Military Review

The end of the tank era? Israel refused to create a fifth-generation tank and is working on a "tank of the future"

137
Tank The era, which began a hundred years ago on the sidelines of the First World War, today seems to be nearing completion.


“The Israeli Defense Ministry decided not to continue the work on the creation of the Merkava Mark V tank, and at this stage the Merkava Mark IV will remain the last tank, the production of which will be continued.” This message caused the effect of a bombshell in the tank world - after all, the Merkava tank, which embodied the newest ideas and technologies of tank construction, was recognized by authoritative experts as one of the best, if not the best, main battle tank in the world.

Although the formal reason for the cessation of work on the creation of the fifth-generation Merkava tank was officially called the reduction of project funding, in fact, this is a real revolution in tank design and the very concept of tanks in modern warfare.

The role of tanks in modern war today is undergoing a cardinal revaluation. Anti-tank defense is becoming more efficient and cheaper, and in the eternal dispute between armor and projectile a third party has now appeared - means of active protection of armored vehicles. And, it seems, they can put an end to the tank stories.

The history of five generations of the main battle tank "Merkava" reflects the evolution of ideas about the role of the tank in a modern war.

General and his tank

Israeli General Israel Tal (1924 — 2010) entered the history of tank forces not only as the winner of tank battles, but also as the creator of the main battle tank Merkava, which made a real revolution in the tank world.

Israel Tal was born in Palestine in 1924, in the Galilean village of Mahanaim, in a family whose roots come from the Polish Hasidim who settled in the cities of Safed and Tiberias in 1777. At the age of five, he miraculously survived when the Arabs set fire to the house where he lived with his mother and younger sister. From childhood, Israel knew hard work - as a boy, he began working in a village forge.

Israel Tal, 1970 year.
In the 15 years he became a fighter of the Jewish illegal army of Hagan. In 1942, at the age of seventeen, Israel Tal volunteered for the British Army. He fought against the Nazis in Libya, participated in the landing of the Allies in Italy in the ranks of the Jewish Brigade and reached the Rhineland in Germany. After the war, he joined the Avengers military organization, which was engaged in the search and liquidation of the Nazis, whose hands were in Jewish blood.

Started in the 1948 year of the War of Independence, Israel Tal met in the ranks of the IDF - he began serving as an instructor-machine-gunner, and then quickly climbed the commanding steps. After graduating from the military academy in the UK, in 1955, Tal took command of the 10 Infantry Brigade, at the head of which he fought in the Sinai campaign of the 1956.

In 1959, the appointment of Colonel Tal to the post of commander of the 7 Armored Brigade took place, permanently linking Israel Tal with the tank forces.

In 1964, General Israel Tal became the deputy commander of tank forces. As an experienced tanker, he understood that in the conditions of the repeated numerical superiority of the enemy in tanks, only excellent crew training would give a chance to survive and win.

Based on combat experience, he developed completely new tactical techniques for conducting tank war. Tal paid special attention to firing training of tank crews, becoming a true innovator in the introduction of tank guns of tank sniper fire to long and long distances - up to 5 — 6 kilometers and even 10 — 11 kilometers.

This gave a significant advantage in battle - the enemy fought on Soviet tank regulations and instructions, which ordered to open aimed fire only at a distance of 1,5 km. So that Israeli tankers, opening fire from long distances, destroyed enemy tanks even before they reached the line of discovery.

General Tal fundamentally reviewed the entire system of combat training of tankers: the gunner of a tank gun became the central figure in the crews, and the entire crew had to work on the gunner and defeat his targets.

The battle was tested by new tactics during the Battle for Water in 1964 — 1966. Then Syria tried to divert the water of the Jordan River and thereby deprive Israel of its water resources. The Syrians began to build a branch canal, which Israel could not allow. It was decided to destroy the earthmoving equipment, tanks and artillery batteries of the enemy, covering the construction with fire of tank guns.

For this purpose, the Israeli command staffed tank units with trained crews. In accordance with the principle “Do as I do” taken from the commanders of the Israeli army, General Tal took the place of a gunner in one of the tanks. The commander of his tank was the battalion commander, and the commander of the tank brigade Colonel S. Lahat became the loader.

