Military Review

Constructive vulnerabilities of the main combat vehicle AOI "Merkava Mk.4"

387
Constructive vulnerabilities of the main combat vehicle AOI "Merkava Mk.4"



Decision to develop your own tank It was adopted by Israel in 1970 after the refusal of the United Kingdom to sell tanks "Chieftain." Former tank commander of the AOI, retired Major General Yisrael Tal, author of the Israeli military doctrine on the use of armored forces, was appointed head of the development of the new tank.

The design of the tank was named Merkava - the chariot.

The development leader made a decision in principle to abandon the classic tank layout, which had previously been developed within the framework of the Soviet, American, German and British tank design schools. Being a professional tanker, I.Tal did not focus on the protection of the machine, but on the protection of her crew. To this end, he placed the engine compartment (MTO) in the nose of the case and applied a front-wheel drive tracked propulsive. The front fuel tanks located behind the lower frontal part of the hull, the armored partition between the tanks and the logistics, as well as the armor partition between the logistics and control compartment are used as additional protection for the crew.

The second fundamental difference between the "Merkava" and classic tanks was a significant increase in hull height (up to 1860 mm) while reducing the height of the turret. In making this decision, I.Tal was guided by the combat statistics of hit in tanks at the beginning of 1970 - more than half of the projectile strikes were in the projection of the tower.

As part of the tank was originally supposed to apply enhanced booking, which led to an increase in the bearing surface of the tracks by increasing their width and length. The first modification was protected by homogeneous armor, subsequent modifications increased the protection through the use of overhead modules of composite armor and side screens. In connection with the use of multi-layered armor with air gaps between the layers, the installation of elements of dynamic protection was impossible.



The tall hull allowed the engine and transmission to be linked in height, freeing up additional volume in the stern of the relatively long hull of the tank. As conceived by the main developer, this section was to be used to transport the reserve crew of the tank.



In order to implement this controversial decision, the tower shoulder strap was located in the classical style - in the center of the hull, which did not allow the weight of the tower to balance the weight of the engine with the transmission. As a result, the Merkava center of gravity shifted forward, which was reflected in the uneven placement of the track rollers in the longitudinal plane.

The armament of the first modification of the tank consisted of a 105-mm rifled unitary loading gun, two 7,62-mm machine guns (one of which was paired with a gun, the other was mounted on a turret), an 60-mm mortar installed inside the control compartment and firing fragmentation and lighting mines, and smoke mortars fixed outside the tower. In the aft niche of the turret there was a mechanized ammunition on 5 shots, increasing the rate of fire from the gun within the specified stock.



For the first time in tank building practice, all shots to a tank gun, cartons with cartridges and mines were in fiberglass refractory containers that withstand open flame for 45 minutes. In addition to this, the logistics, control and additional departments were equipped with a powerful fire extinguishing system. Aft fuel tanks were removed from the hull to separate lightly armored tanks.



Also for the first time in the practice of tank building in the serial tracked vehicle, the suspension rollers of the Christie rollers with an external arrangement of dual springs and tubular shock absorbers were used. This solution made it possible to double (up to 604 mm) the full travel of road wheels as compared to tanks equipped with a torsion bar suspension and to significantly expand the free volume of the hull. One half of the balancers of the road wheels were turned towards the nose, the other half towards the stern of the hull.

A modification of the Merkava Mk.1 tank was adopted by the Israel Defense Forces in October 1979. The first combat test tank passed in 1982 year during the First Lebanon War. The results of its combat use were ambiguous - on the one hand, the Merkava suffered small losses (up to 15 machines, of which 7 was irrevocable), on the other hand all the lost tanks were hit by ATGMs, since during the war there was not a single fire contact with the Syrian Soviet-made T-72 tanks.



The Merkav debut on the battlefield was badly damaged by the photo frames of one of the cars burnt by the ATGM at the Beirut airport. Due to the fact that these pictures went around all the major newspapers in the world and in order to rehabilitate the design of the newest Israeli tank, the Merkava staged firing at the T-72 Syrian tank, previously hit by the Tou ATGM and located in the neutral zone, was organized. The shooting was carried out after the conclusion of a truce between the warring parties under the cameras in the presence of the Chief of Staff of the IDF.

In subsequent years, the Merkava participated in all local military conflicts in southern Lebanon, as well as in police operations in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. In connection with the constant increase in the combat capabilities of the enemy’s anti-tank weapons, the Merkava tank was upgraded by increasing the caliber of the cannon and installing a modern fire control system, enhancing armor protection in the form of mounted composite armor modules and onboard screens, as well as increasing engine power due to an increase in tank mass.



The chassis of the “Merkava” has also undergone significant changes - the balancers of all road wheels were turned to the stern, the openly located tubular shock absorbers were replaced with blade-type, mounted in the thickness of the armor.

The latest version of the Merkava Mk.4, put into service in the 2004 year, weighs 70 tons, is equipped with a hp 1500 diesel engine, a five-speed automatic transmission and a 120-mm smooth-bore gun. The capacity of the mechanized ammo pack is increased to 10 shots. Suspended composite armor mounted on the sides and on the roof of the tower, as well as on the upper frontal hull details. The sides are protected by multi-layered screens, the bottom is a steel sheet installed with an air gap (with a decrease in clearance from 530 to 430 mm).



However, these measures led to the opposite result. While in the First Lebanese War 1982, the Merkava Mk.1 was used as the main battle tank (MBT) with a small level of losses, while in the Second Lebanon War 2007, the Merkava Mk.4 suffered a loss in approximately 50 machines (half of those who took part in the operation in the territory of South Lebanon), of which 10 were irretrievably destroyed.



As a result of the opposition from the Lebanese organization’s Hezbollah militia units, which rely on pre-prepared fortified areas (located in populated areas) and armed Soviet-made RPGs and anti-tank guided missiles with tandem shaped charges, the IDF command was forced to remove Merkava from the assault groups and take them to the second tier.



From this point on, the Merkava began to use self-propelled artillery systems for firing at the front edge of the defenders, since the magnitude of the tank gun and the gunners' qualifications did not allow them to mount fire on targets in the depths of urban areas of fortified areas. Left without a tank cover, the infantry of the assault groups suffered substantial losses.

The plan for the military company was thwarted — the IDF ground attack in southern Lebanon was stopped, Hezbollah’s rocket attacks on Israel increased throughout the Second Lebanon War and were stopped only after a truce between the opposing sides.

The main reason for the IDF’s refusal to use the Merkava as an MBT was the design vulnerabilities inherent in the very first modification of the car.

I.Tal, being the main ideologue of the original Merkava layout, made a fundamental mistake - he replaced the concept of tank protection with the concept of crew protection. At the same time, the method of protecting the crew was also chosen incorrectly - due to the substitution of a vital component of the tank structure - an engine block with a transmission. Thereby, one of the mandatory requirements for the OBT was ignored - countering the loss of travel.



At the same time, the protection of the hull forehead increased by less than 10 percent: the thickness of the upper frontal part together with the composite armor is 200 mm at an angle of 75 degrees, the thickness of the vertical partition between the nasal fuel tanks and MTO - 40 mm, the thickness of the vertical partition between the MTO and the control section - 80 mm, additional protection from the engine and transmission is estimated to 60 mm steel homogeneous armor.

But the situation with the protection of the Merkava from loss of stroke is even worse - the lower frontal part of a high body with a thickness of only 100 mm at an angle of 25 degrees cannot save the MTO from being hit by rocket-propelled grenades with RPG-29 type charges - the precharge pierces the lower frontal part , the main charge pierces the 40-mm septum and disables the engine with the transmission, simultaneously burning the fuel in the nose tanks.

In addition, the use of a front-drive tracked propulsor forces the drive gears into the nose of the hull into protruding niches. Even being covered with armor of a certain thickness, the gear mechanisms of the gearboxes and bearings, on which the axles of the driving wheels rest, are extremely sensitive to any distortion of their design. Therefore, an explosion on the lower frontal part, on a caterpillar or on the ground under the 152-155 mm tank of a high-explosive fragmentation projectile or a thermobaric grenade fired from an Hashim RPG, will also lead to loss of travel without breaking through the frontal armor.

Paradoxically, but the fact is that if the Merkava MTO were moved to the place of an additional aft compartment, and the built-in fuel tanks were placed in the treadmill sponsons, the empty volume in the nose could be filled with a composite cake of thickness 1500 mm, and all this without the risk of loss of travel in the case of partial penetration of armor protection or jamming of the onboard gearboxes.

The developers of the first modification of the tank made two more engineering mistakes: - they increased the height of the hull and placed the towing tower in the center of the hull.
The first mistake led to a sharp increase in zarvievogo volume. As a result, the 70-tonne Merkava Mk.4 has a 1,42 times less security (3,18 tons / cubic meter) than the 50-tonnes T-90MS (4,54 tons / cubic meter). It should be borne in mind that due to the massive introduction of the LMS, the combat statistics of the hitting of shells into the tank in 2000-ies has changed dramatically - now most of the strikes are in the hull, not the tower.

The second error led to a shift in the nose of the center of gravity of the machine. This causes a swing of the tank hull when firing on the move, negating the technical rate of fire of the gun provided by the semi-automatic loading mechanism.



A direct consequence of the original Merkava layout is also the degraded accuracy of aiming the cannon at the target when firing forward in the range of horizontal pointing angles + -15 degrees while the engine is running. The flow of warm air rising from the upper frontal part covering the heated engine causes distortion of the visibility of the target in a tank sight. Therefore, the main way of firing the Merkava with a running engine is to turn the gun sideways at an angle of more than 15 degrees, recorded in numerous photo and video frames. At the same time, the tank automatically substitutes its weakly protected board under attack of the enemy.



After the Second Lebanon War, the AOI attempted to upgrade the tank once again by installing a Trophy active defense system designed to intercept rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank missiles. 1 March 2011 year-ready attack elements, fired from a mortar, for the first time in a combat situation on the border with the Gaza Strip struck a rocket grenade fired at the Merkava.
But the Trophy has a fatal drawback - the radars for detecting rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank missiles are openly mounted on the tank turret and absolutely vulnerable to small-arms bullets weapons, not to mention the shrapnel and small-caliber shells. Therefore, in future clashes, IDF opponents armed with RPGs and anti-tank guided missiles will likely be included in the anti-tank sniper group, which will disable Trophy radars from a SVD or other rifle with a telescopic sight, so that their partners can then hit the tank out of portable equipment.

The recognition of the completion of the Merkava’s career as the main fighting vehicle of the AOI is that the Defense Research and Development Department of the Israel Defense Ministry embarked on the implementation of the Rakiya-Rakia project - (רקיע) - “Neosvod” to create a promising armored platform consisting of a set of specialized armored vehicles designed to replace the existing tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, self-propelled artillery installations, engineering vehicles and BREM.

The weight of one combat unit created on the Rakia platform is determined at the level from 35 to 40 tons. The main type of protection is considered to be a promising SAZ, which is capable of intercepting, inter alia, armor-piercing sub-caliber shells. During 2013, it is planned to prepare tactical and technical requirements and tender documentation for the creation of a promising platform for holding a competition among armored vehicle manufacturers. Planned term of putting into service - 2020 year.
Author:
Articles from this series:
Constructive vulnerabilities of the main combat vehicle AOI "Merkava Mk.4"
Constructive vulnerabilities of the main combat vehicle AOI "Merkava Mk.4". Continuation
387 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 08: 04 New
    +1
    Let the author not be offended, but he has a bunch of mistakes. First, note that Merkava-1 never shot at the T-72 since it was used in units on the Primorsky direction, and the only IDF collision with the T-72 tanks that were part of Syria's First Armored Division was on Damascus Highway and this was not a tank battle, and the ambush of the anti-tank company of the landing brigade against the Syrian vanguard. the second Lebanon war was not in the 2007, but in July-August of the 2006 of the year. During the Second Lebanon, only one Mk-4 machine was irretrievably lost and one was sent to the factory for repair. More 11 vehicles of this type damaged by ATGMs were returned to service in less than 48 hours. According to the recall of all, the tank proved to be excellent. It was used precisely as a classic breakthrough machine. During the breakthrough to Litania, it was the Quartet that broke through an anti-tank ambush, although 7 vehicles were damaged. After the end of the war, a plan was adopted to sharply increase purchases of the Mk-4.
    As for those / shortcomings, our tankers who had the opportunity to work on the training grounds at all western and almost all post-Soviet tanks (thanks to Ukraine), consider the four Lopard2A6 / 7 the only worthy competitors. Sorry, I will not go into the specifics of your mistakes. Nevertheless, thanks for the interesting article. hi
    1. Crang
      Crang 11 June 2013 08: 31 New
      20
      Quote: Aaron Zawi
      As for those / shortcomings, our tankers who had the opportunity to work on the training grounds at all western and almost all post-Soviet tanks (thanks to Ukraine), consider the Lopard2A6 / 7 to be the only worthy competitor.

      They are wrong. Your tank crews. "Leopard-2A6EX and A7" is worse than your 4-ki. Fear first of all the T-90A / MS, the Chinese ZTZ-99A2. From the West - AMX-56 Leclerc and Abrams too. Leperd has many shortcomings.
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 08: 46 New
        +2
        Quote: Krang

        They are wrong. Your tank crews. "Leopard-2A6EX and A7" is worse than your 4-ki. Fear first of all the T-90A / MS, the Chinese ZTZ-99A2. From the West - AMX-56 Leclerc and Abrams too. Leperd has many shortcomings.

        I am not a tanker. I’m from the engineering battalion of the tank brigade, but I’m used to trust the opinion of tankers.
        1. Crang
          Crang 11 June 2013 08: 49 New
          15
          So how do they know that? What they all mastered these machines or met with them in battle? Here you can only mathematically calculate.
          1. aksakal
            aksakal 12 June 2013 07: 41 New
            37
            Quote: Krang
            So how do they know that? What they all mastered these machines or met with them in battle? Here you can only mathematically calculate.
            - I read all the arguments, no one paid attention to this figure
            : It has 1,42 times less security (3,18 tons / cubic meter) than the 50-ton T-90MS (4,54 tons / cubic meter). . And the difference is quite considerable! Almost 1,5 tons of armor per cubic meter of space! You can, of course, yell that the armor from the Research Institute of Steel is not armor, but blotting paper, but it will only be op. The facts are that armor is comparable in quality, hence the much higher security of the T-90. We already read about the Mokrovka engine in Haaretz two years ago - there were problems with dvigla, this is a fact. Against this background, the dviglo of a Russian tank that withstands the most severe tests of the Saudis and Indians - of course, sucks.
            Here, the forum users, under pressure from professors and co, already agreed to name the carrot (and called it) the best tank, with a reservation "for their region, and I called it. In general, I read the features here, about the gearbox, remembered the problems of the dvigol, and here it was the figure is 1,42 times less secure (3,18 tons / cubic meter) than the 50-ton T-90MS (4,54 tons / cubic meter).
            Now I will not write about carrots, which is a good tank. So-so tank. The fact that there are some results in its application is, alas, just the Jewish crews are well trained. They act competently, once again, by stupidity, they do not poke their heads where other things are not necessary. This I have to admit, it is. But hence the false impression that carrots are carrots for all carrots! Alas, the Merkava tank, even in the fourth version, is a mediocre tank, advertised to the fullest, but the result of advertising was achieved by the selfless work of all crews, who were also well trained. On that I stand.
            In principle, all buyers of armored vehicles - and there are specialists there, even if the country does not produce tanks - do not buy Merkava. Even Colombia almost refused. This confirms my version. Forum users, read less gentlemen from Israel. Somehow they have a lot of misinformation. Either the children in the DPRK go hungry, then the carrots all the carrots, the carrots, then in Israel - democracy, and the physicist Mainunu is not considered laughing
            1. bask
              bask 12 June 2013 11: 29 New
              +2
              Quote: aksakal
              m 50-ton T-90MS

              Where he is the T-90MS, they are riveted for India. For the Russian army, they do not even plan purchases.
              And to fight, if it surrenders to Russian tanks, it’s with the latest Chinese Tour-99. And the Chinese have hundreds of them .., there will be thousands.
              This is the main problem and threat to Russia.
              And no one will wait until the age of 20 (((code for the troops will begin to receive the super-expensive Armata ,,))) Already now, the army needs a modern, relatively cheap tank. In thousands of pieces. T-90 MC, could become the main tank until the age of 20 !!!
              There is simply no time to develop something new.
              1. skeptic-
                skeptic- 13 June 2013 14: 06 New
                +3
                [quote = bask] [quote = aksakal] m 50-ton T-90MS [/ quote]
                Where he is the T-90MS, they are riveted for India. For the Russian army, they do not even plan purchases.
                And to fight, if it surrenders to Russian tanks, it’s with the latest Chinese Tour-99. And the Chinese have hundreds of them .., there will be thousands.
                This is the main problem and threat to Russia.

                Why are you soaring us with the Chinese? Yes, even if all Russians are seated in tanks, it’s all the same to tie in a traditional war, it’s pointless. Only tactical nuclear weapons will help neutralize claims. (why do they need radioactively contaminated territory, if now it is possible to get any raw materials, with home delivery)
            2. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 12 June 2013 20: 45 New
              -9
              They didn’t pay, because this is a figure from the ceiling. Why the author deduced it is completely incomprehensible, that would even argue about the calculation method.
              And the rest, well aksakal, You understand, if not only you, but all the forum users will write that Merkava is the worst tank or the best tank, this will not make it better or worse. So write, paper (keyboard) endures. hi
              1. vjhbc
                vjhbc 12 June 2013 21: 29 New
                11
                Aron do not be discouraged by everyone in his swamp frogs and more fat and beautiful sing
                Quote: Aaron Zawi
                They didn’t pay, because this is a figure from the ceiling. Why the author deduced it is completely incomprehensible, that would even argue about the calculation method.
                And the rest, well aksakal, You understand, if not only you, but all the forum users will write that Merkava is the worst tank or the best tank, this will not make it better or worse. So write, paper (keyboard) endures. hi
              2. Wolf
                Wolf 13 June 2013 20: 20 New
                16
                Aron Zaavi, Јa Serb and in a bad Russian hedgehog I will try to tell my opinion. From the beginning of Merkava a good tank, between 15 rays in the world. Normally, every tank today will not live long in battle, if on the contrary there are good soldiers. I have a few questions for you and your people. During the Second World War of Serbia, Jews were saved by the Nazis, when it was very dangerous, they ruled them home, they tried to save their lives, their wife and children. They fought as many as they could from 1941-1945 against the Nazis, and won at the end. At the same time, the fascist funded Ashkenazi capital. 1999 a new fascist and in the guise of NATO bombed us again, one thread from your people 1 word to protect our people, and again you are new to the fascist Ashkenazi financed capital, bastard! When Kude put one of the organizers for parts in Kosovo, one of the organizers of this morbid crime was beaten by a Jew from Israel, and Krisha by a French Jew, Bernard Kushner. Why were these people not beaten, destined in Israel for at least a few life terms, and the ray of death, instead of which, how many times did he hear received 1-2 years, and then conditionally? Is that proportionate? If you know Slovenia, the ORTHODOX patience of the people will be able to say good, or when something exceeds the measure then Khan. The media controlled by Rockefeller and Rothschild wrote such lodges about the Serbs, which is bad for man. Now the fascists will again organize a great glory for 3 where Serbe will declare guilty for 2014 world war, and the hero of Gavril Principle for Bin Laden began the 1th century. In fact, in World War I, Sax Koburgi and Rothschildi seized oil in the blisk east, Ashkenazi terrorized power in Russia, and during the Hubsburgs killed 20% of the population in Serbia. Little men didn’t ask for anything but a ghost, waiting for the moment, and then Zion would not be far away and their neutrality would not save either Rothschild or Rockefeller or Soros or Tisen or Warburg and the rest of the servant of Sax Coburg and the peace backstage. Tell yourself, and here we are, why are there so many such big bastards and criminals between your people?
            3. DimYang
              DimYang 12 June 2013 21: 04 New
              +8
              Well, the Jews are famous masters of lies. They have written so in the Torah (Old Testament-Five Books of the Torah).
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 12 June 2013 21: 23 New
                -9
                And detail? Well, just interesting 8)
                1. DimYang
                  DimYang 13 June 2013 12: 02 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Pimply
                  And detail? Well, just interesting 8)


                  If you are interested, you will find it yourself. For me, this is a long-resolved issue. I do not mean anyone specific. Here the whole question as a whole relates to the ideology of Judaism and its followers (both explicit and not explicit, even for themselves).
            4. skeptic-
              skeptic- 13 June 2013 13: 55 New
              +1
              Quote: aksakal
              Forum users, read less gentlemen from Israel. Somehow they have a lot of misinformation. Either the children in the DPRK go hungry, then the carrots all the carrots, the carrots, then in Israel - democracy, and the physicist Mainunu is not


              good negative
            5. ramsi
              ramsi 13 June 2013 22: 54 New
              +1

              - I read all the arguments, no one paid attention to this figure
              : has a 1,42-fold lower degree of protection (3,18 tons / cubic meter) than the 50-ton T-90MS (4,54 tons / cubic meter). . And the difference is quite considerable! Almost 1,5 tons of armor per cubic meter of space!
              Comrade Aksakal, your argument is simply deadly! Taking off my hat.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. posad
          posad 15 June 2013 07: 13 New
          +3
          Well, if you’re not a tanker, then why did you draw yourself here?
          The author presented a very competent article and showed that the tank is nothing of itself - a dead end.
          What to do? Well, Jews cannot create good weapons. CAN NOT. We figured out the tank. The iron dome is a complete sell. UAV - at the level of aircraft modeling circle. Sales are carried out due to the fact that in many armies they slammed the importance of their use. Now everything is being fixed at an accelerated pace, which means that soon Russian UAVs will be buying on the international market.
          The United States relies on Arabs - they are rich, not parasites, like Jews.
          And what remains? GREAT WAR in BV, during which Israel will become! So the suitcase station ..... and then ....., but not to Russia
          1. Mih1974
            Mih1974 14 January 2018 02: 47 New
            +1
            And by the way, the war in Syria just allowed Russia to "show" and to see the whole World - whose weapons and how they are fighting. good good
            Here are brief conclusions (amateur):
            the bombing is an unconditional and undeniable superiority of Russia, the hephaestus system has especially developed. which, unlike "GBU 49" is installed on the "carrier" and not destroyed with the bomb. good
            Tanks - the complete superiority of Russian tanks, they were burned a lot by Dada, but also many of the modern Russian tanks showed their real ability to withstand the hit of Western anti-tank weapons. Whereas it was precisely Western tanks that were destroyed by all visible ATGMs, and what is more sad, they were not taken "prisoner", because of their whimsicality and the impossibility of being serviced by "barmel men." negative Ethically, the Turks framed the "mythical" German Leopard lol a small failed attack on the barmalei and the myth of the “invulnerability” of leopards vanished like smoke. laughing
            UAVs are a difficult question, especially after the video from our fighters to NATO UAVs, which showed their high vulnerability (well, everyone knew that already, but for some reason they thought that “the UAV era is coming”), but also showed that UAVs are becoming an indistinguishable part of the modern War. By the way, Israeli UAVs did not manifest themselves in any way (or this was not announced). The Americans also transferred the main burden of bombing to aircraft belay . Which is very surprising. Just as suddenly, a problem arose - the fight against small UAVs.
            Artillery showed itself perfectly, perhaps even all indiscriminately. Even such a nightmare (in accuracy and meaningfulness) as ballonets and those had their effect.
            Air defense is a very strange situation with her. In fact, the Russian "big" air defense - just watching, and the whole load and then against the UAV fell on the "shell" (which fellows). But Israeli air defense screwed up in full. Yes, yes, I'm talking about the case when they could not shoot down a Russian (presumably) UAV over its territory, neither the air defense, nor the "dome" nor even the fighter could do anything. belay
            You can’t even discuss about the shooting - EVERYONE and everywhere fought with "Kalash", neither the M-4, nor the Tavorg (or whatever it was) or the Naglov or French shooting marks. Yes, all the sniper samples were probably run in, but this is a very specific weapon and they won’t win the war.
      2. T-130
        T-130 11 June 2013 13: 33 New
        11
        Abrams? They made fun of him, in Iraq they beat him with a heavy machine gun, and you level him up with tanks!
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 11 June 2013 14: 19 New
          -4
          But about how Abrams from a heavy machine gun - more
          1. Kars
            Kars 11 June 2013 14: 30 New
            15
            Quote: Pimply
            But about how Abrams from a heavy machine gun - in more detail

            there was such a moment. This cannot be taken away - but to build whole theories on it is superfluous.
            In Chechnya, the T-72 was disabled from the KPVT. What should I do now?
            1. cth; fyn
              cth; fyn 11 June 2013 21: 43 New
              +2
              What, what, armor to hang in problem areas, that's what.
          2. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 11 June 2013 14: 40 New
            +3
            Quote: T-130
            in Iraq they beat him with a heavy machine gun, and you level him up with tanks!

