Elbit Systems launches production of Sabrah light tanks

Elbit Systems launches production of Sabrah light tanks
Early publicity image tank Sabrah on ASCOD 2 chassis

A few years ago, the Israeli company Elbit Systems presented a project for a promising light tank / combat vehicle with heavy weapons called Sabrah. Potential buyers were offered an armored vehicle on a tracked or wheeled chassis with a full-fledged turret equipped with a large-caliber gun. Soon we managed to find the first customer, and by now mass production has been launched.

Looking for orders

At the end of the tenth years, the Elbit company developed and presented the concept of a promising family of combat vehicles under the general name Sabra. This project involved the creation of a unified fighting compartment and a set of other tools suitable for installation on different chassis. Thus, the advertising materials featured a light tank on a caterpillar chassis and a wheeled combat vehicle with heavy weapons.

Elbit Systems does not have its own production of armored vehicles and some weapons, which is why several other organizations were invited to the project. They had to provide the required platforms and other products, and Elbit took over the development of the fighting compartment and the overall coordination of work.

In parallel with the development of the project, a search for potential customers was carried out. Materials on "Sabra" were regularly shown at various exhibitions. Not so long ago, for advertising purposes, they built a full-size prototype of a tracked version of a light tank, equipped with an original fighting compartment.

In October 2020, the first commercial success of the project became known. Two versions of the Sabrah tank competed in the Philippine Army competition and won. A contract was signed for the supply of 18 tracked and 10 wheeled armored vehicles, as well as other equipment and ammunition with a total cost of approx. $195 million. Delivery time - 3 years from the date of signing the contract.

In the future, the contractor and the customer several times reported on the preparation of production and specified the cost of production. So, in June of this year, at one of the exhibitions, Elbit Systems announced a reduction in the cost of the contract to 172 million dollars. Due to what it was possible to reduce the price of products and whether its quantity has changed, it was not reported.

The search for customers continues. So, in September it became known that Elbit was participating in the competition of the Brazilian army and offering it BMTV on the Eitan chassis with a unified Sabra turret. Later, they announced their participation in the development of the Indian-Israeli tank FRCV. The chassis for it will be prepared by Indian enterprises, and Elbit will provide the Sabrah tower.

Tanks in production

The development company has repeatedly demonstrated mock-ups and prototypes of a light tracked tank at exhibitions. As the Sabrah project developed, the appearance of such samples changed slightly. The unified BMTV has not yet been built “in hardware” and has not been openly demonstrated, and in its case, Elbit Systems managed only with advertising images.

In 2020-21, having received a Philippine order, the companies participating in the project began preparing for production. So, different departments of General Dynamics European Land Systems (GDELS) had to provide the necessary tracked and wheeled chassis. In the near future, the appearance of full-fledged experienced armored vehicles was expected.

In early December, the Elbit enterprise in Haifa was visited by a delegation from the Romanian Ministry of Defense. She was shown the latest developments in various fields, incl. tank "Sabra" on a caterpillar base. This is probably the first serial machine of this type, built for the Philippine order. It should also be expected that the company is already assembling the following machines, and in the foreseeable future they will be shipped to the customer.

Tower "Sabra" on the Pandur II chassis

Two versions

The Elbit Sabra project proposes the construction of light combat vehicles based on different chassis, but using a unified fighting compartment. To date, two variants of such equipment have been developed - a light tank on the ASCOD 2 chassis and a wheeled armored vehicle based on the Pandur II. Two more chassis options are being developed for Brazil and India. More options may appear in the future.

The used chassis is subject to requirements for carrying capacity, energy systems, etc. In addition, it must meet the wishes of the customer in terms of driving characteristics, mobility, protection, etc. Thus, the ASCOD 2 and Pandur II chassis used have fairly high mobility characteristics and are protected from small-caliber artillery and fragments. In both cases, the combat weight of the finished vehicle does not exceed 30 tons.