In the course of tank duels by sniper fire of Israeli tank crews, all targets were destroyed at a distance of 6 km, and then the tank fire was moved to targets that were at a distance of 11 km.

The Syrians suffered heavy losses and were forced to completely abandon their plans to divert water.

In the Six-Day War, Major General Tal commanded the Steel (84 armored) division. His tankers broke through the front in the Gaza area and, with heavy fighting attacking through the Sinai desert, three days later reached the shore of the Suez Canal.

The Doomsday War, which began on October 6 of 1973, was another challenge for the Israeli tank forces - the largest tank battle in world history unfolded in the world from Sinai to the Golan Heights, in which both sides fought to 7 thousands of tanks.

General Tal took command of the Southern Front. There, in the Sinai desert, up to four thousand tanks came together. In the Egyptian offensive, which began on October 14, more than a thousand tanks and two hundred armored personnel carriers with infantry were involved.

The advancing Egyptian troops were attacked by Israeli tank divisions, which included up to 700 tanks. In the ensuing largest tank battle since the Second World Tank Battle, General Tal's tankers inflicted a heavy defeat on the enemy - more than 250 Egyptian tanks were destroyed, Israeli losses amounted to 40 tanks.

The 143, 162 and 252 Israeli tank divisions launched a counteroffensive, during which the 3 and 2 Egyptian armies were surrounded and destroyed, the Israeli forces forced the Suez Canal. In the battles at Sinai, the son of General Tal, the commander of a tank company, Captain Yair Tal, was seriously wounded.

Merkava Project

Analyzing the results of the tank battles of the Sinai Campaign and the Six-Day War, Israel concluded that it was necessary to create their own tank.

There was simply no other choice: before the Six-Day War, the IDF tank forces were equipped with the American tanks M48 and M60 and the British Centurions, but the United States imposed a ban on arms supplies to Israel, and the United Kingdom was pro-Arab and could veto purchases tanks and spare parts for them.

The Arabs were in a different situation: the USSR supplied thousands of its modern tanks to the Arabs free of charge, while guaranteeing the replacement of all the bat equipment.

When creating his tank, General Tal was guided not only by technical improvements. He put forward a completely new conceptual ideas of the tank. The main emphasis, along with firepower and maneuverability, was placed on maximum protection of crew members (even if the tank was completely disabled, but the crew must survive) and on the maintainability of the tank (even after serious damage the tank should be quickly restored and go into battle again) .

The end of the tank era? Israel refused to create a fifth-generation tank and is working on a "tank of the future"

Tank Merkava in East Beirut, 1982 year. Photo: AP


The Israeli tank is fundamentally different in layout from all the combat vehicles built according to the classical scheme first used on the French Reno FT-17 tank of the 1916 model of the year: in front of the control compartment, in the middle - in combat, in the rear - engine-transmission compartment.

General Tal completely refused to follow the tank traditions and proposed a completely new scheme of the combat vehicle.

1. The Israeli tank engine compartment is located in front of the machine, being an additional protection of the crew against anti-tank weapons - in the frontal projection of the tank, according to statistics, most of the shells fall.

2. “A tank is the crew’s home in wartime.” Tankers can not get out of battle for several days, experiencing severe overload from fatigue and nervous exhaustion. Therefore, Tal proposed the concept of round-the-clock use of a tank, for which the fighting compartment must be large and accommodate two crews - one is resting, the second is at war, or it can be used to transport a tank landing.

In order for even a wounded tankman to leave the wrecked car, the landing hatch must be large and located at the rear of the tank.

A fire in a padded tank leads to the death of the crew, so the fire extinguishing system must be reusable, because during the battle the tank may have multiple hits.

3. Statistics showed that in the event of a detonation of ammunition and fuel, the crew perishes completely. Therefore, the combat compartment should be separated from the fuel tanks and ammunition with armor, and the ammunition assembly should be placed in a separate container and automatically shoot out from the tank if it is defeated by anti-tank weapons. Fuel tanks should be in the aft part of the tank, in the zone of the least likely damage from anti-tank weapons.