            Quote: Pimply
            But about how Abrams from a heavy machine gun - more

            About the "heavy machine gun" - it is said loudly. There was a case of friendly fire with the "Bradley" (20mm gun) over the grill, where Abrams has a radiator. The tank is out of order (if I remember correctly).
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 01 New
              +2
              Then it’s more clear
              1. Kars
                Kars 11 June 2013 15: 12 New
                14
                Bad_gr
                About the "heavy machine gun" - it is said loudly. There was a case of friendly fire with the "Bradley" (20mm gun) over the grill, where Abrams has a radiator. The tank is out of order (if I remember correctly).


                for starters, Bradley had 25 mm. And these are two different episodes. An episode with a machine gun is a damage to the APU tank of the Marine Corps. Placed in an abandoned basket.
                1. saturn.mmm
                  saturn.mmm 12 June 2013 21: 15 New
                  +2
                  I fully support Kars on the Internet, you can find all the details, thoroughly with the photo.
          3. Black Colonel
            Black Colonel 11 June 2013 15: 55 New
            15
            I don’t know from the machine gun, but I shot the BMP-2 with 900 m of Abrams from a 30 mm gun so that it burned to the ground. Not the last role was played by the executed APU (oil leaked through leaks into the engine and it caught fire)
          4. anomalocaris
            anomalocaris 12 June 2013 03: 41 New
            +7
            There have been cases. I even watched a video on YouTube.
            In the aft niche of the tower at the "Abrams" is located APU. Moreover, it is extremely weakly armored. So defeating her with a heavy machine gun is very possible. This is followed by ignition of fuel and ... In general, that's all. A thick, polar fox fits this waddle.
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 12 June 2013 10: 45 New
              +5
              Quote: anomalocaris
              In the aft niche of the tower at the "Abrams" is located APU.

              APU at Abrams was placed in three places:

              back right

              On the tower

              on the right fenestrated shelf (in the punch)
              Now they do not put the APU at all, replacing 4 additional accumulators (which is not a full replacement for the APU)
              1. saturn.mmm
                saturn.mmm 12 June 2013 21: 18 New
                +1
                Quote: Bad_gr
                Now they do not put the APU at all, replacing 4 additional accumulators

                So normal boys learn from their mistakes, not like the Jews from strangers.
          5. skeptic-
            skeptic- 13 June 2013 14: 15 New
            0
            Quote: Pimply
            But about how Abrams from a heavy machine gun - more


            Destruction of Abrams after the defeat of the feed, power plant. Burning fuel flowed into the MTO, as a result, the tank could not be restored. Facts and photos in previous articles.
          6. gremlin1977
            gremlin1977 14 June 2013 22: 21 New
            0
            the tank wasn’t knocked out but the additional energy installation at the rear of the turret was disabled (it is weakly armored). And it serves to operate the tank with the engine turned off, it eats a lot of diesel fuel too abrash))))))
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 14 June 2013 23: 39 New
              +2
              Quote: gremlin1977
              the tank wasn’t knocked out but it disabled an additional energy installation behind the turret (it is weakly armored).

              The beginning of the APU fire.
              Burning fuel from the APU flowed into the engine compartment. Subsequently, the tank burned down.
      3. RPD
        RPD 11 June 2013 13: 34 New
        +6
        when another Chinese will meet a Jew)))))
        1. Revolver
          Revolver 11 June 2013 20: 04 New
          +5
          I do not think that Israel will be delighted by having bordered the border with China. All hope for Russia, including the T-90. So that it wasn’t like in that ancient joke: "So far, everything is calm on the Finnish-Chinese border."
        2. atalef
          atalef 11 June 2013 20: 22 New
          12
          Quote: RPD
          when another Chinese will meet a Jew)))

          Last week . we have a lot of them. engaged in repairs, tiles are laid mainly. Narrow-eyed prices are breaking. already more expensive than the Arabs. But there was a time when they worked almost for nothing. Of course they work quickly (not a couple of Arabs with their coffee and smoke breaks), but they need an eye and an eye, hack-workers are scary and really ... the client is probably their sport.
          1. DimYang
            DimYang 12 June 2013 21: 08 New
            +5
            The most interesting thing is that the Chinese are called "Jews of the East."
        3. Hunghuz
          Hunghuz 12 June 2013 07: 26 New
          +8
          hi but tell me) in Lebanon, a couple of narrow streets made baricades a little lower than one meter) Merkava-4 climbed on it and hung from below at Hezbaldy with eggs and pace ...))) prada from a very close distance of their RPG-7 ) Lehaim panovu)))
      4. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 11 June 2013 19: 17 New
        +4
        In fact, the Leopard has always been superior to Abrams. It is not entirely correct to cite ZTZ-99A2 as an example - according to all sources, this MBT is inferior to modern MBT (T-90, Abrams, Leopard, Merkava). Well, Leclercans are generally famous for their insecurity and complexity.
      5. vjhbc
        vjhbc 12 June 2013 21: 26 New
        +3
        Yes, we have called T-72 T-90A / MS in our guns and we are screaming a super tank for the whole world, but in fact the best tank is the T-80 leopard and the Ukrainian modernized T-64 stronghold
        Quote: Krang
        Quote: Aaron Zawi
        As for those / shortcomings, our tankers who had the opportunity to work on the training grounds at all western and almost all post-Soviet tanks (thanks to Ukraine), consider the Lopard2A6 / 7 to be the only worthy competitor.

        They are wrong. Your tank crews. "Leopard-2A6EX and A7" is worse than your 4-ki. Fear first of all the T-90A / MS, the Chinese ZTZ-99A2. From the West - AMX-56 Leclerc and Abrams too. Leperd has many shortcomings.
    2. Vadivak
      Vadivak 11 June 2013 08: 44 New
      +6
      And where is this sleepy ermine Kars interesting?
    3. Yarbay
      Yarbay 11 June 2013 08: 47 New
      13
      Quote: Aaron Zawi
      Let the author not be offended, but he has a bunch of mistakes.

      Quote: atalef

      Original lies

      Guys, and the author wrote the truth that during the Lebanon war they took the tanks to the second echelon and used them as self-propelled guns ???
      this is, to say the least, an incompetent solution!
      Could this really be in your army ??
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 09: 20 New
        +8
        Quote: Yarbay

        Guys, and the author wrote the truth that during the Lebanon war they took the tanks to the second echelon and used them as self-propelled guns ???
        this is, to say the least, an incompetent solution!
        Could this really be in your army ??

        Sometimes applied. But basically during the VLV the tank will dream of its intended purpose. Those. fire and armor covered the infantry. When disassembling flights, two extremely unsuccessful cases of the use of tanks were identified. Near Beit Jabal, when the tanks were simply used as a lightning rod to allow the infantry to escape from the fire when breaking through to Lithuania, when in Vaadi-Saluki reconnaissance launched an anti-tank ambush. By the way, the “fours” were used in Vaadi, and although seven cars were damaged, they all retained combat effectiveness and the battalion did not leave a single vehicle and went to Lithuania.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 11 June 2013 11: 15 New
        +1
        because to use "merkava" as SAMAhodki, the same diplomas decided .....
      4. Rumata
        Rumata 11 June 2013 12: 49 New
        -8
        Quote: Yarbay
        Guys, and the author wrote the truth that during the Lebanon war they took the tanks to the second echelon and used them as self-propelled guns ???

        As a direct participant in those events, I can definitely say that it is not true, like so much in the article. The author began for health, and finished for repose. By the way, for some reason, in all similar articles, they really do not like to write about KAZ, which shows itself very well both in real conditions and in exercises ...
    4. Geisenberg
      Geisenberg 11 June 2013 13: 15 New
      +6
      Quote: Aaron Zawi
      consider the only worthy competitor of the four Lopard2A6 / 7.


      This is a mistake. The fact that your tankers liked the tank does not mean that others are not dangerous. No wonder the T72 Syrians kissed ...
      1. Kars
        Kars 11 June 2013 13: 23 New
        +1
        Quote: Geisenberg
        No wonder the T72 Syrians kissed.

        Did they have a choice?

        for me PERSONALLY merkava 4 is just in fourth place (if you exclude KAZ since this is attachment and you can put money on any tank in principle)
        1. atalef
          atalef 11 June 2013 13: 41 New
          +1
          and who are the first three?
          1. Kars
            Kars 11 June 2013 13: 45 New
            +1
            BM Oplot and nothing else (this is the principle)
            Challenger 2
            Leopard 2
            1. atalef
              atalef 11 June 2013 13: 55 New
              0
              Quote: Kars
              BM Oplot and nothing else (this is the principle)
              Challenger 2
              Leopard 2

              Not a bad company, even if 4.
              good
            2. bask
              bask 11 June 2013 16: 06 New
              +9
              Quote: Kars
              BM Oplot and nothing else (this is the principle)
              Challenger 2
              Leopard 2

              In my opinion, this is not a principle, but a policy !!!
              If you put the tanks in place of the pedestal.
              In the classic combined arms battle, with the use of tanks from opponents against each other.
              No. 1 K2,, Black Panther ,,.
              With the storming of cities, in urban combat, asymmetric warfare.
              No. 1 MBT ,, Merkava-4 ,,.
              The rest of MBT, approximate equality in all respects including the T-90MS !!!
              This is a principle, not a policy!
              1. Kars
                Kars 11 June 2013 16: 16 New
                +2
                Quote: bask
                In my opinion, this is not a principle, but a policy !!!

                This is MY principle, in principle I can still put T-80UD in second place if I get angry.

                Quote: bask
                No. 1 K2,, Black Panther ,,
                Will take leopard places, how it goes into mass production
                1. bask
                  bask 11 June 2013 16: 30 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Kars
                  This is MY principle, in principle I can still put T-80UD in second place if I get angry.

                  Everyone has their own opinion-PRINCIPLE.
                  The principle excludes the discussion on this topic.
                  Quote: Kars
                  Will take leopard places, how it goes into mass production

                  You could say that.
                  But ,, Merkava-4,, anyway, is No. 1 in conditions of urban battle and asymmetric counter-guerrilla war !!!
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 11 June 2013 16: 35 New
                    +6
                    Quote: bask
                    But ,, Merkava-4,, anyway, is No. 1 in conditions of urban battle and asymmetric counter-guerrilla war !!!

                    Well, I don’t know here the matter is more about preparing the Israeli infantry and approach to the matter than about the design of the tank itself. Give it to the Syrians everything will be the same as with the old T-72 shielded sandbags and construction debris and fittings.
                    1. bask
                      bask 11 June 2013 18: 01 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Kars
                      I don’t know here, it’s more about the preparation of the Israeli infantry and the approach to business, rather than the design

                      The complex measures how interaction with infantry and heavy engineering equipment, D-9, combat engineer units, UAVs, helicopters.
                      Tank ,, merkava ,, designed for this theater, Israel.
                      Maximum simplicity and protection in the design of the hull and turret of the tank.
                      And the maximum saturation with electronics, and ammunition, for various purposes.
                      And if you look at it, it’s the construction of the “Merkava” there, I agree there is nothing breakthrough. Everything was invented long before the creation of the “Merkava” !!!
                      Once again, the concept-ideology of creation, Merkava-4, is the maximum protection of the crew. Increased firepower due to modern SLA + ammunition.
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 11 June 2013 18: 47 New
                        +1
                        Quote: bask
                        And if you look at it, it’s the construction of the “Merkava” there, I agree there is nothing breakthrough. Everything was invented long before the creation of the “Merkava” !!!

                        this can and will stop.
                      2. atalef
                        atalef 11 June 2013 18: 50 New
                        -3
                        Quote: bask
                        Everything was invented long before the creation of, Merkava ,, !!!

                        Quote: Kars
                        this can and will stop

                        Yes, the same alphabet was invented (Russian) by Cyril and Methodius, whether on this basis they are co-authors of, for example, Pushkin, Yesenin, Dostoevsky and even all the comments on this site hi
                2. svp67
                  svp67 12 June 2013 14: 22 New
                  +6
                  Quote: Kars
                  This is my principle, in principle I can still T-80UD in second place

                  Of course I act on the principle - "Yes, he is a" son of a bitch ", but he is OUR" son of a bitch "" you can still not ...
                  For me, the Ural “OBNUMX” is cooler than the “Oplot” will be ...

                  Not to mention the Black Eagle
                  1. bask
                    bask 12 June 2013 15: 30 New
                    0
                    Quote: svp67
                    Not to mention the Black Eagle

                    I agree excellent MBT could succeed.
                    Why did they fail ??? Unification beautiful tank ruined.
                    But the assault tank is still needed, specifically for urban combat. An armored, impenetrable pillbox ..
                    OBJECT 292: 152 mm gun. To do this, of course, I had to create a new tower, but the chassis from the T-80 tank.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 12 June 2013 17: 55 New
                      0
                      Quote: bask
                      Why did they fail ??? Unification beautiful tank ruined.

                      here is pure POLICY ...
                  2. Kars
                    Kars 12 June 2013 16: 36 New
                    +2
                    Quote: svp67
                    Of course I act on the principle - "Yes, he is a" son of a bitch ", but he is OUR" son of a bitch "" you can still not ...
                    For me, the Ural “ob187” is cooler than the “Oplot”

                    Of course, but then I don’t have to make such an effort as myself.

                    A black eagle should not be touched ((((
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 12 June 2013 16: 59 New
                      0
                      Quote: Kars
                      Of course, but then I don’t have to make such an effort as myself.
                      A black eagle should not be touched ((((

                      Yes, drop it ... what a special effort- typing a phrase on the keyboard ... Not funny.
                      And most importantly, why did "Cho" suddenly become a "SACRED COW"? The names are not confused?
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 12 June 2013 17: 28 New
                        +3
                        Quote: svp67
                        Yes, drop it ... what a special effort- typing a phrase on the keyboard ... Not funny

                        Well, I thought you were more serious about your words.
                        Quote: svp67
                        And most importantly, why did "Cho" suddenly become a "SACRED COW"? The names are not confused?

                        Well, how did the CHO die not thanks to an external adversary, but was viciously tortured by a clique from UVZ, which now assimilates money for A, and there is no end in sight, even though it was promised to 15
                      2. svp67
                        svp67 12 June 2013 17: 37 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Kars
                        Well, I thought you were more serious about your words.
                        Come on, we won’t continue this topic, otherwise we’ll obviously go in the wrong place ..
                        Quote: Kars
                        Well, how did the CHO die not thanks to an external adversary, but was viciously tortured by a clique from UVZ, which now assimilates money for A, and there is no end in sight, even though it was promised to 15
                        “Armata” will be presented next year, here it is with “CHO”, but fortunately, politics is involved ... But how many good projects were “strangled” by the Malyshevtsy? That having experience on the “Rebel”, “Boxer” and “Hammer” still can not give anything “uproar” ...
                        UVZ didn’t have such a reserve, but now everything seems to be changing for the better for UVZ
                      3. Kars
                        Kars 12 June 2013 17: 44 New
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        Come on, we won’t continue this topic, otherwise we’ll obviously go in the wrong place.

                        Think you care what you want?
                        Quote: svp67
                        "Armata" will be, it will be presented next year

                        Well last year, they said the same thing, one to one.
                        Quote: svp67
                        But HOW MUCH Malyshevtsev “strangled” good projects? That having experience on the “Rebel”, “Boxer” and “Hammer” still can not give anything “uproar”


                        and WHY? who needs it and who pays for it? I personally hoped that Armata would revive interest in promising tanks, and the customer would come to us the same China, but alas, UVZ is not encouraging.
                      4. svp67
                        svp67 12 June 2013 18: 00 New
                        0
                        Quote: Kars
                        Think you care what you want?
                        free-will ...
                        Quote: Kars
                        and why? Who needs it and who will pay for it?
                        it is strange to hear this from a person who is not only a patriot of his country, but also an ardent lover of tanks ... but why is a new weapon being created? Apparently in order to surpass the enemy’s weapons, in the worst case, and in the best case, the neighbor, so that he would have moderate appetites.
                      5. Kars
                        Kars 12 June 2013 18: 06 New
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        free-will ...

                        naturally.
                        Quote: svp67
                        it is strange to hear this from a person who is not only a patriot of his country, but also an ardent lover of tanks.

                        if you think better, there won’t be any oddities. And the fact that I am an ardent tank lover will not make me personally finance a useless undertaking in the near future.
                        Quote: svp67
                        Apparently in order to surpass the enemy’s weapons, in the worst case, and in the best case, the neighbor, so that he would have moderate appetites.

                        Well, so we with BM Oplot surpassed.
                      6. svp67
                        svp67 12 June 2013 23: 32 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Kars
                        Well, so we with BM Oplot surpassed.
                        What, have you exceeded? T90MS has a better scope, so a duel, which is unlikely under current conditions, will pass 50 \ 50. And since that Oplotov, that the MS can be counted on the fingers, the good old T72 and T64 will fight ...
                      7. Kars
                        Kars 12 June 2013 23: 40 New
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        T90MS

                        There is no T-90MS, how do you adopt it, even if on paper you will be telling something. And to your disappointment, BM Oplot is now better than a demonstrator of t-90MS technologies and to recount them with ONE finger. And besides, you can In principle, delete from the list due to the presence of nuclear weapons, and your obligations when Ukraine refused its nuclear weapons,
                      8. svp67
                        svp67 12 June 2013 23: 55 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Kars
                        And to your disappointment, now BM Oplot is better than a demonstrator of t-90MS technologies and that to recount them with ONE finger is enough.

                        Well, rejoice "have given" Russia. Well, well done, well done, they were able to bring the Soviet development to some logical perfection. and then what? What is the experience of its operation? How good is she, how are you trying to describe? In three years we’ll find out, the Thais will tell ...
                      9. Kars
                        Kars 13 June 2013 00: 02 New
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        Well, rejoice "did" Russia

                        not so much Russia, how many UVZ

                        Quote: svp67
                        development through some logical perfection

                        But you ruined the prospects and two design bureaus of Leningrad and Omsk, and you do not need to talk about TCP and modernization of T-72
                        Quote: svp67
                        What is the experience of its operation?

                        For years, 6 has been driving various models, everything is more or less clear.
                        Quote: svp67
                        In about three years we’ll find out, the Thais will tell ..
                        They will tell where they are denuts, and not tell Khlopotov the fantasy is enough,
                      10. svp67
                        svp67 13 June 2013 00: 06 New
                        0
                        Quote: Kars
                        not so much Russia, how many UVZ

                        "Don't give me a gop ..."
                        Quote: Kars
                        But you ruined the prospects and two design bureaus of Leningrad and Omsk, and you do not need to talk about TCP and modernization of T-72

                        Well, at the expense of prospects, you are too much ... And at the expense of design bureaus, the world is changing - so many design bureaus are not needed now, and not everything is good on this issue ... Not so much the “Malyshevtsy” are loaded ... everything is Soviet wealth torment ...
                      11. Kars
                        Kars 13 June 2013 00: 09 New
                        +3
                        Quote: svp67
                        "Don't give me a gop ..."

                        Already, already the last hope for Armata.
                        Quote: svp67
                        we need so many KBs now,

                        Leningrad would have been better, but there probably property is more expensive.
                    2. svp67
                      svp67 13 June 2013 00: 09 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Kars
                      For years, 6 has been driving various models, everything is more or less clear.
                      They can drive them for 20 years, but one thing is the tank in the hands of the tester, and quite another in the hands of combatant drivers ...
  • Pimply
    Pimply 12 June 2013 18: 16 New
    -2
    The black eagle is not a series, with unknown characteristics.
  • Blackgrifon
    Blackgrifon 11 June 2013 19: 22 New
    +4
    Quote: bask
    No. 1 K2,, Black Panther ,,.


    Why exactly K2 - it seems to be very expensive and has never passed the "fire test"?
  • shasherin_pavel
    shasherin_pavel 24 June 2013 18: 28 New
    0
    The strange name "Black Panther" is roughly the same as "Black Negro", the panther itself is the "black" leopard of South America. So you can write "Lion without a mane" instead of a cougar.
  • Alexander D.
    Alexander D. 11 June 2013 20: 05 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    BM Oplot and nothing else (this is the principle)
    Challenger 2
    Leopard 2

    And why the second Challenger? What is its advantage over Leopard 2A?
    1. Kars
      Kars 11 June 2013 20: 18 New
      +5
      the main thing is that the first place of the question did not cause.
      1. Alexander D.
        Alexander D. 11 June 2013 23: 38 New
        +1
        There is no doubt about the first place !!! good
        But we must pay tribute to the fact that in terms of the LMS and the shells the Israelis are definitely ahead of both Ukrainians and Russians combined (unfortunately). By SLA it is necessary to understand not only optics, but also TIUS with navigation systems.
        1. svp67
          svp67 12 June 2013 14: 28 New
          +4
          Quote: Alexander D.
          There is no doubt about the first place !!!
          Oh, whether ...
      2. svp67
        svp67 12 June 2013 14: 26 New
        0
        Quote: Kars
        the main thing is that the first place of the question did not cause.

        You just don’t want to hear counterarguments ...
      3. svp67
        svp67 12 June 2013 15: 27 New
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        the main thing is that the first place of the question did not cause.
        Just because no one takes it seriously ...
        1. Kars
          Kars 12 June 2013 16: 38 New
          +3
          ))))))))))))
          Quote: svp67
          Just because no one takes it seriously.

