13 ms·
Classified Challenger tank specs leaked online for videogame
- duxup 5y agoI think the bigger issue is that this rando user had the document, and I think that means it was already out / online? Amusing context, but I suspect whatever important thing happened with this document, it already happened. And that's assuming it was actually real / classified.
- munificent 5y ago> this rando user Lots of people rightly have access to classified information. This user is likely to be a soldier and tank operator. Many of these people also play videogames. And apparently some fraction of those are dumb enough to leak classified info.
- duxup 5y agoI wouldn't doubt it. Russia had problems with soldiers posting photos online... while working in / around Ukraine.
- ethbr0 5y agoYou mean while vacationing with their service weapons in So^H^HRussian Crimea? /s
- handrous 5y agoThat happened a ton, but I never got the impression it was a problem for them. Was it?
- duxup 5y agoDepends on what you mean by problem. It's just PR as it's not like other nations that didn't like it didn't already know. But Russia did pass some laws forbidding soldiers from doing that thing ... so it seems politically they didn't like it contradicting their stated claims. I did find the passing of the law amusing tho. It's not like the military can't just give a 'don't do that' order much faster...
- chrisseaton 5y ago> this rando user had the document They’re a Challenger instructor. Who else do you think the document is for?
- duxup 5y agoWouldn't the crews have this manual to? Or rando IT guy?
- ethanbond 5y agoAnd the mechanics And the archivist And the printer And so on and so forth Even highly sensitive info must be handled by a lot of people in a modern military.
- adolph 5y agoNo, for M1 series the crew manual (back in the day) just says it is secret stuff and to cover it with a tarp it with a tarp if the outer armor exposes it. That goes for the front of the turret, hull and the first track cover.
- chrisseaton 5y agoIt’s not an M1 it’s a Challenger 2.
- adolph 5y agoTrue, maybe it’s radically different for Challenger crew members and they get detailed metallurgical info because the UK likes self-sufficient crews. Or maybe it is similar.
- some_random 5y agoIt's not a rando user, it's a TC of a Challenger 2.
- edrxty 5y agoThis happens more than you'd imagine. DCS World gets in hot water for this periodically. It doesn't help that these developers are all from Russia
- duxup 5y agoI would think that classified or not ... you kinda assume almost all manuals eventually leak just based on the number of people with regular access.
- content_sesh 5y agoI've held clearances before and that was very much not the attitude of the security folks I met. But they were big fans of reminding you what happens if they catch you doing an unauthorized disclosure. I was very low on the totem pole, so I can't know for certain what leadership actually expects. But it doesn't jibe with my experience that there would be some kind of "leak budget" similar to Google SRE "error budget".
- duxup 5y agoI'm sure everyone involved certainly had the attitude that you don't dork up / release it. I think just from a super high level intelligence standpoint ... you know it is going to happen.
- rblatz 5y agoI agree, and if they don’t that feels like negligence on their part.
- krisoft 5y agoThis feels like you guys are talking by each other. You are right. Security folks don't treat leaks lightly. Ever. This is part of how they maintain compliance with the rules. But I don't think this is what the GP commenter talked about. You definitely design weapons, and doctrine and systems by assuming that it can leak to the enemy eventually. If your whole battle plan folds like wet tissue-paper just because the enemy got their hands on a single CAD file or manual then it wasn't a really good plan to begin with. Exhaust ports of doom are nice plot devices for movies, but in reality you try to avoid designed-in Achilles heels. And you do this because leaks happen. Some information get leaked by carelessness, some by disgruntled employees, some are stolen by spies, some are picked up from a wreckage, some are stolen in transit, some are deduced from signal intelligence. You can design mitigations against all of these. The scary security folks you mentioned are mitigation against the first two really. Their existence and behaviour doesn't have any bearing on what the leadership will expect.
- zzt123 5y agoThe user identifies as a make (sic) in Tidworth with a history of “Tanks & AFV’s, CR2 Tank Commander, AFV Instr, D&M Instr, Gunnery Instr, Former ATDU”. There are less than 250 Challenger 2 tanks. Combined with the rest of their professional experience, digital footprint, and copious words written, I imagine this person has sacrificed many bits of anonymity indeed.
- space_ghost 5y agoThere's a line in the TV show "The Newsroom," after a 4-star General speaks anonymously on air about alleged chemical weapons usage, that "Generals don't have dumb friends." Two minutes of cross-checking military records will be enough to figure out who this guy is.
- worker767424 5y agoWhat if it was leaked by Russian intelligence?
- worker767424 5y agoI'm serious. Or someone from another country's intelligence group went rogue and leaked it. I doubt Russia would be looking that hard for the leak, and there's no reason to assume the leak was from someone British.
- lostlogin 5y agoMaking 250 tanks is going to involve a hell of a lot of people. That said, I’m sure they’ll be found pretty quick.
- zzt123 5y agoHe apparently claims to be a current Challenger 2 commander.
- fnord77 5y agoyup - he/she will be in custody by monday
- le-mark 5y agoMy understanding was the main secret on modern MBTs is the composition of the “sabot catching” armor. Doesn’t sound like that’s what was disclosed here?