4. The tank must have a modular design - by replacing the modules, a wrecked tank can be quickly restored on the battlefield. In addition, the modernization of the tank can be easily implemented by replacing outdated modules with more advanced ones.

All these ideas were revolutionary for tank building and completely changed the traditional ideas about the role and place of the tank in modern combat.

The tank creation program was approved in August 1970, and a group of all 35 tank officers under the leadership of General Tahl began to develop a new tank.

This is how the Israeli tank industry was created, today more than 200 Israeli industrial companies that produce most of the tank's components - from armored steel and artillery to ultra-precise electronic and computer equipment - are participating in the project.

The implementation of the ideas of General Tal led to the creation of a large, heavy (tank weight 63 tons) machines with powerful armor protection in front of the tank and a spacious fighting compartment. The fighting compartment can be used to transport troops and property, as well as to ensure the evacuation of the wounded from the battlefield.

General Tal gave his tank the name "Merkava", which in Hebrew means "War chariot". This word came from the TANAKH; it is mentioned in the first chapter of the Book of Ezekiel as a symbol of movement, power and a stable foundation.

The first rumors that Israel was developing its tank began to spread in the 1972 year. In the spring of 1977, Israeli television showed a new tank, after which pictures taken from the TV screen went around the pages of many military publications.

Then there was information that the production of a pre-production batch of 40 machines began; in October 1978, the first tank "Merkava" was officially transferred to the troops. The command of one of the first battalions manned by the Merkavami was received by the son of General Tal.

The official presentation of the tank took place during the visit of Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin to the tank factory of the Israeli military-industrial corporation Israel Military Industries.


Tank Merkava on the border with the Gaza Strip. Photo: Emilio Morenatti / AP, archive


Four generations of Merkava tanks have already left the conveyor lines of Israeli tank factories. Starting from 2005, the entire IDF tank fleet consists of domestic Merkava combat vehicles.

Today, almost all armored vehicles manufactured in different countries of the world are built on the basis of concepts that were first tested in the Merkava tank. The design of the most modern Russian tank "Armat" also implemented the ideas of the Israeli "tank guru".

What will be the "tank of the future"

The Arab Spring, which began a few years ago, led to the collapse of countries hostile to Israel. Today, the regular armies of Syria and Egypt are almost destroyed and thousands of tanks that were armed with them are no longer able to attack Israeli borders. The enemy is no longer able to wage the classic "symmetrical" war, like the Second World War, in which huge regular armies of the opposing countries participate. A tank was created for the conduct of such wars.

Today, the likelihood of an “asymmetric war” has sharply increased - the war of the regular army against terrorist groups. The enemy here manifests itself not at all unequivocally, often he is hiding among the civilian population sympathizing with terrorists. However, it can be armed with modern weaponwhich he is able to inflict heavy losses on the regular army.

An example of such a defeat of a regular army by terrorists is the storming of Grozny by Russian troops on New Year's Eve 1995 and the death of the Maikop Brigade, which then lost 189 people killed, captured and missing, 22 T-72 tank from 26-te, 102 BMP from 120-ti . The tanks were defenseless against the anti-tank weapons of terrorists acting contrary to the laws of "symmetrical" wars.

The rapid development of the destruction of armored vehicles called into question the prospects for the combat use of tanks and combat vehicles. Solving the problem of survivability of the tank and its crew by further increasing the thickness of the armor was impossible because of the fatal increase in the mass of the armored vehicle. Powerful armor has ceased to be the key to the vitality of modern armored vehicles.

The answer to the victory of the projectile in the battle of "armor - projectile" was the creation of Active Protection Systems (APS), who made a real revolution in the struggle for the survivability of tanks and their crews.

APS destroys or alters the flight paths of the missiles, shells and grenades that fly up to the tank. To solve these problems, various technical solutions are used, conventionally divided into Soft-kill and Hard-kill methods.

Soft-kill armored vehicles protection methods are designed to create false targets or change the flight path of flying ammunition. As a result, the flying ammunition goes “into the milk” without reaching the attacked armored vehicle.