The unified combat compartment "Sabra" is a tower with all the necessary equipment. The cap is made of bulletproof / anti-fragmentation armor and has characteristic chopped contours, as well as a developed aft niche. It is possible to install additional booking or active protection complex. Inside the compartment are the jobs of tankers, a swinging gun mount with an automatic loader, etc.

The basic one weapons is a 105 mm rifled gun with a 52 klb barrel, which is the next development of the old British L7. There is an automatic loader with cells for 12 unitary shots; 24 more projectiles are placed in the body of the armored vehicle. Rate of fire - up to 6 rds / min. If there was interest from customers, they promised to work out the possibility of installing a 120-mm smoothbore gun.

On the gun mount is a coaxial machine gun with a total ammunition load of 2 rounds. Outside the tower provides for the installation of smoke grenade launchers and, at the request of the customer, anti-tank missiles.

Sabra at Eurosatory-2022

The turret is equipped with Combat NG digital fire control system. It integrates three-channel gunner's and commander's sights (panoramic), ballistic computer, stabilizer, etc. The pickup is controlled remotely using electric drives. Declared the possibility of accurate fire at ranges up to 3600 m.

The Sabrah is also equipped with the TORCH-XTM “battlefield management system”, which ensures the interaction of armored vehicles within the unit. An E-LynXTM radio station was used for data exchange and voice communication. Similar equipment will be used on serial tanks for the Philippines. Other customers may choose a different package to get all the features they need.

Unification of opportunities

The goal of the Sabrah project was to create a universal fighting compartment with cannon and machine gun weapons, compatible with various carrier platforms, wheeled and tracked. Elbit Systems was able to solve such a design problem, and, together with contractors, has already managed to develop two full-fledged armored vehicles - and is not going to stop.

The light tank and BMTV "Sabra" have already found their customer and went into production. In the near future, new orders from one or two countries may appear. All this shows that the project from Elbit and subcontractors as a whole meets the needs of potential buyers and has certain commercial prospects.

It is easy to see that the Sabrah project, due to the competent choice of basic ideas and solutions, affects several market niches at once. The development companies simultaneously offer a universal fighting compartment, as well as tracked and wheeled armored vehicles using it. Depending on their needs, the buyer can choose only the turret and install it on the desired chassis, or purchase a complete wheeled or light tank.

One of the first Sabrah tanks at the factory, December 2022

The proposed composition of weapons also takes into account the peculiarities of the market. In recent years, there has been renewed interest in systems in calibers up to 90-105 mm. Such guns are much cheaper than more powerful models, but are capable of hitting a wide range of targets. In particular, they are seen as a convenient means of dealing with obsolete medium tanks or early MBTs.

Many countries are interested in obtaining just such weapons, and it is used in new projects of "light" and "medium" tanks. Another embodiment of this concept is the Israeli technique with the fighting compartment Sabrah. At the same time, the possibility of replacing the gun with a more powerful model is declared, which potentially expands the circle of customers.

However, certain shortcomings are visible. Like other modern "light" armored vehicles, the Sabrah tank and BMTV do not have a high level of protection. Even with additional armor, they are protected only from small-caliber projectiles. In addition, such machines are only formally classified as light, and real dimensions and weights can make it difficult to transfer, logistics, etc.

Clear successes

In recent years, a number of foreign organizations have developed and brought to the market their own versions of "light" or "medium" tanks of a modern look. Some of these developments have not progressed beyond testing at test sites and demonstrations at exhibitions. However, some samples became the subject of contracts and reached mass production.

