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.
387 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    11 June 2013 08: 04
    Let the author not be offended, but he has a lot of mistakes. First, note that the Merkava-1 never fired at the T-72 as it was used in units in the Primorsky direction, and the only collision of the IDF with the T-72 tanks that were part of the Syrian First Armored Division was on Damascus Highway and this was not a tank battle. and an ambush by an anti-tank company of an airborne brigade against the Syrian vanguard. The second Lebanese war was not in 2007, but in July-August 2006. During the Second Lebanon, only one Mk-4 was irretrievably lost and one was sent to the factory for repair. Another 11 machines of this type, which were 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 dash to Litania, it was the "fours" that broke through there through an anti-tank ambush, although 7 vehicles were damaged. After the end of the war, a plan was adopted to dramatically increase purchases of 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
      +20
      11 June 2013 08: 31
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      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 tankers. "Leopard-2A6EX and A7" is worse than your 4-ki. First of all, fear the T-90A / MS, the Chinese ZTZ-99A2. From the West - AMX-56 "Leclerc" and "Abrams" too. Leperd has many flaws.
      1. +2
        11 June 2013 08: 46
        Quote: Krang

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

        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
          +15
          11 June 2013 08: 49
          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. +37
            12 June 2013 07: 41
            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 members of the forum, under pressure from the professors, agreed to name the carrot (and called it) the best tank, with reservations "for my region, and I did. In general, I read the features here, about the gearbox, I remembered the problems of the engine, and then the figure is 1,42 times lower degree of security (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
              +2
              12 June 2013 11: 29
              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-
                +3
                13 June 2013 14: 06
                [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. -9
              12 June 2013 20: 45
              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. +11
                12 June 2013 21: 29
                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. +16
                13 June 2013 20: 20
                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. +8
              12 June 2013 21: 04
              Well, the Jews are famous masters of lies. They have written so in the Torah (Old Testament-Five Books of the Torah).
              1. -9
                12 June 2013 21: 23
                And detail? Well, just interesting 8)
                1. +4
                  13 June 2013 12: 02
                  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-
              +1
              13 June 2013 13: 55
              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
              +1
              13 June 2013 22: 54

              - 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
          +3
          15 June 2013 07: 13
          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. +1
            14 January 2018 02: 47
            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. +11
        11 June 2013 13: 33
        Abrams? They made fun of him, in Iraq they beat him with a heavy machine gun, and you level him up with tanks!
        1. -4
          11 June 2013 14: 19
          But about how Abrams from a heavy machine gun - more
          1. +15
            11 June 2013 14: 30
            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. +2
              11 June 2013 21: 43
              What, what, armor to hang in problem areas, that's what.
          2. +3
            11 June 2013 14: 40
            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 "large-caliber machine gun" - it is loudly said. There was a case of friendly fire from a Bradley (20mm cannon) on the grill where Abrams has a radiator. The tank is out of order (if I remembered correctly).
            1. +2
              11 June 2013 15: 01
              Then it’s more clear
              1. +14
                11 June 2013 15: 12
                Bad_gr
                About "large-caliber machine gun" - it is loudly said. There was a case of friendly fire from a Bradley (20mm cannon) on the grill where Abrams has a radiator. The tank is out of order (if I remembered 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. +2
                  12 June 2013 21: 15
                  I fully support Kars on the Internet, you can find all the details, thoroughly with the photo.
          3. +15
            11 June 2013 15: 55
            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
            +7
            12 June 2013 03: 41
            There have been cases. I even watched a video on YouTube.
            The AFU is located in the aft niche of the tower near the Abrams. Moreover, it is extremely weakly armored. So her defeat with a large-caliber machine gun is quite possible. This is followed by the ignition of fuel and ... In general, that's all. A fat, polar fox is suitable for this unit waddling.
            1. +5
              12 June 2013 10: 45
              Quote: anomalocaris
              The AFU is located in the aft niche of the tower near the Abrams.

              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. +1
                12 June 2013 21: 18
                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-
            0
            13 June 2013 14: 15
            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
            0
            14 June 2013 22: 21
            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. +2
              14 June 2013 23: 39
              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
        +6
        11 June 2013 13: 34
        when another Chinese will meet a Jew)))))
        1. +5
          11 June 2013 20: 04
          I don't think Israel will be happy to have a border with China. All hope for Russia, including the T-90. So that it was not like in that ancient anecdote: "At the Finnish-Chinese border, everything is calm so far."
        2. +12
          11 June 2013 20: 22
          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. +5
            12 June 2013 21: 08
            The most interesting thing is that the Chinese are called "Jews of the East".
        3. Hunghuz
          +8
          12 June 2013 07: 26
          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. +4
        11 June 2013 19: 17
        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. +3
        12 June 2013 21: 26
        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: Aron Zaavi
        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 tankers. "Leopard-2A6EX and A7" is worse than your 4-ki. First of all, fear the T-90A / MS, the Chinese ZTZ-99A2. From the West - AMX-56 "Leclerc" and "Abrams" too. Leperd has many flaws.
    2. +6
      11 June 2013 08: 44
      And where is this sleepy ermine Kars interesting?
    3. Yarbay
      +13
      11 June 2013 08: 47
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      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. +8
        11 June 2013 09: 20
        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 they were used. But basically, during the VLV, the tank will be dreamed of for its intended purpose. Those. covered the infantry with fire and armor. During the debriefing, two extremely unfortunate cases of the use of tanks were highlighted. At Beit Jabal, when tanks were simply used as a lightning rod to give the infantry a breakthrough to Litania, when in Vaadi Saluki, reconnaissance ambushed an anti-tank ambush. By the way, it was in Vaadi that "fours" were used, and although seven vehicles were damaged, all of them retained their combat capability and the battalion, leaving not a single vehicle, went to the Litany.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. +1
        11 June 2013 11: 15
        because the same scholars decided to use the "merkava" as SAMAhodki ...
      4. -8
        11 June 2013 12: 49
        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. +6
      11 June 2013 13: 15
      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. +1
        11 June 2013 13: 23
        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. +1
          11 June 2013 13: 41
          and who are the first three?
          1. +1
            11 June 2013 13: 45
            BM Oplot and nothing else (this is the principle)
            Challenger 2
            Leopard 2
            1. 0
              11 June 2013 13: 55
              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
              +9
              11 June 2013 16: 06
              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. +2
                11 June 2013 16: 16
                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
                  +1
                  11 June 2013 16: 30
                  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. +6
                    11 June 2013 16: 35
                    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
                      +2
                      11 June 2013 18: 01
                      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. +1
                        11 June 2013 18: 47
                        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. -3
                        11 June 2013 18: 50
                        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. +6
                  12 June 2013 14: 22
                  Quote: Kars
                  This is my principle, in principle I can still T-80UD in second place

                  Of course, I act according to 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 steeper than "Oplot" ...

                  Not to mention the "Black Eagle"
                  1. bask
                    0
                    12 June 2013 15: 30
                    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. 0
                      12 June 2013 17: 55
                      Quote: bask
                      Why did they fail ??? Unification beautiful tank ruined.

                      here is pure POLICY ...
                  2. +2
                    12 June 2013 16: 36
                    Quote: svp67
                    Of course, I act according to 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 steeper than "Oplot"

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

                    A black eagle should not be touched ((((
                    1. 0
                      12 June 2013 16: 59
                      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 "HOLY COW"? The names are not confused?
                      1. +3
                        12 June 2013 17: 28
                        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 "HOLY 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. +1
                        12 June 2013 17: 37
                        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, next year it will be presented, here as with "CHO", but fortunately, politics is involved ... But HOW MANY good projects were "strangled" by Malyshevtsev? That having the best practices for "Rebel", "Boxer" and "Hammer" they still cannot give anything "high" ...
                        "UVZ" did not have such a backlog, but now everything seems to be changing for the better for "UVZ"
                      3. +1
                        12 June 2013 17: 44
                        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, next year it will be presented

                        Well last year, they said the same thing, one to one.
                        Quote: svp67
                        But HOW MANY good projects have the Malyshevtsy been "strangled"? That having the best practices for "Rebel", "Boxer" and "Hammer" they still cannot give anything "high"


                        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. 0
                        12 June 2013 18: 00
                        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. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 06
                        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. +1
                        12 June 2013 23: 32
                        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. +1
                        12 June 2013 23: 40
                        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. -1
                        12 June 2013 23: 55
                        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 "got" Russia. Well what can you say - well done, they were able to bring the Soviet development to a certain logical perfection. and then what? What is the experience of its operation? How good is it as you try to describe it? We will find out in three years, the Thai people will tell ...
                      9. +1
                        13 June 2013 00: 02
                        Quote: svp67
                        Well, rejoice, "have done" 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. 0
                        13 June 2013 00: 06
                        Quote: Kars
                        not so much Russia, how many UVZ

                        "Don't tell 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 perspective, you are too ... And as for KB, the world is changing - now so many KB are not needed, and you are not doing well in this matter ... Not much that "Malyshevites" are loaded ... everything is Soviet property is tormented ...
                      11. +3
                        13 June 2013 00: 09
                        Quote: svp67
                        "Don't tell 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.
                      12. +1
                        13 June 2013 00: 09
                        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 ...
                  3. -2
                    12 June 2013 18: 16
                    The black eagle is not a series, with unknown characteristics.
              2. +4
                11 June 2013 19: 22
                Quote: bask
                No. 1 K2,, Black Panther ,,.


                Why exactly K2 - it seems to be very expensive and has never been "tested by fire"?
              3. 0
                24 June 2013 18: 28
                The strange name "Black Panther" is roughly like "Black Negro", the panther itself is the "black" leopard of South America. So you can write "Lion without a mane" instead of a cougar.
            3. Alexander D.
              +1
              11 June 2013 20: 05
              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. +5
                11 June 2013 20: 18
                the main thing is that the first place of the question did not cause.
                1. Alexander D.
                  +1
                  11 June 2013 23: 38
                  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. +4
                    12 June 2013 14: 28
                    Quote: Alexander D.
                    There is no doubt about the first place !!!
                    Oh, whether ...
                2. 0
                  12 June 2013 14: 26
                  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. +1
                  12 June 2013 15: 27
                  Quote: Kars
                  the main thing is that the first place of the question did not cause.
                  Just because no one takes it seriously ...
                  1. +3
                    12 June 2013 16: 38
                    ))))))))))))
                    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. +1
                    12 June 2013 16: 53
                    Quote: svp67
                    Just because no one takes it seriously ...

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

                      - Isn't there really little space in the new tower that such a "bandura" was installed in front of the commander ... How to protect it from shrapnel and bullets are going ...,
                      - 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. +1
                        12 June 2013 17: 32
                        Quote: svp67
                        he can still do nothing, although a lot of questions raise questions,

                        What are weird questions.

                        Quote: svp67
                        it is not possible that there is not enough room in the new tower that such a "bandura" was installed in front of the commander ... How to protect it from shrapnel and bullets are going ...

                        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. +5
                        12 June 2013 17: 35
                        And optical instruments and their external / visual appearance very much depend on the proportions of the tower itself))))
                      3. +4
                        12 June 2013 17: 49
                        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 genius of the designer? But the "car builders" were able to install a new device in the T90 tower, which is just below the T80, without depriving the commander of the TVP ...
                      4. +3
                        12 June 2013 17: 54
                        Quote: svp67
                        But the "car builders" were able to enter the T90 tower

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

                        To do what the Malyshevites were unable to do. namely, to install a new commander's sight so that it does not interfere with the installation of a backup device - TKN and use the ZPU
                      6. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 21
                        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. 0
                        12 June 2013 19: 01
                        Horizontal viewing angle, degrees 78
                        I will express my doubts not in the angle, but in the range at O ​​and 78 degrees ...
                      8. +1
                        12 June 2013 19: 07
                        Quote: svp67
                        I will express my doubts not in the angle, but in the range of O and 78 degrees ..

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

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

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

                        And what? Do you want to compare with something?

