deficiencies with the capabilities of the vehicles themselves. The Challenger 3 has been developed as an enhanced derivative of the Challenger 2 that entered service in the 1990s, and “may represent the final iteration of a now obsolete design philosophy,” Crawford noted, adding that “current generation of Western main battle tanks, Leopard 2, M1A2 Abrams, and now CR3, are increasingly seen as too large, heavy, costly, and vulnerable to justify further development along traditional lines.”
英国陆军正在研发的"挑战者 3"主战坦克可能在服役前就已面临过时风险——这是前英国陆军军官、著名防务评论员斯图尔特·克劳福德中校最新评估报告提出的警示。尽管该坦克项目（尤其是仅计划采购 148 辆的极小规模）的合理性已广受质疑，但克劳福德的评估着重指出了坦克自身性能存在的严重缺陷。作为 1990 年代服役的"挑战者 2"坦克的升级版本，"挑战者 3 可能代表着已过时设计理念的终极形态"，克劳福德特别强调："当前西方主战坦克——豹 2、M1A2 艾布拉姆斯以及如今的 CR3——正因其体积庞大、重量超标、成本高昂且防护脆弱等缺陷，越来越难以证明延续传统发展路线的合理性。"
Threatening the survivability of the fleet, only 60 active protection systems are being procured to be shared by the vehicles which Crawford noted appears to pose considerable risks when considered the lessons learned from the Ukrainain theatre regarding the difficulties such vehicles face with survivability. Regarding mobility, Crawford observed: “The tank also retains the 1,200 hp engine of its predecessor, Challenger 2, criticised by Ukrainian operators as underpowered for its weight. If CR3 [Challenger 3] approaches 80 tonnes in full combat configuration, questions remain over its mobility and whether British Army recovery and bridging assets can handle it.”
威胁到车队生存能力的是，仅采购了 60 套主动防护系统供车队共享。克劳福德指出，考虑到从乌克兰战场吸取的教训——此类车辆在战场生存上面临的困境，这种做法似乎带来了相当大的风险。关于机动性，克劳福德评论道："该坦克仍沿用其前身'挑战者 2'的 1200 马力发动机，乌克兰操作人员批评其动力与重量不匹配。若'挑战者 3'全战斗配置下接近 80 吨，其机动性及英军现有救援架桥设备能否应对仍存疑问。"
“The traditional three-crew turret layout is outdated when autoloaders and remote turrets are widely available,” Crawford added, noting that future tanks “are likely to follow Russia’s T-14 Armata model, with crews enclosed in armoured capsules within the hull. This approach reduces the vehicle’s profile and weight.” China’s new Type 100 main battle tank unveiled on September 3 was a notable example of this, and was designed to prioritise crew protection, lightness and high mobility with a design widely considered to have responded to the prevailing trends seen in the Ukrainian theatre. The Type 100’s example, even more so than the T-14, is expected to be followed by future tank designs.
"传统的三人炮塔布局在自动装弹机和遥控炮塔已广泛应用的当下显得过时，"克劳福德补充道，并指出未来的坦克"很可能会效仿俄罗斯 T-14'阿玛塔'的模式，将乘员密闭在车体内的装甲舱中。这种设计能显著降低坦克的外形轮廓和整体重量。"9 月 3 日亮相的中国新型 100 式主战坦克就是典型范例，其设计以乘员防护性、轻量化与高机动性为优先考量，被普遍认为顺应了乌克兰战场上呈现的主流趋势。比起 T-14，100 式的设计理念更有可能成为未来坦克的蓝本。
Crawford’s assessment highlighted the significant advantages which Soviet, Ukrainain and Russian tanks have had over their Western counterparts, observing: “There is a strong case for a shift towards smaller, lighter, and cheaper tanks in the 45–50 tonne range. Such vehicles could feature remote turrets, crews in protected hull compartments, balanced armour coverage, and extensive use of APS and counter-drone defences.” This weight range encompasses all currently service Soviet and Russian tanks, where Western tanks typically weigh between 70-80 tons. Crawford’s arguments regarding the vulnerability of Western tank designs has been strongly supported by observations of the performances of the American M1A1 Abrams and German Leopard 2 in the Ukrainian theatre. Both types began to take heavy losses almost as soon as they began to see combat, and by early June 2025 the Ukrainian Army was assessed to have lost 87 percent of the American sourced tanks with 27 of the 31 vehicles destroyed or captured, while most of the Leopard 2 fleet had been taken out as early as December 2023.