Among the most successful developments of this kind, there are now two variants of the Sabrah armored vehicle and the fighting compartment of the same name from the Israeli Elbit Systems. Whether it will be possible to develop such successes and get new contracts is unknown. At the same time, the recently launched series production increases the chances for further success.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Eug
    8 December 2022 06: 32
    Those. Russia with the Octopus "flew" past India?
    1. +4
      8 December 2022 07: 36
      Just a cheap version of the MBT, the monsters have gone far in price and weight, and the armies are simpler and the equipment is needed cheaper.
      1. -7
        8 December 2022 08: 01
        Just a cheap variant of MBT

        What is a cheap version of an MBT with a 105mm gun?))))
        For infantry fighting vehicles, these 105mm are redundant, but for MBT it is completely insufficient. He will not be able to fight directly with tanks, only to the side, from an ambush, but in such cases tank destroyers are better.
        1. +8
          8 December 2022 15: 40
          Quote: lucul

          What is a cheap version of an MBT with a 105mm gun?))))
          For infantry fighting vehicles, these 105mm are redundant, but for MBT it is completely insufficient. He will not be able to fight directly with tanks, only to the side, from an ambush, but in such cases tank destroyers are better.

          Because this is not an MBT, but a light tank for the jungle and highlands.
          1. TIR
            25 January 2023 08: 41
            That's exactly what, in fact, where this light tank will be used, there it will not meet MBTs. So it makes no sense to put a large caliber. Infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, wheeled lightly armored vehicles with light small arms will compete with him there. The most dangerous thing for him is ATGM. But there is a chance for dynamic protection. Although, in fact, with a small thickness of homogeneous armor, no dynamic one will save. It can only weaken armor penetration. But don't stop. I don’t know where this panacea came from, that dynamic armor will protect infantry fighting vehicles and such light tanks. Only KAZ will help here, and then you still need to have good iron armor
        2. 0
          5 February 2023 13: 09
          Quote: lucul
          For infantry fighting vehicles, these 105mm are redundant, but for MBT it is completely insufficient

          I would not say that modern BCs for L7 are not enough for tanks. Maybe it’s not enough for Leo2 and Abrams, but against the T55 T62, M60, AMX30, Chinese MBT and T72 all sorts of things are quite enough for yourself. It hits at least further than even the Soviet versions of 125mm and the SLA sees further and allows it to work beyond the capabilities of old tanks. Yes, and 30 tons is still 2 times lighter and probably cheaper than a modern MBT of 60+ tons.
    2. +3
      8 December 2022 09: 07
      Indians make themselves on a similar module. They need not a floating, but a mountain tank.
    3. +5
      8 December 2022 09: 23
      Quote: Eug
      Those. Russia with the Octopus "flew" past India?

      He was not considered at all. TK does not match.
      1. +1
        8 December 2022 18: 14
        Quote from cold wind
        He was not considered at all. TK does not match.

        Still would. With his paper armor. Clueless machine.
      2. +1
        10 December 2022 09: 31
        Quote from cold wind
        He was not considered at all. TK does not match.