                        ________________________________
                      12. +1
                        12 June 2013 23: 14
                        And what kind of pictures are you?
                      13. 0
                        12 June 2013 17: 59
                        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 a different sight was supposed to be installed on the Oplot (the impression is that it even interferes with an anti-aircraft machine gun, however - I could be wrong).
                      14. +3
                        12 June 2013 18: 07
                        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.
                      15. 0
                        12 June 2013 18: 14
                        Quote: Kars
                        Hindered, therefore, the necessary changes were carried out.

                        Thank you, I didn’t know!
                      16. +1
                        12 June 2013 17: 51
                        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 ...
                      17. +3
                        12 June 2013 18: 01
                        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.
                      18. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 17
                        Quote: Kars
                        Definitely more than it was in old Soviet tanks.
                        Come on, I doubt very much that the commander has an excellent view of the area - from the right front wheel arch liner - on the starboard side, almost to the MTO. All these "boxes" of protection and the sight pedestal will greatly limit the view ...
                      19. +2
                        12 June 2013 18: 31
                        Quote: svp67
                        Come on, I doubt very much that the commander has an excellent view of the area - from the right front wheel arch liner - on the starboard side, almost to the MTO. All these "boxes" of protection and the sight pedestal 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?
                      20. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 44
                        Quote: Kars
                        Now you will begin to somehow prove the FACTS that the MS does not have dead space?

                        I will not, as it was only possible to avoid this on the Merkava4 by installing video cameras. But in this case, MCs have less of them ...
                      21. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 46
                        Quote: svp67
                        o in this case, they are less for MS.

                        Why did you decide so and how can you confirm your words?
                      22. 0
                        12 June 2013 18: 50
                        Quote: Kars
                        Why did you decide so and how can you confirm your words?
                        And prove the opposite ...
                      23. +3
                        12 June 2013 18: 53
                        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.
                      24. 0
                        12 June 2013 19: 11
                        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...
                      25. +1
                        12 June 2013 19: 14
                        Quote: svp67
                        Do not count your chickens before they are hatched.

                        What year?
                      26. 0
                        12 June 2013 19: 22
                        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'm embarrassed to ask, how is the Malyshev Plant doing with this?
                      27. +1
                        12 June 2013 19: 32
                        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'm embarrassed to ask, how is the Malyshev Plant doing with this?

                        he’s not embarrassed, he doesn’t even use state resources in this way, but sales are not so big, but not on credit.
                      28. 0
                        12 June 2013 19: 38
                        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 ...
                      29. +1
                        12 June 2013 19: 42
                        Quote: svp67
                        allow yourself to provide a loan,

                        therefore, do not make any conclusions about quality on this)))
                      30. 0
                        12 June 2013 20: 23
                        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 ...
                      31. +2
                        12 June 2013 20: 27
                        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.
                      32. +1
                        12 June 2013 20: 32
                        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 ...
                      33. +2
                        12 June 2013 20: 48
                        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.
                      34. 0
                        12 June 2013 20: 50
                        Quote: Kars
                        will begin and take 64 ki.
                        At the same time, we’ll conduct a census of idiots ...
                      35. +2
                        12 June 2013 20: 54
                        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.
                      36. 0
                        12 June 2013 21: 18
                        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 ....
                      37. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 34
                        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.
                      38. 0
                        12 June 2013 21: 38
                        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 ...
                      39. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 42
                        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.
                      40. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 46
                        Quote: Kars
                        Yes, and maybe a couple of T-90С will remain combat-ready,

                        "The Lord God is always on the side of the big battalions" Frederick II the Great
                      41. +2
                        12 June 2013 21: 49
                        Suvorov (not the one that Victor) and Sheremetyev did not agree with him.
                      42. 0
                        12 June 2013 22: 00
                        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 ...
                      43. +1
                        12 June 2013 22: 04
                        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.
                      44. 0
                        12 June 2013 22: 09
                        Quote: Kars
                        and irrelevant to the case.

                        I agree - the rule is not who does not cancel ...
                      45. +2
                        12 June 2013 23: 14
                        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.
                      46. 0
                        12 June 2013 23: 23
                        Quote: Kars
                        What? About the big battles? If you start the debate, then there will be too many exceptions.
                        Let's start examining the issues of tactics and strategy ... I will repeat once again that in order to win it is necessary to create an advantage in forces precisely at the cutting edge ... and the secondary ones can be neglected, the main thing is not to get carried away and keep your finger on the pulse ...
                      47. +1
                        12 June 2013 23: 28
                        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.
                      48. 0
                        12 June 2013 21: 41
                        You have somehow gracefully "forgotten" that the Hindus have not only Pakistan as potential adversaries.
                        But also China
                      49. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 47
                        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.
                      50. +2
                        12 June 2013 19: 02
                        Quote: svp67
                        I will not, as it was only possible to avoid this on the Merkava4 by installing video cameras. But in this case, MCs have less of them ...

                        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.
                      51. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 21
                        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 be ridiculous - the sector "at 11 o'clock" of shooting at ground targets for the ZPU is "closed"

                      52. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 24
                        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 ...
                      53. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 29
                        Quote: svp67
                        Don't be ridiculous - the sector "at 11 o'clock" of shooting at ground targets for the ZPU is "closed"

                        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
                      54. 0
                        12 June 2013 19: 15
                        Quote: Kars
                        And the tower doesn’t turn around anymore?
                        that is, to solve the arising firing task for the machine gun, the commander will have to disconnect the gunner from the "work" ... Perhaps, but not rationally ...
                      55. +2
                        12 June 2013 19: 22
                        Quote: svp67
                        that is, in order to solve the arising firing task for the machine gun, the commander will have 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?
                      56. +1
                        12 June 2013 19: 25
                        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 "curbstone" is clearly not an obstacle for him, but will it be of any use?
                      57. +1
                        12 June 2013 19: 34
                        Quote: svp67
                        Who doubts the power of the 12,7mm cartridge, this "curbstone" is clearly not an obstacle for him, but will it be of any use?

                        Well, it will not fall into the pedestal in principle))))
                      58. 0
                        12 June 2013 19: 42
                        Quote: Kars
                        Well, it will not fall into the pedestal in principle))))
                        Yes, you are right, it will not hit ... not where it will not hit ground targets at these corners from the ZPU, it will also spoil the glass of the sight with "metal splashes" ...
                      59. +2
                        12 June 2013 19: 44
                        Quote: svp67
                        e where it will not hit ground targets at these angles from the ZPU, it will also spoil the glass of the sight with "splashing metals" ...

                        You don’t know what to come up with?
                      60. -2
                        12 June 2013 19: 57
                        Quote: Kars
                        You don’t know what to come up with?
                        When everything is obvious, you don't need to invent anything ... You yourself perfectly understand that there are no tanks without weak points. BM "Oplot", having accommodated many changes, remained almost unchanged in the body, it looks like here the "Malyshevites" are trying to "get by with little blood ..."
                      61. +2
                        12 June 2013 20: 06
                        Quote: svp67
                        When everything is obvious, you don't need to invent anything ... You yourself perfectly understand that there are no tanks without weak points. BM "Oplot", having accommodated many changes, remained almost unchanged in the body, it looks like here the "Malyshevites" are trying to "get by 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.
                      62. 0
                        12 June 2013 20: 59
                        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?
                      63. +2
                        12 June 2013 21: 03
                        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.
                      64. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 07
                        _______________________---
                      65. 0
                        12 June 2013 21: 13
                        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/
                      66. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 22
                        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.
                      67. 0
                        12 June 2013 21: 26
                        Quote: Kars
                        Did you collapse with an oak tree? How many degrees of circumference do you say?

                        from 5 to 10 degrees ... Think less?
                      68. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 31
                        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?
                      69. 0
                        12 June 2013 21: 36
                        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...
                      70. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 45
                        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
                      71. 0
                        12 June 2013 21: 51
                        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 ...
                      72. +1
                        12 June 2013 21: 52
                        then
                        Quote: svp67
                        anyway, at this range the width of the dead zone remains from kilometers

                        we are not interested
                      73. 0
                        12 June 2013 21: 53
                        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 ...
                      74. +2
                        12 June 2013 21: 56
                        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.
                      75. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 38
                        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 "Oplot" is not for long. Moreover, its effectiveness is under a big question: this design has been at Oplot for a long time, but no one is in a hurry to copy it. But lattice screens have become widespread - that means they are effective. And the dimensions of the lattice are 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)))
                      76. 0
                        12 June 2013 18: 56
                        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 accuse the "Tagilites" that they copied it in 1986 ... smile
                      77. +1
                        12 June 2013 19: 01
                        Quote: svp67
                        it became only possible to accuse the "Tagilians" that in 1986 they were

                        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.
                      78. 0
                        12 June 2013 19: 25
                        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 accuse the "Tagilites" that they copied it 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.
                      79. 0
                        12 June 2013 17: 52
                        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 predominant use of "Oplot" as a "breakthrough tank", and for the development of success and ambushes, "Bulat" is more suitable (as it seems to me) there both the speed is higher and the dimensions are smaller.
                      80. +2
                        12 June 2013 17: 57
                        Quote: Arkan
                        "Oplot" as 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.
                      81. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 07
                        In the foreseeable future, Ukraine does not threaten to completely replace the tank fleet with the "Oplot", and it will not escape the division of the functions of the tanks in service.
                      82. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 17
                        Quote: Arkan
                        In the foreseeable future, Ukraine does not threaten to completely replace the tank fleet with the "Oplot", and it will not escape the division of the 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.
                      83. 0
                        12 June 2013 18: 35
                        In any General Staff, planning comes from the principle of "how best to use what is if tomorrow is a war" - surely units equipped with the latest tanks will have tasks different from units armed with tanks of the previous generation (their capabilities are too different in order not to "bother" In other matters, this is already a matter for the tacticians and strategists of the tank forces.
                        Quote: Kars
                        Here it will be more like linear parts and ceremonial.

                        And so everywhere and always, while there is no war.
                      84. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 40
                        Quote: Arkan
                        "how best to use what is if tomorrow is a war" - surely units equipped with the latest tanks will have tasks different from units 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.
                      85. 0
                        12 June 2013 19: 08
                        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.
                      86. +1
                        12 June 2013 19: 13
                        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.
                      87. +2
                        12 June 2013 19: 41
                        ))) 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 In response, Ukraine removed border guards from the threatened sections of the border (a common practice before the start of the war), and the commander of the 98th SVDD (then not yet divided between Ukraine and Russia) Alexander Nikolayevich Bespalov said approximately the following: “in the event of the outbreak of hostilities, my the division will have breakfast in Bolgrad, dine in Chisinau, and have supper in Bucharest "(well, the artillery regiment has also deployed ...). The Romanians removed their tanks, everything was quiet ... laughing drinks
                      88. 0
                        12 June 2013 17: 33
                        Quote: svp67
                        The tank then it may still nothing, although a lot of questions,

                        I can’t answer these questions because I’m not a specialist and my opinion is purely subjective. Of course, visually, I also don’t like everything about Oplot (including the scope's dimensions), and I judge it solely by the combination of its main characteristics. laid out in the public domain.
                      89. +1
                        12 June 2013 18: 29
                        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 "Oplot" is not for long. Moreover, its effectiveness is under a big question: this design has been at Oplot for a long time, but no one is in a hurry to copy it. But lattice screens have become widespread - that means they are effective. And the dimensions of the lattice are more modest.
        2. +1
          12 June 2013 21: 55
          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. +2
            12 June 2013 22: 00
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            [media = http: //fun.mivzakon.co.il/video/israel/13535/ טנק_מרכבה. html]


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



      1. +2
        11 June 2013 19: 25
        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.
    6. reichsmarshal
      +5
      11 June 2013 22: 26
      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. +3
        12 June 2013 00: 23
        Quote: reichsmarshal
        And about which tank is better: the one that is simply better is better, and also who has more motor resources.