克劳福德的评估凸显了苏联、乌克兰及俄罗斯坦克相较于西方同类型号的显著优势，他指出："有充分理由转向 45 至 50 吨级更小、更轻且成本更低的坦克。此类战车可配备遥控炮塔、乘员位于防护性车体舱室、均衡的装甲覆盖，并广泛使用主动防护系统和反无人机防御系统。"这一重量范围涵盖了所有现役苏俄坦克，而西方坦克通常重达 70 至 80 吨。克劳福德关于西方坦克设计脆弱性的观点，从美制 M1A1 艾布拉姆斯和德制豹 2 在乌克兰战场的表现得到了有力佐证——两款坦克几乎投入战斗后便迅速遭受重大损失。截至 2025 年 6 月初，乌军评估损失了 87%的美援坦克（31 辆中有 27 辆被毁或缴获），而豹 2 坦克群早在 2023 年 12 月就已大部损失。
After summarising the program’s shortcomings, Crawford concludes: “That raises a strategic question: where does Britain go after Challenger 3? Some argue that with such limited numbers, the UK might be better leaving the tank business altogether. Others contend that a smaller, more affordable design could restore credible mass. NATO allies face similar dilemmas as they plan successors to Leopard 2, Abrams, and Leclerc.” He argues that joining the joint pan-European MARTE tank program could provide the best means forward, as “British firms could contribute to protection systems, optics, powertrains, and suspension, potentially securing both industrial participation and domestic manufacturing.” To make this argument, he reiterates that “Challenger 3 may serve as a capable stopgap, but it embodies a design philosophy already nearing obsolescence.”
在总结该计划的不足后，克劳福德得出结论："这引发了一个战略性问题：英国在挑战者 3 之后该何去何从？有人认为，以如此有限的数量，英国或许应该彻底退出坦克业务。另一些人则主张，采用更小型、更经济的设计可以重建可信的规模优势。北约盟国在规划豹 2、艾布拉姆斯和勒克莱尔的继任者时也面临类似困境。"他提出加入泛欧洲 MARTE 联合坦克计划可能是最佳出路，因为"英国企业可以在防护系统、光学设备、动力总成和悬架方面作出贡献，既保障产业参与度，又能维持本土制造能力。"为佐证这一观点，他再次强调"挑战者 3 或许能作为有效的过渡方案，但其体现的设计理念已濒临过时。"
Beyond Europe possible alternatives not noted by Crawford could include joining the South Korean K3 program, as the K2 it is being developed to succeed is currently considered the most capable NATO-compatible main battle tank in the world setting a strong precedent for success. Japan and the United States, which are other leading potential partners, are not known to have taken similar steps towards developing new generations of main battle tanks.