        It is not surprising that the strange - a light tank airborne by parachute did not look like a mountain one - the armor is weak, the engine is rather weak for the highlands.
        Another thing is if the improved hull of the BMP-3M Dragoon with a front engine, retaining the rear ramp (or door) and the Octopus turret were chosen as the base for the Octopus. Engine from "Kurganets" with a power of 800+ l / s, security from 30 mm. projectile in a circle (forehead, sides), the highest thrust-to-weight ratio, the presence of dynamic protection and the possibility of installing KAZ, and besides, it is also waterfowl (composite side screens, like those of the Kurganets, add buoyancy because they have positive buoyancy).
        Such a light tank would come in handy in India, and for Southeast Asia, and for the countries of Latin America, and for arming the Airborne Forces of the RF Armed Forces (as airborne, but without a parachute - by landing method, but up to TWO such tanks in one Il-76MD90A), and as part of tank and motorized rifle divisions as part of the vanguard units for forcing water barriers at once and holding bridgeheads until pontoon crossings are established and put into battle on MBT bridgeheads. And for arming the MP of the Navy, such amphibious tanks would have come in handy. The tank capacity of landing ships and ships would double.
        But this opportunity was missed, and it won ... the "landing lobby", which was beautiful and with a parachute, and during the exercises, seemed much more important than in battle and for the benefit of the cause.
    4. +1
      8 December 2022 21: 39
      India decided to plunder its own funds and throw them away for its homemade product.
      1. 0
        17 December 2022 22: 31
        How rude you are. Do not plunder yourself, but master the allocated funds ©. Why are Indians worse than others!?
  2. +1
    8 December 2022 07: 04
    A dubious idea, in the age of anti-tank systems and combat helicopters.
    1. +12
      8 December 2022 07: 23
      The Philippines does not need to fight a war, but to smoke the Islamist terrorists Abu Sayyaf out of the jungle, and for this, MBTs are redundant. If the armor holds a DShK bullet, it’s already enough, and partisans are unlikely to have more serious calibers. RPG-7? So neither Abrams nor Leopard keep him in the barrel.
      1. +2
        8 December 2022 07: 26
        14.5 mm hold modern armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles.
        There are machine guns and small-caliber guns.
        1. +2
          8 December 2022 07: 33
          This tank says "Sabrah is fitted with armor protection systems to provide ballistic protection up to NATO STANG 4569 Level 4". That is, in the basic configuration, it holds 14,5 mm from all sides. With a mounted composite and remote sensing, it can also hold an RPG.
          1. -1
            8 December 2022 08: 33
            RPGs are also held by Stryker, as those who fought on them write.
            And the ATGM?
            1. +1
              8 December 2022 08: 50
              Well, it’s not the armor that “holds”, as it were, but the very “half-caliber gratings” that destroy RPG warheads without triggering. IMHO, the ATGM will be the same story. And if KAZ is attached, then the issue can be resolved with roofers.
              1. +1
                8 December 2022 08: 55
                Therefore, you can get by with modern armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles.
                1. +4
                  8 December 2022 09: 17
                  This is not obvious and is not the correct answer for all situations.
                  The same Israelis do not take such "light" tanks for themselves and do not get by with armored personnel carriers (and they have IMHO infantry fighting vehicles, they are not available as a class). The argument is that in a full-fledged war, the Merkava 4 will be more effective than a light tank. And for the current situation, if something is redundant, for example, protection against sabots, then it can be tolerated.
                  At the same time, there will be no Merkava 5 IMHO, but there will be another BT family.

                  Light tanks, IMHO, get their niche where they do not wait for the arrival of sabots "at maximum speed." RPG, ATGM, something small-caliber, while mobility is higher than that of MBT.
                  IMHO, the pioneers in the new generation of such machines are still the Chinese with the "mountain" Type15, BT5 / ZTQ-15

                  1. +7
                    8 December 2022 09: 30
                    The tank is created from the conditions of the theater. India needs a mountain light tank, the Philippines is needed for transfer between islands and work in the jungle, respectively, also a light tank.
                    When the ILC began preparing for war in the conditions of the Asia-Pacific Region, their Abrams were written off immediately.
                    1. +1
                      8 December 2022 10: 19
                      I agree.
                      It was unpleasant for the Indians in another fight on sticks with the Chinese to see "mountain" tanks - but there were no "own mountain tanks".