          Quote: svp67
          That you just do not want to hear counter-arguments.

          Quote: svp67
          Oh li

          ))))))) well, they didn’t take the minus, as did a couple of three people, including the lover of the black eagle - but he at least commented on something.
        2. Arkan
          Arkan 12 June 2013 16: 53 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          Just because no one takes it seriously ...

          Oh well there, Oplot is not a frail tank! good smile It’s a pity that they are few in number. (((
          1. svp67
            svp67 12 June 2013 17: 03 New
            +3
            Quote: Arkan
            Oh well there, Oplot is not a frail tank! It’s a pity that they are few in number. (((
            The tank then it may still nothing, although a lot of questions,

            - there isn’t enough space in the new tower that such a “bandura” was installed before the commander ... How to protect it from fragments and bullets ...,
            - as with visibility on the sides from the place of the m-in? I don’t think so, so all these miracles - bulwarks will remain in the very first forest planting ...
            1. Kars
              Kars 12 June 2013 17: 32 New
              +1
              Quote: svp67
              he can still do nothing, although a lot of questions raise questions,

              What are weird questions.

              Quote: svp67
              there isn’t really enough space in the new tower that such a “bandura” was installed in front of the commander ... How to protect it from fragments and bullets ...

              In seen on a white eagle? Or Leclerc ?, but from fragments and bullets it is just protected normally, only the optics are vulnerable, but so is everyone.
              Quote: svp67
              - as with visibility on the sides from the place of the m-in? I think not so

              think so in vain.

              Quote: svp67
              all these miracles - bulwarks will remain in the first forest planting ...
              But it protects the crew well, and only try to not damage this bulwark in the interests of the crew.
            2. Kars
              Kars 12 June 2013 17: 35 New
              +5
              And optical instruments and their external / visual appearance very much depend on the proportions of the tower itself))))
            3. svp67
              svp67 12 June 2013 17: 49 New
              +4
              Quote: Kars
              And optical instruments and their external / visual appearance very much depend on the proportions of the tower itself))))

              that is, what does not depend on the designer genius? But the “car builders" were able to install the new device in the T90 tower, just below the T80, without depriving the commander of the transformer substation ...
            4. Kars
              Kars 12 June 2013 17: 54 New
              +3
              Quote: svp67
              But the “car builders" were able to the T90 tower

              What could they do?
            5. svp67
              svp67 12 June 2013 18: 05 New
              +2
              Quote: Kars
              What could they do?

              To do what the "kids" could not. namely, to establish a new commander’s sight so that it does not interfere with the installation of a backup device - TKN and use ZPU
            6. Kars
              Kars 12 June 2013 18: 21 New
              +1
              Quote: svp67
              Do what h

              Do not self-deceive.

              And by the way, much difference in size is not visible.

              OBSERVATION AND ORIENTATION DEVICES
              Daytime observation devices
              TNPO-160 device
              A type
              prismatic, with heating of the input and output windows
              Amount:
              at the commander
              1 in the block and 1 in the spare parts
              at the driver
              3 in the mine in front of the hatch and 1 in the spare parts
              Increase, krat
              1
              Field of view, city .:
              in the vertical plane
              5
              in the horizontal plane
              36
              Viewing angle in the horizontal plane, degrees.
              78
              Periscope, mm
              160
              TNP-165A device
              A type
              prismatic
              Number, pcs.
              at the commander
              2 in the manhole cover
              at the gunner
              3 in the tower and 1 in the spare parts
              Multiplicity of increase, krat
              1
              Field of view, city .:
              in the vertical plane
              7
              in the horizontal plane
              34
              Viewing angle in the horizontal plane, degrees.
              71
              Periscope, mm
              165
              Hydropneumatic cleaning system for viewing devices of the hull and turret
              It is intended for cleaning sight glasses and protective glasses of sights from dirt with liquid, and from dust and snow - with air.

              Night device of the driver’s mechanic TVN-5
              A type
              periscopic, binocular with 2nd generation electron-optical converter
              Quantity
              1
              Increase, krat
              1
              Field of view angle:
              in the vertical plane
              27
              in the horizontal plane
              36
              Range of vision of the road surface:
              In passive mode with ENO from 3 · 10-3 to 5 · 10-3 lux, m, not less
              180
              In the active mode with ENO not less than 3 · 10-3 lux, m, not less
              80
              Orienteering device
              A type
              gyro-feed
              Mark
              GPK-59
            7. svp67
              svp67 12 June 2013 19: 01 New
              0
              Horizontal viewing angle, degrees 78
              I will express my doubts not in the angle, but in the range at O ​​and 78 degrees ...
            8. Kars
              Kars 12 June 2013 19: 07 New
              +1
              Quote: svp67
              I will express my doubts not in the angle, but in the range of O and 78 degrees ..

              ??
            9. svp67
              svp67 12 June 2013 19: 33 New
              0
              Quote: Kars
              ??

              in the range of vision at these angles ...
            10. Kars
              Kars 12 June 2013 19: 35 New
              +1
              Quote: svp67
              in the range of vision at these angles ...

              And what? Do you want to compare with something?
            11. svp67
              svp67 12 June 2013 22: 07 New
              0
              Quote: Kars
              Quote: svp67
              in the range of vision at these angles ...

              And what? Do you want to compare with something?

              ________________________________
            12. Kars
              Kars 12 June 2013 23: 14 New
              +1
              And what kind of pictures are you?
  • Arkan
    Arkan 12 June 2013 17: 59 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    And optical instruments and their external / visual appearance very much depend on the proportions of the tower itself))))

    Yes, but it seems to me that “Oplot” was supposed to set another sight (the impression is that it even interferes with the anti-aircraft machine gun, however, I could be wrong).
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 07 New
    +3
    Quote: Arkan
    (the impression is that it even interferes with the anti-aircraft machine gun, however - I could be wrong)

    Hindered, therefore, the necessary changes were carried out.
  • Arkan
    Arkan 12 June 2013 18: 14 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Hindered, therefore, the necessary changes were carried out.

    Thank you, I didn’t know!
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 17: 51 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    But it protects the crew well, and only try to not damage this bulwark in the interests of the crew.


    interests often conflict with reality, in this case with the skill of mechanized water and commanding controllability ... how much does the commander see from his place, precisely when moving in limited dimensions and what is the sector of fire at ZPU against ground targets ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 01 New
    +3
    Quote: svp67
    interests often conflict with reality

    The dead crew and the burned tank do not have any contradictions in principle. The main issue here is identification of corpses.
    Quote: svp67
    Does the commander see much from his place, precisely when moving in limited dimensions and what is the sector of fire at the ZPU at ground targets ..

    Definitely more than it was in old Soviet tanks.

    Maximum firing range, m:
    By air targets
    2000
    For ground targets
    2000
    Angles of fire (guidance), city .:
    Vertically
    -3 to 60
    Horizontally
    360

    And will you share data on the ZPU MS in the performance of a heavy machine gun? 7.62 if it is honestly not serious.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 18: 17 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    Definitely more than it was in old Soviet tanks.
    Yes, come on, I doubt very much that the commander is perfectly looking through the area - from the right front fender liner - on the starboard side, almost to the MTO. All of these "boxes" of protection and the scope of the sight will greatly limit the view ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 31 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    Yes, come on, I doubt very much that the commander is perfectly looking through the area - from the right front fender liner - on the starboard side, almost to the MTO. All of these "boxes" of protection and the scope of the sight will greatly limit the view ...


    Now will you begin to somehow prove the FACTS that the MS does not have dead space? Or do you need everything to be viewed from one monitoring device?
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 18: 44 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    Now you will begin to somehow prove the FACTS that the MS does not have dead space?

    I won’t, since this was only possible to avoid on Merkava4 by installing video cameras. But in this case, the MS have less ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 46 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    o in this case, they are less for MS.

    Why did you decide so and how can you confirm your words?
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 18: 50 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Why did you decide so and how can you confirm your words?
    And prove the opposite ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 53 New
    +3
    Quote: svp67
    And prove the opposite ...

    So you can’t, this is understandable in principle, since the MS is a prototype that is quite comparable to the running model, and so far, despite the appearance at several international exhibitions, we have not found customers, even lured Indians.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 19: 11 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    So you can’t, this is understandable in principle, since the MS is a prototype that is quite comparable to the running model, and so far, despite the appearance at several international exhibitions, we have not found customers, even lured Indians.

    Do not count your chickens before they are hatched...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 19: 14 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    Do not count your chickens before they are hatched.

    What year?
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 19: 22 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Quote: svp67
    Do not count your chickens before they are hatched.

    What year?
    Yes, everyone ...
    In the export of tanks, Uralvagonzavod occupies a leading position, producing and supplying customers with long-term contracts 1300 tanks. In second place is the Omsk Transport Engineering Plant, ... 709 machines were exported

    I am embarrassed to ask, how are things with this at the Malyshev Plant?
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 19: 32 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    delivered 1300 tanks to customers on long-term contracts

    Well, the main buyer is India, which has nowhere to devatas, the rest are either borrowers or countries with dubious regimes.
    Quote: svp67
    I am embarrassed to ask, how are things with this at the Malyshev Plant?

    he’s not embarrassed, he doesn’t even use state resources in this way, but sales are not so big, but not on credit.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 19: 38 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    he’s not embarrassed, he doesn’t even use state resources in this way, but sales are not so big, but not on credit.

    Well here is Politics. Someone can afford to provide a loan, and someone can only talk about it ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 19: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    allow yourself to provide a loan,

    therefore, do not make any conclusions about quality on this)))
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 20: 23 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    therefore, do not make any conclusions about quality on this)))
    Well, how to say ... the main export tank of Ukraine remains the T72, and here as they say do not give, do not take ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 20: 27 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    Well, how to say ... the main export tank of Ukraine remains the T72, and here as they say do not give, do not take ...

    And what? It’s not expensive to sell, it’s withdrawn from service and it’s a pity for re-melting.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 20: 32 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    And what? It’s not expensive to sell, it’s withdrawn from service and it’s a pity for re-melting.
    T64 and under such conditions no one wants to take ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 20: 48 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    T64 and under such conditions no one wants to take ..

    They are difficult for different monkeys such as Sudan and Ethiopia. But soon 72 ends, UVZ will raise the price trying to 90 to push, they will start and take 64 ki.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 20: 50 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    will begin and take 64 ki.
    At the same time, we’ll conduct a census of idiots ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 20: 54 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    At the same time, we’ll conduct a census of idiots ..

    )))) Well, you need to start with the Indians who are divorced to the fullest, but even those are getting smarter.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 21: 18 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    )))) Well, you need to start with the Indians
    Well, put them under No. 1, who expressed a desire to buy t64, then Pakistan will be happy ....
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 34 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    Well, put them under No. 1, who expressed a desire to buy T64, then Pakistan will be happy.

    Pakistan is glad that they bought T-90С, not in vain the Indians increase their number, they know that they need at least two to one, and preferably three to one.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 21: 38 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Pakistan is glad that they bought T-90С, not in vain the Indians increase their number, they know that they need at least two to one, and preferably three to one.

    Of course, the ratio of 3 to 1 allows India to count on a CARDINAL solution to the Pakistan question. No country, no problem ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    3 to 1 allows India to count on a CARDINAL solution to the Pakistan issue

    Yes, and maybe a couple of T-90S will remain combat-ready, at least for sure the Indians would torture their Arzhdun.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 21: 46 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    Yes, and maybe a couple of T-90С will remain combat-ready,

    "The Lord God is always on the side of the large battalions" Frederick II the Great
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 49 New
    +2
    Suvorov (not the one that Victor) and Sheremetyev did not agree with him.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 22: 00 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Suvorov (not the one that Victor) and Sheremetyev did not agree with him.
    They were geniuses and knew how, in the absence of a general superiority in the forces to create it where necessary for victory ... So, this is not even an exception to the rule, but one of its confirmations ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 22: 04 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    So, this is not even an exception to the rule, but one of its confirmations ...

    as they said in the Garage - this is a privacy, and it has nothing to do with the matter.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 22: 09 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    and irrelevant to the case.

    I agree - the rule is not who does not cancel ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 23: 14 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    I agree - the rule is not who does not cancel.

    What? About the big battles? If you start the debate, then there will be too many exceptions.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 23: 23 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    What? About the big battles? If you start the debate, then there will be too many exceptions.
    We’ll start to analyze issues of tactics and strategy ... Once again I repeat that for victory it is necessary to create an advantage in power precisely at the tip of the strike ... and you can neglect the secondary ones, the main thing is not to get carried away and keep a finger on the pulse ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 23: 28 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    Let’s get started on tactics and strategy.

    What for?
    Quote: svp67
    then for victory it is necessary to create an advantage in forces precisely on the tip of the strike ... and minor ones can be neglected

    Yes, but this is done with a constant total quantity, but the question WHY remains valid.
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov 12 June 2013 21: 41 New
    0
    You somehow gracefully “forgot” that the Indians have not only Pakistan in their probable opponents.
    But also China
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 47 New
    +1
    Quote: Spade
    You somehow gracefully “forgot” that the Indians

    We can gracefully recall that India is armed not only with the T-90S, but according to the assurances of local experts, Chinese tanks are Soviet deteriorating clones and are piles of scrap metal.
  • Bad_gr
    Bad_gr 12 June 2013 19: 02 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    I won’t, since this was only possible to avoid on Merkava4 by installing video cameras. But in this case, the MS have less ...

    By the way, there are cameras on the T-90ms: 3 on the bar (where the wind speed sensors are) and one on the right side of the tower.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 18: 21 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    Definitely more than it was in old Soviet tanks.

    Maximum firing range, m:
    By air targets
    2000
    For ground targets
    2000
    Angles of fire (guidance), city .:
    Vertically
    -3 to 60
    Horizontally
    360


    Don’t tell, the sector "at 11 hours" of firing at ground targets is closed for ZPU

  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 18: 24 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    And will you share data on the ZPU MS in the performance of a heavy machine gun? 7.62 if it is honestly not serious.
    To be honest, then 12,7mm is not serious as a ZPU, especially an NSV, with its monstrous accuracy ... But in this installation both PCT, NSVT and AGS can be installed ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 29 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    Don’t tell, the sector "at 11 hours" of firing at ground targets is closed for ZPU

    And the tower doesn’t turn around anymore?
    Quote: svp67
    To be honest,

    If I honestly thought you would answer with specifics, I vet and asked about 12.7 mm so you could conclude that I know that they DECLARE the possibility of varying the type of weapon.
    Quote: svp67
    2,7mm now as a ZPU is not serious
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 19: 15 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    And the tower doesn’t turn around anymore?
    that is, to solve the arising fire problem for the machine gun, the commander will be forced to disconnect the gunner from the "work" ... Perhaps, but not rationally ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 19: 22 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    that is, to solve the arising fire problem for the machine gun, the commander will be forced to disconnect the gunner from the "work" ... Perhaps, but not rationally ..

    In general, everything is duplicated, and has independent stabilization, while even the notorious sector for 11 hours also shoots from a certain angle, not even talking about attracting short distances that are more rational than a coaxial machine gun, which will also make it possible to use the main gun in case of a strong threat, you at least you do not limit the ground sector?
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 19: 25 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    At the same time, even the notorious sector on the 11 hours is also shot from a certain angle

    Who doubts the power of the 12,7mm cartridge, this "stand" is clearly not an obstacle for him, but will it be useful?
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 19: 34 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    Who doubts the power of the 12,7mm cartridge, this "stand" is clearly not an obstacle for him, but will it be useful?

    Well, it will not fall into the pedestal in principle))))
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 19: 42 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Well, it will not fall into the pedestal in principle))))
    Yes, you’ll be right, it’s not where it doesn’t get from the ZPU on ground targets at these angles, and the glass will spoil the sight with “metal splashes” ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 19: 44 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    e where he doesn’t get from the ZPU on ground targets at given angles, the glass will spoil the sight too with “metal splashes” ...

    You don’t know what to come up with?
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 19: 57 New
    -2
    Quote: Kars
    You don’t know what to come up with?
    When everything is obvious, you don’t need to invent anything ... You yourself understand very well that there are no tanks without weak points. BM "Oplot" incorporating a lot of changes, remained almost unchanged in the body, it seems that the "kids" are trying to "get along with little blood ..."
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 20: 06 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    When everything is obvious, you don’t need to invent anything ... You yourself understand very well that there are no tanks without weak points. BM "Oplot" incorporating a lot of changes, remained almost unchanged in the body, it seems that the "kids" are trying to "get along with little blood ..."



    The funny thing is that you really don’t already know what to think of, and even in this particular case with the installation of the ZPU. The specific dead zone (narrow for the same) for 12.7 is in the area of ​​operation of the coaxial machine gun, and for a long range it is possible to fire over the curbstone.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 20: 59 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    The specific dead zone (narrower) for the 12.7 is in the coaxial machine gun's working area, and firing on top of the pedestal can be fired over a long range.
    So, we deviate from the topic. Question answer. VPU T90MS - has such dead zones?
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 03 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    VPU T90MS - has such a dead zone?

    who knows - you don’t answer questions
    Quote: Kars
    And will you share data on the ZPU MS in the performance of a heavy machine gun? 7.62 if it is honestly not serious.
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 07 New
    +1
    _______________________---
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 21: 13 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Specific Dead Zone (narrow also) for 12.7

    Well, the first answer is that for the range of a direct shot of the NSW (850 meters for the target h = 2m) the dead zone will be from 2500 to 5000 meters. Even for a minimum a bit too much ...

    Quote: Kars
    who knows - you don’t answer questions

    You don’t really ask them ... You need data on UDP T05BV-1
    Check out this http://army-news.ru/2011/10/ognevaya-moshh-tanka-t-90ms-tagil/
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 22 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    Well, the first answer is that for the range of a direct shot of the NSW (850 meters for the target h = 2m) the dead zone will be from 2500 to 5000 meters. Even for a minimum a bit too much ...
    Did you collapse with an oak tree? How many degrees of circumference do you say?
    Quote: svp67
    .You need data on UDP T05BV-1

    No, I do not need this data, I need data on the installed UDP on the T-90MS tank
    Quote: svp67
    http://army-news.ru/2011/10/ognevaya-moshh-tanka-t-90ms-tagil/

    )))))))))) / Alexey Khlopotov, gurkhan.blogspot.com/

    when I have a specific UVZeshny booklet pictures from which are used in the article.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 21: 26 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Did you collapse with an oak tree? How many degrees of circumference do you say?

    from 5 to 10 degrees ... Think less?
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 31 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    from 5 to 10 degrees ... Think less?

    rather 5-7 and this is from 360
    Quote: svp67
    Even for a minimum a bit too much ...

    Do you think so?
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 21: 36 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    rather 5-7 and this is from 360

    I'm sorry, I mistook angular minutes with thousandths - anyway, at this range the width of the dead zone remains from a kilometer. Lot...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 45 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    ce equally at this range

    Excuse me, and what is the effective range of the 12.7 mm machine gun? What would fire from it for mundane targets? And if you do not notice, then your .. small .. the sight prevents the machine gun from declining
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 21: 51 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Excuse me, what is the effective range of the 12.7 mm machine gun?
    Table - 2000 meters, but at such a distance it’s hard to get into a person, it’s very bad for NSVT with accuracy, DShK will be better ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 52 New
    +1
    then
    Quote: svp67
    anyway, at this range the width of the dead zone remains from kilometers

    we are not interested
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 21: 53 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    ..a small..the sight interferes with the declination of the machine gun


    Well, there are flaws everywhere, but still, this installation has a smaller, non-shooting range ...
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 21: 56 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    Well, there are flaws everywhere, but still, this installation has a smaller, non-shooting range ..

    It’s about the same, but the sector is more different from the sector covered by the coaxial machine gun, somewhere by 25 degrees. And it is in the near zone.
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 38 New
    +1
    Bad_gr Today, 18:29 | Constructive vulnerabilities of the main combat vehicle of the AOI “Merkava Mk.4”
    Quote: svp67
    all these miracles - bulwarks will remain in the first forest planting ...
    I drove tanks in Hungary. As a rule, after the exercises, some of the tanks are without wheel arches or with a strong crew. If he was crushed, it was more profitable to lose, because then a new one was issued from the warehouse. If he brought with him a rumpled one, they forced him to straighten and put this pokotsany in his place. When the lockers were out of stock, they made self-made of 2-hundred liter barrels.
    This is what I mean: this sundress on the "Bastion" for a short while. Moreover, its effectiveness is under a big question: at Oplot this construction has been around for a long time, but no one is in a hurry to copy it. But lattice screens are rampant - it means effective. And the size of the grill is more modest.


    Well, yes, I remember when they laughed at the skirt - and now it’s like crap on the MS.

    And the dimensions of the Reshetok are very similar)))
  • svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 18: 56 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Well, yes, I remember when they laughed at the skirt - and now it looks like crap on the MS. And the dimensions of the laths are very similar)))

    it remains only to blame the "Tagil" that they copied this in the 1986 year ... smile
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 19: 01 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    it became only to blame the "Tagil" that they in 1986

    Are you sure that this COMPUTER modelka belongs to 1986?
    And the skirt is ______


    it’s a pity that such a configuration leaves little chance for the crew to survive when more or less modern RPGs hit, and how interesting it is that Hashim is produced in some kind of Arab country.
  • Bad_gr
    Bad_gr 12 June 2013 19: 25 New
    0
    Quote: svp67
    Quote: Kars
    Well, yes, I remember when they laughed at the skirt - and now it looks like crap on the MS. And the dimensions of the laths are very similar)))
    it remains only to blame the "Tagil" that they copied this in 1986 ... smile

    Challengers hung boxes with dynamic protection. We offer similar for light armored vehicles (for example, BMP-3). Oplot has just a skirt.

    Incidentally, the T-90ms has a bulwark with dynamic protection.
  • Arkan
    Arkan 12 June 2013 17: 52 New
    0
    Quote: Kars
    But it protects the crew well, and only try to not damage this bulwark in the interests of the crew.

    Probably the designers assumed the primary use of the Oplot as a “breakthrough tank,” and for the development of success and ambushes, the Bulat is more suitable (it seems to me) there is more speed and less overall dimensions.
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 17: 57 New
    +2
    Quote: Arkan
    The bulwark is like a breakthrough tank, and Bulat is more suitable for the development of success and ambushes

    Vryatli someone expected the separation of functions. These are all just financial opportunities and nothing more.
  • Arkan
    Arkan 12 June 2013 18: 07 New
    +1
    The complete replacement of the tank fleet by Oplot does not threaten Ukraine in the foreseeable future, and there is no escape from the separation of functions of the tanks in service.
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 17 New
    +1
    Quote: Arkan
    The complete replacement of the tank fleet by Oplot does not threaten Ukraine in the foreseeable future, and there is no escape from the separation of functions of the tanks in service.