        The truth is inaccessible to our understanding, and perhaps even foreign military officials. Technically advanced, super armored tanks have the advantage when facing off against an equal number of "non-advanced" tanks. If the non-advanced tanks are more miraculous, the tanks have advantages only in terms of technical characteristics, according to the results of the war, inevitable defeat. We remember the history of the match Tigers \ Panthers and T-34 \ Shermans
        1. 0
          12 June 2013 11: 05
          It all depends on the percentage. Tigers released only 1000 pieces.
        2. +7
          12 June 2013 19: 03
          Quote: biznaw
          The truth is inaccessible to our understanding, and perhaps even foreign military officials. Technically advanced, super armored tanks have the advantage when facing off against an equal number of "non-advanced" tanks. If the non-advanced tanks are more miraculous, the tanks have advantages only in terms of technical characteristics, according to the results of the war, inevitable defeat. We 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 about the "match Tigers / Panthers and T-34 / Shermans" - 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 "soldier tank" - a BM, in which protection, mobility, and weapons are successfully implemented with normal maintainability and price. It is these BMs that win in a difficult, uncompromising war. Now these vehicles include only modern T-72 (and, accordingly, T-90), T-80 (including the Ukrainian branch of this vehicle), Merkava, Leopard and a number of new Chinese MBTs. All other existing MBTs are expensive and unreliable toys designed to win exclusively in police wars of a deliberately weak enemy.
          1. reichsmarshal
            +2
            12 June 2013 22: 38
            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 the KV and the T-34 were successfully hit by the German artillery systems 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 mechanized corps of the Red Army lost not because of bad tanks or tankers, but because there were few motorized infantry and artillery in their organizational structure, and also because they were not mobilized and, accordingly, did not have vehicles. "Naked" tanks are an easy target for a well-trained enemy, and he will not allow a "tank on 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. +1
              12 June 2013 23: 26
              Here is a very, very competent comment.
            2. +2
              13 June 2013 00: 57
              Quote: reichsmarshal
              Nonsense! Both the KV and the T-34 were successfully hit by the German artillery systems 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 mechanized corps of the Red Army lost not because of bad tanks or tankers, but because there were few motorized infantry and artillery in their organizational structure, and also because they were not mobilized and, accordingly, did not have vehicles. "Naked" tanks are an easy target for a well-trained enemy, and he will not allow a "tank on tank" battle. The speed of advance of the Germans in the fall fell because they did not receive marching reinforcements from the very beginning of the war. Consequently, support by infantry and artillery in the assault. groups of the Germans 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
                0
                14 June 2013 00: 16
                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. +1
            12 June 2013 22: 42
            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, which can be hit by all enemy vehicles. And nevertheless ...
      2. +1
        12 June 2013 11: 04
        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
          +2
          12 June 2013 22: 42
          It is necessary to compare the armies as a whole, and not by the numerical ratio of tanks. Tanks in real life are not like in a computer: "both a Swiss, and a reaper ..." This is just a weapon, and not an autonomous universal combat module. But the IDF is in fact a more effective structure due to the fact that the Israelis are a more educated nation than the Arabs, and by 1-2 orders of magnitude.
          1. +1
            12 June 2013 23: 28
            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).
    7. +2
      11 June 2013 23: 58
      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. +1
        12 June 2013 11: 05
        Respectively - who left the battlefield behind.
    8. Ivan Mechanic
      +8
      12 June 2013 00: 25
      "The IDF admitted that 46 tanks were destroyed" - that is, you say that the IDF command and the Israeli leadership are primitive liars? You at least read this and then tell us about how good Merkava is http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/history/2nd-lebanon-war/acv-losses/ It is worth remembering that both the USA and Israel (in contrast to Russia) they always underestimate their losses by 1,5-2 times and overestimate the enemy's losses by 2-5 times!
      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. +1
        12 June 2013 11: 09
        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
          -2
          14 June 2013 00: 03
          Let's see the statistics!
          1. Earlier in this thread I indicated the source from where I got 49. I did not see your "different sources" by you. 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 the underreporting or concealment of losses - the United States -> Iraq, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, ...... One of the methods of concealing casualties is the use of PMCs (dead and wounded PMC fighters are not included in the list of losses or you are not guessed). As for Israel - the same picture only without PMCs. This is stated by the alleged free press of the West. Although if you write that they are lying - then it’s also a problem - your sources cannot be verified either!
    9. Hunghuz
      +1
      12 June 2013 07: 20
      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. +1
        12 June 2013 11: 11
        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.
    10. Iskander73881
      0
      21 August 2013 11: 12
      "practically on all post-Soviet tanks (thanks to Ukraine)" - does Ukraine have "practically" all post-Soviet tanks?
  2. +1
    11 June 2013 08: 16
    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
    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.

    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. +11
      11 June 2013 10: 12
      Dear atalef, I ask you to refrain from your own fabrications about the "Armata" I am sure that at the moment no one knows what will happen there. I can say that the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces did not seriously consider the layout of a tank with a front MTO position not when. with a mid-engine compartment and aft transmission. I assure you, no matter how the Russians come up with the tank, the drive wheels will ALWAYS be behind it.
      1. -8
        11 June 2013 11: 31
        Quote: Argon
        Whatever tank the Russians invented, its drive wheels will ALWAYS be behind.

        Don't scratch laughing
        1. +2
          11 June 2013 12: 29
          As for Almaty, everything is ambiguous so far. So wait a moment.
          1. 0
            11 June 2013 12: 41
            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. +3
            11 June 2013 20: 59
            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
              +2
              11 June 2013 23: 18
              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. +2
        11 June 2013 14: 47
        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
          +2
          11 June 2013 15: 52
          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. +1
          11 June 2013 16: 07
          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. 0
      11 June 2013 14: 33
      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. +2
        11 June 2013 15: 02
        Do not believe in this particular picture
        1. 0
          11 June 2013 15: 12
          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. 0
            11 June 2013 15: 26
            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. 0
              11 June 2013 15: 48
              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. +2
                11 June 2013 15: 53
                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
            +2
            11 June 2013 15: 56
            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. +1
              11 June 2013 16: 08
              Quote: bask
              Self-propelled guns, BMP-T / BTR-T, on the General Staff ,, Armata ,,
              MTO only in the nose of the platform.

              good
            2. +3
              11 June 2013 16: 19
              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
                0
                11 June 2013 16: 38
                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. +2
                11 June 2013 23: 50
                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. +2
      11 June 2013 15: 58
      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. -2
        11 June 2013 16: 03
        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
      +5
      12 June 2013 00: 47
      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. +2
        12 June 2013 17: 15
        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
          -2
          14 June 2013 00: 17
          This is serious ;-). But where is the explosion! Yes, and hitting or breaking through, they are also different, then there are! Here under the shoulder strap - this is one thing, on the forehead - another, and 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 the losses of the Merkav were not reduced to "zero". It's amazing how he left one lost tank. The same applies to the concept of "Armata" allegedly lapped from the Merkava! And that you are very well versed in such nuances as hitting, breaking through, defeating - it's great - that's just what I'm interested in when you talk to friends about a new mobile, explain to friends what GPS is, what frequencies it has, how to melt metal and plastic, and others things related to the mobile, or still do not get into such a jungle that is indirectly related to the issue?
  3. Crang
    +12
    11 June 2013 08: 24
    I saw in the photographs at least a few Merkavs turned into scrap metal. Of course, anything can be repaired ... But as I see it, the truth is somewhere in between.
    1. +1
      11 June 2013 12: 30
      5 tanks were irrevocably destroyed. Two landmines, three Pturami, one of them four.
      1. 0
        13 January 2018 19: 02
        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 "
  4. -4
    11 June 2013 08: 25
    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
      +11
      11 June 2013 08: 38
      According to the most authoritative information, not a single T-72 has yet been destroyed in the battle by the Merkavas, just as the T-72 has not yet destroyed a single Merkava. But one "Merkava" was slammed by a T-62 - 115mm BOPS. And one T-72 seems to have crashed some fancy Centurion with a 105mm cannon.
      1. +8
        11 June 2013 08: 52
        Quote: Krang
        According to the most authoritative information, not a single T-72 has yet been destroyed in the battle by the Merkavas, just as the T-72 has not yet destroyed a single Merkava. But one "Merkava" was slammed by a T-62 - 115mm BOPS. And one T-72 seems to have crashed some fancy Centurion with a 105mm cannon.

        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. +1
          12 June 2013 06: 44
          t-34 didn’t punched in the forehead not a TIGER not a PANTHER, nevertheless there are a lot of monuments to the "thirty-four" and not a single one to the "animals"!
          1. +1
            12 June 2013 17: 17
            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. +1
              12 June 2013 20: 11
              dragged it in Afghanistan for six months, a good pipe !!! but "tavolga" is something! take a look at the characteristics if you're interested
    2. +15
      11 June 2013 09: 19
      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. +8
        11 June 2013 09: 54
        And I would really like to read a more detailed commentary by the professor, I hope to appear in the evening.
      2. -3
        11 June 2013 11: 32
        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. +1
          11 June 2013 11: 59
          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. -1
            11 June 2013 12: 08
            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. +3
              11 June 2013 13: 49
              Quote: atalef
              What interests?

              How for what? My wife and I want to go to the Dead Sea! lol
              1. +2
                11 June 2013 14: 02
                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. +1
                  11 June 2013 14: 45
                  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. +2
                    11 June 2013 14: 48
                    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
                +7
                11 June 2013 22: 34
                - 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
                  +3
                  12 June 2013 23: 02
                  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. 0
                    12 June 2013 23: 28
                    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
            -5
            11 June 2013 19: 54
            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. +3
          11 June 2013 12: 16
          nobody defeated us either!
          1. -3
            11 June 2013 12: 18
            Quote: Oberst_71
            nobody defeated us either!

            Well, therefore, the same is invincible. Unlike Syrian (as an example)
        3. +6
          11 June 2013 15: 05
          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 a single state that was occupied by other states for 2000 years and was not renamed once. Israel is a state that became independent because it was unnecessary and with the permission of its "elder brothers".
          So the army is so-so.
        4. -4
          11 June 2013 15: 46
          You won the whole WWII. So much so that you’re still moaning about Lochokost.
        5. reichsmarshal
          +2
          12 June 2013 22: 58
          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. -1
            12 June 2013 23: 44
            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
              0
              13 June 2013 21: 40
              IMHO: When at stake. 40s Israel had just appeared, its rulers thought that the Jews were one people. In fact, it turned out that this was not so: disagreements began among God's chosen ones (like I am a Semitic, and you are Ashkenazi). Under these conditions, the Israeli government made the mistake of 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 (Stalin's Project!). In an effort to maintain influence in the BV, the USSR went to cooperate with the Arabs (which the people in the Union itself did not approve of until 1967). Moshe Dayan decided to kill two birds with one stone: to create the image of the enemy and to strengthen the national identity and unity of the Jewish people with a small victorious war over him, as well as to raise his personal weight and the weight of the IDF in the internal politics of Israel. Further: the classic conspiracy of the generals, TRUE about the readiness and desire of the Arabs to attack Israel; successful defeat in 1967; international isolation and condemnation of the aggressor; and a total incessant guerrilla with the Arab world. Plus to this - 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 within more than one day, so the Israeli attack cannot be considered preventive) ...
              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. +1
                13 June 2013 22: 11
                So, do not carry the next nonsense about the Stalin project.
                1. reichsmarshal
                  0
                  14 June 2013 00: 03
                  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. 0
                    13 January 2018 19: 30
                    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. +2
                13 June 2013 22: 45
                Curious you (IMHO), but has the right to be.
                This week in Vancouver, Canada, a meeting of the city's Jewish community with a reserve brigadier general, ex-minister Avigdor Kahalani, took place. In the Six Day War, Kahalani commanded a tank company and was badly wounded in the battle on Sinai. He spent a year in the hospital and underwent 12 plastic surgeries. For this fight Avigdor Kahalani was awarded the medal "For Distinction". In the Yom Kippur War, he commanded the 77th Tank Battalion, which defended the Golan Heights. In the battle near the city of Quneitra, the 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 turret 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 Yom Kippur War, Kahalani lost his brother Emmanuel and brother-in-law Ilan. In Operation Peace for Galilee, Kahalani commanded the Gaash armored division.
                Kahalani arrived at the studio "Radio VERA" - the radio station of the World Forum of Russian-speaking Jews, 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: "How did you, a Yemeni Jew, feel in the early 1990s when the wave of aliyah from the former Soviet Union literally swept Israel?" Kahalani's frank response stunned Canadian radio listeners: “We were afraid of them. We thought they were people very far from Jewishness. And besides, they were bringing with them communism, which could not only harm our country, but also destroy it. created our Jewish home literally bit by bit. It's like creating an enemy in your own state. "
                But then, Avigdor Kahalani noted, it became clear that these fears were 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 sphere of society, in modern technology, in sports and in art," he said Kahalani.
                "Three months ago, I had a Russian-Jewish-Yemeni granddaughter with a musical name - Salt. And we are all happy in our friendly family. This is an example of the life of modern Israeli society," he said.
      3. +1
        11 June 2013 15: 33
        Such a nature, nothing can be done request laughing
      4. 0
        12 June 2013 06: 49
        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. 0
          12 June 2013 17: 21
          What are his mistakes, can you make out in detail?
          1. 0
            12 June 2013 20: 08
            first, front layout, second landing squad, all to protect the crew but not for a tank attack !!!
          2. 0
            12 June 2013 20: 17
            You certainly respect as a patriot of Israel, but Russian weapons are a brand, well, I am also a patriot of my country!
    3. +7
      11 June 2013 09: 26
      Professor had to read, maybe he could see it at least a little)
    4. +4
      11 June 2013 14: 51
      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
      0
      12 June 2013 22: 52
      If you haven't read it, that's your problem. There is nothing fantastic in this situation. The question of the effectiveness of the gun and armor was being addressed. It has long been proven that the FRG photos of "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: the tank (apparently simply abandoned due to lack of fuel) was banal with gasoline and set on fire - it’s obvious. And they are dancing nearby! And then literate people do not know what kind of fire and smoke tanks burn. The fact that the Merkava is more powerful than the T-72 - and who would argue? Only the Merkava, even the "one", is a third generation tank, and the T-3 is of the second. And his opponent is the M72, well, Chieftain.
  5. 0
    11 June 2013 08: 29
    On the subject of "Cancer", legs grow out of an article in "ISRAEL DEFENCE". In general, the concepts of new armored vehicles have the right to be, but Mr. Vasiliev forgot to mention that the article bydo indicated that the idea of ​​"Rakia" will be realized only after the appearance of weapons on new principles, ie. laser or rail, which will be possible to use from relatively small platforms.
  6. +4
    11 June 2013 08: 35
    Quote: Krang
    I saw in the photographs at least a few Merkavs turned into scrap metal. Of course, anything can be repaired ... But as I see it, the truth is somewhere in between.