                      In terms of the ILC, there is an unobvious discussion going on, IMHO. If the KMP is "expeditionary units" - they captured the island and sit on it, hiding behind missiles (war in the Asia-Pacific Region), then yes, the commandant of the KMP is right, there is simply nowhere for tanks to work there. But if the ILC has to land and fight with combined arms units, then the lack of tanks can become a problem. IMHO, the dispute has theoretical significance for the ILC - the enemy, for which tanks are conditionally needed tomorrow, is not visible, but by the conditional day after tomorrow, let them change the task for the ILC, then the tanks will return. The situation is all the more amusing because the probably removed ILC tanks will go to Poland, so the tanks will deal with one of the two probable opponents of the ILC one way or another.
                  2. 0
                    8 December 2022 09: 45
                    In my opinion, the saturation of troops with helicopters with anti-tank systems calls into question the use of any armored vehicles.
                    1. +5
                      8 December 2022 10: 36
                      From ATGMs and RPGs, there is only one effective means - KAZ (and situational awareness request ).
                      If the conditional TOU is intercepted by the KAZ, then it is not very important how much armor the BT has. And it doesn’t matter at all how thick the frontal sheet is, if a roof-breaker flies into the BT, but there is no KAZ ....
                      saturation of troops with helicopters with anti-tank systems calls into question the use of any armored vehicles
                      this question has been raised since the 80s of the last century, especially after the wars involving Israeli helicopters. Similar exercises were conducted in the USSR, where, IMHO, they came to the conclusion that "it is better to have 100 tanks covered from the air than 1000 not covered."
                      The "sword and shield" competition has not stopped, and what we have seen since February is still flowers - Javelins, NLAUs and older anti-tank systems against T72 clones. Spike and MMP are on the way, IMHO ...
                      1. 0
                        8 December 2022 20: 21
                        Leclerc in Yemen withstood an ATGM hit in the driver's hatch - the driver was killed, the commander was wounded in the leg.
                      2. Eug
                        11 December 2022 17: 13
                        Products that are more efficient than LNG-9 (especially considering the price) are unlikely to appear in the near future.
            2. 0
              8 December 2022 09: 39
              RPGs are different! In Iraq, Abrams with RPGs were destroyed!
              1. 0
                27 February 2023 02: 12
                This myth has not been debunked only by the lazy
            3. +3
              8 December 2022 14: 02
              Quote: Maxim G
              RPGs are also held by Stryker, as those who fought on them write.

              EMNIP, there are statistics on the resistance of "Strikers" to RPGs only for PG-7V rounds. Against them - yes, the defense works fine. But there are simply no normal statistics for other types of shots for RPG-7 and other RPGs - since in those parts where the Strykers worked, these shots and RPGs were not widespread and were used extremely rarely.
              1. +1
                8 December 2022 19: 43
                The Americans claimed that there were arrivals and PG-7VR without penetration. Believe it or not - then everyone decides for himself. There could be arrivals at sharp angles, and then non-penetration cannot be surprising. But it seems to me that at a right angle, the PG-7VR should definitely pierce the Stryker in any body kit, I would even say - from side to side.
      2. +1
        5 February 2023 13: 59
        Quote: Nagan
        RPG-7? So neither Abrams nor Leopard keep him in the barrel.

        Did you check it yourself? Judging by the statements of the manufacturers and the experience of use, they perfectly hold RPGs around the entire perimeter.
  3. 0
    8 December 2022 07: 41
    Well, I don’t know how, for me, someone made a light sau better. any more sense
    1. 0
      8 December 2022 20: 31
      This is essentially an ersatz-sau, similar tanks can shoot at an angle of up to 46 degrees.
  4. -2
    8 December 2022 07: 53
    If there was interest from customers, they promised to work out the possibility of installing a 120-mm smoothbore gun.

    So, in my opinion, initially a turret with a 105 mm gun is unpromising, it was not even worth working out an installation of such a caliber even in the first options. With a smoothbore gun of 120 mm caliber, while maintaining a mass of up to 30 tons, it would be a very interesting option for the poor armies of small states, as well as for combat operations in corpse-accessible areas.
    1. +2
      8 December 2022 09: 20
      Perhaps they want to earn extra money on the supply of stale BC. This is primarily a product for business, to scare neighbors who have a maximum of something like Bulldogs and barmaley on carts ....
    2. 0
      8 December 2022 12: 48
      And it will not be cheaper even in 2 times. But will two such light tanks be better than one normal one?
    3. 0
      10 December 2022 10: 22
      If they could create a tank with a 120 mm gun in the same dimensions and weight culture, they would do it, however, the manufacturer himself says that such an option is being worked out. In general, your conclusion about the futility is erroneous:
      - There are more shells for the L7 in the world than for Soviet tanks, because this weapon, as it were, has been the standard since the 60s, and the range of BPs is huge.
      - The latest versions of OBPS, although inferior to 120-125mm OBPS, are not as critical as they might seem.
      - Increasing the caliber will greatly increase the weight of the vehicle, here the turret will have to be increased and the shells themselves are not light. An illustrative example is China, which has been building these mountain tanks, as if not since the 70s, they have always put smaller caliber guns on them.
      - The probability that such a machine will meet something in the jungle mountains that will not have enough impact of 105mm is not extremely small, but simply absent.
  5. -1
    8 December 2022 07: 56
    they are seen as a convenient means of dealing with obsolete medium tanks or early MBTs.