    There will not be a separation of functions in principle, since it does not make sense at all in our case. There is more of a general question about the number of BM Oplot in service with the Armed Forces of Ukraine. It will look more like linear units and ceremonial ones.
  • Arkan
    Arkan 12 June 2013 18: 35 New
    0
    In any general production plan, planning proceeds from the principle of "what is the best way to use what is tomorrow if there is a war" - for sure the units equipped with the latest tanks will have different tasks from the units armed with the tanks of the previous generation (their capabilities are too varied in order to "not bother" ). In other matters, this is already a matter for tacticians and strategists of the tank troops.
    Quote: Kars
    Here it will be more like linear parts and ceremonial.

    And so everywhere and always, while there is no war.
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 18: 40 New
    +1
    Quote: Arkan
    “what is the best way to use what exists if war is tomorrow” - for sure, units equipped with the latest tanks will have tasks different from units armed with tanks of the previous generation


    The tasks will be exactly the same, and it is quite possible that they will enter the battle not in accordance with their capabilities, but in accordance with the geographical and transport location.
  • Arkan
    Arkan 12 June 2013 19: 08 New
    0
    A war involving the use of heavy armored vehicles always has a latent or explicit threatened period (harsh statements by politicians, concentration of probable enemy troops at the borders, mobilization, receipt of ammunition, fuel and medicine in military units at rates that exceed peacetime standards, increased activity of probable enemy intelligence. ..) in accordance with the incoming information, countermeasures are carried out (troop transfer, mobilization ...). If a possible war begins according to your scenario (- manual External Expansion of intelligence can be considered traitors, and war is likely to be lost.
  • Kars
    Kars 12 June 2013 19: 13 New
    +1
    Quote: Arkan
    .If a possible war begins according to your scenario (- the foreign intelligence leadership can be considered traitors, and the war is most likely lost.

    Well, why so? It’s difficult to foresee a fragment of the Romanians, but it’s not so deadly.

    And even when deploying, there will still be no tasks to diversify, the fact that the connections will be equipped with homogeneous equipment is a matter of course, but any division --- BM Oplot will, in principle, be in the front row, provided it is of course available.
  • Arkan
    Arkan 12 June 2013 19: 41 New
    +2
    ))) In the early 90s, Romanian politicians seriously talked about the annexation of Moldova and Bessarabia and the creation of Greater Romania, in the 93rd all their tanks were supposedly secretive laughing are concentrated near our border. In response, Ukraine removed the border guards from the threatened sections of the border (common practice before the start of the war), and the commander of the 98 SVDD (then not yet divided between Ukraine and Russia) Alexander Nikolayevich Bespalov said something like this: "in case of hostilities the division will have breakfast in Bolgrad, dine in Chisinau, and will have dinner in Bucharest "(well, the artillery regiment has also deployed ...). Romanians removed their tanks, everything calmed down ... laughing drinks
  • Arkan
    Arkan 12 June 2013 17: 33 New
    0
    Quote: svp67
    The tank then it may still nothing, although a lot of questions,

    I won’t be able to answer these questions because I’m not a specialist and my opinion is purely subjective. Of course, visually, I also don’t like everything in Oplot (including the dimensions of the scope), and I judge it solely by the totality of the main characteristics laid out in the public domain.
  • Bad_gr
    Bad_gr 12 June 2013 18: 29 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    all these miracles - bulwarks will remain in the first forest planting ...

    I drove tanks in Hungary. As a rule, after the exercises, some of the tanks are without wheel arches or with a strong crew. If he was crushed, it was more profitable to lose, because then a new one was issued from the warehouse. If he brought with him a rumpled one, they forced him to straighten and put this pokotsany in his place. When the lockers were out of stock, they made self-made of 2-hundred liter barrels.
    This is what I mean: this sundress on the "Bastion" for a short while. Moreover, its effectiveness is under a big question: at Oplot this construction has been around for a long time, but no one is in a hurry to copy it. But lattice screens are rampant - it means effective. And the size of the grill is more modest.
  • saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 12 June 2013 21: 55 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    for me, PERSONALLY merkava 4 is just in fourth place (

    Vidio with the insides of Mk 4
    [media = http: //fun.mivzakon.co.il/video/israel/13535/ טנק_מרכבה. html]
    1. Kars
      Kars 12 June 2013 22: 00 New
      +2
      Quote: saturn.mmm
      [media = http: //fun.mivzakon.co.il/video/israel/13535/ טנק_מרכבה. html]


      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 12 June 2013 22: 13 New
        0
        thanks, but something didn’t turn around for me
  • w.ebdo.g
    w.ebdo.g 11 June 2013 16: 14 New
    12
    but I like the T-90 ...
    Created with great sense and aesthetically impeccable.
    our designers love the technique of making dangerous and graceful ...



    1. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 11 June 2013 19: 25 New
      +2
      Quote: w.ebdo.g
      and I like the T-90 ... it was created with a good sense and aesthetically impeccable. Our designers love the technique of making dangerous and graceful ...


      MBT is good, but there is a big minus - in the troops it is not enough. PS: they made Armatu more comfortable for the crew - the entire T-72 family is cramped.
  • reichsmarshal
    reichsmarshal 11 June 2013 22: 26 New
    +5
    By the way, the author wrote that there were no tank battles between the Merkavas and the T-72. There was a shelling of a trophy wrecked tank. However, the 105 mm M-60 and Merkava guns could well hit the T-72 even in the frontal projection. Regarding the 2nd Lebanese: Wiki wrote about 3 irrevocations. lost tanks. But any tanker knows that combat damage to a tank and subsequent repairs are the harsh inevitability of an offensive war. Irrevocable losses of 90% are those tanks that could not be evacuated, and not those that burned down in the battle itself. So the question is not about ATGM systems (and, as of 1982, not about T-72), but about who left the battlefield behind, i.e. to operational success. The operational success of the IDF was determined by quantitative factors and almost never depended solely on the training of Israeli soldiers. And about which tank is better: the one that is simply better is better, and also who has more motor resources.
    1. biznaw
      biznaw 12 June 2013 00: 23 New
      +3
      Quote: reichsmarshal
      And about which tank is better: the one that is simply better is better, and also who has more motor resources.

      Truth inaccessible to the understanding of our and perhaps foreign military officials. Technically advanced, super armored tanks have an advantage when confronted with an equal number of "non-advanced." If non-advanced tanks are more miraculous, tanks have advantages only in terms of technical characteristics, as a result of the war, inevitable defeat. Sun remember the history of the match Tigers \ Panthers and T-34 \ Shermans
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 12 June 2013 11: 05 New
        0
        It all depends on the percentage. Tigers released only 1000 pieces.
      2. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 12 June 2013 19: 03 New
        +7
        Quote: biznaw
        Truth inaccessible to the understanding of our and perhaps foreign military officials. Technically advanced, super armored tanks have an advantage when confronted with an equal number of "non-advanced." If non-advanced tanks are more miraculous, tanks have advantages only in terms of technical characteristics, as a result of the war, inevitable defeat. Sun remember the history of the match Tigers \ Panthers and T-34 \ Shermans


        I do not agree with TZ that the whole thing is in quantity.
        The Second World War is just a vivid example of the fact that not the most numerous tank wins, but the most effective one - in terms of the sum of qualities, armor-mobility-protection-price-repair.
        Before the Second World War, the USSR army had several mechanized corps equipped with a lot of outdated light tanks and a small number of modern ones: the modernized T-28, T-34, KV1 and KV-2.
        It was the new, although more expensive tanks, that allowed to slow down the speed of the offensive of the Nazi troops. But the old T-26 and BT, although they inflicted damage on the enemy, were amazed at any of the anti-tank missions.

        And as for the “match of the Tigers \ Panthers and T-34 \ Shermans" - they bent and that's why.

        T-34, the newest and invulnerable to most VET means at the beginning of the Second World War, a year later lost its security advantage and required modernization. By the end of the war, the T-34-85 was the best medium tank (maintainability, cost and production time, weapons, mobility).
        Panthers were born as an adversary for the T-34. At first, developers were generally required to simply copy and improve the Soviet medium tank, but then they refused. Those tanks that went into battle on the Kursk Bulge at 43 were still not perfect, but after a few months the Panthers gained formidable fame - powerful weapons, armor, excellent optics, good working conditions for the crew - these are the advantages of this tank. They did not disdain to use this tank even in the Soviet army - not a few trophy vehicles, under the control of Soviet tankers, defended our homeland and liberated Europe in 44-45. But with all the advantages, the Panther had a number of disadvantages: insufficient reliability, high cost for production and low maintainability.
        Sherman - lost to German medium tanks T-IV and Panther in almost all respects. Its only advantages are quantity and possibility of modernization. Of the entire Sherman family, only Firefiles could fight on an equal footing with the Panthers and T-34-85 (already in the Korean War).

        A tiger is a heavy tank and a point. He was a dangerous enemy thanks to weapons and armor, but after the appearance of the IS-2, the command did not recommend German tankers to engage in a duel with a Soviet heavy tank.

        Conclusion: a good tank is a "tank soldier" - BM, which successfully implemented protection, mobility, weapons with normal maintainability and price. It is these BMs that win the hard, uncompromising war. Now only modern T-72 (and, accordingly, T-90), T-80 (including the Ukrainian branch of the development of this machine), Merkava, Leopard and a number of new Chinese MBTs can be attributed to such machines. All other existing MBTs are expensive and unreliable toys, designed to win exclusively in police wars of a knowingly weak enemy.
        1. reichsmarshal
          reichsmarshal 12 June 2013 22: 38 New
          +2
          It was the new, although more expensive tanks, that allowed to slow down the speed of the offensive of the Nazi troops. But the old T-26 and BT, although they inflicted damage on the enemy, were amazed at any of the anti-tank missions.

          Nonsense! Both KV and T-34 were successfully struck by the artillery systems of the Germans from the first days of the war. Any tank has conceptually weak points, the defeat of which leads to the loss of combat effectiveness. The Red Army mechanized corps was lost not because of bad tanks or tankers, but because there were few motorized infantry and artillery in their staff structure, and also because they were not mobilized and therefore did not have vehicles. Naked tanks are an easy target for a well-trained adversary, and he will not allow a tank-to-tank battle.
          The speed of the advance of the Germans in the fall fell because from the very beginning of the war they had not received marching replenishment. Consequently, the support of infantry and artillery as part of the assault. Germans' groups weakened, and therefore losses in tanks began to grow.
          You need to understand that the effectiveness of tanks is determined by the overall effectiveness of the entire army, and not vice versa! The Israel Defense Forces as a whole are effective, and both Russian and American tanks will be effective in its composition. The Arabs do not have an army as such - they have an unorganized crowd. They know how to partisan, but not to fight. to draw conclusions about our / western tanks from the experience of the Arab-Israeli wars is unwise. It is necessary to analyze the Iran-Iraq.
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 12 June 2013 23: 26 New
            +1
            Here is a very, very competent comment.
          2. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 13 June 2013 00: 57 New
            +2
            Quote: reichsmarshal
            Nonsense! Both KV and T-34 were successfully struck by the artillery systems of the Germans from the first days of the war. Any tank has conceptually weak points, the defeat of which leads to the loss of combat effectiveness. The Red Army mechanized corps was lost not because of bad tanks or tankers, but because there were few motorized infantry and artillery in their staff structure, and also because they were not mobilized and therefore did not have vehicles. Naked tanks are an easy target for a well-trained adversary, and he will not allow a tank-to-tank battle. The speed of the advance of the Germans in the fall fell because from the very beginning of the war they had not received marching replenishment. Consequently, the support of infantry and artillery as part of the assault. Germans' groups weakened, and therefore losses in tanks began to grow.


            Judging by Soviet and German sources (starting from official documents and memoirs and ending with published letters), then this is your argument is nonsense.
            1. At the initial stage of the Second World War KV-1, KV-2, T-34 were hit by the majority of fascist tank guns only point blank or 88 anti-aircraft guns, of which there were not so many. Actually, the German anti-tank system since the French campaign has not undergone significant changes - and Soviet tanks of new types significantly exceeded all analogues. The main reason for the loss of KV and T-34 in the summer of 41 is technical (b / p, fuel, malfunctions) and the action of enemy aircraft.
            2. The reasons for the defeat of the mechanized corps are not only in their lack of mobilization - there are a lot of reasons ranging from an unsuccessful organizational staff and ending with their unfortunate location before the war. But large losses in technology were largely caused by its deterioration and lack of b / p, fuel, spare parts, in the end, many units rushed from point A to point B, wasting resources and “melting” - giving separate BMs to help one, then other neighbors. But in the battles against fascist tanks, the new BMs were out of competition.
            3. The tale of a drop in the speed of advancement of the Nazis as a result of lost replenishment kills. And why do they need replenishment if, in your opinion, they brilliantly advanced? The fact that even after being defeated, many units of the Soviet army continued fighting and inflicted considerable damage to the enemy, for some reason is not taken into account.


            PS: My comment was about the effectiveness of the tank as a combat unit, and not as part of the aircraft.
            1. reichsmarshal
              reichsmarshal 14 June 2013 00: 16 New
              0
              In order:
              1. The captured commander of the 4th Red Army TD Potaturchev in captivity said: they (T-34) were hit in the forehead with 37-mm guns, and even 20-mm caliber on board. HFs were invulnerable to the forehead, but even 37 mm guns were affected in the engine compartment. KV's frontal armor made its way through 50 mm T-3 guns with 150, and T-34 from 400 m. The invulnerability of the T-34 and KV even in 1941 is a myth from Viktor Suvorov's opuses: in battle, any tank can easily be disabled: caterpillar, gun mask, optics (which, incidentally, collapses even without breaking through the armor), armor fragments will cripple the tankers, finally.
              2. The battle of tanks with tanks is a rarity in the era of WWII / WWII. 90% of the Red Army tanks lost in battle were disabled by guns, not tanks. Non-combat losses are the RESULT, and not the cause of defeat: if the battle ended in success, broken tanks could be easily repaired (this was after the counter-offensive near Moscow).
              3. Replenishment is needed even by the strongest army, since the Red Army command deployed to the rear more and more new units. No victory is bloodless. The Wehrmacht understood this, but hoped that upon reaching a certain milestone in Moscow an uprising would break out against Stalin and the Communists. This did not happen, because unlike Russia 1917 and Russia 201? the people had power and a country for which almost everyone was ready to die.
        2. svp67
          svp67 12 June 2013 22: 42 New
          +1
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          It was the new, although more expensive tanks, that allowed to slow down the speed of the offensive of the Nazi troops. But the old T-26 and BT, although they inflicted damage on the enemy, were amazed at any of the anti-tank missions.

          The “hero” of the offensive near Moscow was the T60 - a new but very cheap tank that was hit by all of the enemy’s TCP. And yet ...
    2. Pimply
      Pimply 12 June 2013 11: 04 New
      +1
      You were joking about quantitative factors, right? In the Second Lebanon there was a quantitative and qualitative superiority. Which, however, is logical during the assault. And previous wars - about quantitative, are somehow funny.

      5 cars were irretrievably lost, 3 from petrozavod, two from a landmine.
      1. reichsmarshal
        reichsmarshal 12 June 2013 22: 42 New
        +2
        It is necessary to compare the army as a whole, and not by the numerical ratio of tanks. tanks in real life - it’s not like in a computer: “both the shvets and the reaper ...” This is just a firearm, and not an autonomous universal combat module. But IDF is, in fact, a more efficient structure in view of the fact that the Israelis are a more educated nation than the Arabs, and by 1-2 orders of magnitude.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 12 June 2013 23: 28 New
          +1
          And even more true. Especially taking into account the fact that tankers in Israel usually have bespectacled spectacles with a high level of intelligence and who do not go into infantry for health 8).
  • dustycat
    dustycat 11 June 2013 23: 58 New
    +2
    About the return to service in 48 hours ...
    How many Soviet tanks were irretrievably lost from combat damage on the Kursk Bulge, and how many were wrecked by German sappers using almost a train of TNT?
    The question is not whether it can be repaired or not.
    The question is - will this be possible?
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 12 June 2013 11: 05 New
      +1
      Respectively - who left the battlefield behind.
  • Ivan Mechanic
    Ivan Mechanic 12 June 2013 00: 25 New
    +8
    "The IDF recognized 46 tanks damaged" - i.e. you claim that the IDF command and the leadership of Israel are primitive nonsense? You at least read it and then talk about how good Merkava is http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/history/2nd-lebanon-war/acv-losses/ It is worth remembering that the United States and Israel (unlike Russia) always 1,5-2 times underestimate their losses and 2-5 times overestimate the losses of the enemy!
    In reality, Merkava is nothing more than a regional tank that is only suitable for war with wild tribes armed with bows and arrows. As soon as at least the past generation of anti-tank weapons appears on the horizon, Merkava dies quietly! Incidentally, the article correctly identifies problems due to improper layout.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 12 June 2013 11: 09 New
      +1
      So, let's look at the statistics.

      Hit - 51 (52) - tank. According to various sources.
      Defeat of these 52 - 49.
      Penetration - in 24 cases.

      If you want, I will give specific terms in Hebrew.

      5 lost irrevocably (2 on HEs).
      11 went to the factory for repairs.
      The rest returned to duty within 48 hours.

      And where did you get about understating losses? Inferences?
      1. Ivan Mechanic
        Ivan Mechanic 14 June 2013 00: 03 New
        -2
        Let's see the statistics!
        1. I previously indicated in this thread the source I got 49 from. I didn’t see your “different sources”. So alas - I believe my sources. When you indicate your "different sources" then it will be possible to discuss them.
        2. (since you got into such nuances) - is a mine explosion considered a hit? It seems to be somehow not considered - hit is a derivative of the shot. It should be noted that a shot is a necessary BUT an insufficient condition for hitting!
        3. I don’t read in Hebrew because we won’t have to interrogate prisoners in Hebrew in the upcoming war (as well as planting our banner of victory over the Knesset of Israel).
        4 As for underreporting or concealment of losses - USA -> Iraq, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, ...... One of the methods of concealing human losses is the use of PMCs (dead and wounded soldiers of PMCs are not included in the list of losses or you don’t guessed). As for Israel - the same picture only without PMCs. This is claimed by the supposedly free press of the West. Although if you write that they are breaching - then this is also a problem - your sources can not be verified either!
  • Hunghuz
    Hunghuz 12 June 2013 07: 20 New
    +1
    hi It’s strange, but the Russian-language press in Israel writes that the engine breaks after 200 km ....... ??? it's about Merkava-4 non-invisible tank) and Kama type now BELIEVE ???????
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 12 June 2013 11: 11 New
      +1
      The non-Russian-language press wrote. Lenta.ru wrote, incorrectly translating the article. In which it was said about the problems with several tanks in reserve, from the first series of Merkava 4, the motors for which were with glitches, and to which other engines were later delivered.
  • Iskander73881
    Iskander73881 21 August 2013 11: 12 New
    0
    "practically on all post-Soviet tanks (thanks to Ukraine)" - but in Ukraine there are "practically" all post-Soviet tanks?
  • atalef
    atalef 11 June 2013 08: 16 New
    +1
    then in the Second Lebanon War of 2007 of the year “Merkava Mk.4” when trying to use it as a MBT in combat, it suffered losses in the amount of approximately 50 vehicles (half of those participating in the operation in southern Lebanon), of which 10 were irretrievably destroyed.

    The original lies. Loss data is open, only one Mk-4 is lost.
    In addition, the use of a front-drive tracked propulsor forces the drive gears into the nose of the hull into protruding niches. Even being covered with armor of a certain thickness, the gear mechanisms of the gearboxes and bearings, on which the axles of the driving wheels rest, are extremely sensitive to any distortion of their design. Therefore, an explosion on the lower frontal part, on a caterpillar or on the ground under the 152-155 mm tank of a high-explosive fragmentation projectile or a thermobaric grenade fired from an Hashim RPG, will also lead to loss of travel without breaking through the frontal armor.

    Perhaps that’s why Armata - took the same concept - the engine in front
    Acknowledgment of the completion of Merkava’s career as the IDF’s main combat vehicle, the Defense Ministry’s Defense Research and Development Department of Israel launched the Rakiya - Rakiya - (רקיקע) - Sky firm project to create a promising armored platform consisting of a set of specialized armored vehicles designed to replace existing tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, self-propelled artillery installations, engineering vehicles and ARVs.

    Another nonsense. Nobody refuses Merkava. promising development will be different. Does the development of the UAV indicate the final end of the aircraft and that the whole concept of aircraft construction was wrong. Article minus
    1. Argon
      Argon 11 June 2013 10: 12 New
      11
      Dear atalef, I ask you to refrain from your own inventions about the “Almaty”, I’m sure at the moment no one knows what will be there. I can say that the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation did not seriously consider the layout of the tank with the front MTO not when. There was an option with a mid-engine compartment and aft transmission arrangement. I assure you, no matter what kind of tank the Russians came up with, its drive wheels will ALWAYS be behind.
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 11: 31 New
        -8
        Quote: Argon
        Whatever tank the Russians invented, its drive wheels will ALWAYS be behind.

        Don't scratch laughing
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 11 June 2013 12: 29 New
          +2
          As for Almaty, everything is ambiguous so far. So wait a moment.
          1. Argon
            Argon 11 June 2013 12: 41 New
            0
            But I don’t have much time to rush, who said that it’s not clear if it is already being made, it’s not known, I agree.
          2. atalef
            atalef 11 June 2013 20: 59 New
            +3
            Quote: Pimply
            As for Almaty, everything is ambiguous so far. So wait a moment.

            And when will it be at least a little unambiguous?
            since 2008 years are developing. in the meantime, there is no single or unequivocal one. No chassis, not like a tank.