    You could see at least five Merkavas turned into "metal", but two of them are of the second model and two of the third ones.
    1. beard999
      +7
      11 June 2013 15: 03
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      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. +1
        11 June 2013 15: 29
        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
          +5
          11 June 2013 18: 07
          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. +1
            12 June 2013 17: 33
            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. Upgrading Merkva 2 and 3 significantly raises their level. However, it does not make them a "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. -1
        12 June 2013 06: 53
        RPG-29 "Tavolga" will blow the merkava even head-on !!!
        1. +1
          12 June 2013 17: 36
          Yes? And where such confidence comes from. From what distance? Which Merkava?
  7. ramsi
    +5
    11 June 2013 08: 37
    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
      +4
      11 June 2013 08: 38
      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
        0
        11 June 2013 08: 53
        with the T-72 is understandable, but the Merkavs - stronger "blowing" to the sides and more powerful thermal insulation of the VLD
        1. Crang
          +1
          11 June 2013 08: 59
          What is clear about the T-72? And the "Merkava" exhaust in the front - how to isolate it?
          1. ramsi
            +5
            11 June 2013 09: 14
            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. +8
            11 June 2013 11: 07
            Quote: Krang
            What is clear about the T-72? And the "Merkava" exhaust in the front - 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. 0
              13 January 2018 21: 26
              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. +4
            11 June 2013 14: 09
            What is clear about the T-72? And the "Merkava" exhaust in the front - how to isolate it?


            First, the "Merkava" exhaust sideways and not up. And secondly, in theory, this should not really interfere with thermal imagers, since they use focusing optics, which are designed to form a picture starting from a certain distance. Just like dust on a camera lens lens does not appear in a photo.
    2. +1
      11 June 2013 12: 33
      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
        +2
        11 June 2013 14: 23
        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. +5
          11 June 2013 15: 05
          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. +2
            12 June 2013 11: 30
            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
              0
              12 June 2013 23: 08
              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. +1
                12 June 2013 23: 45
                And in this he was absolutely right. By the way, I didn’t especially see capricious moods for Arabs.
          2. 0
            12 June 2013 12: 59
            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
              +1
              12 June 2013 14: 58
              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
                0
                12 June 2013 15: 08
                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
                  0
                  12 June 2013 15: 19
                  so what’s specific - to swim a kilometer in full combat without fins in boots?
                  1. Cat
                    +2
                    12 June 2013 15: 35
                    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
                      -1
                      12 June 2013 15: 43
                      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. +2
                        12 June 2013 22: 28
                        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. 0
                12 June 2013 16: 30
                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 riflemen ended with the nickname "samotopes" assigned to the units that took part in the exercises, and the marines had to be reinstated.
                1. ramsi
                  0
                  13 June 2013 06: 13
                  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. 0
                    13 January 2018 21: 37
                    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. +1
          12 June 2013 15: 50
          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
  8. +6
    11 June 2013 08: 44
    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, after reading such articles, we asked such a question on the "Tironute" (KMB). It was popularly explained to us that we are and you and that the presence of a landing ramp in the tank is intended to leave a damaged vehicle and to evacuate the crews of other tanks who have already left the vehicle, with maximum safety.
    1. Crang
      +5
      11 June 2013 08: 52
      Aron is not your designer invented for the landing. Initially, the theme was this - the "Merkava" tank goes into battle with two crews. While one is at war, the other sleeps in a specially designated place. Then they pass / accept the shift and change places. But then, when they realized that this was nonsense, and that no one wanted to burn in a dream, this topic was abandoned, and the additional volume was used for the BC or the landing force as needed.
      1. ramsi
        +2
        11 June 2013 08: 54
        additional volume - this is all the same nonsense, the maximum that is needed is to fade quietly when knocked out
      2. +6
        11 June 2013 09: 23
        Quote: Krang
        Aron is not your designer invented for the landing. Initially, the theme was this - the tank "Merkava" goes into battle with two crews. While one is at war, the other sleeps in a specially designated place.

        It was just one of the thoughts of Israel Tal in an interview. Nobody even tried to implement it. The "troop compartment" is not adapted for No matter how long people stay.
        1. +7
          11 June 2013 09: 27
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          "Airborne compartment" is not adapted

          So I thought the tank was a marshurt? Do not overtake especially if you drive along your intersection
        2. +6
          11 June 2013 13: 51
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          The "troop compartment" is not suited for No matter how long people stay.

          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. 0
            13 January 2018 21: 48
            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
        +1
        11 June 2013 13: 20
        Type Indian taxi. One taxis the second in the trunk asleep.
    2. ramsi
      +1
      11 June 2013 09: 54
      if the extra bed is for evacuation only, why didn’t the tower be moved back?
  9. +1
    11 June 2013 09: 25
    Well here they say the best tank
  10. Perch_xnumx
    +1
    11 June 2013 09: 37
    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. +1
      11 June 2013 11: 22
      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 you will have to carry the generator with you in order to supply power to the "jammer".
      1. Perch_xnumx
        0
        11 June 2013 12: 08
        Then you will have to carry the generator with you in order to supply power to the "jammer".
        Battery - no? Used and threw it away. Or sent to reload. A directional antenna will not eat energy beyond the limits.
        1. +1
          11 June 2013 12: 33
          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. +1
            11 June 2013 12: 39
            Quote: Tourist's 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. +2
              11 June 2013 12: 58
              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 the iron trump card of those who are "not in the subject", but do not suspect about it -
              GREAT AND POWERFUL AMY aka EMP !!!!
              1. Perch_xnumx
                0
                11 June 2013 14: 20
                You can add the iron trump card of those who are "not in the subject", 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
              +1
              11 June 2013 13: 51
              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. +5
                11 June 2013 15: 02
                RPG-30 "Hook"
                "...... At the moment of a shot, the propelling charges of both projectiles are triggered. In this case, the target simulator leaves the barrel first, after which, with a slight delay, the main ammunition of the PG-30 starts. able to react to the next main anti-tank grenade. As a result, the main cumulative ammunition penetrates the main layer of armor, affects the equipment and the crew inside the tank, causes a fire and detonation of ammunition. ... "
                1. 0
                  11 June 2013 15: 43
                  They tested them on modern Kaz 8)?
              2. 0
                11 June 2013 17: 40
                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. +2
                  12 June 2013 00: 10
                  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. +1
                12 June 2013 08: 09
                The mysterious Russian soul ... It, you know, demoralizes cleaner than a macaque with a grenade! wassat
              4. 0
                13 January 2018 21: 59
                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. +2
            11 June 2013 23: 40
            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. 0
              12 June 2013 10: 53
              And remember the ammunition AMY... In general, any electronics if not a corpse then a useless load.


              Here it is! I knew it!
            2. +2
              12 June 2013 17: 38
              In theory, it's all beautiful. In practice - wait, sir
              1. 0
                15 June 2013 11: 55
                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 the caliber to 40mm RPG shot, the "hitting miss" zone increases to 50m.
                Neither Arena nor Trophy will react to the missile ammunition.
              2. 0
                17 June 2013 07: 41
                Amendment.
                Soldier of Fortune No. 3 of 1996
                1. +2
                  17 June 2013 13: 31
                  Where did KAZ "Trophy" come from in 1996?
  11. +4
    11 June 2013 09: 44
    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. +11
      11 June 2013 11: 10
      Well, do not forget which country we are talking about.
    2. +3
      11 June 2013 11: 23
      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
      0
      11 June 2013 14: 25
      In fact, in battle, all these boxes will be open all the time.

      > unburned BZ for use in still whole tanks.

      Yeah, like in WoT, the unspent is returned to the warehouse. laughing
    4. +1
      12 June 2013 10: 29
      That there was no explosion of BC, after which there is nothing to collect !!!
  12. The comment was deleted.
    1. +8
      11 June 2013 11: 06
      Yes, brute, how can the concept of "tank" refer to this product in general. A limitedly mobile bunker is its characteristic, problems with maneuverability have always been and will be, they are embedded in the layout. In principle, all the "Achilles heels" of this MBT are indicated true, but, in my opinion, their perniciousness is not sufficiently substantiated (one could give examples of the use of similar technical solutions on other MBTs with the subsequent rejection of them) One can argue about the security of the machine for a long time, but I consider links to open information (submitted by Israel) childish ( the truth will begin to emerge in 20 years). The only thing, 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 only the weight of the car is UNCONDITIONALLY progressing. And the owners of this miracle are well aware that, except in the fight against the "Basmachs" and the partisans, there is little sense in it, so the "Merkavas" do not even make up 85% of the tank forces fleet.
      1. -1
        11 June 2013 12: 40
        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. +2
        11 June 2013 16: 07
        Quote: Argon
        Yes, bust you, how generally the concept of "tank" can refer to this product. A limitedly mobile bunker is its characteristic, problems with maneuverability have always been and will be, they are incorporated 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. +7
          11 June 2013 16: 35
          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
            +7
            11 June 2013 17: 35
            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. +4
              11 June 2013 18: 10
              Yes, the extreme videos from Syria clearly show all the "advantages" of the small reserve volume and the dense layout of the T-72.
              1. Genady1976
                +2
                11 June 2013 18: 29
                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
                +3
                11 June 2013 18: 41
                well, if the priority is not the destruction of the enemy, but the chances of survival, then you are right. (This is me on the question of the "advantages" of a smaller silhouette)
                1. +1
                  11 June 2013 20: 27
                  well, if the priority is not the destruction of the enemy, but the chances of survival, then you are right. (This is me on the question of the "advantages" of a smaller silhouette)


