Is the Merkava as remarkable as they say in various documentaries

>>34531401
Both.

>>34531401
Maybe

>>34531401
It's a modern enough tank being used against people a half step removed from poo-in-loo.

So no/yes.

>>34531401
it has a one job and thats to kill arabs and be immune to RPG-7, it does that perfectly so it's remarkable in it's job. Against any modern MBT no engine in front is a stupid idea many idiots think engine is an extra armor without realizing engines are full of holes and majority of it's material is aluminium

>>34531401

didn't that tank get stomped in some battle a few years ago ?

oppo had some kind of anti-tank missiles & israel lost several tanks

File: Merkava 4 powerpack.jpg (65KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 604x453px

>>34531540
>engine in front is a stupid idea many idiots think engine is an extra armor without realizing engines are full of holes and majority of it's material is aluminium

I guess that the two tons of steel of the transmission counts for nothing....

>>34531871

That was 11 years ago (2006 Lebanon War) and the IDF suffered five (5) tanks "damaged beyond repair".

From what I recall, at least some of the crews escaped with their lives.

>>34531917

You are correct, it does count for nothing.

>>34531401
Only for removing arabs and staying in its soil

>tfw Merkgunner is gone

F

>>34532001

So, you know nothing.

I think more MBTs ought to have an integrated infantry support mortar.

>>34532088

>Thinking that a few thin layers of aluminium and non-hardened metal counts as armor to replace thick composite layering

>>34532102
It's not for infantry support; that's what the main gun and GPMGs are for. The mortar is for suppressing ATGMs on reverse slopes.

>>34532023
I'm alaways lurking, anon.

>>34532124

During the 1980s, the French tested the protection offered by a front-mounted engine layout, using a reversed AMX-30 hull.

Four HOT missiles were fired on the thin hull rear of the AMX-30 and the shaped charge jets of the first two missiles were stopped by the transmission, the other two failed to pass through the the engine block.

Knowing that the shaped-charge warhead of the HOT anti-tank missile can penetrate 800 mm of RHA, the protection offered by a transmission is therefore significant.

>>34531401
Was good before 2004.

>>34532170
People tend to forget that shaped charges lose quite some penetration when moving through air or through inhomogus material like an engineblock with attachments. It is like an 1-2m shitty NERA block, nothing perfect, but still too much to ignore.

>>34532124

>Thinking that all kinds of air gaps aren't going to fuck up an EFP.

>>34532714
>Against any modern MBT
>EFP
Hate to break it to you Schlomo, but nobody with a modern MBT uses HEAT for anti-tank if they can help it.

>>34532823
When was the last time they fought against tanks?

>>34534071

Glad that you agree it's useless against KEPs then.

>>34534195
All of you guys are >implying
That it doesn't have any frontal armor except the engine.
Instead it has really really sloped and quite thick (I don't have numbers and wouldn't share then if I did) armor.
T. Serve in idf tank division.

>>34532170
>>34532711
>takes hit in front
>engine takes hit
>yay! We survived!
>can't drive away
>gets overrun and killed
OY VEY!

>>34534195
I'm not >>34532714. All I'm trying is that it's a very specialised tank, and it's good enough for what it does.

>>34531871
>>34531922
In addition, I think the lost tanks were Merkava Mk 2s

File: 1458461680911.jpg (12KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 225x225px

>>34531922
>>34534521
>source: my ass

Here's the real story for anyone that doesn't want to get shilled by JIDF

https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=Ela6DjyEBQwC&pg=PA111&lpg=PA111&dq=Lessons+of+the+2006+Israeli-Hezbollah+War+israeli+tank+casualties&source=bl&ots=hA5cA-DPjl&sig=N80VEQRaBSA25zNztn1o7Sfc0MI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixy5n8l4fVAhXCuBQKHT9oAfoQ6AEIVDAG#v=onepage&q=Lessons%20of%20the%202006%20Israeli-Hezbollah%20War%20israeli%20tank%20casualties&f=false

>>34531401
a bit of both, like all the others

>>34531922
tanks are made to be used, losing some without losing the crew is a successful use of the resource, a lesson learn from the Russians.

>>34531401
Frontal against leopard above upgrade 2A3 and Abrahams M1A1 completely trash, because the amour in the Merkava is more equally distributed around all sides. This makes sense in urban combat, if the infantry is to pussy and the enemy has nothing more than standard RPG-26 (Merkava has aktive defense system). The low profile is also designed for this kind of semi urban warfare against enemy infantry. In the Libanon war the weaknesses were on open display because the terrain wasn't urban at all, but still complicated because of narrow paths and bridges the M. couldn't pass. The enemy was also useing modern war tactics (electronic warfare, live data links, modern atgm), which even with complete air superiority rapidly showed them their limits. I wouldn't say it's a completely failed concept, since it's doing it's job in Gaza quiet well, but as a Maine battle tank likely even in the solo role against state of the art (or only slightly below) infantry rather useless and likely also obsolet against anything below upgraded T-90M etc., if you consider numerical superiority of the enemy, since the cost of it are only a fraction of the M. I guess this is because they believe to be able to nearly get every enemy tank with their air superiority (personally i doubt this rational especially, if the enemy is sophisticated unlikely or has sophisticated support more likely and is able to use decoy, ew and manages to involve the planes in battles against anti air craft weapons.

