it is true that america suplemented the mark 1 chobbam armour with DU slab armour, but only when the requirement was needed. it does not permenantly use the DU armour supplement due to weight/speed issues etc.

other tanks supplement their armour with DU/slab armour when needed, i believe it is now pretty much standard practice now to do so. the Challenger does this aswell when needed. as for your main question the dorchester armour is the mark 2 version of chobbam armour. the americans have mark 1 chobbam. the mark 2 is vastly superior to the mark 1 version used the the abrams tanks. even when supplemented with DU armour over the top mark 1 chobbam is still thought to be inferior (or just up to the same standard as mark 2 dorchester) to the mark 2 version (DU armour is very restrictive in its application, especially on MBTs). dorchester armour is also supplemented with DU armour on occasion on its more vunerable areas, but i believe that dorchester armour is superior to mark 1 chobbam + DU. to back up this claim you can look at the various actions the two types of armour have seen. the abrams and challenger tanks saw extensive action in both gulf wars each were supplemented with DU armour on top of their standard armour complement due to the nature of the engagments that they would be taking part in.

in the second gulf war for example no Challenger 2 tanks ( all protected with dorchester armour) were lost to enemy fire even though several had been heavily engaged with a number of varying antitank weapons froms RPGs to MILAN anti tank missiles. one Challenger was damaged when its sights were destroyed, that particular tank sustained 14 RPG hits and small arms fire, as well as a close range MILAN missile attack without any of the crew being harmed, after six hours under fire the tank and crew were recovered and the tank was back in action in under 5 hours. another incident involved a Challenger being hit with a massive IED equvilant to a 600 pound bomb, some of the crew were wounded but all survived, the tank was hit on the underside its weakest part, showing testament to its surviability, once again the tank was back in service within the week. only one Challenger was lost due to friendly fire when a DUR round from another hit the open hatch of the tank and killed two of the crew, the turret was destroyed but still two of the crew survived.

abrams losses differ, as far as i know 18 abrams tanks have been lost in the gulf war 9 were instantly destroyed the others were either lost to accidents (many friendly fire) and some were recovered but were beyond repair. these tank were using the older chobbam with the DU supplement. you can draw your own conclusion from this.

it shows just how much of an advantage the dorchester armour offers the Challenger

you asked a good question, i hoped this helped somewhat :)

Jeff, that was an incredible post. I also enjoyed your analysis on different tanks and their different purposes.

 

Superlatives, cool pictures/looks and even cool lineage or names give weapons systems value. They don't necessarily need to perform in real life because no-one without tactical or strategical insights bothers to find out the truth behind superlatives.

 

"Supertank-3400 Magnum features the best co-axial machine-gun in the world!" and the masses go "woohoo!". 

 

It's the PR-angle that is the most grossly underrated aspect of warfare even among true professionals like those found on this forum. And the non-professionals are actually the most relevant people because their perception reflects the inclinations of the everyman. Thus, the Fanboys are most interesting to study because whenever you encounter a new fanboy, someone just won a PR-battle.

 

Sometimes it feels like weapons and people that use them are only tools that enable headlines.

 

M

This ranking is totally stupid because T90 / M1A1 / Challenger2 / Lecerk / Leopard2A6 and even Merkava are all more or less at a Top rank.

The Indian Arjun may be the proud of the Indian Army, and it looks like a tank, but is totally unsiutable for military use. It had Problems with the engine from the beginning, at least now it is equipped with a new engine from Germany. The Turret has huge areas where antitank weapons can be placed, the aiming doesnt work well, the tank is too big and too slow. That is why India has ordered more T-90 from Russia.

That is about right. 

 

The OP was not so good...  

Among myriad examples of French military skill and valor I would merely note 4th battle of Monte Cassino where the French Corp under Juin was the key force in the battle and clearly fought with more skill and elan than any other allied force.  Personally I will never forgive Chirac and France for 2003 but facts are facts.

agreed, yes they can fight and fight well, the french army (or rather what was left of it) conducted itself in an excellent manor during the african campaign in ww2.
no dispute over their ability to fight, more over their ability to win, or win without the help of ither and/or to defend themselves and their territory, im sure even the french can admit that their track record for winning and/or defending fance hasnt been all too great in the past especially when confronted with the British (as far as i know when its been Britian vs France, france always lose). but yes as i said before they have had their fair share of excellent performances, but i will dissagree about the comment of the french conducting themselves with the most skill at Monte Cassino over any other allied unit, i merely state the it was a Polish brigade that took the summit, and the the Ghurka units serving with the british conducted themselves with such bravery and determination the likes of which are rarely seen (even in warfare, god bless our Nepalese brother, if i had my way i would have Brown shot for what he did). an example of such bravery dissplayed at monte cassino was when in true Ghurka fassion elements of their regiment enagaged german positions with the khukri knives that they have become famous for (fact, if you dont believe me take it up the the history channel, and the Ghurka vetran that made the statement)

but yes the french can fight, but i thought this was about tanks???