    But obsolete medium tanks and early MBTs are superior in armor protection, and everything else is being pulled up during modernization, while the Soviet old medium tanks and MBTs are also close in mass with much smaller dimensions. What ambush? There is nothing to do in the city at all, if only as a police tank))
    The only thing is - "they don't fight in a double-breasted now"
  6. Eug
    8 December 2022 08: 23
    If I did it myself - under 57 mm. automatic machine with circular protection from 30 mm. and the possibility of attaching additional armor. If you make good armor-piercing - enough for everyone, at least the RP will take down the entire body kit, and even against 57 mm. except for the forehead and corners of heavy armored vehicles, nothing can stand ...
    1. +3
      8 December 2022 09: 08
      The Philippine barmaley does not seem to have armored vehicles. Anyway, for now. So the priority is the firing range and the power of high-explosive fragmentation ammunition. Also, the turn signals and headlights are beautiful ...
  7. 0
    8 December 2022 10: 36
    I don't understand Jews. Good for easy money. But don’t they want to make their own platform from scratch for themselves and further for export? Askod is not the most successful platform. Even for purely commercial attempts. It would be better to create your own. They have a school and the financial situation allows. By ourselves, it is clearly more necessary and desirable with our own requirements. And so normal for those who are going to buy. They don't care what to take. Like women with big ears. Whoever shows the most beautiful advertisement will sell it. At the expense of our Octopus to India ... Why do they need it? It is clear to the Indian fool that the lancet + octopus = big broads. We don't need it either. And after the controversy about the reorganization of the Airborne Forces, they completely retired. In Ukraine, several tanks are burning every day, and not always from enemy tanks. If you take the Octopus with a body kit as it should be in the series, then excellent. But here our paratroopers will whine, as usual, that they need parachutes everywhere and on everything, which means they don’t need them. Let them then ride the BMP-1 without parachutes. One mess. That our politicians, that the military have one mess in their heads. Wanting and not wanting.
    1. +3
      8 December 2022 10: 43
      Why make a platform on the scale of the IDF and Israel itself? They even use ready-made solutions for the Merkava in terms of internal combustion engines and transmissions .... Israel still has a huge fleet of armored vehicles by the standards of normal countries ..... what to do with it?
  8. +1
    8 December 2022 10: 40
    It is strange, but neither the USSR nor the Russian Federation thought of unifying the BO on armored vehicles .... Not our way.
    1. +2
      8 December 2022 12: 31
      Despite the fact that 2A46 guns are at all))
      1. 0
        8 December 2022 13: 35
        I'm surprised how it happened...
  9. 0
    8 December 2022 12: 46
    It feels like it's purely a marketing hat. There are no noticeable advantages over obt.