                  Survive to then destroy the enemy.
                  1. 0
                    13 January 2018 22: 36
                    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. +3
              12 June 2013 17: 39
              In conditions of lesser reserved volume, it is much more difficult for tankers to work - they get tired many times faster.
              1. 0
                13 January 2018 22: 38
                the crew is not alive in a single volume!
          2. 0
            11 June 2013 20: 28
            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
        +3
        11 June 2013 19: 14
        Quote from rudolf
        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.
  13. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      11 June 2013 11: 16
      Quote from rudolf
      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. +8
        11 June 2013 11: 30
        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.
  14. +1
    11 June 2013 09: 56
    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.
  15. +2
    11 June 2013 10: 06
    The protection of ammunition is good for sure.
    1. ramsi
      0
      11 June 2013 12: 11
      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. +4
        11 June 2013 12: 22
        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. +2
          11 June 2013 13: 15
          Quote: atalef
          for 5.31 seconds look

          so for laughs, but minus what for?
          1. +3
            11 June 2013 13: 26
            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. +3
              11 June 2013 13: 54
              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. +1
                11 June 2013 14: 32
                Quote: atalef
                specifically for you found out (

                Thank you.
              2. ramsi
                0
                11 June 2013 14: 34
                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. +1
                  11 June 2013 15: 45
                  From the inside. This is not self-propelled guns
                  1. ramsi
                    +1
                    11 June 2013 16: 55
                    that is, the loader goes down, climbs into the stern, pulls out the container, returns and puts it in the same point? .. Are the empty ones from the feeder - at least they are thrown out automatically? .. In general, it is all somewhat reminiscent of "getting" shots at thirty-four from shell boxes on the floor
                    1. 0
                      11 June 2013 18: 36
                      Quote: ramsi
                      that is, the loader goes down, climbs into the stern, pulls out the container, returns and puts it in the same point? .. Are the empty ones from the feeder - at least they are thrown out automatically? .. In general, it is all somewhat reminiscent of "getting" shots at thirty-four from 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
                        0
                        11 June 2013 18: 46
                        Yes, I looked, and asked about what I did not understand ... is the pallet a container?
                      2. +1
                        11 June 2013 19: 02
                        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
                        0
                        11 June 2013 19: 36
                        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)


                        On the 4th minute, the machine, show us, if you please, the "feed system".
                      4. +1
                        11 June 2013 18: 48
                        Quote: atalef
                        that the sleeve is combustible, only the pallet remains

                        it's not about a sleeve, but about a protective plastic pencil case.
                      5. 0
                        11 June 2013 18: 56
                        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?
                      6. +2
                        11 June 2013 19: 00
                        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.
                      7. 0
                        11 June 2013 20: 12
                        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.
                      8. +2
                        11 June 2013 20: 20
                        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.
                      9. +1
                        11 June 2013 20: 32
                        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.
                      10. +1
                        11 June 2013 20: 45
                        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?
                      11. 0
                        11 June 2013 20: 53
                        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.
                      12. +1
                        11 June 2013 20: 58
                        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.
                      13. +1
                        11 June 2013 21: 09
                        ___________
                      14. +1
                        11 June 2013 21: 13
                        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.
                      15. +1
                        11 June 2013 21: 16
                        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.
                      16. Yemelya
                        +1
                        11 June 2013 20: 26
                        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 splendor (zabronevoe space, where the shots are "called")? lol
                      17. 0
                        11 June 2013 20: 40
                        Quote: Emelya
                        Looks like it turns out.

                        And where is all this splendor (zabronevoe space, where the shots are "called")?

                        For especially .... I repeat. on the TANK. fool
                        Googled a little. if you know what it is
                      18. Yemelya
                        0
                        11 June 2013 20: 51
                        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.


                        And nothing, that from what you, dear friend, consider a "mechanized ammunition rack", 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?
                      19. +2
                        11 June 2013 21: 29
                        Quote: Emelya
                        And where is all this splendor (zabronevoe space, where the shots are "called")? 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.
                      20. Yemelya
                        +2
                        11 June 2013 22: 41
                        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.
                      21. Genady1976
                        0
                        11 June 2013 23: 28
                        they can push 80+ shells into the tank and everything is in containers
                      22. +4
                        11 June 2013 23: 40
                        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
              3. Yemelya
                +2
                11 June 2013 18: 42
                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 the canisters and put empty ones in place?
                1. 0
                  11 June 2013 18: 46
                  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 the canisters and put empty ones in place?

                  Watch the video and don't ask stupid questions.
                  1. ramsi
                    +4
                    11 June 2013 18: 59
                    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
                    +4
                    11 June 2013 19: 08
                    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.
        2. Alexander D.
          0
          11 June 2013 21: 28
          Quote: atalef
          for 5.31 seconds look

          Oh yeah! The opinion of these ecchorts is generally beyond any doubt! wassat
          1. ramsi
            -1
            13 June 2013 21: 11
            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.
  16. The comment was deleted.
    1. +2
      11 June 2013 11: 30
      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. +15
        11 June 2013 11: 45
        I always imagine that in the photo the professor is holding his head.
        1. +1
          11 June 2013 14: 01
          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. +4
            11 June 2013 14: 34
            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
              0
              11 June 2013 16: 09
              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. +5
                11 June 2013 16: 21
                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
                  +3
                  11 June 2013 16: 42
                  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. +1
              11 June 2013 16: 40
              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. +3
                11 June 2013 16: 47
                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
                  +3
                  11 June 2013 16: 57
                  Quote: Kars
                  Well, I have more, but the professor is not there, mostly small things

                  So this professor brought a, not us))))))))
    2. +4
      11 June 2013 12: 12
      In Belarus, he will ride with his weight only on the Minsk highway !!! And then not for long!
      1. +8
        11 June 2013 12: 24
        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
          +2
          11 June 2013 14: 48
          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. +3
            11 June 2013 14: 51
            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. +3
        11 June 2013 14: 04
        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. +5
          11 June 2013 14: 15
          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. Consmo
        +1
        11 June 2013 14: 43
        Traffic cops will not give.
        1. +4
          11 June 2013 14: 50
          Quote: Konsmo
          Traffic cops will not give.

          in Ukraine? for grandmas all give
          wassat
          1. Consmo
            +2
            11 June 2013 15: 31
            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. +5
              11 June 2013 15: 35
              Quote: Konsmo
              And where did the tankers get carbovanci?
  17. +4
    11 June 2013 10: 15
    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. -1
      11 June 2013 12: 36
      The author stated his fabrications, without using several sources.
  18. +6
    11 June 2013 11: 03
    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. +4
      11 June 2013 12: 07
      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. +2
      11 June 2013 12: 10
      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, there are T-72 videos in Syria on the Internet. Isn't it "modeling"?
      1. +4
        11 June 2013 12: 26
        Quote: Tourist's Breakfast
        Why, there are T-72 videos in Syria on the Internet. Isn't it "modeling"?

        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. 0
          11 June 2013 12: 45
          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. +4
            11 June 2013 13: 04
            Quote: Tourist's 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's 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. +2
              11 June 2013 13: 59
              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. +1
                11 June 2013 14: 37
                Quote: Tourist's 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. +4
              11 June 2013 18: 39
              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. +4
      11 June 2013 12: 31
      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. +4
        11 June 2013 12: 52
        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. +2
          11 June 2013 14: 01
          Quote: Kars
          I show my regularly

          I'm not talking about this, you show me the models
          1. +5
            11 June 2013 14: 42
            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. +8
              11 June 2013 14: 44
              this is a general view)))))
              1. 0
                12 June 2013 22: 58
                Impressive, did they assemble the models themselves?
              2. 0
                12 June 2013 23: 03
                For a clearer can you post photos of teshek, if possible?!
                1. +3
                  12 June 2013 23: 21
                  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. 0
                    15 June 2013 16: 18
                    Thank yousmile , cool models, the appearance of t90 ms, maybe?
                    1. +1
                      15 June 2013 16: 23
                      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
      0
      11 June 2013 13: 23
      I agree the photo is just wonderful. At least a mine under the caterpillar lodge.
  19. +4
    11 June 2013 11: 30
    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. -1
      11 June 2013 12: 16
      Confabulation - wishful thinking !!! Well, this is national, forgive. fellow
  20. +5
    11 June 2013 12: 07
    Jews made a unique world-class tank without having their own school of tank building, almost out of the blue. Jews, as always, adhere strictly to rationality. Respect!
    1. +5
      11 June 2013 12: 11
      Quote: DAGESTANETS333
      a 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. +1
        11 June 2013 12: 29
        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. +4
          11 June 2013 12: 38
          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. -1
          11 June 2013 15: 46
          I would have seen what you would have created, if not for the enormous help from America and indemnity for the "Holocaust" from the Germans.
          1. +1
            11 June 2013 15: 58
            "Huge aid" from America began to flow after 1979, when Israel gave up its oil and gas-rich piece of land the size of itself. Contributions for the Holocaust were one-time, and amounted to 3 billion marks. The money the Germans later paid went and goes to foundations that care for Holocaust survivors.

            Egypt has the same help. Did they create something?
        3. reichsmarshal
          0
          12 June 2013 23: 16
          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. +1
        11 June 2013 12: 46
        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. +5
          11 June 2013 13: 00
          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. +1
            11 June 2013 13: 05
            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. +1
              11 June 2013 13: 09
              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
              0
              15 June 2013 07: 17
              Russian tanks look more impressive. But this ugly good only for the Jews))))
  21. The comment was deleted.
    1. +3
      11 June 2013 12: 40
      Israel had a strong technical school.
      1. Perch_xnumx
        +1
        11 June 2013 14: 43
        Israel had a strong technical school.
        This is why they fly American planes, use American bombs and missiles. The Israeli school is the most scholastic school. As they say, give me "the right amount of money" (a fulcrum) and I will turn the globe.
        1. +3
          11 June 2013 15: 09
          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
      -2
      11 June 2013 14: 49
      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. +5
        11 June 2013 15: 00
        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. +2
          11 June 2013 15: 09
          More precisely, since 1969.
          1. +1
            11 June 2013 15: 17
            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:
  22. Consmo
    0
    11 June 2013 12: 54
    Not guys. Jews and mechanics are two things incompatible. The fact that the mechanics of the chariot are pouring out is a fact. I don't follow the wars of the Jews with the popuas, whether they had such as in the film. "In war as in war." The capture of a settlement with the confrontation of tanks and infantry with faust-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. +1
      11 June 2013 13: 02
      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. Consmo
        +4
        11 June 2013 14: 15
        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. +1
          11 June 2013 14: 18
          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. Consmo
            0
            11 June 2013 14: 57
            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. +3
              11 June 2013 18: 20
              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. 0
                12 June 2013 17: 46
                Nothing else in Jaffa, in Abulafia
              2. Consmo
                -1
                13 June 2013 15: 35
                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. +1
            11 June 2013 15: 49
            But essentially, in addition to insults, what do you say?
  23. -1
    11 June 2013 13: 08
    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. Consmo
      0
      11 June 2013 14: 59
      What Makarov went to design tanks? smile
  24. ed65b
    +10
    11 June 2013 13: 27
    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. Consmo
      +5
      11 June 2013 14: 21
      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. +5
      11 June 2013 18: 44
      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. Consmo
        +1
        13 June 2013 15: 52
        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.
  25. +4
    11 June 2013 14: 05
    Quote: DAGESTANETS333
    Jews made a unique world-class tank without having their own school of tank building, 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.
  26. +2
    11 June 2013 14: 11
    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
      0
      11 June 2013 14: 38
      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. +4
        11 June 2013 14: 47
        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. Consmo
      -1
      11 June 2013 15: 07
      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. +4
        11 June 2013 15: 12
        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. Consmo
          +2
          11 June 2013 15: 44
          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. +1
            11 June 2013 18: 23
            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
              -1
              11 June 2013 21: 56
              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.
    3. 0
      11 June 2013 16: 04
      That's just where these "heads" were taught ...
      1. +3
        11 June 2013 18: 23
        Quote: alicante11
        That's just where these "heads" were taught

        Other heads taught the same thing, that's where they are, the question belay
        1. Genady1976
          +2
          11 June 2013 18: 36
          lol their other heads taught different drinks
  27. Avenger711
    +2
    11 June 2013 14: 31
    In general, the front-engine layout for tanks has long been known, but is extremely rare, the question is why? Apparently because the disadvantages of such an arrangement of the engine, in particular its slight defeat with a very likely fire (not only fuel), outweigh the advantages.
  28. USNik
    +4
    11 June 2013 14: 42
    I read the article. According to the shortcomings, the merkavas agree on everything. Although it would not hurt to note that the tank was created for smooth rocky terrain and did not look particularly at weight. The airborne compartment assumed the presence of a shift crew or reconnaissance group, which should be in comfort, which caused the indiscreet size of the MBT. In general, Chariot-4 is an excellent tank for its area, as well as the T-72 for its own, which they proved in battle. Unlike the vaunted Leclerc, who, with all his will, can’t be found in Mali. winked
    1. +2
      11 June 2013 15: 12
      Is this the Golan? 8)
    2. 0
      14 January 2018 01: 25
      Have you seen the location of this landing in Merkava? no? Well then I wish you to dance there with a hippo for a couple, or better with an elephant.
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. Perch_xnumx
    +1
    11 June 2013 14: 58
    Quote: atalef

    German engine. Everything else including electronics is ours. The gun was produced under license, now it’s kind of like ours.
    Even if we assume that all the components of electronics, sensors, processors, matrices, etc. you produce exclusively in Israel, which I personally doubt very much, you import all the same raw materials, semi-finished products, blanks into the country.
    1. +1
      11 June 2013 15: 08
      Quote: Perch_1
      Even if we assume that all the components of electronics, sensors, processors, matrices, etc. you produce exclusively in Israel, which I personally doubt very much, you import all the same raw materials, semi-finished products, blanks into the country.