>>34534718
learn to spell

>>34534757
I wrote it in 3 min, not native English speaker, but third language and I don't care, if the language is further trashed, since already trashed by millions of non native speakers. Deal with it.

>>34534307
Hey, don't blame them for preferring yourself as a 'well done'.

>>34534798
It's 4chan. People shit talk everything.

>>34534307
The crew has a chance to fall back and fight another day. It's better to have a skilled crew survive.

>>34534960

It's better for the tank to not get put out of action in the first place. Or do you think western tanks can't take a hit on the front hull?

>>34531401
It works amazingly well for what the Israelis need it to do which is,

>Soak up RPGs /ATGMS
>Provide ample Crew space and protection
>Be intimidating

Problem is it would not work well outside roads, It is Xbox Hueg and weighs a tremendous amount, Its offroad ability suffers because of this

TL:DR Works perfect for Israel / Would not be ideal for other nations

>>34535203
>crew dead instead of motor
>this is somewhat better
What?

>>34535435
>Implying Western tanks can't take a hit from the front

>>34535435
The motor doesn't provide any significant advantage as armor vs modern weapons.

>>34535479
Never was said, Strawboo.

>>34535504
You implied that with>>34535435

>>34535494
Learn into NERA effect of tank components and stand off armor next time before postin such nonsense.

>>34535531
If the enemy has already penetrated the tank you dun goofed,

>>34535520
No, it just mean
armor/motor/crew better than armor/crew/motor
for crew survivalbility for a penetrating shot.

>>34535553
No.

>>34535554
Wouldn't having the Engine where the Armour is thinnest IE the back be better? than the already heavily armoured front?

>>34535520
He didn't imply it, you assumed. If the frontal armor remained the same just with the engine in the rear, the crew would be killed by a penetration that would have otherwise only taken out the engine. Either scenario results in a tank no longer combat effective, but in one the crew survives to fight another day with any gained experience that a new crew wouldn't have.

>>34535424
>Its offroad ability suffers because of this
Oh boy, you should see her go through the Golan Heights. She is eating those boulders like they are air.

>>34535598
Why not put it on the roof the armor is the thinnest there? Or put otherwise: stay on discussion, it was about engine before or after crew when hit from the front.

>>34535658
I concede that engine in the front is better for Crew survivability. Im just spit balling as to why every other main battle tank has the engine in the rear what i have come up with is:

>Thermal signature: With the engine at the back, the rest of the tank shields the engine's thermal signature.

>Weight distribution - With the heaviest armour on a tank being at the front, having the engine at the rear helps to keep the centre of gravity around the middle of the vehicle.

>Engine rear makes it much more accessible to repair and maintenance. It always helps to not have to remove several tons of armour if you want to get at the powerpack.

>>34535721
It might just come down to cost, The advantage of a front engine design is not enough to warrant changing to a new mbt

>>34535721
>Im just spit ballin
Then say so from the start, til now it looked like you didnt want to see any advantages in a front engine.

>>34535768
I'm not against it, Just was having a hard time believing that the Israelis are the only ones in the world to realize the benefit of a front engine design. So i figured there must be drawbacks or others would follow

>>34535800
It is a quid pro quo thing. Could you please link your first response in this thread?

>>34534307
Yes. Because every battle force sent out by the Israelis is a single unbeatable merkava tank to play up how weak and vulnerable Israel is to it's enemies. Right? Right anon?

File: 1488710204161.jpg (79KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 600x600px

>>34531401
well it is odd
that and israel does have allot of ditches for it to fall into

>>34535869
Sure

Here ya go>>34535424
and my second post >>34535479

Israel can bring infantry in Merks to defend them.

What about SPECIFIC USE CASES don't mongs understand? Carrying a max of six passengers is valuable in that particular use case. The US has infinite armor and infantry and doesn't fight in urban areas very often.

So what if an expendable engine is up front? That frees the rear for troops. Tanks are replaceable and expected to take losses. Israelis are rather fond of their troops so they invest in APS etc to keep them alive to fight again as well as come home in one piece.

>>34535910
Please, next time dont assume so hard and freely as in the second post, it gives a strong troll or derailing vibe.