            So back to Merkava.
            Start of the 1970 project year. 1971 g - steel layout. 1972 g - development of the chassis and transmission, 1974 g. 2 - prototypes began to pass tests. Serial tanks began to arrive in 1979.
            And this is in the absence of a tank school. frames and generally creating everything from scratch.
            5 years have already passed since the beginning of the design of Armata. not even a chassis yet.
            1. Genady1976
              Genady1976 11 June 2013 23: 18 New
              +2
              wink
              A prototype of the tank made of structural steel was already ready in April 1971. A study of the concept of the front placement of the MTO was carried out in 1972 on the converted Centurion tank, and in December 1974 tests of two prototypes of the first tank of Israeli design began. The decision on serial production was made even before the start of testing prototypes, and preparations for serial production at the tank repair plant of the IDF began in 1976.
              Engine - American diesel Teledine Continental AVDS-1790-5A turbocharged. The diesel engine is an AVDS-900 engine boosted to 1790 hp, mounted on American M 60 tanks and Israeli Centurion and M 48 tanks. The transmission is also American, Allison CD-850-6B, but modernized by Israeli specialists, hydromechanical, such as “ Cross Drive ”with hydrostatic rotation mechanism.
              and the gun itself, too, developed from scratch smile
      2. ultra
        ultra 11 June 2013 14: 47 New
        +2
        Quote: Argon
        at the moment no one knows

        The mechanic seems to have written that the platform without a tower bites his nose, if so then the MTO is definitely ahead, with the installation of the tower the center of gravity will shift and everything will be fine! hi
        1. bask
          bask 11 June 2013 15: 52 New
          +2
          Quote: ultra

          The mechanic seems to have written that the platform without a tower bites his nose, if so then the MTO is clearly ahead, with the installation of a tower

          It is not clear why, “BIT”, was developed in the late 80s, the platform with the front MTO ,,, object 299 ,,.
        2. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 11 June 2013 16: 07 New
          +1
          Quote: ultra
          The mechanic seems to have written that the platform without the tower bites his nose, if so then the MTO is clearly ahead

          Not at all a fact. The multi-layer armor of the front of the tank weighs quite a lot. If the engine compartment is compact then it will nod. Therefore, the tower will be slightly displaced from the center back - and there will be a balanced platform. Incidentally, the T-72 tower is slightly shifted back (who doubts, look at the length of the tank with the gun forward and with the gun back).
    2. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 11 June 2013 14: 33 New
      0
      Quote: atalef
      Perhaps that’s why Armata - took the same concept - the engine in front

      Who told you that?
      According to Armata, it is not in dispute that the crew is seated in a separate armored capsule (fenced off from the combat armored partition) - and where is the place where three people can sit next to each other if the engine is in front? in the stern?


      http://rosinform.ru/photo/osnovnoy-tank-t-14--na-baze-tyazheloy-unifitsirovannoy
      -platformy-armata / # slide-15
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 02 New
        +2
        Do not believe in this particular picture
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 11 June 2013 15: 12 New
          0
          Quote: Pimply
          Do not believe in this particular picture
          These pictures were drawn by the designer, but he advised Khlopotov, who is at UVZ and knows how Armata looks. Of course, the security stamp has not yet been removed from Almaty, and there are probably discrepancies in the appearance of the prototype with what the designer drew. But to draw the MTO from behind, while it is ahead - it would be something ...
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 26 New
            0
            Khlopotov simply commented on this, as far as I remember. But the mechanic from this forum, who really worked with Armata, says that there are more than zero similarities with the picture.
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 11 June 2013 15: 48 New
              0
              More or less, it’s clear from the chassis: most likely there will be a 7-roller, since both at object 195 and at object 640 they came to it. MTO: an X-shaped engine with a hydrostatic transmission has passed the full test cycle at facility 195 - there is no reason to change it. 125mm caliber gun - this has been said more than once. The crew in a separate booked capsule - again, voiced more than once. The combat is not inhabited, therefore, making such powerful armor on the tower as in the figure is useless. Again, the picture is not a symmetrical tower: the left half (in the direction of the gun) is occupied by the sight, the right half is empty for some reason, although there is no machine gun coaxial with the gun, which, most likely, will occupy the right side of the tower. Or anti-aircraft. In any case, an empty area on the right side of the tower will be occupied by some equipment.
              I think so.
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 53 New
                +2
                Let's see, the topic is interesting, but it’s been guessed with the iPhone - as a result, nothing similar to a regular phone of that time happened 8)
          2. bask
            bask 11 June 2013 15: 56 New
            +2
            Quote: Bad_gr
            These pictures were drawn by the designer, but he advised Khlopotov, who is at UVZ and knows how Armata looks

            If the MTO is in the stern. Then why was the Armata project started at all as a unified tracked chassis.
            What then self-propelled guns, BMP-T / BTR-T will look like, on the General Staff ,, Armata ,,
            MTO only in the nose of the platform.
            1. ultra
              ultra 11 June 2013 16: 08 New
              +1
              Quote: bask
              Self-propelled guns, BMP-T / BTR-T, on the General Staff ,, Armata ,,
              MTO only in the nose of the platform.

              good
            2. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 11 June 2013 16: 19 New
              +3
              Quote: bask
              If the MTO is in the stern. Then why was the Armata project started at all as a unified tracked chassis.

              In my opinion, the idea of ​​a universal platform should not be reduced to absurdity.
              As I understand it:
              create chassis, transmission, OMS, etc. Depending on the task, the product is assembled from ready-made units, as in the Lego constructor. For example, an armored personnel carrier. A chassis is taken, armor is placed on it, which is preferable for an armored personnel carrier, and not for a tank, an MTO is placed in a place where it is more convenient for an armored personnel carrier + FCS, for interaction with other units of the Army. The same goes for self-propelled guns. Only nodes are interchangeable, and the layout can be any.
              1. bask
                bask 11 June 2013 16: 38 New
                0
                Quote: Bad_gr
                In my opinion, the idea of ​​a universal platform should not be reduced to absurdity.

                Quote: Bad_gr
                y, OMS, etc. Depending on the task from the finished nodes, as in the Lego constructor,

                Totally agree with you.
                Unification should not be based on the layout, but on the components and assemblies of the platform.
                A lineup for MBT should be ,, classic, ”MTO in the stern. Or the average location of the MTO ((MT-LB armored personnel carrier)) Mech .. water in the bow. The turret is shifted in the stern.
                But they do look like MBT, with MTO in the nose.
              2. dustycat
                dustycat 11 June 2013 23: 50 New
                +2
                Well, let's remember the T-70 model of 1941 and how the SU-76 was made of them - they just deployed the MTO forward and that's it.
                New - well forgotten old.
    3. IRBIS
      IRBIS 11 June 2013 15: 58 New
      +2
      Quote: atalef
      The original lies. Loss data is open, only one Mk-4 is lost.

      Strange ... I watched at least three pieces on TV. About shooting from different angles - no need, I don’t suffer from geographic cretinism.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 11 June 2013 16: 03 New
        -2
        The conversation is about MK-4. One machine of this modification is irretrievably lost. 5 and 11 were irretrievably lost, 51 were sent for repair and returned to duty, the rest of the 48 affected tanks returned to duty within XNUMX hours.
    4. Ivan Mechanic
      Ivan Mechanic 12 June 2013 00: 47 New
      +5
      What kind of lies are you talking about? Which one tank? If the IDF (you know what kind of organization it is) OFFICIALLY recognized the loss of 48 buckets with bolts called Merkava! Those. Lied to the IDF? And this is with the complete domination of aviation in the air and war against partisan units! Maybe it’s true you agree with the IDF? ;-) Armata has not yet taken this concept - these are just the assumptions of Internet users! And according to these assumptions, you can actually put a cannon under the bottom and make the tower cubic :-). As for a single armored platform - read your Israeli development directions yourself and be surprised!
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 12 June 2013 17: 15 New
        +2
        This is not about loss, it is about the defeat of the tank. These are different things. There is a hit, defeat, penetration. Lost irretrievably - 5.
        1. Ivan Mechanic
          Ivan Mechanic 14 June 2013 00: 17 New
          -2
          This is serious ;-). But where is the blast! Yes, and hit or penetration, they are also different! Here under the epaulette - this is one thing, in the forehead - another, but if on top and even a bonboy, then it's generally cool !! :-))))) And now really seriously - the meaning of my comment was completely different. The fact is that the commentator to whom I wrote the answer, except that Merkav’s losses did not reduce to zero. It is simply amazing how he generally left one lost tank. The same goes for the concept of "Almaty" supposedly with a slime from Merkava! And that you are very well versed in such nuances as hitting, penetrating, defeating - it’s great - but I’m just wondering when you and your friends are talking about a new mobile, telling your friends what GPS is, what frequencies it has, how metal and plastic melt, and others things related to the mobile, or still don’t get into such a jungle that is indirectly related to the issue?
  • Crang
    Crang 11 June 2013 08: 24 New
    12
    I saw at least a few Merkavs turned into scrap metal in the photographs. Of course, anything can be repaired ... But as I see it, the truth is somewhere in between.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 11 June 2013 12: 30 New
      +1
      5 tanks were irrevocably destroyed. Two landmines, three Pturami, one of them four.
      1. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 13 January 2018 19: 02 New
        0
        Quote: Pimply
        Irrevocably

        If you put 90% of the new equipment on the burned box, then legally the tank will not be irretrievably lost, but legally, but practically the question is completely different.
        I hold this view: if the machine was unable to carry out a combat mission, i.e. was taken out of the battlefield, then there is no difference between "destroyed / destroyed" and therefore such machines need to be equated with destroyed. If the car was damaged but was restored without any harm to the combat mission, for example, combat capability was restored during the crew’s rest break, maintenance, replenishment of resources, or while holding the position, then such a machine should be recorded in the “return loss” status "
  • Professor
    Professor 11 June 2013 08: 25 New
    -4
    The Merkava staged shooting at the T-72 Syrian tank, previously hit by the Tou ATGM and located in the neutral zone, was organized. The shooting was carried out after the ceasefire between the warring parties under the cameras in the presence of the chief of the General Staff of the IDF

    It seems the article does not apply to the bikes section? request I did not read further, excuse me.
    1. Crang
      Crang 11 June 2013 08: 38 New
      11
      According to the most authoritative information, not a single T-72 has yet been destroyed in the Merkava battle, just as the T-72 has not yet destroyed a single Merkava. But one "Merkava" slammed the T-62 - 115mm BOPS. And one T-72 seems to have slammed some sort of fancy “Centurion” with an 105mm gun.
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 08: 52 New
        +8
        Quote: Krang
        According to the most authoritative information, not a single T-72 has yet been destroyed in the Merkava battle, just as the T-72 has not yet destroyed a single Merkava. But one "Merkava" slammed the T-62 - 115mm BOPS. And one T-72 seems to have slammed some sort of fancy “Centurion” with an 105mm gun.

        Israeli tanks didn’t fire at the T-72. They simply were not in the area where they were involved. All T-72 were ambushed by an ATGM company.
        1. aleshka
          aleshka 12 June 2013 06: 44 New
          +1
          the T-34 didn’t hit the TIGER not the PANTER in the forehead, nevertheless there are a lot of monuments to the “thirty-four” and not a single “animal”! so your merkava is good against the “Indians” !!!!
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 12 June 2013 17: 17 New
            +1
            Do you propose to put a monument to RPG-7? 8)
            Well, maybe it's good against the Indians. Who knows, against whom else - others no longer risk attacking.
            1. aleshka
              aleshka 12 June 2013 20: 11 New
              +1
              dragged him in Afghanistan for six months, a good pipe !!! but the "meadowsweet" is something! look at the characteristics if interested
    2. Veter
      Veter 11 June 2013 09: 19 New
      15
      Quote: Professor
      It seems the article does not apply to the bikes section?

      No, of course these are not tales. Tales are about your invincible and powerful army and its weapons.
      1. Argon
        Argon 11 June 2013 09: 54 New
        +8
        And I would really like to read a more detailed commentary by the professor, I hope to appear in the evening.
      2. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 11: 32 New
        -3
        Quote: Veter
        No, of course these are not tales. Tales are about your invincible and powerful army and its weapons.

        and someone already defeated us / Until they won, it means-invincible.
        laughing
        1. neri73-r
          neri73-r 11 June 2013 11: 59 New
          +1
          Do not say gop ............... (c), but better spit, otherwise the GDP will drop you a couple, three divisions and that's all ...........! laughing laughing laughing
          1. atalef
            atalef 11 June 2013 12: 08 New
            -1
            Quote: neri73-r
            Do not say gop ............... (c), but better spit, otherwise the GDP will drop you a couple, three divisions and that's all ...........!

            Well damn scared. Have you already gathered to fight with Israel? What interests?
            1. omsbon
              omsbon 11 June 2013 13: 49 New
              +3
              Quote: atalef
              What interests?

              How for what? My wife and I want to go to the Dead Sea! lol
              1. atalef
                atalef 11 June 2013 14: 02 New
                +2
                Quote: omsbon
                How for what? My wife and I want to go to the Dead Sea!

                In order to drink a glass of milk, it is not necessary to buy a cow. To travel to the M. Sea it is not necessary to fight, it is enough to buy a ticket and you do not need a visa. It’s hot there now, though at the expense of the lowland it is difficult to burn in the sun there.
                1. omsbon
                  omsbon 11 June 2013 14: 45 New
                  +1
                  Quote: atalef
                  To go to the M. Sea is not necessary to fight

                  Dear Alexander! Actually, I was joking about fighting. I admit that if the joke is not understood, then it is unsuccessful. It’s my fault.
                  1. atalef
                    atalef 11 June 2013 14: 48 New
                    +2
                    Quote: omsbon
                    . I admit that if the joke is not understood, then it is unsuccessful. It’s my fault.

                    Well, in general, I also did not cut
                    hi
              2. Gromila78
                Gromila78 11 June 2013 22: 34 New
                +7
                - Have you been abroad?
                - Why? I was in Berlin, in Prague.
                “Did you go there on business?”
                - I did not go. I'm on foot.
                - As a tourist?
                - No, in the infantry.
                laughing
                1. reichsmarshal
                  reichsmarshal 12 June 2013 23: 02 New
                  +3
                  Frankfurt Airport, the sky is loaded to the limit, planes take off and land at 5-minute intervals, the controllers are sweaty. One of the first Aeroflot flights to Germany comes in for landing. He misses the lane and goes to the second round, breaking the entire schedule. The dispatcher annoyingly yells into the microphone of the radio:
                  “Have you never flown to Frankfurt before ?!”
                  From the speaker, the pilot’s calm answer:
                  - Why, I flew ... But it was in the forty-third, and then we did not sit down ... laughing
                  1. Pimply
                    Pimply 12 June 2013 23: 28 New
                    0
                    The original story was about the British, as far as I remember.

                    There was another great story about Russians, one of the first flights of the GDR
          2. Barabas
            Barabas 11 June 2013 19: 54 New
            -5
            damn how do you like a drink ... arit!
            One already landed a regiment in Grozny, and no one left. But what is even worse no one answered for the loss of people and equipment! Landing men !!!!!!!!!
        2. Oberst_71
          Oberst_71 11 June 2013 12: 16 New
          +3
          nobody defeated us either!
          1. atalef
            atalef 11 June 2013 12: 18 New
            -3
            Quote: Oberst_71
            nobody defeated us either!

            Well, therefore, the same is invincible. Unlike Syrian (as an example)
        3. yanus
          yanus 11 June 2013 15: 05 New
          +6
          Quote: atalef
          Quote: Veter
          No, of course these are not tales. Tales are about your invincible and powerful army and its weapons.

          and someone already defeated us / Until they won, it means-invincible.
          laughing

          I don’t remember any more state that was occupied by other states for 2000 years and as soon as it was renamed. Israel is a state that has become independent as unnecessary and with the permission of the "elder brothers."
          So the army is so-so.
        4. alicante11
          alicante11 11 June 2013 15: 46 New
          -4
          You won the whole WWII. So much so that you’re still moaning about Lochokost.
        5. reichsmarshal
          reichsmarshal 12 June 2013 22: 58 New
          +2
          I am not anti-Semite, but ... The Spanish Armada was also called Invincible. Invincible was called Napoleon, Hitler. Before Vietnam, Americans were considered invincible; before Afghanistan, we Russians were considered ... belay Many around the world (!) Regret that they lost their wars. And will someone feel sorry for Israel if SOMETHING IS SUCH?
          Indeed, in fact, the Arab-Israeli wars were NEEDED to the Israeli government (and the people?) And FAVORABLE to it. If victories go one after another, and the end of the war is not visible, is it not that something is amiss in the Danish kingdom? ... request
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 12 June 2013 23: 44 New
            -1
            But this is stupid, sorry. Why were they needed, do not you say? Look, for example, at Egypt. Since the signing of the peace treaty, has Israel attacked it? Or to Jordan? The Israel Defense Forces is invincible compelled. Take a trip to Israel and drive from the center of the country to the nearest border. Not too fast driving - half an hour or an hour.
            1. reichsmarshal
              reichsmarshal 13 June 2013 21: 40 New
              0
              IMHO: When in con. 40s Israel just appeared, its rulers thought that the Jews are a single people. In fact, it turned out that this was not so: among the God's chosen ones, disagreements began (like I mean, and you are ashkenaz). Under these conditions, the Israeli government made a mistake by deciding to play its party in the Middle East on its own, without taking into account the interests of the USSR, which, in fact, Israel created (the Stalin Project!). In an effort to maintain influence on the BV, the Soviet Union began to cooperate with the Arabs (which the people in the Union itself completely did not approve until 1967). Moshe Dayan decided to kill two birds with one stone: to create the image of the enemy and, with a small victorious war over him, strengthen the national identity and unity of the Jewish people, as well as raise his personal weight and the weight of IDF in Israeli domestic politics. Further: the classic conspiracy of the generals who DID about the willingness and desire of the Arabs to attack Israel; successful defeat of 1967; international isolation and condemnation of the aggressor; and total incessant guerilla with the Arab world. Plus, the need to prove the preventive nature of the 1967 attack (people who worked in the Arab states know that in the Arab "armies" it is impossible to plan anything for more than one day, so the Israeli attack cannot be considered a preventive one) .
              Moreover, Israel cannot end this war. Arabs do not care about Israel, but the end of the war in the BV will force the United States, for economic reasons, to prepare a new war there. Israel’s withdrawal from the war with the Arabs will automatically put it under American sights.
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 13 June 2013 22: 11 New
                +1
                So, do not carry the next nonsense about the Stalin project.
                1. reichsmarshal
                  reichsmarshal 14 June 2013 00: 03 New
                  0
                  If not for the consent of I.V. Stalin, Israel would not have appeared. Britain openly sabotaged this idea, and the United States, too, was not eager.
                  1. ProkletyiPirat
                    ProkletyiPirat 13 January 2018 19: 30 New
                    0
                    Do you have links to the source? otherwise, in other places everyone says exactly the opposite, that Israel is a project of the USA and especially of Britain in order to create a mess and maintain control over resources in case of loss of control over the territory. So I do not believe you or anyone else, I look forward to references to what, when and where Stalin said in the context of the creation of a Jewish state.
              2. Aaron Zawi
                Aaron Zawi 13 June 2013 22: 45 New
                +2
                Curious you (IMHO), but has the right to be.
                This week in Vancouver Canada, a meeting was held between the Jewish community of the city and the brigadier general of the reserve, ex-minister Avigdor Kahalani. In the Six Day War, Kahalani commanded a tank company and was seriously injured in the battle at Sinai. He spent a year in the hospital and underwent 12 plastic surgery. For this battle Avigdor Kahalani was awarded the medal "For Distinction". In Doomsday War, he commanded the 77 tank battalion, which was defending the Golan Heights. In a battle near the city of Kuneitra, a battalion under the command of Kahalani managed to stop the superior enemy forces and destroy dozens of Syrian tanks. Kahalani himself controlled the battle, standing in the tower of his car, the hatch of which was open. For this battle, he was awarded the highest award of Israel - the medal "For Heroism". In the Doomsday War, Kahalani lost his brother Emmanuel and brother-in-law Ilan. In Operation Peace Galilee, Kahalani commanded the Gaash armored division.
                Kahalani came to the studio "Radio VERA" - the radio station of the World Forum of Russian-speaking Jewishness, for a dialogue with the Russian-Jewish community of Vancouver. Alexandra Gerson, executive director of the Canadian Forum of Russian-speaking Jewry and producer of Radio VERA, asked him the question: "How did you, a Yemenite Jew, feel in the early 1990's, when a wave of aliyah from the former Soviet Union literally swept Israel?" Kahalani’s frank answer stunned Canadian radio listeners: “We were afraid of them. It seemed to us that they were people very far from Jewry. And besides, they bring communism with them, which can not only harm our country, but also destroy it. But we they created our Jewish home bit by bit. It's the same as creating an enemy in their own state. "
                But then, Avigdor Kahalani noted, it became clear that these fears are unjustified. "Russian Jews not only did not harm us, but turned Israel into a strong and developed country. The modern Jewish state in the international arena has become a serious partner in business and in any other area of ​​society, in modern technology, in sports and in art," said Kahalani.
                "Three months ago, I was born a Russian-Jewish-Yemeni granddaughter with a musical name - Sol. And we are all happy in our friendly family. This is an example of life in modern Israeli society," he said.
      3. smirnov
        smirnov 11 June 2013 15: 33 New
        +1
        Such a nature, nothing can be done request laughing
      4. aleshka
        aleshka 12 June 2013 06: 49 New
        0
        I read a lot about Tal, about the creation of Israeli tank forces! Yes, as a commander and man he was at the highest level, but with the layout of the tank he made many mistakes, you can understand him, there are not many Jews !!! so he tried to save the crew first of all !
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 12 June 2013 17: 21 New
          0
          What are his mistakes, can you make out in detail?
          1. aleshka
            aleshka 12 June 2013 20: 08 New
            0
            first, front layout, second landing squad, all to protect the crew but not for a tank attack !!!
          2. aleshka
            aleshka 12 June 2013 20: 17 New
            0
            You certainly respect as a patriot of Israel, but Russian weapons are a brand, well, I am also a patriot of my country!
    3. Slevinst
      Slevinst 11 June 2013 09: 26 New
      +7
      Professor had to read, maybe he could see it at least a little)
    4. ultra
      ultra 11 June 2013 14: 51 New
      +4
      Quote: Professor
      It seems the article does not apply to the bikes section?

      They themselves are to blame! I asked the people to make a review on Merkava4! request
    5. reichsmarshal
      reichsmarshal 12 June 2013 22: 52 New
      0
      Not read - this is your problem. There is nothing fantastic in this situation. They decided the issue of the effectiveness of guns and armor. It has long been proven that FRG pictures of the "many destroyed T-72s" are one and the same tank, photographed at different angles and at different times of the day. In 2011, it was shown on TV how the Libyan "rebels" burned the T-72: a tank (obviously, simply abandoned due to lack of fuel) was trivially poured with gasoline and set on fire - it’s possible to fry the barbecue. Yes, they are dancing nearby !. And then literate people do not know what kind of fire and smoke tanks burn. The fact that Merkava is more powerful than the T-72 - and who would argue? Only Merkava, even the “one,” is the 3rd generation tank, and the T-72 is the second. And the enemy is M60, well, Chieftain.
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 08: 29 New
    0
    Regarding the "Raki" legs grow out of the article in the "ISRAEL DEFENSE". In general, the concepts of new armored vehicles have a right to be, but Mr. Vasilyev forgot to mention that the article would have pointed out that the idea of ​​"Raki" will only be realized after the appearance of weapons on new principles, i.e. laser or rail, which will be possible to use from relatively small platforms.
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 08: 35 New
    +4
    Quote: Krang
    I saw at least a few Merkavs turned into scrap metal in the photographs. Of course, anything can be repaired ... But as I see it, the truth is somewhere in between.