Hard-kill armored vehicles protection methods imply an active influence on flying ammunition, their interception and destruction. The work of APS in this case is reduced to the detection of an attacking anti-tank projectile and shooting at the appropriate time with protective ammunition.

Detection of ammunition flying to the tank is performed by the onboard radar installed on the tank. In combat, the radar provides the search and detection of targets flying up to the tank. Information about the parameters of the movement of the target is transmitted to the on-board computer. The computer issues a command to start the protective ammunition. The whole process from detecting a flying ammunition to its destruction lies in the time range from milliseconds to seconds. The IDF became the first army in the world in which all the Merkava Mk4 serial tanks are equipped with Trophy active protection systems.

However, the development of active protection of tanks unexpectedly led to a seemingly paradoxical conclusion - if anti-tank missiles and projectiles no longer threaten armored vehicles, then the armor itself turns to nothing.

It turns out that any mobile platform equipped with active protection systems and devoid of heavy armor will be much easier, cheaper and faster than a traditional tank.

In the Israeli military, a special group of tank officers and engineers was created to define the principles for building a "tank of the future." Their task was to formulate conceptual ideas of a combat armored vehicle capable of providing mobile and powerful fire support on the battlefield.

The group faced the following questions:

1. Will the future tank be lighter than the current 70-tonne Merkava? After all, existing means of active protection of armored vehicles that destroy anti-tank missiles on approach allow you to safely abandon the thick multi-layered armor, which reduces the speed of the tank, as well as increases fuel costs and production costs.

2. What crew is needed to service the tank of the future. The development of computer systems and telecommunications allows us today to abandon a number of crew members and even make it completely “unmanned”.

3. In the tank of the future will use the traditional turret gun, or is it another system. “When we think about what the tank of the future should be, we need a broad view of all existing technologies,” said General Yigal Slovik, until recently commanding the IDF armored forces. - For example, electromagnetic and laser guns, which are now too large in size, and cannot be used. However, in the near future, such weapons will become a reality. ”

4. What a tank engine is needed. For example, a hybrid engine can be used as a power plant in a tank, which charges the batteries by burning the fuel and then uses them to keep the vehicle moving for a long time, and whether the “future tank” will be wheeled or remain tracked.

Israeli experts based on these polls came to this conclusion:

The tank of the future will be radically different from traditional tanks. It is doubtful even that it can be called a tank at all - it will be so different from the usual armored vehicles.
Author:
Originator:
http://rusplt.ru/
137 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Argon
    Argon 14 December 2013 08: 38
    +9
    This article should be called - "A lesson for the poor, or work on mistakes."
    1. Alekseev
      Alekseev 14 December 2013 12: 26
      63
      Quote: Argon
      This article should be called - "A lesson for the poor, or work on mistakes."