File: dune2.jpg (113KB, 644x404px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 644x404px

>>34535888

>>34534307
As opposed to taking a hit that barbecues the crew but the engine is fine. Much better.

>>34535968
Yes, that was my bad i interpreted your post incorrectly

File: atmos_2000.jpg (88KB, 600x363px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 600x363px

One of the most consistent problems the IDF faces is the fact that the kenesset is fucking retarded, and literally filled with cheap Jews that don't understand that they need to invest in tech solutions after developing them.

During the Lebanon war, APS had already been invented by was not standardized because the government didn't clear the funding for it. For years IDF soldiers didn't have body armor standard either. But they had factories to build it, and were selling it internationally.

Its not a problem with their R&D or doctrine, its a problem with a government that doesn't care when soldiers pointlessly die. Solving this would require phasing out conscription, and moving into having a professional army, but they don't want to do that either.

File: chrysler-tv-8-nuclear-tank.jpg (56KB, 630x638px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 630x638px

>>34536032
Now that this is settled, lets focus on something entirely different for our amusement; ridiculous tanks with ridiculous placement of the egine:
>nuclear engine in the turret
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_TV-8
Is there a competitor?

File: 1489910183751.png (116KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 300x300px

>>34536000
>implying light infantry doesn't carry everything with them and are only "light" because you don't have to transport them with vehicles

>implying light infantry has light firepower

>implying US Army rangers aren't hauling mortars and shit with them the whole time

Damn Moshe, you're getting too good at this.

File: Cutaway-of-Mark-IV.jpg (64KB, 748x413px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 748x413px

>>34536378
Mark IV?

>Engine in the crew compartment

>>34536466
I allow it.

>>34536378

That is actually brilliant. Create the atomic tank. Send to Iraq. IS hits it with an ATGM or IED, detonates nuke. Glasses a region. Blame IS for nuclear war, glass the rest of the area as a retaliatory strike.

>>34536347
Sounds like these Knesset boys are quite keen with measuring up to the memes.

>>34535494
>The motor doesn't provide any significant advantage as armor vs modern weapons.
That's why Israel sends Americans to fight enemies that have modern weapons.

>>34534307
ah. so now that the engine armor concept is validate the goal post moves. I am begining to think no one is this stupid, so you must be one of those paid shills out to stir up shit on 4chan.

/pol/ is across the top and bottom of the page towards the right. good luck.

>>34535928
The Merk can only carry troops in back if there's no ammo stored there. It's not a feature so much as an exploit.

File: merkava4engine2.jpg (189KB, 1260x707px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 1260x707px

>>34534236
>quite thick

The IDF failed pretty badly in 2006 so now they're trying to use America and Sunni Jihadists to defeat Hezbollah and Iran indirectly.

>>34538326
That complete lack of argument.

>>34534575

Your link says three tanks were penetrated and two were immobilized.

>>34534307
I don't think tanks operate in isolation. If a tank gets taken out like that, there are others who can keep the enemy off of it.

>>34536347
>But they had factories to build it, and were selling it internationally
Ay gevalt!

File: 1457485989696.jpg (12KB, 183x232px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 183x232px

>>34539384
Are you retarded?

That's just in Wadi Salouki. You blatantly ignored the other 46 tank hits + 4 landmines in the same paragraph and above...

Get out of here JIDF.

>>34531401
This is a good Western-standard tank. It's tailored for Israeli needs and tactics, and therefore not the one's of many other countries. Thus, it's on par (some things above, some things below) of what you'ed expect of a modern tank, but under a mostly different set of standards.

There's a quite a lot of criticism about the front mounted engine (as means of protection for the crew, should the tank get penetrated), but, as far as I can see, it's consists mostly of reactionist responses, finding reasons of why they think that it's stupid/won't work- while testing and practice seems to indicate otherwise.
The bulky thing that goes on the barrel was set as close to the base as possible, again, prioritizing crew safety and health. Whether it's good or bad thing depends on you're operational and national priorities.

>>34534307
Even in a scenario like this (tank is completely isolated from any force and is surrounded), suffering immobilizing hit while surviving it and running the risk of getting overrun before managing to escape sounds like better odds than getting hit and killed on the spot, and not even having the chance to escape.

File: 1361413998514.jpg (51KB, 505x449px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 505x449px

>>34536636
>atomic reactors are atomic bombs
>shooting an atomic bomb causes it to go off
>atomic bombs "glass" anything

File: Trinitite-detail2.jpg (485KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

485KB, 1280x960px

>>34543145
You're mostly right about that retard, however
>atomic bombs "glass" anything
Never heard of Trinitite?

>>34536466
Man I wish we had modern rhomboid tanks with sponsons. They're so sexy, impractical but sexy.