    You could see at least five Merkavs turned into "metal", but two of them are of the second model and two of the third.
    1. beard999
      beard999 11 June 2013 15: 03 New
      +7
      Quote: Aaron Zawi
      but two of them are the second model and two are third

      And why such neglect, as you put it, to the "second and third models"? These tanks are by no means old. Merkava Mk.2B Dor Dalet (1999), Merkava Mk.3B Baz dor Dalet (1999), Merkava Mk.4 (2002). All three modifications with the Israeli "miracle armor", the so-called fourth generation. I remember how in the year 2005, at Granovsky, on the crow's bark, your fellow countrymen staged a whole orgy about the “fourth generation” of armor, on these MBTs. Statements were like: “you can only penetrate the stern of the tower”, all other projections “no ATGM will take” ... Well, etc. rave. However, the July War showed that there was much more cheap truths in such statements of cheap show-offs than truths. 50-plus crashed MBTs (and this, if you rely solely on Israeli sources), for 26 days of real battles, give 2 disabled tanks per day. And this is in battles with insurgents, armed not with the most modern TCP ...
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 29 New
        +1
        Because the modernization of the tank is still not turning it into a new model. 50 undefeated - affected tanks. 16 were disabled, 5 of them were not subject to recovery. The rest went into operation within 48 hours. Have you ever seen statistics on earlier wars?
        1. beard999
          beard999 11 June 2013 18: 07 New
          +5
          Quote: Pimply
          Because the modernization of the tank is still not turning it into a new model

          Demagogy of pure water. It's about new modifications to the tank. In the designations of Merkava Mk.2 / 3, this is directly reflected. Armor resistance in cars with the so-called armor "fourth generation" increased? Yes, definitely. Is there better armor on Israeli MBT? No. Thus, I see no reason to consider the "Merkava Mk.2B Dor Dalet" and "Merkava Mk.3B Baz dor Dalet" as somehow flawed in terms of armor protection.
          Quote: Pimply
          50 undefeated - affected tanks

          Can you reasonably explain the difference between “hit” and “hit”? I believe that the “crippled” (disabled) this is exactly the MBT “struck” by that or TCP ...
          Quote: Pimply
          The rest went into operation within 48 hours

          Do you have a link to an independent or official Israeli source (AOI), which explicitly states that all other MBTs (except the 16 specified by you) "went into operation within 48 hours"?
          And further. Israel got used to fleeting wars (II Arab-Israeli war of 1956 - 9 days, III Arab-Israeli war of 1967 - 6 days, IV Arab-Israeli war of 1973 - 19 days, V- I am the Arab-Israeli war of 1982 - 5 days (if we consider the active phase of ground battles with the Syrian army), the VI-th Arab-Israeli war of 2006 - 26 days (ground operation)). So for the IDF, MBT incapacitated even for 2 days, this is not so little.
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 12 June 2013 17: 33 New
            +1
            What nonsense are you? Tell me, if we upgrade the T-64 with the help of modern technologies, will it become a T-80 or T-90 from this? No. Because it is a different tank. This is a different design, a different engine, rollers, suspensions, tower shape, etc. Significantly changed the configuration of the armored modules of the tower, the gun is equipped with a mask. The roof reservation has also been significantly strengthened: the reservation size has increased and covers the entire roof, and not just the front part, as on the Mk.3B and Mk.3D models.
            Merkava 4 is another tank. Modernization of Merkva 2 and 3 significantly raises their level. However, it does not make them "four".

            Quote: beard999
            Can you reasonably explain the difference between “hit” and “hit”? I believe that the “crippled” (disabled) this is exactly the MBT “struck” by that or TCP ...


            A beaten one is a tank guaranteed to be taken out of battle. The affected one is a tank on which a defeat is recorded, but, quite possibly, he continued to fight.


            As for the rest. For starters - do you read Hebrew?

            Secondly. You lost the war of 1948 somewhere, lost the War of Attrition from 1967 to 1970, lost Lebanon, where Israel was until the year 2000, and so on. Definitely - very short-term wars.
      2. aleshka
        aleshka 12 June 2013 06: 53 New
        -1
        RPG-29 "meadowsweet" umativaet merkava even in the forehead !!!
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 12 June 2013 17: 36 New
          +1
          Yes? And where such confidence comes from. From what distance? Which Merkava?
  • ramsi
    ramsi 11 June 2013 08: 37 New
    +5
    I won’t argue about the front location, in the end you can cope with the haze, but creating additional volume for the backup crew is complete nonsense in its purest form
    1. Crang
      Crang 11 June 2013 08: 38 New
      +4
      Quote: ramsi
      , in the end, the haze can be dealt with,

      How? Even in the T-72B, it is not recommended to shoot or launch missiles in a left-back direction to avoid overheating of the 1K13-49 device.
      1. ramsi
        ramsi 11 June 2013 08: 53 New
        0
        with the T-72 it’s understandable, but to the merkavs it’s stronger to “blow” to the sides and more powerful thermal insulation of the VLD
        1. Crang
          Crang 11 June 2013 08: 59 New
          +1
          What is clear with the T-72? And the "Merkava" front exhaust - how to isolate it?
          1. ramsi
            ramsi 11 June 2013 09: 14 New
            +5
            nothing needs to be done with the T-72, he drives ahead. And for Merkava, the main problem is not exhaust, but the removal of hot air from the cooling system. In addition, you can always make a sort of screen (even under VLD) and blow air between them from the kondeya, and not into the fighting compartment ... let them sweat
          2. Kars
            Kars 11 June 2013 11: 07 New
            +8
            Quote: Krang
            What is clear with the T-72? And the "Merkava" front exhaust - how to isolate it?

            Most BMPs have exhaust in the front, and there are also much smaller dimensions and armor screens over the MTO, probably they also shouldn’t shoot ahead?
            1. ProkletyiPirat
              ProkletyiPirat 13 January 2018 21: 26 New
              0
              It is important to consider the likelihood of warm air getting into the optics trajectory. And it depends not only on the location of the exhaust but also on its direction. And it also depends on the relative position of the optics and the tower, move the tower a little back and it will be a completely different matter. Also, weather conditions need to be taken into account, for example whether the wind blows warm air into the aiming path. And the difference will be in movement and standing.
              In general, there are nuances.
          3. Tourist Breakfast
            Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 14: 09 New
            +4
            What is clear with the T-72? And the "Merkava" front exhaust - how to isolate it?


            Firstly, the “Merkava” exhaust sideways and not up. And secondly, in theory, this doesn’t really need to interfere with the thermal imagers, since they use focusing optics that are designed to form a picture starting from a certain range. In the same way, dust on the lens of a camera lens is not displayed on a photograph.
    2. Pimply
      Pimply 11 June 2013 12: 33 New
      +1
      Tal had a very reasonable shift crew concept, which involved replacing tankers tired in battle with others. As a result, she did not come to life.
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 11 June 2013 14: 23 New
        +2
        Lord, Tal is your complete nerd. Why the hell do you need to carry another crew in the tank, when the car still needs constant refueling and replenishment of ammunition, so that the crew can simply be changed during any of these operations.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 05 New
          +5
          Tal is one of the most famous tankers in the world who commanded successful tank formations in several real wars. I didn’t understand something. Do you have more experience than him?
          1. vorobey
            vorobey 12 June 2013 11: 30 New
            +2
            Quote: Pimply
            Tal is one of the most famous tankers in the world, commanded successful tank formations in several real wars.


            Fell. Guderian with his labors rests. Yes, and Rommel died out against the background of Tal. I'm not talking about ours.
            1. reichsmarshal
              reichsmarshal 12 June 2013 23: 08 New
              0
              It is characteristic that Israel Tal himself actively criticized the IDF BTV and did a lot for their successful modernization. He said that the high losses of 1973 were not the work of the Soviet prodigy, but the result of the stupidities committed by the high commanders of the IDF, as well as the miscalculations of the BTV structural organization.
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 12 June 2013 23: 45 New
                +1
                And in this he was absolutely right. By the way, I didn’t especially see capricious moods for Arabs.
          2. Arkan
            Arkan 12 June 2013 12: 59 New
            0
            Quote: Pimply
            Tal is one of the most famous tankers in the world.

            The authority of the commanders does not always indicate the correctness of their decisions, G.K.Zhukov was a great commander, but being in the post of Minister of Defense of the USSR, he took and dispersed the marine corps of the USSR ...
            1. ramsi
              ramsi 12 June 2013 14: 58 New
              +1
              I am an ignoramus, so make a discount and explain how the marines differ from the ordinary (except for different submissions and questionable, in terms of difficulty, specific tasks?)
              1. Cat
                Cat 12 June 2013 15: 08 New
                0
                the specificity of the tasks is different. And submission is nonsense, the Ukrainian MP was subordinated to the National Guard at one time (a certain analogue of the internal troops). Then, however, they thought better of it and returned it to the Navy =)
                1. ramsi
                  ramsi 12 June 2013 15: 19 New
                  0
                  so what’s specific - to swim a kilometer in full combat without fins in boots?
                  1. Cat
                    Cat 12 June 2013 15: 35 New
                    +2
                    Quote: ramsi
                    so what’s specific - to swim a kilometer in full combat without fins in boots?

                    swimming a kilometer (in flippers, boots, or no shoes at all) is not a task, but a way to accomplish it.
                    And if you get confused even in such things, there’s no reason to tell you anything about MP tasks. Because for a start you will have to explain a bunch of elementary truths, such as the fact that the difference between TOZ-8 and D-30 is not only that the second weighs more and flounders louder =)
                    1. ramsi
                      ramsi 12 June 2013 15: 43 New
                      -1
                      Thank you, I already understood: the specifics boil down to a different form, - and so, everything in general, the same - forward, attack, take over ... - oh yes, I forgot, I still need to not get sick
                      1. svp67
                        svp67 12 June 2013 22: 28 New
                        +2
                        Quote: ramsi
                        Thank you, I already understood: the specifics boil down to a different form, - and so, everything in general, the same - forward, attack, take over ... - oh yes, I forgot, I still need to not get sick

                        The specificity is that one has to start fighting knee-deep in the water - without any chance to hide from the enemy’s bullets, fight for every meter of the bridgehead, without support and open flanks, not allowing the enemy to seize the initiative for an hour, because there is simply no turning back ... You can only hope for your strengths and capabilities ... The experience of the landing has shown that people need to be taught and educated. And just changing here is not enough ...
              2. Arkan
                Arkan 12 June 2013 16: 30 New
                0
                Quote: ramsi
                specifics of tasks?

                Exactly! This concept includes the corresponding technical equipment and, therefore, tactics and methods of combat use - and this, in turn, determines the system and methods of preparation ...
                All attempts to land motorized rifles ended in the fact that the units participating in the exercises were given the nickname "self-propelled guns", and the marine corps had to be rebuilt for a new one.
                1. ramsi
                  ramsi 13 June 2013 06: 13 New
                  0
                  amphibious assaults - in our Palestinians - is a rather exotic thing and I just don’t understand why it is impossible to leave the Airborne Forces - the structure is also quite exotic, but let it at least be one
                  1. ProkletyiPirat
                    ProkletyiPirat 13 January 2018 21: 37 New
                    0
                    It’s a good idea, I also think it myself, but using today's models of equipment and management structures this is impossible. It is necessary to change a lot, and the Defense Ministry in general and the General Staff of the Navy in particular will not do this, especially the General Staff of the Navy because it is extremely unprofitable for them.
        2. svp67
          svp67 12 June 2013 15: 50 New
          +1
          Quote: Avenger711
          Lord, Tal is your complete nerd. Why the hell do you need to carry another crew in the tank, when the car still needs constant refueling and replenishment of ammunition, so that the crew can simply be changed during any of these operations.

          It all depends on where and how you are going to use this tank, and it is quite possible to use this vehicle as a firing point at an outpost or checkpoint ... Yes, and extra hands for servicing, loading, equipment and protecting positions are not not superfluous
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 08: 44 New
    +6
    Quote: ramsi
    I won’t argue about the front location, in the end you can cope with the haze, but creating additional volume for the backup crew is complete nonsense in its purest form

    Of course nonsense. I remember having read such articles, we asked such a question on Tironut (KMB). They explained to us popularly that we were you and that the presence of a landing ramp in the tank was intended to leave a damaged vehicle and to evacuate crews of other tanks that had already left the car, with maximum safety.
    1. Crang
      Crang 11 June 2013 08: 52 New
      +5
      Aron is your designer did not come up with the landing. Initially, the theme was this - the Merkava tank goes into battle with two crews. While one is fighting, the second is sleeping in a specially designated place. Then they hand over / accept the shift and change places. But then when they realized that this was dog nonsense, and that no one wanted to burn in a dream, they refused this topic, and used the additional volume for ammunition or landing as needed.
      1. ramsi
        ramsi 11 June 2013 08: 54 New
        +2
        additional volume - this is all the same nonsense, the maximum that is needed is to fade quietly when knocked out
      2. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 09: 23 New
        +6
        Quote: Krang
        Aron is your designer did not come up with the landing. Initially, the theme was this - the Merkava tank goes into battle with two crews. While one is fighting, the second is sleeping in a specially designated place.

        It was just one of Israel Tal’s thoughts in an interview. Nobody even tried to realize it. The "landing compartment" is not adapted for however long a stay of people.
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak 11 June 2013 09: 27 New
          +7
          Quote: Aaron Zawi
          The "landing compartment" is not adapted

          So I thought the tank was a marshurt? Do not overtake especially if you drive along your intersection
        2. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 11 June 2013 13: 51 New
          +6
          Quote: Aaron Zawi
          The "airborne compartment" is not adapted for however long a stay of people.

          MK4 is a very good tank and, according to statistics, the crew’s survival rate is higher than in previous versions, but at the expense of the airborne compartment.
          I recalled a scene from a film about national characteristics
          You want to live, and you’re not getting up to it
          1. ProkletyiPirat
            ProkletyiPirat 13 January 2018 21: 48 New
            0
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            You want to live, and you’re not getting up to it

            Actually, when after a battle or during a battle with the loss of a piece of equipment there are several crews on one tank and the crews cannot be transported out of service, and you cannot carry them on the armor because they will shoot, the ability to throw out a part of the BC and save the trained L / C costs a small increase in the reserved amount.
      3. ed65b
        ed65b 11 June 2013 13: 20 New
        +1
        Type Indian taxi. One taxis the second in the trunk asleep.
    2. ramsi
      ramsi 11 June 2013 09: 54 New
      +1
      if the extra bed is for evacuation only, why didn’t the tower be moved back?
  • Slevinst
    Slevinst 11 June 2013 09: 25 New
    +1
    Well here they say the best tank
  • Perch_xnumx
    Perch_xnumx 11 June 2013 09: 37 New
    +1
    After the Second Lebanon War, the IDF tried again to modernize the tank by installing the Trophy active defense system on it, designed to intercept rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank missiles.
    And if, for example, you use a mobile jammer, for example, the scanner reads the radar signal, analyzes it at the right time, starts to hammer. Then a second shot and a departure. We kind of went along the path of twin charges.
    1. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 11: 22 New
      +1
      And if, for example, you use a mobile jammer, for example, the scanner reads the radar signal, analyzes it at the right time, starts to hammer.


      Then it will be necessary to drag the generator along with it, so that the jammer can supply power.
      1. Perch_xnumx
        Perch_xnumx 11 June 2013 12: 08 New
        0
        Then it will be necessary to drag the generator along with it, so that the jammer can supply power.
        Battery - no? Used and threw it away. Or sent to reload. A directional antenna will not eat energy beyond the limits.
        1. Tourist Breakfast
          Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 12: 33 New
          +1
          Battery - no? Used and threw it away. Or sent to reload. A directional antenna will not eat energy beyond the limits.

          The battery is not designed to instantly take a lot of power from it. And it’s not the antenna that eats the energy, but the noise generator and amplifier. And they will only eat like that, since you need to work in a wide range and with a constant signal, because the exact characteristics of the KAZ radar are unknown and can vary.
          1. atalef
            atalef 11 June 2013 12: 39 New
            +1
            Quote: Tourist Breakfast
            And it’s not the antenna that eats the energy, but the noise generator and amplifier. And they will only eat this way, because you need to work in a wide range and with a constant signal,

            Zhenya, why not discuss the feasible and prove to the person that his idea is nonsense, if it is clear to everyone. Lugging at the calculation of an RPG or ATGM is also a jamming station, not just nonsense, but complete nonsense.
            1. Rumata
              Rumata 11 June 2013 12: 58 New
              +2
              Quote: atalef
              Zhenya, why not discuss the feasible and prove to the person that his idea is nonsense, if it is clear to everyone. Lugging at the calculation of an RPG or ATGM is also a jamming station, not just nonsense, but complete nonsense.

              You can add an iron trump card to those who are "off topic", but do not suspect about it -
              GREAT AND POWERFUL AMY aka EMP !!!!
              1. Perch_xnumx
                Perch_xnumx 11 June 2013 14: 20 New
                0
                You can add an iron trump card to those who are "off topic", but do not suspect about it -
                GREAT AND POWERFUL EMPI aka EMP !!!!
                You can add something not from the category of Amy, and not a trump card, but just the idea. But I will not voice it here.
            2. Perch_xnumx
              Perch_xnumx 11 June 2013 13: 51 New
              +1
              Zhenya, why not discuss the feasible and prove to the person that his idea is nonsense, if it is clear to everyone. Lugging at the calculation of an RPG or ATGM is also a jamming station, not just nonsense, but complete nonsense.
              The radar does not have the ability to rebuild instantly, especially the one that is installed on the kaz, because this is a cheap option. There is not much time needed for the work of the special device. Will it be able to rebuild - a question? Whether this is nonsense or not, only calculations and simulations will show.
              As practice shows, sometimes delusional at first ideas are realized and spill over into a headache.
              You can install a special device and remotely read and analyze data showing how the frequency is being tuned, which algorithm, well, until it clicks, or the operator sends a command for self-destruction.
              By the way, do not feed the Chinese with bread, just let them develop something like that, cheaper than the rest, so that the countries of the 3rd world buy.
              Another option is special. grenade firing cloud of reflectors with a remote fuse.
              And finally, if you have nothing to prove why you had a conversation here between your own.
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 11 June 2013 15: 02 New
                +5
                RPG-30 "Hook"
                "...... At the time of the shot, the projectile charges of both shells are triggered. In this case, the target simulator leaves the barrel first, after which the main ammunition of the PG-30 starts with a slight delay. Modern KAZ tanks, firing on a simulator shell, are not in able to respond to the next main anti-tank grenade following it. As a result, the main cumulative ammunition penetrates the main layer of armor, hits equipment and crew inside the tank, causes a fire and detonation of the ammunition. ... "
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 43 New
                  0
                  They tested them on modern Kaz 8)?
              2. Tourist Breakfast
                Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 17: 40 New
                0
                The radar does not have the ability to rebuild instantly, especially the one that is installed on the kaz, because this is a cheap option.


                Right?
                1. dustycat
                  dustycat 12 June 2013 00: 10 New
                  +2
                  Put any radar in a cloud of plasma and it does not matter - can it quickly rebuild or not - it will not see anything.
                  Radiophysics.
                  Explosion of the damaging element of the SAZ itself creates a plasma cloud, but short-lived - 0,001 - 0,01 s. With this radar and on the AFAR and with a swinging antenna can handle.
                  But with a cloud of aluminum powder hanging in the air - until it is blown away by the wind - not a single radar will do anything. And if this cloud is also heated to 300-600 degrees ... From one to ten seconds of blindness will be.
                  Even a thermal imager will be useless.
              3. papik09
                papik09 12 June 2013 08: 09 New
                +1
                The mysterious Russian soul ... It, you know, demoralizes cleaner than a macaque with a grenade! wassat
              4. ProkletyiPirat
                ProkletyiPirat 13 January 2018 21: 59 New
                0
                More logical is a high-frequency pulsed microwave emitter operating from a micro-mini explosive generator and located in the nose of the projectile, starting the generator according to the timer set before the shot according to the range table to the target. Even if it does not burn out the AFAR, it will create interference. But again, there is a lot of “IF” and “BUT”. So, R&D is required, and therefore it is not for us to judge the reality of the implementation of this option at the current technological level.
          2. dustycat
            dustycat 11 June 2013 23: 40 New
            +2
            It is possible both easier and cheaper and without power sources.
            Double shot: one leader-free director of the plasma cloud (a pack of aluminum rain from a Christmas tree and a firecracker to spray it into the cloud), any super-duper radar fades for five seconds), the second charge - the main tandem - breaks the blinded car.

            And remember the ammunition of the EMP ... In general, any electronics if not a corpse then a useless load. request
            1. Tourist Breakfast
              Tourist Breakfast 12 June 2013 10: 53 New
              0
              And remember the ammunition AMY... In general, any electronics if not a corpse then a useless load.


              Here it is! I knew it!
            2. Pimply
              Pimply 12 June 2013 17: 38 New
              +2
              In theory, it's all beautiful. In practice - wait, sir
              1. dustycat
                dustycat 15 June 2013 11: 55 New
                0
                In practice, we read the soldier of fortune from 2004.
                The practical results of shelling tanks with a complex like Arena or Trophy are a complete shutdown or blocking for 10-30 seconds with a miss of up to 20m 30mm underbarrel EMP grenade.
                With an increase in caliber to 40 mm shots from an RPG, the zone of "missed miss" increases to 50m.
                Neither Arena nor Trophy will react to the missile ammunition.
              2. dustycat
                dustycat 17 June 2013 07: 41 New
                0
                Amendment.
                Soldier of Fortune No. 3 of 1996
                1. Tourist Breakfast
                  Tourist Breakfast 17 June 2013 13: 31 New
                  +2
                  Where did KAZ Trophy come from in 1996?
  • igordok
    igordok 11 June 2013 09: 44 New
    +4
    For the first time in tank building practice, all shots to a tank gun, cartridges with ammunition and mines were in fiberglass refractory containers that withstand the effects of an open flame for 45 minutes.

    Why was this done? Tank after 45 minutes of fire kayuk. The fact that the KB did not explode does not play a role. Or tankers collect unused, unburned BZ for use in still whole tanks.
    1. Argon
      Argon 11 June 2013 11: 10 New
      11
      Well, do not forget which country we are talking about.
    2. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 11: 23 New
      +3
      Why was this done? Tank after 45 minutes of fire kayuk. The fact that the KB did not explode does not play a role. Or tankers collect unused, unburned BZ for use in still whole tanks.


      Tankers will not wait 45 minutes before leaving a burning tank.
    3. Avenger711
      Avenger711 11 June 2013 14: 25 New
      0
      In fact, in battle, all these boxes will be open all the time.

      > unburned BZ for use in even whole tanks.

      Yeah, like in WoT, the unspent is returned to the warehouse. laughing
    4. aleshka
      aleshka 12 June 2013 10: 29 New
      +1
      That there was no explosion of BC, after which there is nothing to collect !!!
  • rudolff
    rudolff 11 June 2013 09: 46 New
    +5
    A tank, if not the best, is one of the best. Each machine has design flaws, it’s impossible to create an ideal one and you always have to sacrifice something and compromise. It is not clear where the author took such figures of MK.4 losses during the Lebanese events. You can shovel any sources, only one four was irretrievably lost.
    1. Argon
      Argon 11 June 2013 11: 06 New
      +8
      Yes, it’s broader, how the concept of “tank” can refer to this product. Limited mobile bunker is its characteristic, problems with maneuverability have always been and will be, they are laid down in the layout. In principle, all the “Achilles heels” of this MBT are indicated in the article true but, in my opinion, their detriment is not sufficiently substantiated (it would be possible to give examples of the application of similar technical solutions to other MBTs with the subsequent abandonment of them) I can argue about the security of the machine for a long time, but I consider the links to open information (submitted by Israel) childish m babble (the truth will begin to emerge in 20 years). The only, no doubt, is that it is lower than the requirements of the military, which actually explains the presence of modifications that are significantly technologically different from each other. Moreover, note that the weight of the machine UNCONDITIONLY progresses. Moreover, the owners of this miracle themselves , understand perfectly well that there is little use for it except in the fight against the Basmachis and partisans, therefore the Merkavs do not even make up 85% of the tank forces.
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 12: 40 New
        -1
        Quote: Argon
        the only, no doubt, is that it is lower than the requirements of the military, which actually explains the presence of modifications that are significantly technologically different from each other.

