FV4201 Chieftain MBT

The FV4201 Chieftain was the main battle tank of the United Kingdom during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. This is the one on display at the Imperial War Museum in Duxford.

A development of the Centurion, the Chieftain introduced the supine (reclining) driver position to British design allowing a heavily sloped hull with reduced height. A new powerpack and improved transmission gave it higher speed than the Centurion despite being heavier due to major upgrades to armour protection and the armament.

A development of the Centurion, the Chieftain introduced the supine (reclining) driver position to British design allowing a heavily sloped hull with reduced height. A new powerpack and improved transmission gave it higher speed than the Centurion despite being heavier due to major upgrades to armour protection and the armament.

I did consider buying some for Team Yankee, but was put off by apparent issues with the smoke dischargers on the side of the turret. Certainly for a 1970s version of Team Yankee you couldn’t use the new Challenger, and would need to use the Chieftain.

There was also one on display at the Bovington Tank Museum.

FV4201 Chieftain MBT

The FV4201 Chieftain was the main battle tank of the United Kingdom during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. This is the one on display at the Tank Museum at Bovington.

A development of the Centurion, the Chieftain introduced the supine (reclining) driver position to British design allowing a heavily sloped hull with reduced height. A new powerpack and improved transmission gave it higher speed than the Centurion despite being heavier due to major upgrades to armour protection and the armament.

Still in service in the Middle East, the British Army stopped using it in 1995.

I did consider buying some for Team Yankee, but was put off by apparent issues with the smoke dischargers on the side of the turret. Certainly for a 1970s version of Team Yankee you couldn’t use the new Challenger, and would need to use the Chieftain.

There was also one on display at Duxford.

Cold Flames of War

As well as the Brown Water Navy announcement in Battlefront’s Flames of War State of the Union, they announced a new period based on the Cold War.

October sees us diving into a brand new period as we release Fulda Gap. The period of the modern war when tensions between NATO and the Warsaw Pact were running high is a wonderful theatre to develop as the forces arrayed on both sides boast some of the coolest-looking equipment in history. And with the advances in technology, we are looking forward to seeing forces of M1-Abrams covered by A10-Thunderbolts pitting their might against the swathes of T-72s and BMP-mounted infantry. We plan for this to be a complete period with books covering nations and plastic sets for all the main vehicles of every nation. October is just the start and 2016 will have more books and additional miniatures.

Though there is very little information in the announcement, there is a mention of T72s and BMP-1s for the Warsaw Pact forces. So what of the NATO side? It appears that the US Army will be done first, with M1-Abrams and A-10 Thunderbolts, but I am looking forward to seeing the models for the BAOR.

British Chieftain Tanks

It would make for a good game to have Chieftains, FV432s and Harriers in action against T80s and the odd Hind D Attack Helicopter.

As the announcement mentions the M1-Abrams, which entered service in 1980, we can assume that the period for the games will be the 1980s, the height of the Cold War. If Battlefront do decide to go with some BAOR British forces, we may also see the Challenger I which entered service in 1983.

As well as fighting across Europe, another possibility will be to recreate the original Red Dawn film and have Soviet forces fighting on US soil.

I might also look at doing some alternative history British Civil War games set in the same time period, this setting was described in an article I had published in Wargames Illustrated in the 1990s.

I also wonder what other nations we will see in 2016, the French possibly?