- ummonk 5y agoIt doesn't seem like anything dangerous was posted, but the individual who posted it shouldn't be making judgement calls about what they think shouldn't need to be classified.
- User23 5y agoBack in the 90s my buddies in the military would say that Tom Clancy basically got it right. Also private intelligence sources like Janes probably will sell you this info too, although I can’t be sure because I’m not willing to pay to find out.
- greedo 5y agoJust because it's classified doesn't mean it's valuable. Lots of stuff is classified for bureaucratic reasons. Also, there's little about the Challenger 2 that opposing forces couldn't have researched. The tank itself has been around for more than 2 decades, and the Soviets/Russians have been consistently able to penetrate British security for the last 70 years. The gun is nothing special, and it's performance is well known. Chobbham/Dorcester armor has been around for quite awhile, and isn't unique. The US has sold M1s to Egypt, Iraq etc with Chobbham armor.
- jandrewrogers 5y agoFWIW, the armor on the export M1 is different than the US version.
- greedo 5y agoYes, but all M1s have Chobbham/Dorcester armor. Some additionally have DU (Depleted Uranium) inserts. The DU inserts are generally limited to US Army M1s.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- duxup 5y agoI remember growing up watching the "military vehicle shows" on the Discovery channel when they just output all the various specs of every vehicle. I think a lot of the general operating specs and such are pretty well known.
- hugh-avherald 5y agoN.B. The document appears to be marked Restricted which is technically lower than 'classified'.
- KineticLensman 5y agoIn the UK, ‘classified’ is a generic term not a formal classification level. Perhaps you meant ‘confidential’? But in any case, the level ‘restricted’ was taken out of use a few years ago in the UK, and its use indicates that the document concerned is not recent. The current equivalent is ‘official sensitive’
- OJFord 5y agoHow could it be otherwise, that wouldn't make sense - 'classified' as what?
- renewiltord 5y agoOkay, but the interesting thing is what you can do now that the data is out there. Can you adjust your in-game specs to align? Or is that a problem?
- GekkePrutser 5y agoI would imagine that if a game developer has access to a classified document, that actual enemies already own that document and the real harm has been done long ago.
- ummonk 5y agoA few years back some people got charged for trying to export F-16 manuals to a Russian flight sim company: https://www.standard.net/police-fire/russian-deported-after-pleading-guilty-to-smuggling-f-16-fighter-jet-technical-manuals/article_61e7e427-24f1-5f54-9dc9-562b93f7487a.html https://www.standard.net/police-fire/russian-deported-after-...
- inopinatus 5y ago"The Official Secrets Act is not there to protect Secrets, it is there to protect Officials." — Sir Humphrey Appleby, Yes, Minister
- gerdesj 5y agoA long running documentary, masquerading as an humorous sitcom.
- secfirstmd 5y agoCan confirm. I worked in Westminster for a bit. That and "The Thick of It" were actually more realistic than many staged managed and PR airbrushed documentaries I have seen.
- acomjean 5y agoWhen I worked in defense they made us watch “ethics” videos. One of the senarios was a software developer was moonlighting as a game dev and was using algorithms and parameters from his day job in the game. We thought far fetched and crazy… Apparently not.
- angry_octet 5y agoIt seems like everybody is jumping to assume things that haven't been remotely proved, e.g.: - That the forum poster is in the British Army. - That they are British. - That the manual is current and true. First, low grade manuals (like UK RESTRICTED) are not very secret. This could even by an FI disinfo op to make people think a current RAC officer would be dumb enough to post a classified document online, a great way to create bad publicity from a low grade document which has nothing further to tell you. Nothing in this manual will say anything about armour or engine capabilities or weapons that isn't already known to adversaries or easily determined from photos. Chill already.
- redis_mlc 5y agoMost smart missiles in the past 2 decades attack tanks by detonating on top. You don't really need classified tank data for this well-known vulnerability. A-10 pilots fire into the ground obliquely to ricochet into the bottom of tanks. Neither the top nor bottom have much armor in tanks. In WW2, the most successful aerial tank attacks were to drop a 500 or 1,000 pound bomb on or next to a German tank, turning it over. (You can ignore any tank attack claim numbers that were not done by large bombs or specialized anti-tank planes - P-51's just couldn't "shoot up" German tanks.) The BalticaBeer channel has remarkable videos of the Sidewinder and Wall-eye missiles (the Wall-eye II could destroy anything with its 2,000-pound shaped charge. Most of the Gulf War TV footage you've seen is from Wall-eyes, which used analog edge detection for precise targeting of buildings, bridges and vehicles, and could fly through a single pre-selected window - in a train even!) Balticabeer Military Aeronautics Youtube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgUYW-I81BUzQFIe3UtAE-w https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgUYW-I81BUzQFIe3UtAE-w Source: I study war.
- teslaberry 5y agowhat's classified is the fact that tanks will all be totally obsolete , a relic of the past, in 30-40 years. starting with anti-tank drones NOW. and they are super secret classified now. you build a 200 pound steroid like quadcopter capable of autonomously being deployed out of c130. they have anti-tank stinger missiles on them, 2 per drone.