      Yes, we import the same oil, is it possible to say on this basis that the tanks are manufactured in Azerbaijan (we mainly supply oil from there). Well, electronics - the matrix of your 90% computer is made in Israel, like Vindos and much more. My employee’s wife, for example, makes tank helmets with an integrated fire control system (weapons track the direction of the commander’s gaze) and follow him. So, as an example.
      1. Perch_xnumx
        -1
        11 June 2013 15: 23
        Well, electronics - the matrix of your computer is 90% made in Israel, like Vindos and much more.
        Windows in israel? This is nonsense, the core of Windows is a very complicated thing and make it all over the world, but mainly in the head office. What is a matrix - a silicon single crystal for microchips, or an LSD matrix for a monitor, etc., is a solid mega (even a giga plant), if they close 90% of world consumption. Koreans, Japanese and Americans cry between the breaks. Israel is too insecure to close its business on it, since the core is like with hard drives in Thailand.
        1. +1
          11 June 2013 15: 41
          A number of leading development centers of large international companies are located in Israel. Intelovsky i7 - development and production of the Israeli center.
          http://habrahabr.ru/company/intel/blog/144767/

          About microsoft

          Microsoft plans to open a new R&D (Research & Design) center in Israel. Recall that this is the third Microsoft R&D center in Israel. The two previous centers operate successfully and generate revenue in the Microsoft piggy bank. Israel is the only country outside the United States in which Microsoft has set up its R&D centers. Thus, we can assume that Microsoft has noticed positive trends in the development of its Israeli branches and has promising developments regarding the further development of its software in our country.

          This is news from 2009. The center has been functioning for a long time.

          Well, Intel is going to build a new plant in Israel.
          1. Perch_xnumx
            0
            11 June 2013 16: 08
            Intelovsky i7 - development and production of the Israeli center.
            And what are the findings? Are you the navel of the earth? And what about i5 and i3, in fact, also only smaller transistors. From Windows, I only like XP and the server, the rest is essentially with a bunch of useless and unnecessary bells and whistles, people buy fresh Windows only because there is a fresh graphics library. The Windows kernel began to be developed long before the opening of R&D in Israel. And all this is concentrated in California.
            1. +3
              11 June 2013 16: 38
              Do not transfer your complexes to others. You are trying to prove that Israel is nothing. I tell you that this is one of the most technologically advanced countries to date. And confirmation of this is the policy of leading IT companies.
        2. Consmo
          -1
          11 June 2013 16: 01
          Not Phil Gates, his factory, built it for sure. The processor is molded.
          What about the rest? An acquaintance came a programmer from Israel, with some kind of oil industry, to go on about the security system. They drank the coffee well and they told her that they were kind of like dogs, uncut for safety. And who are you. Come on. Bye.
          But arrogance is higher than the roof. Basic learned and programmers already. Ezhkin Cat.
          1. Consmo
            +1
            11 June 2013 16: 53
            Not Filya, but Intel. I apologize. Design centers are where certification pass. Engineer for laying cables, "twisted pair" training and exam more than $ 1000. Certification books in "Young Guard", book on the Tretyakovka metro station. You take it, teach it and hand it over. And at the Macrosoft Center, they read this book to you.
            We had a dunduk in the company that passed many exams. But they were not allowed to design it. Type get a salary and do not go in. Since the hands of the ass. But they told everyone there is a certified special. At tenders you need.
        3. 0
          11 June 2013 18: 30
          Quote: Perch_1
          Windows in israel? This is nonsense, the core of Windows is a very complicated thing and make it all over the world, but mainly in the head office.

          In 2003, Intel introduced the revolutionary Intel Centrino technology and Pentium M processors that truly revolutionized our understanding of mobility and laptops. They were fully developed at the Intel Development Center in Haifa, under the guidance of the same Muli Eden. Subsequent Intel processors, codenamed Yonah, Merom, Penryn, Sandy Bridge, were also created in Israel.
          In 2009, Intel became the largest Israeli exporter. Exports of the Israeli branch of Intel in 2009 amounted to 3,4 billion dollars. This is 145% more than a year earlier. From 1999 to 2011, Intel's Israeli branch sold 22 billion worth of goods overseas.
      2. Consmo
        -1
        11 June 2013 15: 52
        And if the commander for women? Type Mashka for a frog. It will also track and surrender to his wife. By Skype
        Who will serve. wink
        1. +2
          11 June 2013 18: 39
          Quote: Konsmo
          And if the commander for women? Type Mashka for a frog

          crying

          Quote: Konsmo
          Will also track down his wife and surrender

          then with a blade on the glasses wassat
    2. Consmo
      0
      11 June 2013 15: 23
      Exactly, exactly. And the doctor’s and amateur sausage in the loaf, each, we always send to friends if someone arrives in Moscow. I swear by mom.
      By the way, mom and homemade pies sends 20-30 pieces if she manages to do it. smile
    3. +2
      11 June 2013 15: 25
      Do you assume that there are completely independent countries? What do you think, whose matrices are on Russian tanks? Or whose helmets are now shipped to Migi? Machine tools? And many many others.
      So do not carry the blizzard. Now is not winter, but summer.
      1. Consmo
        0
        11 June 2013 16: 18
        Yes, I wonder whose. If he himself drove the plasma screens to Angstrom (Zelenograd) for repair. This was the year 90. Then we did not hear about the plasma screens. We told them about tanks and under. we put boats and your robots are consumer goods and household goods.
        And we were selling this household service to all sorts of ship, space, tank, aircraft cantors, all sorts of Khrunichev stood in line.
        This is so lyric.
        1. 0
          11 June 2013 18: 33
          Quote: Konsmo
          Yes, I wonder whose. If he himself drove the plasma screens to Angstrom (Zelenograd) for repair. This was the year 90. Then we did not hear about the plasma screens. We told them about tanks and under. we put boats and your robots are consumer goods and household goods.

          In the 93 year on Nevsky (in St. Petersburg) plasmas cost 40t bucks (mine Philips)
          1. Consmo
            +1
            13 June 2013 16: 13
            On our computers for machines and robots, 12 inch plasma screens were already
            1989. Then I got a job as a representative of the manufacturer at Moscow machine-tool factories. They were not cheap either. We also had an analogue of the current flash drives. 128 kilobytes. Our programmers wrote programs for them to process parts for machine tools. Question-answer. They told the British. Sam drove installed programs for the Naval Shipyard. Then they made and introduced a line of machines and robots for processing, made of special alloys, wheels for cars, drove and tested without tires on the landfill.
            Then they pushed technology into Formula 1. It was 1991.
            1. 0
              13 June 2013 16: 18
              Quote: Konsmo
              1989 year. I then got a representative of the manufacturer at the Moscow machine-tool plants. They were not cheap either. We also had an analogue of the current flash drives. 128 kilobytes.

              In 1988, Intel released the first commercial NOR-type flash chip.
              The NAND type of flash memory was announced by Toshiba in 1989 at the International Solid State Circuses Zonferenz.

              B89 released the first and immediately came to you, sorry - I do not believe it. negative
  31. Perch_xnumx
    0
    11 June 2013 15: 16
    Quote: Pimply
    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.
    Yes? However, missile bombs cost money and a lot of them are needed. From that, in any major mess, Israel is given a larger batch of American weapons, as if by accident, although their own like shoe polish. What about avionics, are you absolutely sure that at least half of the park is exclusively Israeli avionics?
    1. +1
      11 June 2013 15: 32
      Yes, more than.

      Quote: Perch_1
      From that, in any major mess, Israel is given a larger batch of American weapons, as if by accident, although their own like shoe polish.

      Fall over. At the expense of American help. Which, by the way, also goes to the Arab countries, and Egypt. And Israel also receives this help for giving up a piece of land the size of all of Israel.
  32. +1
    11 June 2013 15: 21
    As always, the article drowned in a bias towards Israel and Merkava. However, there are a couple of interesting points:
    - the effect of heat from the windshield on optics, etc.,
    - questions about running gear ("destruction without penetration").
    In general, this does not affect "vulnerability", but rather "features".
    It’s too early to bury Merkava, and without KAZ it will be quite effective for a long time.
    1. Consmo
      +2
      11 June 2013 16: 30
      Quote: yanus
      As always, the article drowned in a bias towards Israel and Merkava. However, there are a couple of interesting points:
      - the effect of heat from the windshield on optics, etc.,
      - questions about running gear ("destruction without penetration").
      In general, this does not affect "vulnerability", but rather "features".
      It’s too early to bury Merkava, and without KAZ it will be quite effective for a long time.

      In Ukraine, up to 1500 T-34 tanks stood in July for 41 years.
      Because of such features. Like Merkava. They were given orders to move first to one point and then to another. And all the resource ran out. It was around 100 km.
      Instead of stepping on Warsaw, the tank forces evaporated. Less than 100 tanks left. The rest were abandoned.
      In war, a spoon is a weapon, not a trifle or a feature.
      1. +1
        11 June 2013 17: 11
        Quote: Konsmo
        In Ukraine, up to 1500 T-34 tanks stood in July for 41 years.
        Because of such features. Like Merkava. They gave orders to move first to one point then to another. And all the resource ended. It was around 100 km

        stupidity
    2. +2
      12 June 2013 21: 10
      I agree. Strange article - especially killed:

      "I.Tal, being the main ideologist of the original layout of the" Merkava ", 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 element of the tank design - Thus, one of the obligatory requirements for MBT was ignored - counteraction to the loss of motion. "

      According to the logic of the author, a tanker is a bargaining mechanism that can be replaced in the event of a breakdown. In fact, a tanker is a VERY expensive specialist, for the preparation of which the state and people spend a lot of money. It is better to lose the tank, but to keep the experienced crew, than to drive the young boys who have just left the training school to the repaired BM.
  33. Genady1976
    +7
    11 June 2013 16: 53
    here is a movie about a real tank good
    1. Andrew 121
      0
      11 June 2013 17: 44
      I watch them without additional armor.
  34. Yemelya
    0
    11 June 2013 18: 18
    Due to the use of multilayer armor with air gaps between the layers, the installation of dynamic protection elements was impossible.

    This is not entirely clear. Like, the outer layer of armor was too thin and collapsed when the DZ element was blown up? Well, x .. with him, his fate is like that.

    Maybe they just thought that a spaced reservation was enough?