    What is lightness? 30 tons? Well, that's it.
    Most likely he does not swim, he does not fly with a parachute. Take the T-55/62, the essence is the same.
    1. +3
      8 December 2022 19: 50
      There is a noticeable advantage over the T-55 and T-62. Firstly, a much more accurate fire control system, and secondly, the range of ammunition for 1-mm fluff is perhaps the most luxurious (in terms of diversity) of all existing tank guns. Not to mention the huge number of already manufactured shells. In the 2rd, for a 105-mm gun, the nomenclature is very weak, and the 3-mm from the T-115 is much weaker than the 100-mm L55 purely energetically and structurally. Penetration of the best L105 shells reaches 7 mm per 7 km and this is not the limit. In addition, the gun is extremely accurate. No wonder the Chinese removed 600 mm from the ZTZ-2 back in the early 59s, eventually replacing them with 100 mm.
      1. 0
        8 December 2022 21: 43
        Take the M60 if you are one of those. The essence is the same.
        1. 0
          9 December 2022 20: 08
          I understood your idea, but I was not talking about the confrontation between MBT and LT, but about the fact that the old L7 gun is being installed on new vehicles, that is, it is suitable, unlike 100-mm and 115-mm guns. For objective reasons.
          1. 0
            9 December 2022 23: 12
            But now I don't understand. Is it good because they put it on?
        2. +1
          10 December 2022 10: 52
          M-60 practically weighs 50 tons, t-55/62 36/37 tons, this is a significant increase in weight, not to mention the ratio of mass to power.
          1. 0
            10 December 2022 14: 34
            And you look a little higher about what we are talking about: the advantage due to the mass is not realized. That 30 tons, that 50 - there is not much difference. This is not an octopus that swims and can parachute (and where there is at least some logic, it differs slightly from a tank in price).
            It is claimed that the "light" car is CHEAPER. But the T-62 / M-60 is even cheaper, there are a lot of them in commercial quantities, etc.
            1. 0
              10 December 2022 15: 21
              In the jungle and mountains, there will be an advantage due to mass, where every kilogram and horsepower have weight. There is less oxygen, the engine produces less power, and you also need to drag 36-50 tons over some fierce shit, where the rainy season has been like a month and a half, I'm not even talking about the fact that it's possible and there are no bridges capable of withstanding such a load. If everything was so simple, the Chinese would not have created type 62 for such conditions, but would have used type 59, but they put it into production almost immediately, having just mastered the 59th.
              This light vehicle is cheaper than a new modern MBT, and not used tanks from 60 years ago.
              1. 0
                10 December 2022 16: 18
                And now let's look at the thrust-to-weight ratio and ground pressure of the Jewish light chariot. This car will not be more passable, it has these parameters at the level of the fourth merkava, if not worse.

                But the type 62 in this vein stands out for two important nuances: it surpasses the T-55 in terms of mobility and still costs several times cheaper: then the main part of the cost was precisely the gun, engine and hull.
                1. +1
                  10 December 2022 18: 35
                  And now let's look at the thrust-to-weight ratio and ground pressure of the Jewish light chariot.

                  ASCOD 2 has about 24 hp. per ton, I don’t know how much ground pressure there is, but something tells me that this indicator will not be worse than that of tanks half a century ago. The t-55 has 16 hp. per ton, the M-60 has similar performance. The specific pressure of both is about 0.8. Why it will not be more passable is the question.
                  But the type 62 in this vein is distinguished by two important nuances: it surpasses the T-55 in terms of mobility and still costs several times cheaper.

                  Yes, they only built it not because it was cheaper, but because it was much lighter and could climb where heavy equipment could not be banned, for example, only type 62 participated from China during the Vietnam-China conflict.
  10. The comment was deleted.
  11. 0
    28 March 2023 11: 04
    We would also finish the octopuses and put them into mass production.
    1. 0
      28 March 2023 11: 46
      Moreover, they are needed immediately with additional armor - hinged thick screens to hold 40mm in the forehead, on the side and 30mm sub-calibers and DZ, which would save at least from old shots of grenade launchers, such as spg-9 and all sorts of light ones like RPG-18 fly .. But with the possibility that these screens could be removed by the forces of the repair units of the airborne brigade / division, if necessary, landing the tank from the aircraft.