        No, it just means that the car is constantly being upgraded.
      2. IRBIS
        IRBIS 11 June 2013 16: 07 New
        +2
        Quote: Argon
        Yes, it’s broader, as the concept of “tank” can refer to this product. Limited mobile bunker is its characteristic, problems with maneuverability have always been and will be, they are laid down in the layout

        Five points!!! An 70-ton tank of such menacing proportions is only to drive Arabs through the desert. And then in the presence of a normal road. Yes, Jews do not lie here - a defensive tank, for sure. Going on the offensive to such crap is suicide, which poorly armed Palestinians have demonstrated to them.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 11 June 2013 16: 35 New
          +7
          Have you ever seen what the terrain in Israel turns into during rains of many months? No need for normal roads and desert.

          Here is a comparison of the sizes of the T-90 and Merkava. As for the sighting devices of tanks, that for the calculations of Ptur there is no radical difference here. And there and there it’s big crap
          1. ramsi
            ramsi 11 June 2013 17: 35 New
            +7
            Well, don’t tell ... In polygon conditions - yes, but with limited visibility, limited time, vigorous maneuvering, stress, disguise - a smaller silhouette can work very well
            1. Tourist Breakfast
              Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 18: 10 New
              +4
              Yes, in the extreme video from Syria, all the "advantages" of the small reserved volume and the tight layout of the T-72 are clearly visible.
              1. Genady1976
                Genady1976 11 June 2013 18: 29 New
                +2
                To all three + Pimpy Ramsi Tourist Breakfast
                Here is a comparison of the sizes of the T-90 and Merkava. As for the sighting devices of tanks, that for the calculations of Ptur there is no radical difference here. And there and there it’s big crap
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. ramsi
                ramsi 11 June 2013 18: 41 New
                +3
                Well, if the main goal is not to destroy the enemy, but the chances of survival, then you are right. (This is me to the question of the "advantages" of a smaller silhouette)
                1. Tourist Breakfast
                  Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 20: 27 New
                  +1
                  Well, if the main goal is not to destroy the enemy, but the chances of survival, then you are right. (This is me to the question of the "advantages" of a smaller silhouette)


                  Survive to then destroy the enemy.
                  1. ProkletyiPirat
                    ProkletyiPirat 13 January 2018 22: 36 New
                    0
                    here it’s another matter. Soviet tanks, due to their small silhouette, have no VN angles, as a result, it’s unrealistic to aim when moving a machine along an intersection. Yes, everything is "excellent" at the training ground, but either the training ground, or real combat situations. Here, the example of tank games, both arcade and simulators, is just very indicative, since their TVD (maps) are much more diverse and the number of scenarios and combat situations is simply prohibitive. The same problems are confirmed by military operations, especially in Syria where special firing positions are created for tanks where they can shoot in movement on a relatively flat surface.
            2. Pimply
              Pimply 12 June 2013 17: 39 New
              +3
              In conditions of lesser reserved volume, it is much more difficult for tankers to work - they get tired many times faster.
              1. ProkletyiPirat
                ProkletyiPirat 13 January 2018 22: 38 New
                0
                the crew is not alive in a single volume!
          2. Argon
            Argon 11 June 2013 20: 28 New
            0
            I think the ratio of projections is not shown correctly, in other words, the scale is incorrect, the Merkava is slightly larger and 4ka is especially higher
      3. bask
        bask 11 June 2013 19: 14 New
        +3
        Quote: rudolff
        A tank, if not the best, is one of the best.

        Quote: Argon
        .Only movable bunker-that's it

        In my opinion, the time has come to close up the concept of MBT, into two concepts.
        1. assault tank-assault gun. Kal .. guns 140-152 mm. Angle elevation guns + 35-40 gr. Maximum armored weighing up to 70 tons.
        2. Tank for highly maneuverable war. The gun is 120-125 mm. Mass up to 50-55 tons. Here the suspension has an important role, only hydropneumatic. Maximum patency, speed, maneuverability of the tank. Means survival in battle.
  • rudolff
    rudolff 11 June 2013 09: 53 New
    +7
    Plastic containers for shells give time to work out the on-board fire extinguishing system or, in extreme cases, evacuate wounded crew members. The solution is not perfect, but the meaning is clear.
    1. igordok
      igordok 11 June 2013 11: 16 New
      0
      Quote: rudolff
      Plastic containers for shells give time to work out the on-board fire extinguishing system or, in extreme cases, evacuate wounded crew members. The solution is not perfect, but the meaning is clear.

      But 45 minutes. Why make such a fuss. Or get money for an unnecessary thing.
      1. Kars
        Kars 11 June 2013 11: 30 New
        +8
        Quote: igordok
        But 45 minutes.

        And how many?
        Quote: igordok
        Or get money for an unnecessary thing.

        Containers for gunpowder charges were used in the Challenger and Chiften tanks. From where they migrated to Israeli tank construction. Although, it is possible, the roots go from .. wet .. combat soundings of Sherman.
  • Scandinavian
    Scandinavian 11 June 2013 09: 56 New
    +1
    He is not such a beast, as all Western specialists call him. The only thing I liked was that the warhead was covered in shells, well done Jews. Thought out this chip.
  • sys-1985
    sys-1985 11 June 2013 10: 06 New
    +2
    The protection of ammunition is good for sure.
    1. ramsi
      ramsi 11 June 2013 12: 11 New
      0
      but I don’t really understand how the process of removing the container and loading the projectile during the battle (well, when those that are behind the tower in the feeder are over) are going on. In any case, a completely isolated BO from the crew is better
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 12: 22 New
        +4
        Quote: ramsi
        but I don’t really understand how the process of removing the container and loading the shell during the battle goes

        for 5.31 seconds look
        1. atalef
          atalef 11 June 2013 13: 15 New
          +2
          Quote: atalef
          for 5.31 seconds look

          so for laughs, but minus what for?
          1. Kars
            Kars 11 June 2013 13: 26 New
            +3
            By the way, who and when loads the automatic machine? And if during the battle its resource ends (5-10 shells) how is it with access to the remaining bk?
            1. atalef
              atalef 11 June 2013 13: 54 New
              +3
              Quote: Kars
              By the way, who and when loads the automatic machine? And if during the battle its resource ends (5-10 shells) how is it with access to the remaining bk?

              I’ve found out specially for you (a tankman works with me in the department, still goes to training camps). To begin with, 5 shells are loaded into the automatic loader, the rest of the ammunition is stuffed in containers around the tank. After shooting the first 5-tee (the combustible sleeve remains only the pallet). The new kit is loaded manually (by the loader) - again into the automatic loader.
              1. Kars
                Kars 11 June 2013 14: 32 New
                +1
                Quote: atalef
                specifically for you found out (

                Thank you.
              2. ramsi
                ramsi 11 June 2013 14: 34 New
                0
                I didn’t minus, I don’t play these games at all. Tell me, but in order to cram a shell into the feeder, do I have to get out on the armor, or can this be done from inside the car?
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 45 New
                  +1
                  From the inside. This is not self-propelled guns
                  1. ramsi
                    ramsi 11 June 2013 16: 55 New
                    +1
                    that is, the loader goes down, gets into the stern, takes out the container, returns and puts it in the same point? .. And are the empty ones from the feeder even thrown out automatically? .. In general, it all resembles “fetching” shots thirty-four of shell boxes on the floor
                    1. atalef
                      atalef 11 June 2013 18: 36 New
                      0
                      Quote: ramsi
                      that is, the loader goes down, gets into the stern, takes out the container, returns and puts it in the same point? .. And are the empty ones from the feeder even thrown out automatically? .. In general, it all resembles “fetching” shots thirty-four of shell boxes on the floor

                      Watch the video (about M 4) posted in my comment on (5 min 31 sec), there was already such a question, and my answer to Kars about the fact that the sleeve is combustible, only the pallet remains.
                      1. ramsi
                        ramsi 11 June 2013 18: 46 New
                        0
                        Yes, I looked, and asked about what I did not understand ... is the pallet a container?
                      2. atalef
                        atalef 11 June 2013 19: 02 New
                        +1
                        Quote: ramsi
                        Yes, I looked, and asked about what I did not understand ... is the pallet a container?

                        The pallet, this is the brass bottom of the shell, the shell itself burns down. The projectile is located in the projectile feeding system in a plastic container from where it is pulled out manually and fed to the loading system (containing 5 shells manually) Each projectile has a type marker and the machine delivers the projectile of the required type for firing, depending on the requirements of the commander. Projectile delivery system (from reserved space) at the 4 minute
                      3. Yemelya
                        Yemelya 11 June 2013 19: 36 New
                        0
                        Quote: atalef
                        The projectile is located in the projectile supply system in a plastic container from where it is pulled out manually and fed into the loading system (containing 5 shells manually)


                        In the 4th minute, show us, kindly, the "feed system."
                  2. Kars
                    Kars 11 June 2013 18: 48 New
                    +1
                    Quote: atalef
                    that the sleeve is combustible, only the pallet remains

                    it's not about a sleeve, but about a protective plastic pencil case.
                  3. atalef
                    atalef 11 June 2013 18: 56 New
                    0
                    Quote: Kars
                    it's not about a sleeve, but about a protective plastic pencil case.

                    And where did you see that it would be removed by the loader along with the shell?
                  4. Kars
                    Kars 11 June 2013 19: 00 New
                    +2
                    Quote: atalef
                    And where did you see that it would be removed by the loader along with the shell?

                    The fact of the matter is that almost nothing is visible. In theory, it remains in the drum, like a sleeve in a revolver. Therefore, it is interesting how they are extracted, and how charging is not performed through the feed machine.
                  5. atalef
                    atalef 11 June 2013 20: 12 New
                    0
                    Quote: Kars
                    The fact of the matter is that almost nothing is visible. In theory, he remains in the drum, like a sleeve in a revolver.

                    \ and there is

                    Quote: Kars
                    Therefore, it is interesting how they are extracted, and how charging is not carried out through an automatic feeder.

                    In the outside space, they are in plastic cases. The loader calls up the required ammunition and it is fed from the outside space (it can be seen that the loader presses the sash and the projectile exits), then it manually leads it into the loading machine (on 5 shells). the commander, depending on the required ammunition, calls the desired ammunition. the machine gives it out and charges the gun.
                    Such a system.
                  6. Kars
                    Kars 11 June 2013 20: 20 New
                    +2
                    Quote: atalef
                    Charger calls for the required ammunition and it is fed from the reserved space

                    The question is precisely how it is delivered from the reserved space? Is there a mechanized combat deployment?
                    Quote: atalef
                    To begin with, 5 shells are loaded into the automatic loader, the rest of the ammunition is shipped in containers across the tank.
                  7. atalef
                    atalef 11 June 2013 20: 32 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Kars
                    The question is precisely how it is delivered from the reserved space? Is there a mechanized combat deployment?

                    The tank was equipped with an improved 120-mm gun, designed for increased pressure of powder gases. Together with the gun, the new improved electric drum mechanism is now working, feeding shells to the loader and 10-designed shells, the rest, as before, are stored in individual refractory containers in the stern of the tank.


                    The tank is equipped with an 120 mm gun. This is a modernized version of the gun from the Merkava Mk-3 tank.
                    The upgraded gun is characterized in that the shells have acquired a high initial velocity. The gun is equipped with a projectile feeding system, which, in semi-automatic mode, selects and delivers the desired projectile from the protected compartment.
                  8. Kars
                    Kars 11 June 2013 20: 45 New
                    +1
                    Quote: atalef
                    The gun is equipped with a projectile feeding system, which, in semi-automatic mode, selects and delivers the desired projectile from the protected compartment.

                    Quote: atalef
                    designed for 10 shells, the rest, as before, are stored in refractory individual containers in the stern of the tank.


                    Gun ammunition 48 [2]
                    Feeder holds 48 shells? I understand or ten?
                  9. atalef
                    atalef 11 June 2013 20: 53 New
                    0
                    Quote: Kars
                    Feeder holds 48 shells? I understand or ten?

                    Kars. Well, do not slow down, honestly. I explained it to you normally. Two systems for delivering shells from an ammunition shell 48 shells from an armored on-call loader are automatically delivered to him. and he sends the shell to the loading machine, the machine is already loading the gun. Well chesslovo. What's not clear.
                    I’ll talk to Nimrod tomorrow (he’s a tanker) and he will describe everything in pictures to me. We'll have to feed him the truth with hummus wassat he will give all secrets to him.
                  10. Kars
                    Kars 11 June 2013 20: 58 New
                    +1
                    Quote: atalef
                    48 shells from an armored on-call loader is automatically delivered to his hands


                    I'm sorry but I DO NOT BELIEVE
                    Quote: atalef
                    Well chesslovo. What's not clear

                    The fact that for some reason a mechanized ordnance with the choice of ammunition and even 48 shells about this I would hear.
                    I think it's worth calling your friend back and clarifying.
                  11. Kars
                    Kars 11 June 2013 21: 09 New
                    +1
                    ___________
                  12. atalef
                    atalef 11 June 2013 21: 13 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Kars
                    I think it's worth calling your friend back and clarifying.

                    I’ll talk to Nimrod tomorrow (he’s a tanker) and he will describe everything in pictures to me. He will have to feed him with hummus, he will give out all the secrets for him.
                  13. Kars
                    Kars 11 June 2013 21: 16 New
                    +1
                    Quote: atalef
                    I’ll talk to Nimrod tomorrow (he’s a tanker) and he will describe everything in pictures to me.

                    Do mercy. I will be grateful.
      2. Yemelya
        Yemelya 11 June 2013 20: 26 New
        +1
        Quote: atalef
        In the outside space, they are in plastic cases. The loader calls up the necessary ammunition and it is fed from the outside space (this is pid, the loader presses the flap and the projectile goes out 0, then manually he puts it into the automatic loader 9 for 5 rounds of 0. The commander, depending on the required ammunition, calls the necessary ammunition. charges the gun.
        Such a system.


        Looks like it turns out.

        And where is all this grandeur (the reserved space, where the shots are “called up” from) located? lol
      3. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 20: 40 New
        0
        Quote: Emelya
        Looks like it turns out.

        And where is all this grandeur (the reserved space, where the shots are “called up” from) located?

        For especially .... I repeat. on the TANK. fool
        Googled a little. if you know what it is
      4. Yemelya
        Yemelya 11 June 2013 20: 51 New
        0
        I reformulate the question for the dull: where is the reserved space on the tank?

        Quote: Emelya
        In the outside space, they are in plastic cases.


        But is it nothing that from what you, dear friend, consider “mechanized combat laying”, a shot leaves without a pencil case?

        Or, do you know how a sharp-pointed shot emerges from a bottle-shaped pencil case forward?

        And why, let me know, in the reserved space fireproof cases?
    2. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 11 June 2013 21: 29 New
      +2
      Quote: Emelya
      And where is all this grandeur (the reserved space, where the shots are “called up” from) located? lol

      As I understand it, a drum for 5-10 shots is located in the tower (where the abrams has a warhead).

      When the shells end in the drum, the loader takes shots from containers (canisters) that are stacked on both sides of the aisle to the aft door and immediately charges them into the cannon. When he has time, he replenishes the warhead in the drum (it is much more convenient to take shots from it than from a non-combustible container, therefore, when fed from the drum, the rate of fire is higher).
      That's all the automation.
    3. Yemelya
      Yemelya 11 June 2013 22: 41 New
      +2
      Quote: Bad_gr
      As I understand it, a drum for 5-10 shots is located in the tower (where the abrams has a warhead).
      It just does not raise my doubts.

      Dear atalef, he tried to prove, incidentally scattering obscenities, that in this armored space the entire BC, and even in containers, was connected to a gun with an automatic machine, which the commander controls:
      Quote: atalef
      In the outside space, they are in plastic cases. The loader calls up the required ammunition and it is fed from the outside space (it can be seen that the loader presses the sash and the projectile exits), then it manually leads it into the loading machine (on 5 shells). the commander, depending on the required ammunition, calls the desired ammunition. the machine gives it out and charges the gun.
      Such a system.
    4. Genady1976
      Genady1976 11 June 2013 23: 28 New
      0
      they can push 80+ shells into the tank and everything is in containers
    5. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 11 June 2013 23: 40 New
      +4
      There she is, the main ammunition (view from the driver's side towards the aft door)

      Loading mechanisms (in addition to being picked there) can not be seen
  • Yemelya
    Yemelya 11 June 2013 18: 42 New
    +2
    Quote: atalef
    To begin with, 5 shells are loaded into the automatic loader, the rest of the ammunition is stuffed in containers around the tank. After shooting the first 5 (the combustible sleeve remains only the pallet). The new kit is loaded manually (by the loader) - again into the automatic loader.


    And in the "compartment for the landing" you can not put the second loader, so that he helps to pull out shots from canisters and put empty in place?
    1. atalef
      atalef 11 June 2013 18: 46 New
      0
      Quote: Emelya
      And in the "compartment for the landing" you can not put the second loader, so that he helps to pull out shots from canisters and put empty in place?

      Watch the video and don't ask stupid questions.
      1. ramsi
        ramsi 11 June 2013 18: 59 New
        +4
        in short, from the video and your comments it turns out that the merkava - for 5 shots of battle, and any shells - that they managed to put into the feeder, and then - we put the smoke screen and tear the claws to recharge for another 5 shots ... Do I understand correctly?
      2. Yemelya
        Yemelya 11 June 2013 19: 08 New
        +4
        Quote: atalef
        Watch the video and don't ask stupid questions.


        I saw that people took shots from a machine gun and put it into a cannon. When 5 shots in the machine are over, he either has to charge one at a time, taking out each time from the pencil case, or charge the machine, which will take at least 1 min. If there was a second loader, the first would only have to put shots into the cannon.

        Watch the video and don’t give silly answers.
  • Alexander D.
    Alexander D. 11 June 2013 21: 28 New
    0
    Quote: atalef
    for 5.31 seconds look

    Oh yeah! The opinion of these ecchorts is generally beyond any doubt! wassat
    1. ramsi
      ramsi 13 June 2013 21: 11 New
      -1
      the damned Jews never revealed military secrets what kind of loading system on the merkava: whether manual, like on an abrams and leopard, or semi-automatic - from a machine gun for 5 shots and a feeder - it is not known how much .., between which (sophisticated intellect ) - charging.
  • rudolff
    rudolff 11 June 2013 10: 13 New
    +4
    The machine is optimal for its theater of operations. It is simply impossible to imagine her in conditions such as Belarusian woodland. Forests, rivers, rivulets, swamps and RPGs behind any tree will negate all its advantages. As well as any other tank.
    1. il grand casino
      il grand casino 11 June 2013 11: 30 New
      +2
      Israel has a very diverse area. From the desert to the mountains (where by the way there is heavy snow). Plus, dirt can be such that it fails anyway - you won’t get it. As for the Belarusian forests, I agree
      1. Kars
        Kars 11 June 2013 11: 45 New
        15
        I always imagine that in the photo the professor is holding his head.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 11 June 2013 14: 01 New
          +1
          Quote: Kars
          I always imagine that in the photo the professor is holding his head.

          It seems that there is one puddle throughout the field.
          The professor with the tanks was not completely determined.
          1. Kars
            Kars 11 June 2013 14: 34 New
            +4
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            Professor with tanks not completely decided

            but they decided on me)) and it was a pity it was interesting - at least to me.
            1. Yarbay
              Yarbay 11 June 2013 16: 09 New
              0
              Quote: Kars
              but they decided on me)) and it was a pity it was interesting - at least to me.

              you are not the only victim of the squabble character of a professor)))
              Probably already half the site in the same position as you))
              1. Kars
                Kars 11 June 2013 16: 21 New
                +5
                He didn’t lie on the site’s floor in the emergency situation. Yes, and I see how he is arguing with some.
                1. Yarbay
                  Yarbay 11 June 2013 16: 42 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Kars
                  He didn’t lie on the site’s floor in emergency situations. Yes, and I see how he argues with some

                  these are those who stayed)))) together with me in his emergency, I counted 15 people))))) these are those who themselves declared)))
                  still bought our T-90s !!
                  Azerbaijan will demonstrate T-26S tanks for the first time at a military parade of the Armed Forces on June 90.

                  This was reported to APA in military sources.

                  These tanks were purchased in Russia in 2011.
            2. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm 11 June 2013 16: 40 New
              +1
              Quote: Kars
              but they decided on me)) and it was a pity it was interesting - at least to me.

              What, seriously, blacklisted?
              Sometimes you do something in the heat of the moment and then you regret it, but pride does not allow to fix it.
              1. Kars
                Kars 11 June 2013 16: 47 New
                +3
                Quote: saturn.mmm
                What, seriously, blacklisted?

                Yes, and probably one of the first.
                Quote: Yarbay
                together with me in his emergency I counted about 15 people))))

                Well, I have more, but the professor is not there, mostly small things.
                Quote: Yarbay
                Azerbaijan will demonstrate T-26S tanks for the first time at a military parade of the Armed Forces on June 90.

                It’s not long to wait, so we'll see.
                1. Yarbay
                  Yarbay 11 June 2013 16: 57 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Kars
                  Well, I have more, but the professor is not there, mostly small things

                  So this professor brought a, not us))))))))
    2. neri73-r
      neri73-r 11 June 2013 12: 12 New
      +4
      In Belarus, he will ride with his weight only on the Minsk highway !!! And then not for long!
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 12: 24 New
        +8
        Quote: neri73-r
        In Belarus, he will ride with his weight only on the Minsk highway !!! And then not for long!

        And we will fight with Belarus. What for ? I was born in Gomel.
        1. Perch_xnumx
          Perch_xnumx 11 June 2013 14: 48 New
          +2
          Quote: atalef

          And we will fight with Belarus. What for ? I was born in Gomel.
          Who will ask you? Get an order and sign, national security interests and things like that. Today, Israel spits on Christians in Syria, and who will spit tomorrow if it considers that it is so profitable.
          1. atalef
            atalef 11 June 2013 14: 51 New
            +3
            Quote: Perch_1
            Who will ask you? Get an order and sign, national security interests and things like that.

            then Monaco is better. even a volunteer
      2. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 11 June 2013 14: 04 New
        +3
        Quote: neri73-r
        In Belarus, he will ride with his weight only on the Minsk highway !!! And then not for long!

        What will he ride there?
        1. atalef
          atalef 11 June 2013 14: 15 New
          +5
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          What will he ride there?