      This article contains a number of "nonsense" (despite interesting biographical facts from the life of Gen. Thal and a listing of the design features of the Merkava tank), which indicates that it was written, or rather, configured, by a journalist far from tanks and armored forces.
      1. It is asserted that "the introduction of sniper fire of turret guns of tanks into the tank forces at long and ultra-long distances - up to 5-6 kilometers and even 10-11 kilometers." on tanks the adversary. lol The rules of firing from tanks (and not Battle manuals, there is a little about something else) have never been in the crayfish of the writer.
      2. An incompetent example is given: "An example of such a defeat of the regular army by terrorists is the storming of Grozny by Russian troops on New Year's in 1995 and the death of the Maikop brigade, which then lost 189 people killed, captured and missing, 22 T-72 tanks out of 26 tee, 102 infantry fighting vehicles out of 120. The tanks turned out to be defenseless against the anti-tank weapons of terrorists, acting contrary to the laws of "symmetric" wars. "
      a.) there was no brigade, there was a combined detachment at its base
      b.) what a regular army ... Poorly trained conscripts, tanks without explosive plates in DZ boxes ... Far from being an assault combat engineer brigade from the time of the WWII.
      c.) what is the assault on FIG? The assault detachments were not created, the troops entered Grozny in marching order. Military demonstration of force, and more! Indeed, "asymmetric" war!
      d.) Therefore, the tanks and "were defenseless." A little later (alas, we have so often yes ) they showed the fighters how much they are protected and dangerous.
      3.) Reasoning about heavy multilayer armor and KAZ. Yes, Merkava is too heavy. But how will KAZ hit BOPS (BPS)? And, that, KAZ is not subject, in turn, to any suppression, both by means of electronic warfare and by fragments (shrapnel) of large-caliber shells.
      4.) A hybrid engine on the tank ... Weight (and volume) of the battery? Acceptable so far beyond technology.
      The comrade obviously does not imagine that on a tank the engine almost always works at a mode close to maximum power. When should he charge the batteries? This is not something that you should run along the highway, but you need to overtake, batteries or ICEs, at the command of the controller, they will help. And the links to Israeli experts are not correct here, they never really bring serious questions to the general discussion.
      The article spells out vague prospects for a very distant future. Then, probably, not only tanks, but also people will not look like themselves. laughing
      In general, the article, if not for "Murzilka", then only for "Young Technician".
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 07
        22
        This is Shulman. He has a lot of patriotism, and little real knowledge. His articles are very much reminiscent of Soviet propaganda. I really don't like it.
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 13: 40
          17
          Well yes. Plain boogamoraka. Earning on a popular topic. How did he manage to appoint Tal as the commander of the Southern Front when, instead of the displaced Gorodish, he was headed by the Bar-Lion. Too lazy to discuss.
        2. Kars
          Kars 14 December 2013 20: 31
          12
          Quote: Pimply
          This is Shulman. He has a lot of patriotism,

          And this is by chance not the real name of the Professor?
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 15 December 2013 00: 28
            0
            Quote: Kars
            And this is by chance not the real name of the Professor?

            Look through the comments of the person under the nickname "A Nas Rat", you partially learn what the professor expresses on the topic.
      2. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 14 December 2013 13: 20
        +7
        Quote: Alekseev
        This article contains a number of "nonsense" (despite interesting biographical facts from the life of Gen. Thal and a listing of the design features of the Merkava tank), which indicates that it was written, or rather, configured, by a journalist far from tanks and armored forces.


        Greetings, Lesh!
        hi

        With a difference in a minute, they commented on the article almost the same ...
        laughing
    2. vjhbc
      vjhbc 15 December 2013 02: 40
      +4
      I support wondering where the author took this "The design of the most modern Russian tank" Armata "also implements the ideas of the Israeli" tank guru "."
  2. uhjpysq1
    uhjpysq1 14 December 2013 08: 38
    0
    really! a tank is just an expensive protected cannon carrier with cheap shells. maybe it’s worth changing the concept. expensive shell, cheap carrier. and generally a nurs is no more expensive than an OF shell.
  3. Backfire
    Backfire 14 December 2013 08: 43
    41
    Good article. Thanks to the author.
    You must definitely try to "look" into the future, although ... sometimes it's better not to rush:
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 07
      +9
      A fig article with a bunch of bugs.
      1. old rocket man
        old rocket man 14 December 2013 18: 55
        +4
        Quote: Pimply
        A fig article with a bunch of bugs.

        You know ?, I agree with you and Aaron completely, the mess is full, even disinformation got into the biography, in general, an article from the area "make the clever man pray to God" (even sayings are moderated).
        Full minus. drinks
  4. Running
    Running 14 December 2013 08: 43
    18
    In vain you are so about the storming of Grozny. In urban combat, it is always difficult to fight, especially tanks (back then there was only dynamic defense). And about active armor, the question here is complicated. How the system will behave if it is shot, for example, from an RPG-30 with leading and duplicate shells. And what will happen to the infantry at this moment? In general, so far everything is very controversial with the new Israeli tank and looks more like an infantry fighting vehicle than a tank.
    1. Aristocrat
      Aristocrat 14 December 2013 08: 53
      12
      Quote: Spring
      then there was only dynamic protection

      She was not there at all. More precisely, the boxes for her were empty ...
    2. ed65b
      ed65b 14 December 2013 09: 00
      16
      Quote: Spring
      In vain you are so about the storming of Grozny. In urban combat, it is always difficult to fight, especially tanks (back then there was only dynamic defense). And about active armor, the question here is complicated. How the system will behave if it is shot at, for example, from an RPG-30 with leading and duplicate shells. And what will happen to the infantry at this moment? In general, so far everything is very controversial with the new tank of Israel and looks like more on BMP than on the tank.