    By the way, if anyone knows, I ask you to suggest the further (after 1982) fate of the Blazer DZ, why the Jews refused DZ and why the Merkava's passive armor is better than the DZ.
    1. +4
      11 June 2013 19: 01
      Quote: Emelya
      the fate of DZ "Blazer", why the Jews refused DZ

      no better explanation came across.
      1. Yemelya
        0
        11 June 2013 19: 42
        Quote: Kars
        no better explanation came across.


        Thank you, from this it turns out that the remote sensing device in Israel continues to be operated in a kind of "built-in" version.

        And at the expense of the DZ on the "Merkava-4" information is there?
        1. +2
          11 June 2013 19: 45
          Quote: Emelya
          that DZ in Israel continues to be operated in a kind of "built-in" version

          I personally realized that after Blazer they could not make a more effective DZ capable of answering the challenges of the late 80s and early 90s. Therefore, I decided to bet on the analog of Chobham with spacing.

          Quote: Emelya
          And at the expense of the DZ on the "Merkava-4" information is there?

          feel
          1. Yemelya
            0
            11 June 2013 19: 58
            Quote: Kars
            I personally realized that after Blazer they could not make a more effective DZ capable of answering the challenges of the late 80s and early 90s. Therefore, I decided to bet on the analog of Chobham with spacing.

            On the given page from the book of M. Baryatinsky it is written about some "hybrid armor packages, including both reactive and passive layers." "Reactive", as I understand it, is DZ. That is, according to the "Contact-5" type.
            1. +1
              11 June 2013 20: 17
              Quote: Emelya
              "hybrid armor packages including both reactive and passive layers."

              1999, and that it’s someone who knows him. On the four I’m not observing anything reactive. Although .. active .. claims.
              1. Yemelya
                0
                11 June 2013 20: 57
                Quote: Kars
                On the four, I’m not observing anything reactive. Although .. active .. declares.


                So on the "Magah" there are no external signs.

                Maybe desa?

                Or Baryatinsky beguiled something.
                1. +1
                  11 June 2013 21: 34
                  Well, on Magah, the picture is somewhat different.
                  1. Yemelya
                    0
                    11 June 2013 22: 47
                    Quote: Kars
                    Well, on Magah, the picture is somewhat different.

                    I meant this, tk. "hybrid packages", apparently, it should contain:
                    1. +1
                      12 June 2013 00: 04
                      Quote: Emelya
                      I meant this, tk. "hybrid packages", apparently, it should contain:

                      Most likely speech
                      Quote: Emelya
                      On the given page from the book of M. Baryatinsky it is written about some "hybrid armor packages, VK

                      it is in the photo that I brought.

                      And on
                      Quote: Emelya
                      apparently on it

                      most likely super-duper passive armor.

                      Or am I confusing something.
                      1. Yemelya
                        0
                        12 June 2013 00: 29
                        Quote: Kars
                        most likely super-duper passive armor.

                        "Magah-6V Batash" should have side screens, and the one with the DZ boxes on the tower looks like it was from the times of the Lebanese war.
                      2. +1
                        12 June 2013 00: 39
                        Quote: Emelya
                        "Magah-6V Batash" should have side screens, and the one with the DZ boxes on the tower looks like it was from the times of the Lebanese war.

                        Screens are removable equipment and their absence can in principle prove nothing.
                        Quote: Emelya
                        and the one with the DZ boxes on the towers

                        if you have in mind my early photo, then there’s generally a training ground.


                        Then what?
                      3. Yemelya
                        0
                        12 June 2013 01: 00
                        in the book by M. Baryatinsky "Israeli tanks in battle" this is "Magah-6 Bet":
                      4. Yemelya
                        0
                        12 June 2013 01: 02
                        And this "Magah-6 Bet Gal Batash":
                      5. +3
                        12 June 2013 01: 12
                        And then?
                        Quote: Emelya
                        Baryatinsky's book "Israeli tanks in battle" is "Magah-6 Bet":

                        What is the problem then what is wrong?

                        Open the elementary wiki and look
                        Magah-6 Bet Gal Batash "- created in 1999, the version of" Magah-6 Bet Gal "with enhanced passive armoring of the tower and the front of the hull, side screens and a new, more powerful engine. Small amount produced.

                        PASSIVE reservation? What is the question?
                      6. Genady1976
                        0
                        12 June 2013 01: 17
                        I have ? in Syria tanks of what production? What a moan
                      7. +3
                        12 June 2013 01: 23
                        Quote: Genady1976
                        I have ? in Syria tanks of what production?

                        The USSR and Czechoslovakia
                      8. Genady1976
                        0
                        12 June 2013 01: 37
                        and the Czechs themselves corps tanks riveted? or brought from the USSR
                      9. +2
                        12 June 2013 01: 43
                        Quote: Genady1976
                        and the Czechs themselves corps tanks riveted?

                        As I understand it, the full cycle. But the T-72 is not my hobby.
                      10. Genady1976
                        +1
                        12 June 2013 01: 46
                        thanks a lot
                      11. Genady1976
                        0
                        12 June 2013 01: 44
                        discovered in export TRANSPORT AND LICENSE PRODUCTION
                      12. Yemelya
                        0
                        12 June 2013 19: 45
                        Quote: Kars
                        What is the problem then what is wrong?

                        Open the elementary wiki and look
                        Magah-6 Bet Gal Batash "- created in 1999, the version of" Magah-6 Bet Gal "with enhanced passive armoring of the tower and the front of the hull, side screens and a new, more powerful engine. Small amount produced.
                        PASSIVE reservation? What is the question?


                        On the page from the book that you brought, it is written in black and green that “Magah-6 Bet Gal Batash” has a hybrid armor with elements of DZ.
                      13. +1
                        12 June 2013 20: 01
                        Quote: Emelya
                        On the page from the book that you brought, black

                        Have you read carefully?
                      14. Yemelya
                        0
                        12 June 2013 23: 12
                        Quote: Kars
                        Have you read carefully?


                        Carefully.

                        Have you tried to read the next paragraph?
                      15. +1
                        12 June 2013 23: 25
                        Quote: Emelya

                        Have you tried to read the next paragraph?


                        And where there
                        Quote: Emelya
                        black and green it says "Magah-6 Bet Gal Batash "

                        ?
  35. Genady1976
    +6
    11 June 2013 19: 10
    I have a real fighting T-72 with a cat, a monster was beating, the truth was won
    1. +3
      11 June 2013 19: 12
      As I understand it))))))))
  36. +2
    11 June 2013 19: 15
    Israel never achieved its stated goals during the 2006 war. Hezbollah is not disarmed or broken. Its leaders are still alive and well and continue to prepare for the next war. Guarantees from new rocket attacks and terrorist attacks by extremists have not been received. The IDF’s reputation was undermined and a political crisis erupted in the country. In this regard, we can talk about the failure of the campaign. During the Lebanon war, Israel did not achieve its goals and Merkava did not help. So that the irreparable losses of the Merkava were small, they did not play a role, there were enough replaceable losses, as well as relatively large losses of the Israeli army.
    In comparison, Merkava and T-90, it is not a fact that the T-90 is worse, they did not meet in combat conditions.
    Do not forget that the T-90, unlike Merkava, was created when our defense industry and science were purposefully destroyed.
    1. +1
      12 June 2013 18: 09
      Who told you that the goal was to disarm Hezbollah. This is unrealistic, with the support of Iran and Syria, and 40% of the Shiite population in Lebanon. The main goal was to shuganut, move away from the border and stop shelling. For all 7 years since the start of the war, there has been silence on the northern border.
  37. Genady1976
    +1
    11 June 2013 19: 43
    finish no legs reach no arms reach
  38. +3
    11 June 2013 20: 03
    Quote: slaventi
    Israel never achieved its stated goals during the 2006 war. Hezbollah is not disarmed or broken.

    No one set this goal

    Quote: slaventi
    Its leaders are still alive and well and continue to prepare for the next war.

    Having not climbed out of the bunker for 7 for years, and communicating with my supporters only on TV

    Quote: slaventi
    no guarantee was received from new rocket attacks and terrorist attacks by extremists

    Well, terrorists generally give no guarantees to anyone. only for 7 years for some reason there wasn’t one

    Quote: slaventi
    The IDF’s reputation was undermined and a political crisis erupted in the country. In this regard, we can talk about the failure of the campaign

    the company of course was not a fountain. but not a failure definitely

    Quote: slaventi
    During the Lebanon war, Israel did not achieve its goals and Merkava did not help.

    But what were the goals, do not tell me? One of them is the cessation of shelling and provocation by Hezbollah. 7 years for BV a huge period. so that the test of time passed. Until next time. which of course someday will be
    But on BV, in general, everything is temporary and there is nothing unequivocal


    Quote: slaventi
    , as well as the relatively large losses of the army of Israel.

    Specify losses
    1. 0
      12 June 2013 13: 51
      Not a failed .120 person is not so small, with the continuation could be more. a surprise for the Israeli army was the presence of a large number of modern anti-tank weapons in the militants. Perhaps even for this, the hostilities were suspended. Even the prisoners were not released. Hezbollah’s authority was strengthened. Hezbollah was not destroyed and is now helping Syria.
  39. +1
    11 June 2013 20: 18
    Well, finally, it’s all merkava and merkava. After Lebanon it was disgusting to read. The credit was set off, but they were embarrassed. If the war lasts not for a month, but for at least a year (intensive actions), who will fill this ashes. Judging by comments the opinion of Israeli citizens are not interested
  40. +2
    11 June 2013 20: 29
    Merkava is an excellent tank, any of the modern characteristics makes it an excellent tank, in some it is sharply superior, in some it is inferior. Always delighted the efforts of Israeli citizens to save their soldiers ... Our tanks are in many ways no worse, and in a combat strike, I think it’s better, but as a home for many actions, Israeli tanks are better (zkv 1 tr)
  41. +1
    11 June 2013 22: 03
    I think it's all about the concept. Our tanks have always been created as offensive tanks, western ones as defenses. Such pillboxes on gusyankas. Plus, we took into account the possibility of wartime production when only simplified versions can be produced. Hence the neglect of convenience. Sam served in the only deployed tank regiment (Novocherkask "Cossack camps") of the USSR. The main idea that was suggested to us is that in a modern oncoming battle, any tank regiment lives no more than half an hour. And during battles in the city, everything is determined by the skill of the shift and the minimum amount of high command
  42. +5
    11 June 2013 22: 46
    If the "bad" tank saves the crew, it's a great tank.
    If the crews are constantly on fire in an "excellent" tank, it's a shitty tank.
    I don’t name brands, because no difference.
  43. Yemelya
    +2
    11 June 2013 23: 25
    As I understand it, during production, the number of hatches in the tower was reduced to one:
    1. +2
      11 June 2013 23: 55
      One sunroof, aft door and another hatch for the driver. That's just to climb out the fur water through your hatch is probably not at all fun (and in most cases, it is hardly possible).
      Total: for four, one hatch (which is very high), and one door. On the T64-90, the entire crew sits in chairs and each has its own hatch overhead.
      1. Yemelya
        +1
        12 June 2013 00: 10
        Quote: Bad_gr
        On the T64-90, the entire crew sits in chairs and each has its own hatch above their heads.


        In the USSR, the shape of the tower and the placement of attachments allowed the driver to get out at any of its positions.

        On the T-90MS and the latest version of the T-84, they shot it up - the towers significantly increased in size due to the installation of aft boxes for BC, etc. So now the position of their mechanical drives is no better than that of Merkavovsky.
        1. 0
          12 June 2013 11: 22
          Quote: Emelya
          On the T-90MS and the latest version of the T-84, they shot this up - the towers significantly increased in size due to the installation of aft boxes for BC, etc.

          On the T-90ms, perhaps the most dimensional tower of all the teshes. But the tower turret does not prevent the driver from leaving the tank.

          If the tower sideways - even more so. The problem with leaving the tank will be if the turret is turned back by the cannon, but this is rare (does the tank conduct a battle turning back to the enemy?). And in this case, the mechanic can leave the tank through the battlefield and one of the hatches (commander or gunner).