          For sweets, Spartak factories - if only.
          But in Ukraine, I would ride on it, or rather, at the customs of Boryspil. And then every time fat is taken out with a fight (you must give it to your paw, otherwise you will not be allowed to take it out) And so on the tank and order.
          good
      3. Konsmo
        Konsmo 11 June 2013 14: 43 New
        +1
        Traffic cops will not give.
        1. atalef
          atalef 11 June 2013 14: 50 New
          +4
          Quote: Konsmo
          Traffic cops will not give.

          in Ukraine? for grandmas all give
          wassat
          1. Konsmo
            Konsmo 11 June 2013 15: 31 New
            +2
            And where did the tankers get carbovanci?
            No, for a fine parking will be driven.
            And about the Belarusian traffic cops and say nothing. They have an old man Lukashenko for Merkava quarterly premium increases.
            1. Kars
              Kars 11 June 2013 15: 35 New
              +5
              Quote: Konsmo
              And where did the tankers get carbovanci?
  • SOUTH,
    SOUTH, 11 June 2013 10: 15 New
    +4
    Despite the assurances of the representatives of the Israeli army, the author’s words are more credible, if only because he thoroughly described each shortcoming. And as for the T72, it didn’t matter whether Merkava fired.
    Certainly, the actions of the crew, the enemy’s position and the control of the database are sometimes crucial.
    No tank can be considered invulnerable. Tanks are primarily large tank formations designed for deep throwing behind enemy lines, bypassing fortified areas.
    The third world will begin ... as they say spring will come the snow will melt ...
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 11 June 2013 12: 36 New
      -1
      The author stated his fabrications, without using several sources.
  • Kars
    Kars 11 June 2013 11: 03 New
    +6
    The beginning is good, then a little blown away, and very controversial judgments began.

    for example, a direct comparison of 82 years and 2006, it makes no sense to draw parallels in principle.
    It would be interesting to see the replacement of Merkav with Abrams, Leclair, T-72 in the Second Lebanon and the resulting level of losses, it is a pity that such a simulation, even if carried out, is classified.

    But this photo sopryu itself in a collection.
    1. Kars
      Kars 11 June 2013 12: 07 New
      +4
      From this point on, the Merkava began to use self-propelled artillery systems for firing at the front edge of the defenders, since the magnitude of the tank gun and the gunners' qualifications did not allow them to mount fire on targets in the depths of urban areas of fortified areas. Left without a tank cover, the infantry of the assault groups suffered substantial losses.


      This passage is also somewhat annoying. Tanks and their high-speed guns generally don’t offer a mounted arrow, except at a distance of more than 6-8 km. Yes, and the fact of the retraction, Merkav also somehow does not find exposure.
      You can also recall the principles of conducting urban combat with armored formations that MUST follow the infantry, suppressing the identified centers of resistance, and not be the leading element in isolation from infantry escort.

      The most important indicator of the use of Merkav in the second Lebanese for me is this quote

      A total of 30 tankers were killed (19 regular army and 11 reservists) in 13 tanks

      http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/history/2nd-lebanon-war/acv-losses/
      Where the figure of 400 tanks used in this conflict is also voiced
    2. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 12: 10 New
      +2
      It would be interesting to see the replacement of Merkav with Abrams, Leclair, T-72 in the Second Lebanon and the resulting level of losses, it is a pity that such a simulation, even if carried out, is classified.


      Why, over the T-72 in Syria, there’s a lot of videos on the Internet. What is not a "simulation"?
      1. Kars
        Kars 11 June 2013 12: 26 New
        +4
        Quote: Tourist Breakfast
        Why, over the T-72 in Syria, there’s a lot of videos on the Internet. What is not a "simulation"?

        No, it won’t work out. The military equation should include military training that suppresses the air and artillery superiority of the IDF over Lebanon, the use of drones, technical intelligence. The availability of satellite intelligence and communications. For example, replacing the T-72 in the government of Syria with Merky 4 change the level of BTT losses, and possibly even increase.
        1. Tourist Breakfast
          Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 12: 45 New
          0
          We do not compare the IDF and the SAA as a whole, but only tanks. You can compare the results of shelling ATGMs and RPGs Merkava and T-72 completely. Fortunately, the means used and the tactics of Dushmans are very similar in both cases.
          1. Kars
            Kars 11 June 2013 13: 04 New
            +4
            Quote: Tourist Breakfast
            We do not compare the IDF and CAA in general, but only tanks

            And tanks in combat operations in isolation from the complex do not make much sense to compare.
            Quote: Tourist Breakfast
            You can compare the results of shelling ATGMs and RPGs Merkava and T-72 completely.

            Well, if I’m not mistaken, Lebanon took less than a month to Syria for at least a year, and so on.
            Quote: Kars
            It would be interesting to see the replacement of Merkav with Abrams, Leclair, T-72 in the Second Lebanon and the resulting level of losses


            Keyword REPLACEMENT.
            1. Tourist Breakfast
              Tourist Breakfast 11 June 2013 13: 59 New
              +2
              Well, if I’m not mistaken, Lebanon took less than a month to Syria for at least a year, and so on.


              I think I’ll really analyze the available videos in Syria, and collect statistics like Granovsky’s - the number of armor penetrations for the number of hits, the number of irrevocable from the total number of penetrations, etc.
              1. Kars
                Kars 11 June 2013 14: 37 New
                +1
                Quote: Tourist Breakfast
                I think I’ll really analyze the available videos in Syria, and collect statistics like Granovsky’s - the number of armor penetrations for the number of hits, the number of irrevocable from the total number of penetrations, etc.

                Not vryatli. And what will it give? Compare with the merkava in VLV all the same will not work.

                Сonclusion
                Summing up the above figures, we can state the following:

                • 45 tanks were hit by ATGMs and RPG grenades, in total 51 missiles hit the tanks.

                We will also take it based on the hit of 51 missiles / grenades? In what period? Retreat? Defense? Offensive? Time period?
            2. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 18: 39 New
              +4
              Quote: Kars

              And tanks in combat operations in isolation from the complex do not make much sense to compare.

              taking off my hat hi How many copies on this subject are broken. In the tank brigade of 4000, there are only 400 tankers, but without an engineering battalion, reconnaissance battalion, artillery battalion, rambat, support battalion, headquarters, they are just one-time heroes for an hour.
    3. Vadivak
      Vadivak 11 June 2013 12: 31 New
      +4
      Quote: Kars
      And here is a photo sopryu itself in a collection


      Julie pancake is growing, you'd better show your collection as much as you can already, at least a couple of pictures posted
      1. Kars
        Kars 11 June 2013 12: 52 New
        +4
        Quote: Vadivak
        Julie pancake is growing, you'd better show your collection as much as you can already, at least a couple of pictures posted

        Well, what to do?

        I’m showing it regularly, but there’s only one problem - everything is also stolen there, one by one, and I can call it mine only on my hard drive)))
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak 11 June 2013 14: 01 New
          +2
          Quote: Kars
          I show my regularly

          I'm not talking about this, you show me the models
          1. Kars
            Kars 11 June 2013 14: 42 New
            +5
            Quote: Vadivak
            I'm not talking about this, you show me the models

            I’ve already shown it too. But I repeat --- there’s still no better photo - I’m in a state of permanent repair that is superimposed on personal circumstances. This led to large losses of armored vehicles, albeit not at all irrevocable and correctable glue.
            1. Kars
              Kars 11 June 2013 14: 44 New
              +8
              this is a general view)))))
              1. Zlodeey
                Zlodeey 12 June 2013 22: 58 New
                0
                Impressive, did they assemble the models themselves?
              2. Zlodeey
                Zlodeey 12 June 2013 23: 03 New
                0
                For a clearer can you post photos of teshek, if possible?!
                1. Kars
                  Kars 12 June 2013 23: 21 New
                  +3
                  Quote: ZloDeey
                  Did you collect models?
                  not all. some received in the process of exchange
                  Quote: ZloDeey
                  if possible?!

                  there is already a new laminate))
                  1. Zlodeey
                    Zlodeey 15 June 2013 16: 18 New
                    0
                    Thank yousmile , cool models, the appearance of t90 ms, maybe?
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 15 June 2013 16: 23 New
                      +1
                      Quote: ZloDeey
                      cool models, the appearance of t90 ms, maybe?

                      http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2013/05/90-gur-khan-meng-models.html

                      all that is
    4. ed65b
      ed65b 11 June 2013 13: 23 New
      0
      I agree the photo is just wonderful. At least a mine under the caterpillar lodge.
  • Tuzik
    Tuzik 11 June 2013 11: 30 New
    +4
    perfect things do not happen, but the fact that Merkava is the best tank for protecting the crew is a fact, the task was set and completed.
    1. neri73-r
      neri73-r 11 June 2013 12: 16 New
      -1
      Confabulation - wishful thinking !!! Well, this is national, forgive. fellow
  • DAGESTAN333
    DAGESTAN333 11 June 2013 12: 07 New
    +5
    Jews made a unique world-class tank without their own tank building school, almost out of the blue. Jews, as always, strictly adhere to rationality. I respect
    1. Kars
      Kars 11 June 2013 12: 11 New
      +5
      Quote: DAGESTANETS333
      world-class tank without its own tank building school, almost out of the blue

      An equal place for Jews was underpinned by BTT supplies from all over the world, including gifts from Arabs from the German Four of the Great Patriotic War to the Soviet T-62.
      A habit began even with the modernization of American Sherman
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 12: 29 New
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        An equal place for Jews was underpinned by BTT supplies from all over the world, including gifts from Arabs from the German Four of the Great Patriotic War to the Soviet T-62.
        A habit began even with the modernization of American Sherman

        Well, the Arabs also delivered supplies (as well as to many countries of the world) But they did not even create their own tanks, they did not even learn how to upgrade one. In Israel, in the absence of both heavy industry and steelmaking facilities in general, a tank building school and the ability to receive tanks from the states for nothing. Nevertheless, they created their own and one of the best tanks in the world.
        1. Kars
          Kars 11 June 2013 12: 38 New
          +4
          Quote: atalef
          Well, the Arabs also went

          Arabs, they are Arabs. But the Abrams in Egypt learned to collect all the same. Let them be a screwdriver, but still.
          Quote: atalef
          In Israel, in the absence of both heavy industry and steelmaking facilities in general,

          Well, so you bought what was missing, what percentage of Merkav equipment from local capacities? And the work on Carrots was carried out in VERY close cooperation with the USA.
          I will not remember about a quarter of our people)))
          Quote: atalef
          making the ability to receive tanks from the states practically for nothing

          What can I say here, you made a great effort on yourself, but there probably also were prerequisites and an expectation for the future
          Quote: atalef
          Nevertheless, they created their own and one of the best tanks in the world.

          And this is generally easier to say, since tanks are not like cars — a dozen names (modern) and that’s all, you will say one of the best and who the hell is that.
        2. smirnov
          smirnov 11 June 2013 15: 46 New
          -1
          I would see what you would create if it were not for the enormous help from America and the indemnity for the "Holocaust" from the Germans.
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 58 New
            +1
            "Great help" from America began to come after 1979, when Israel refused a piece of earth-rich oil and gas rich in size. Compensation for the Holocaust was one-time, and amounted to 3 billion marks. The money that the Germans paid subsequently went and goes to foundations that care for survivors in the Holocaust.

            Egypt has the same help. Did they create something?
        3. reichsmarshal
          reichsmarshal 12 June 2013 23: 16 New
          0
          STOP! If Israel does not have heavy industry, WHERE DO THEY MAKE A MERCAVA? In the village forges rivet, like Czech Wagenburgs of the XV century?
      2. DAGESTAN333
        DAGESTAN333 11 June 2013 12: 46 New
        +1
        Kars, of course, I do not match you in tank affairs, but I think you need to admit - Merkava is the Jews own thought, not to mention the beautiful and aesthetic appearance of this machine.
        1. Kars
          Kars 11 June 2013 13: 00 New
          +5
          Quote: DAGESTANETS333
          already about the beautiful and aesthetic appearance of this machine.

          here I agree unconditionally. Whoever gave Merkava 4 at least on a scale of 35)))) otherwise, according to plans and with my laziness, she doesn’t fall into this decade for me)
          1. atalef
            atalef 11 June 2013 13: 05 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars
            ut agree unconditionally. Anyone else who gave Merkava 4 at least on the 35 scale)))) and then according to the plans and with my laziness, I don’t get it in this decade)

            In general, Ibei can be bought.
            And so every time I see 4-ku, power is simply mesmerizing. The tank is simply beautiful. good
            1. Kars
              Kars 11 June 2013 13: 09 New
              +1
              Buying it is not a special problem. But the principle is that I already have two, but there is no T-64, and Centurion)) so it’s the turn.
            2. posad
              posad 15 June 2013 07: 17 New
              0
              Russian tanks look more impressive. But this ugly good only for the Jews))))
  • rudolff
    rudolff 11 June 2013 12: 17 New
    +3
    N-yes ... The fact that the Israelis created such a machine without any experience in tank building is surprising and respects. Moreover, they did not blindly copy other people's equipment, which in general would be understandable, but created their own unique platform!
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 11 June 2013 12: 40 New
      +3
      Israel had a strong technical school.
      1. Perch_xnumx
        Perch_xnumx 11 June 2013 14: 43 New
        +1
        Israel had a strong technical school.
        This is why they fly on American planes, use American bombs and missiles. The Israeli school is the most high school. As they say, give me "the right amount of money" (fulcrum) and I will turn the globe.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 09 New
          +3
          American planes have Israeli avionics, which is considered one of the best in the world. And the bombs with missiles are mostly mine. There was a good Lavi plane, two copies of which flew, and which they did not start into production only under the pressure of the Americans - switched to UAVs and became leaders in this area. Yes, this is a good technical school.
    2. Perch_xnumx
      Perch_xnumx 11 June 2013 14: 49 New
      -2
      N-yes ... The fact that the Israelis created such a machine without any experience in tank building is surprising and respects. Moreover, they did not blindly copy other people's equipment, which in general would be understandable, but created their own unique platform!
      You might think America had nothing to do with it. They created the nuclear bomb themselves, from scratch, these are such brilliant people.
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 15: 00 New
        +5
        Quote: Perch_1
        You might think America had nothing to do with it. They created the nuclear bomb themselves, from scratch, these are such brilliant people.

        how can I blurt out so from the bald without even knowing the essence of the matter. Look at the date the center was established in Dimona and correlate this time with the relationship between Israel and the United States. Then the relationship was just zero. America began to help Israel only after the 1967 year. When a long time ago (according to foreign sources) everything was done. And France delivered the reactor to Israel, receiving in return the most advanced heavy water production technology at that time (invented in Israel)
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 11 June 2013 15: 09 New
          +2
          More precisely, since 1969.
          1. atalef
            atalef 11 June 2013 15: 17 New
            +1
            Quote: Pimply
            More precisely, from 1969

            Especially. I have an employee in the department (who worked with Vanunu by the way) Razkazyval as if the arrival of the Amerov delegation the whole floors (underground center) were laid with bricks (entrances) were plastered and painted over so that they would not have guessed about the availability of secret rooms.
            Helpers.
            : tongue:
  • Konsmo
    Konsmo 11 June 2013 12: 54 New
    0
    Not guys. Jews and mechanics are two things that are not compatible. The fact that the mechanics of the chariot is pouring is a fact. I don’t follow the Jewish wars with the poits, did they have something like in the movie. "At war as at war." The capture of the village with the confrontation of tanks and infantry with the Fausts-RPG?
    No matter what they show on TV, they stand in pillboxes and shoot at the manink or stand on tractors.
    A friend of mine, my tribe on a tractor, carried the last modification of Merkava to the last mess. In short, they didn’t take it off, it’s dumbly strewed from the platform. I was surprised that they were talking on Skype and laughing, in real life, when they were shooting there.
    1. Rumata
      Rumata 11 June 2013 13: 02 New
      +1
      Quote: Konsmo
      No matter what they show on TV, they stand in pillboxes and shoot at the manink or stand on tractors.

      While the rest of the tanks of the planet are not standing in bunkers covering the infantry, they themselves clean houses and carry out arrests.

      Quote: Konsmo
      not removed, dumb from the platform, sprinkled.

      Oh how ...
      1. Konsmo
        Konsmo 11 June 2013 14: 15 New
        +4
        Type for your power insulting.
        Bullshit weighing 70 tons can’t travel. Here and excuses, then the sheets from the bottom are removed for patency (as planned), then they argue behind the place for 2 crews or troops. What kind of landing, the tank does not pull 100 km.
        Alah Akbar.
        However, I have nothing against Israel, if Muslims bury it, it would not be better for anyone.
        Just an ambition for doh .. well, like the Poles. But for those, the cavalry is famous with wings, and here the Chariot with a cannon is like a siliceous rushnyka.
        hi
        1. atalef
          atalef 11 June 2013 14: 18 New
          +1
          Quote: Konsmo
          Bullshit weighing 70 tons can’t travel. That's the excuse, then the sheets from the bottom are removed for patency (as planned), then they argue behind the place for the 2 crew or landing. What kind of landing, the tank’s suspension on the 100 km

          A liar, such a small, plump liar. You don’t even reach the adult.
          1. Konsmo
            Konsmo 11 June 2013 14: 57 New
            0
            wassat About the plump, you guessed it?
            And what about the mechanics of filthy, at the level of T-34 of 1941, they switched gears in 4 hands. So this is full of articles. Are they all plump?
            Oh, I'll go buy hummus. wassat
            1. atalef
              atalef 11 June 2013 18: 20 New
              +3
              Quote: Konsmo
              Oh, I'll go buy hummus.

              Normal hummus only in Acre at Saeed or in Shfaram (Abu Shadi), at worst in Abu Ghosh (near Jerusalem) - the rest is a miserable likeness of the left hand wassat


              Quote: Konsmo
              And what about the mechanics of filthy, at the level of T-34 1941 of the year, there the hands switched gears in 4. So this is full of articles

              In Merkava, the box is an automatic machine. I would say at least that they switch to four legs - it would sound believable. laughing
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 12 June 2013 17: 46 New
                0
                Nothing else in Jaffa, in Abulafia
              2. Konsmo
                Konsmo 13 June 2013 15: 35 New
                -1
                The machine is not automatic one hell is a mechanic. I'm talking about something that is not finished. There are plenty of mechanics there without a box.
                I’m buying hummus in 7 Continent on Profsoyuznaya Street in Moscow. Judging by our price, it’s better. what About 5 dollars 300 grams. There are with pine nuts.
                The tribe cracks only ears move. He studied in Tel Aviv for about 7 years. Now he is studying at graduate school in Moscow. Today, by the way, he will give his first patent (scientific development). He can drink it with alcohol in the evening.
                And his school friends are already in the army, yours has passed. Therefore, information is what, yes, how full it is at first hand. On Skype he has a lot of guys, school friends.
          2. smirnov
            smirnov 11 June 2013 15: 49 New
            +1
            But essentially, in addition to insults, what do you say?
  • Sars
    Sars 11 June 2013 13: 08 New
    -1
    And I think that the tank, if not the worst, then one of the worst!
    It was complete nonsense when General Makarov and the company took him as the basis for Almaty.
    1. Konsmo
      Konsmo 11 June 2013 14: 59 New
      0
      What Makarov went to design tanks? smile
  • ed65b
    ed65b 11 June 2013 13: 27 New
    10
    Water and fire came together again. Brothers of Israel do not pay attention to articles. Your tank is the tank itself. The rest in the letter g. I wish you to rivet them further and add 70 tons of weight, as it will be a little less than 100 or 120. And more of it and wider. We can sell you a license for a king cannon. And the king's bell, too. One will shoot and the second to ring.
    1. Konsmo
      Konsmo 11 June 2013 14: 21 New
      +5
      Ofigel brother. On the king of the gun no way.
      They say they used to show her to the ambassadors. We’ll put such a snare into your pants.
      Ambassadors only opened their mouths.
      That is a great politician. drinks
    2. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 11 June 2013 18: 44 New
      +5
      The Tsar Bell doesn’t ring half-baked,
      The Tsar Cannon doesn’t shoot mother
      And that means the Jews are to blame
      It remains only to find the chronicle. (I. Guberman)
      good
      1. Konsmo
        Konsmo 13 June 2013 15: 52 New
        +1
        And why the gun does not shoot. How so.
        It’s just a pity for tourists. Previously, it was installed opposite the Spassky Gate, during the assault the gates could be opened. Since the cannon shot with buckshot (it’s proved that it shot) Now tourists are behind the gates, thousands roam, well, why do they.
        And the bell shows the level of metallurgists in Russia. In the world, a similar level of casting did not exist. It’s shaky because it’s fired from the belfry in a fire. He couldn’t surpass him and shaky.
  • MRomanovich
    MRomanovich 11 June 2013 14: 05 New
    +4
    Quote: DAGESTANETS333
    Jews made a unique world-class tank without their own tank building school, almost out of the blue.

    there is nothing surprising here, given the heads that came from all over the world — the USSR, Europe, states, etc., plus the connection of those who arrived with those who remained. In this situation, you can build any technical equipment without having a ready base under your feet.
  • atalef
    atalef 11 June 2013 14: 11 New
    +2
    Quote: MRomanovich
    there is nothing surprising if you consider which heads came from all over the world — the USSR, Europe, states, etc.

    What kind of heads, Jewish heads. By the way, besides coming up with, you also have to make; Jews also made - I think you have no doubt about that.
    1. Perch_xnumx
      Perch_xnumx 11 June 2013 14: 38 New
      0
      What kind of heads, Jewish heads. By the way, besides coming up with, you also have to make; Jews also made - I think you have no doubt about that.
      And are the spare parts, electronics components, devices, and finally materials exclusively Israeli?
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 14: 47 New
        +4
        Quote: Perch_1
        And are the spare parts, electronics components, devices, and finally materials exclusively Israeli?

        German engine. Everything else including electronics is ours. The gun was produced under license, now it’s kind of like ours.
    2. Konsmo
      Konsmo 11 June 2013 15: 07 New
      -1
      In short, the salt of the earth.
      Salty heads, what will it be ?? recourse
      I have several Jewish acquaintances, you will expel FIGs. The Moscow Synagogue is closer, the fat is cracked and not bored.
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 June 2013 15: 12 New
        +4
        Quote: Konsmo
        I’m several Jewish acquaintances, you’ll expel FIGs. The Moscow Synagogue is closer, the fat is cracked and not bored.

        I understand them. After all, you have to work in Israel. And you have both a synagogue and fat.
        1. Konsmo
          Konsmo 11 June 2013 15: 44 New
          +2
          Yes, we don’t really have to work. One dream of life, an apartment on the Arbat has already come true. Poems will pee.
          Other kosher beef factories near the Caspian Sea are designing for Israel.
          An hour to bathe, an hour to design.
          And there is vanity in Israel, some plumber, some in the printing house. Arbeiten. am All sweet places are taken apart.
          1. atalef
            atalef 11 June 2013 18: 23 New
            +1
            Quote: Konsmo
            And there is vanity in Israel, some plumber, some in the printing house. Arbeiten. All the sweet places are taken apart

            In warm places (in Israel), the same factory from morning to evening. This is not Russia, it is necessary to work here, or splint (teeth) on a shelf laughing
            1. ed65b
              ed65b 11 June 2013 21: 56 New
              -1
              But damn it is not necessary to work here ?? .. Herach from morning till night. I was not on vacation for 3 years, since all the beauty is nearby.