除克劳福德未提及的欧洲替代方案外，另一个可能选择是加入韩国 K3 坦克项目。作为 K2 黑豹的继任者，K2 目前被公认为全球最具战斗力的北约标准主战坦克，这为 K3 的成功奠定了坚实基础。而同样具备合作潜力的日本与美国，迄今未见类似的新一代主战坦克研发动向。
Britain’s Challenger 3 Next Generation Tank is Already Obsolete, Army Expert Warns
军事专家警告：英国挑战者 3 新一代坦克还没服役就已过时
The Challenger 3 main battle tank currently under development to equip the British Army may suffer from obsolescence before it even enters service, according to a recent assessment published by former British Army officer and prominent defence commentator Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Crawford. Although questions have been widely raised regarding the sufficiency of the tank program, in particular its very small planned procurement numbers of 148 vehicles, Crawford’s assessment highlighted serious deficiencies with the capabilities of the vehicles themselves. The Challenger 3 has been developed as an enhanced derivative of the Challenger 2 that entered service in the 1990s, and “may represent the final iteration of a now obsolete design philosophy,” Crawford noted, adding that “current generation of Western main battle tanks, Leopard 2, M1A2 Abrams, and now CR3, are increasingly seen as too large, heavy, costly, and vulnerable to justify further development along traditional lines.”
英国陆军正在研发的"挑战者 3"主战坦克可能在服役前就已面临过时风险——这是前英国陆军军官、著名防务评论员斯图尔特·克劳福德中校最新评估报告提出的警示。尽管该坦克项目（尤其是仅计划采购 148 辆的极小规模）的合理性已广受质疑，但克劳福德的评估着重指出了坦克自身性能存在的严重缺陷。作为 1990 年代服役的"挑战者 2"坦克的升级版本，"挑战者 3 可能代表着已过时设计理念的终极形态"，克劳福德特别强调："当前西方主战坦克——豹 2、M1A2 艾布拉姆斯以及如今的 CR3——正因其体积庞大、重量超标、成本高昂且防护脆弱等缺陷，越来越难以证明延续传统发展路线的合理性。"
Threatening the survivability of the fleet, only 60 active protection systems are being procured to be shared by the vehicles which Crawford noted appears to pose considerable risks when considered the lessons learned from the Ukrainain theatre regarding the difficulties such vehicles face with survivability. Regarding mobility, Crawford observed: “The tank also retains the 1,200 hp engine of its predecessor, Challenger 2, criticised by Ukrainian operators as underpowered for its weight. If CR3 [Challenger 3] approaches 80 tonnes in full combat configuration, questions remain over its mobility and whether British Army recovery and bridging assets can handle it.”
威胁到车队生存能力的是，仅采购了 60 套主动防护系统供车队共享。克劳福德指出，考虑到从乌克兰战场吸取的教训——此类车辆在战场生存上面临的困境，这种做法似乎带来了相当大的风险。关于机动性，克劳福德评论道："该坦克仍沿用其前身'挑战者 2'的 1200 马力发动机，乌克兰操作人员批评其动力与重量不匹配。若'挑战者 3'全战斗配置下接近 80 吨，其机动性及英军现有救援架桥设备能否应对仍存疑问。"
“The traditional three-crew turret layout is outdated when autoloaders and remote turrets are widely available,” Crawford added, noting that future tanks “are likely to follow Russia’s T-14 Armata model, with crews enclosed in armoured capsules within the hull. This approach reduces the vehicle’s profile and weight.” China’s new Type 100 main battle tank unveiled on September 3 was a notable example of this, and was designed to prioritise crew protection, lightness and high mobility with a design widely considered to have responded to the prevailing trends seen in the Ukrainian theatre. The Type 100’s example, even more so than the T-14, is expected to be followed by future tank designs.