          But the mechanics of tanks with MZ (T64-80-84) to get out through the battle trays with shells need to be removed, which is not an ice in a combat situation.
    2. 0
      12 June 2013 11: 45
      Quote: Emelya
      As I understand it, during the production the number of hatches in the tower was reduced to one

      There is an option with two hatches
      1. 0
        12 June 2013 15: 51
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        There is an option with two hatches

        A more visual option. Clickable
        1. Yemelya
          0
          12 June 2013 23: 33
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          There is an option with two hatches

          Here the question is, which of the modifications is earlier, which is later?

          On the prototype there were 2 hatches, so, most likely, with one hatch - the last option, the charging hatch was eliminated in order to enhance protection.
  44. bubble82009
    +3
    11 June 2013 23: 27
    how this topic is interesting to society. what a heated discussion. and our generals told us how much Merkava is better than our tanks. The T-72 is now the most warring tank. Western military primarily attack him and peck. in this position no tank can stand
    1. Genady1976
      0
      11 June 2013 23: 38
      Definitely not a day of peaceful life
  45. +1
    12 June 2013 00: 51
    In the Russian "Armata" the same principles are laid as in the "Merkava", and from here it is not difficult to predict the fate of the "Armata" ... By the way, the front drive position was used in the German "Panther" ... "Merkave" in this case is not applicable ...
    1. Ivan Mechanic
      +3
      12 June 2013 01: 22
      So far, only fantasy of tank lovers and nothing more has been laid in the armature. What is actually laid there is not yet clear!
    2. 0
      12 June 2013 16: 01
      Quote: I think so
      By the way, the front drive arrangement was used in the German "Panther".
      And also Pz3 Pz4 Pz6 - that is, ALL medium and heavy tanks of German production of that time ...
  46. Ivan Mechanic
    +5
    12 June 2013 01: 01
    How interesting it is to read comrades from Israel - just like listening to the statements of their leadership. "The best tank, trawl-la, ....". If so, why during the second Lebanon war, the Israeli leadership voted like a woman because of the presence of ATGMs of the penultimate generations of the Hezbollah fighters? Just like now with the S-300. Six months ago, the Israeli leadership of the country and the army told everyone that they had long dismantled the S-300 into bolts and have long had equipment or devices to neutralize it. And the iron dome was somehow recalled sideways (inertly, this multimillion-dollar oddity will be able to withstand only 5 GRAD cars? Or will it die quietly). And as soon as it came to the real presence of the S-300 in the region, as the women who found out about the sudden pregnancy began to screech and beg to not supply the GDP to Moscow.
  47. +9
    12 June 2013 02: 10
    Beautiful tank "Merkava Mk.4"! For each country, “your tank” is the best !! For Jews this is protection, for Russians it is simplicity, for Germans it is reliability, for Ukrainians it is continuity, for Americans it is because it is American ...
  48. +1
    12 June 2013 06: 33
    As rarely on the site lately - the correspondence of articles and discussions. Not a bad article (not without errors) and a very pleasant discussion of it (without mutual objections). It's a pity the "professor" did not participate, probably he would have something to add. I would put a plus on the whole forum, it's a pity you can't))).
  49. DZ_98_B
    +2
    12 June 2013 10: 49
    Good tank. Jews do not advertise it, they don’t sell it to anyone, and they even don’t even go for a drive. The fascist tiger had leading sprockets and final drives in front and after the first hit did not fall apart. why merkava this unit has become problematic! Cross the swamps look in SIBERIA. in TYUMEN. T 330 or T500 WEIGHT HAVE NO LESS. and Nitsche roam the swamps !!!! cool engine, 1500 mares is not a toy. Do not tell me the weight of the engine? the center of gravity is approximately in the middle. fine. our T90 has a center of gravity in the area of ​​the second rear roller. The weight of the engine probably affects it. our engine will be 100 years old soon. it is not very different from the B2 engine. Let's hope for the X-shaped. And to get the wounded driver in the battle, from our T 72 through his hatch and sit down on the levers to take the car from the battle, did anyone succeed?
    1. 0
      17 June 2013 09: 11
      Everyone has already buried the X-image. Its draft characteristics are not better than GTE, and the mass is much larger.
      Rear alignment when driving through swamps and sand is more reasonable - a tank with such alignment on the go forward glides along on soft ground. Merkava with his centering is stuck in the dunes. You have to climb out in reverse or look for a tugboat.
      The engine (or rather the unit) weighs two tons. GTE of the same power less than one and a half.
      The wounded mechanic’s water tank in T72 is blessed with memory — two tanks of a solarium with a wall thickness of 1,5 mm with shells in one — God forbid the others get out. Even to climb from the place of the MV to the tower - a minute is needed in the summer and a half in the winter and not in all positions of the tower it is possible.

      The layout of the T-72 is high time to change your mind or think out.
      1. 0
        17 June 2013 18: 33
        Quote: dustycat
        Everyone has already buried the X-image.

        Is that all right? Give links to at least someone.

        Quote: dustycat
        Its draft characteristics are not better than GTE, and the mass is much larger.

        Quote: dustycat
        The engine (or rather the unit) weighs two tons. GTE of the same power less than one and a half.


        X-shaped engine A-85-3, aka 2B12-3, aka 12CHN15 / 16, aka 12H360 ...
        Engine power kW (hp) ......... 1103 (1500)
        Weight, kg ...................................1550
        http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/09/2_06.html

        Engine --------------------- В-92С2 ----- (V-92S2F [V-93])
        Engine power kW (hp) - 736 (1000) --- ( 831 [1130])
        Weight, kg -------------------------- 1020 --------- (1100)
        http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/09/3.html

        Quote: dustycat
        The wounded mechanic’s water tank in T72 is blessed with memory — two tanks of a solarium with a wall thickness of 1,5 mm with shells in one — God forbid the others get out. Even to climb from the place of the MV to the tower - a minute is needed in the summer and a half in the winter and not in all positions of the tower it is possible.

        In Abrams, the driver doesn’t have the opportunity to go into combat at all, and the tank does not have a hatch in the bottom, but on the two sides of the driver there are two tanks with kerosene (if I am not mistaken, 2 tons). Will the same driver mechanics be buried right away? or how?
        Leopard-2 has an ammunition shell with shells on the left of the driver - what shall we do with it?
  50. 0
    12 June 2013 10: 57
    Explain to me a civilian, what is a "shrapnel and lighting mine"?
    supposedly a Palestinian partisan came up, stepped on a mine and lit it with a flashlight? belay
    can then scatter sound mines?
    supposedly the Palestinian partisans again approached and, as usual, had already stepped on a mine
    and from there a trumpet voice:
    "AHTUNG! You stepped on a mine illegally, pay a license to pass (yes / no)" laughing
    only where to mine a coin acceptor for such a mine? request
    1. +3
      12 June 2013 11: 04
      Quote: Aryan
      shooting shrapnel and lighting mines "?
      supposedly a Palestinian partisan approached, stepped on a mine



      Mina is not only an engineering munition, but also an artillery
  51. +2
    12 June 2013 17: 53
    A tank, like a tank, has its own strengths and weaknesses, the matter still remains in the person, the one with the more experienced crew will win. Put today's sronov on t 80 and old contract soldiers on t 64, the result will be immediately visible, but no one says that t 64 is better than t 80.....
  52. +1
    12 June 2013 18: 07
    Everything is the same as everywhere else... it’s one thing to fool around from a stationary position in the desert, another thing to climb into a populated area.
  53. +1
    13 June 2013 00: 18
    The best tank today is the slightly modified Thor. We give him a couple of drones on wires with a rise of 50-100 meters with power from the base network, a bunch of simpler missiles - after all, there is no need to chase tanks and pillboxes at supersonic speed, we only use a strike from above and, within the capabilities of our drones or external target designation, we extinguish the enemy without even leaning out from behind the hill.
  54. Bigar
    +1
    14 June 2013 16: 41
    Hello everyone, everyone who understands tank business and everyone who considers themselves one but is not..
    There is no need to consider yourself smarter than those who actually design and produce! There is no need to operate with the knowledge that you received from a friend about a link on the Internet where every literate person scribbles articles... The author of this article fulfilled a simple order... to write an article. in this perspective..
    Everyone who really believes that the IDF, which has won all the wars to date, has poor weapons, is either stupid and does not understand this, or has intent.. The Soviet encyclopedia of tank forces allocated a separate place for the Merkava and rated it very highly.. So all your disputes are completely reeking profanation and lack of knowledge of the material. For the site owners, this is a loss, since the site is worthy, but the comments are left by obvious losers... My best wishes to everyone..
    1. posad
      +1
      15 June 2013 07: 22
      The article is objective and debunks the myth about Merkava. Everyone laughed merrily at the Jews once again.
      Now tell me what is wrong in the article? No need for emotions and wet dreams. Specifically, point by point, paragraph by paragraph.
      If you don’t write, then you are a Jewish jingoist and deserve nothing but ridicule. We're waiting, sir.
  55. 0
    14 June 2013 18: 41
    Quote: Bigar
    IDF, which has won all wars to date

    Congratulations to you! But there is a first time for everything!
    So hello to you from the poor students! smile
  56. 0
    14 June 2013 18: 41
    Quote: Bigar
    IDF, which has won all wars to date

    Congratulations to you! But there is a first time for everything!
    So hello to you from the poor students! smile
  57. Eric
    0
    15 June 2013 14: 20
    Quote: DZ_98_B
    Has anyone managed to pull a wounded driver in combat conditions from our T 72 through its hatch and sit behind the levers to take the vehicle out of battle?

    There have been cases.

    In any case, I'll put in my two cents.
    In a global war, I would rely on:
    -maneuver
    - tank dimensions

    and only then on electronics, our tanks quite rightly bear the title Tank. And I would prefer the tightness of our T-ki, and the shells in the fighting compartment. Simply tried and tested, not by me, but by my nation. And not only.

    And in a local conflict, for the infantry (city).
  58. 0
    17 June 2013 22: 34
    ALLOW AN AMATEUR TO SPEAK! WHO IS THE JEWISH STATE AT WAR? WITH PAMIMILITARY AND TERRORIST FORMATIONS. SO IN THESE T.N. IN THE COMBAT ON THEIR SIDE, HAD OUR THIRTY-FOUR PARTICIPATED, VICTORY WOULD STILL BE WITH ISRAEL. WHAT ADVANTAGES OR DISADVANTAGES OF A "COMbat" MACHINE CAN BE CONSIDERED IF IT DOES NOT HAVE A REAL ENEMY ON THE BATTLEFIELD. WE MODERNIZED THAT, CHANGED THIS, ADDED ADDITIONAL PROTECTION..... THE ASK IS, WHO ARE YOU PROTECTING FROM, AGAINST AN ENEMY ARMED TO THE TEETH? THE HISTORY OF OUR DOMESTIC TANK BUILDING EVIDENCES - A COMBAT VEHICLE IS BORN ONLY ON ANALYSIS AND STUDY OF COMBATS OF EQUAL-SIZE OPPONSES!
    1. 0
      14 January 2018 01: 56
      The history of our tank building testifies to only one thing: in peacetime we do not know how to analyze either tactics or equipment, and in wartime we begin to frantically come up with solutions to problems. Moreover, the latter is usually done by the fighters themselves on the front line. hi
      1. +1
        14 January 2018 02: 09
        Sorry, you are a stupid person. No. Just at the beginning of the Second World War, German tank building was in COMPLETE F... fool . Their best tank on June 22, 41, PyTsy4, was a piece of shit compared to even the T-34, and against the KV-1 it didn’t even have any conceptual chance lol . Only military successes not at all related to the “superiority of tanks” helped Germany hold out until the appearance of the “Panthers” and especially the “Tigers”.
        And pay attention, both the T-34 and KV-1 were created “not in the trenches” but in design bureaus and tank factories. And about “solving problems on the front line”, tell the German tank crews in the winter of 41, when everything froze to hell for them. And also to the mechanics of the “tigers” (later) who “really loved” the creator of the “chessboard arrangement” of the skating rinks, when they were clogged with snow and soil and by the morning they became such a cheerful “single whole” am
  59. 0
    1 July 2018 15: 06
    website promotion website promotion seo optimization For any questions you may have, you can contact Skype login SEO PRO1, we will be happy to answer all your questions...Analysis of your Internet project for free