"传统的三人炮塔布局在自动装弹机和遥控炮塔已广泛应用的当下显得过时，"克劳福德补充道，并指出未来的坦克"很可能会效仿俄罗斯 T-14'阿玛塔'的模式，将乘员密闭在车体内的装甲舱中。这种设计能显著降低坦克的外形轮廓和整体重量。"9 月 3 日亮相的中国新型 100 式主战坦克就是典型范例，其设计以乘员防护性、轻量化与高机动性为优先考量，被普遍认为顺应了乌克兰战场上呈现的主流趋势。比起 T-14，100 式的设计理念更有可能成为未来坦克的蓝本。
Crawford’s assessment highlighted the significant advantages which Soviet, Ukrainain and Russian tanks have had over their Western counterparts, observing: “There is a strong case for a shift towards smaller, lighter, and cheaper tanks in the 45–50 tonne range. Such vehicles could feature remote turrets, crews in protected hull compartments, balanced armour coverage, and extensive use of APS and counter-drone defences.” This weight range encompasses all currently service Soviet and Russian tanks, where Western tanks typically weigh between 70-80 tons. Crawford’s arguments regarding the vulnerability of Western tank designs has been strongly supported by observations of the performances of the American M1A1 Abrams and German Leopard 2 in the Ukrainian theatre. Both types began to take heavy losses almost as soon as they began to see combat, and by early June 2025 the Ukrainian Army was assessed to have lost 87 percent of the American sourced tanks with 27 of the 31 vehicles destroyed or captured, while most of the Leopard 2 fleet had been taken out as early as December 2023.
克劳福德的评估凸显了苏联、乌克兰及俄罗斯坦克相较于西方同类型号的显著优势，他指出："有充分理由转向 45 至 50 吨级更小、更轻且成本更低的坦克。此类战车可配备遥控炮塔、乘员位于防护性车体舱室、均衡的装甲覆盖，并广泛使用主动防护系统和反无人机防御系统。"这一重量范围涵盖了所有现役苏俄坦克，而西方坦克通常重达 70 至 80 吨。克劳福德关于西方坦克设计脆弱性的观点，从美制 M1A1 艾布拉姆斯和德制豹 2 在乌克兰战场的表现得到了有力佐证——两款坦克几乎投入战斗后便迅速遭受重大损失。截至 2025 年 6 月初，乌军评估损失了 87%的美援坦克（31 辆中有 27 辆被毁或缴获），而豹 2 坦克群早在 2023 年 12 月就已大部损失。
After summarising the program’s shortcomings, Crawford concludes: “That raises a strategic question: where does Britain go after Challenger 3? Some argue that with such limited numbers, the UK might be better leaving the tank business altogether. Others contend that a smaller, more affordable design could restore credible mass. NATO allies face similar dilemmas as they plan successors to Leopard 2, Abrams, and Leclerc.” He argues that joining the joint pan-European MARTE tank program could provide the best means forward, as “British firms could contribute to protection systems, optics, powertrains, and suspension, potentially securing both industrial participation and domestic manufacturing.” To make this argument, he reiterates that “Challenger 3 may serve as a capable stopgap, but it embodies a design philosophy already nearing obsolescence.”
在总结该计划的不足后，克劳福德得出结论："这引发了一个战略性问题：英国在挑战者 3 之后该何去何从？有人认为，以如此有限的数量，英国或许应该彻底退出坦克业务。另一些人则主张，采用更小型、更经济的设计可以重建可信的规模优势。北约盟国在规划豹 2、艾布拉姆斯和勒克莱尔的继任者时也面临类似困境。"他提出加入泛欧洲 MARTE 联合坦克计划可能是最佳出路，因为"英国企业可以在防护系统、光学设备、动力总成和悬架方面作出贡献，既保障产业参与度，又能维持本土制造能力。"为佐证这一观点，他再次强调"挑战者 3 或许能作为有效的过渡方案，但其体现的设计理念已濒临过时。"
Beyond Europe possible alternatives not noted by Crawford could include joining the South Korean K3 program, as the K2 it is being developed to succeed is currently considered the most capable NATO-compatible main battle tank in the world setting a strong precedent for success. Japan and the United States, which are other leading potential partners, are not known to have taken similar steps towards developing new generations of main battle tanks.
除克劳福德未提及的欧洲替代方案外，另一个可能选择是加入韩国 K3 坦克项目。作为 K2 黑豹的继任者，K2 目前被公认为全球最具战斗力的北约标准主战坦克，这为 K3 的成功奠定了坚实基础。而同样具备合作潜力的日本与美国，迄今未见类似的新一代主战坦克研发动向。
很赞 3
收藏