      I completely agree about Grozny. our guys there faced not a horde of bearded men with grenade launchers, but an intelligent and competent enemy operating in well-prepared positions and with a numerical superiority. Plus, as always, a complete lack of interaction between parts of the Russian Federation, carelessness and sometimes even outright betrayal on the part of some "servicemen".
    3. varov14
      varov14 14 December 2013 09: 16
      10
      Yes, no ordinary Trojans commanded the well-learned methods of war of their fathers, but forgot about the war of their grandfathers, i.e. civilian, where they shot in the back.
    4. Mairos
      Mairos 15 December 2013 12: 38
      0
      Multilayer armor, dynamic protection and KAZ (active defense complex) are different concepts. What do you mean by active armor? And the tanks in the city are working behind the infantry, so that the infantry is not threatened with undermining the DZ boxes.
  5. faraon
    faraon 14 December 2013 09: 05
    0
    a good and modern approach to the topic of the tank of the future, which will have a colossal economic effect, for the given period of time with its advanced technologies it’s really time to think about it and reconsider the concept of the tank in modern combat. As I stated above (it’s a very hard to pronounce name) that the tank is a carrier guns, and this is indeed true, and in all respects is very expensive. I believe that General Tal’s decision is timely, takes into account all the realities of the vision of modern warfare.
    1. sevtrash
      sevtrash 14 December 2013 11: 55
      +3
      Quote: faraon
      As stated above his opinion (very difficult to pronounce the name)

      He is just formidable

      Quote: faraon
      I believe that General Tal’s decision is timely, taking into account all the realities of the vision of modern warfare.

      Tal has already died, and a special group of 5 people is nameless, the above conclusion does not contain information. Introducing drones at all levels is a worldwide trend, there is nothing new in this. Another thing is that replacing a tank crew will be more difficult than a flight crew - target recognition is much more difficult.
    2. Rex
      Rex 15 December 2013 02: 55
      +4
      The amateurish article.
      The author, not understanding even a quarter of all the problems, "gave out on the mountain" a hodgepodge of facts and theoretical ideas of others.
      This has already happened - tanks in their present form have been burying for half a century.
      Why a gun? There are rockets! Why caterpillars? Put on an air cushion!
      Well now - why the crew? why armor?

      You can offer new ideas for future articles - on which operating system will the tanks of the future work; how many megapixels will be in their sights; will they use the cards of Hugoa, etc.
      Everything in the spirit of "advanced technologies" and "the realities of modern warfare"
    3. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 15 December 2013 19: 19
      +1
      Quote: faraon
      A tank is a cannon carrier

      just the point of view of the tank
      A.M. Lyulka also seemed to say that you can fly on a stick, if there was an engine!
  6. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 14 December 2013 09: 15
    44
    In general, one should learn from the Israelis (discarding hostility). They have vast experience, if not to say that for more than Russia ... Israel has been fighting without stopping for more than half a century ...
    It is worth adopting some of their approaches. For example, to finally learn to appreciate the life of a soldier more than his flask ... To finally teach a soldier to start (shame! There are so many misses and driving mistakes on the tank biathlon ... and these are the best crews specially selected for "show", and the worst then what ... ). Let the pimply bespectacled 9th graders throw stones at me, but I know not by hearsay how things are with the equipment, training, etc. in our army ... Being a patriot does not mean fanatically smile at the reforms in the army and shout that "the armor is strong and our tanks fast. " To be a patriot is to understand the harsh reality and mature at the root. Otherwise, the 41st is waiting for us again ... On New Year's Eve and the fate of the Maykop brigade + the 81st regiment (my colleagues from the 27th Guards). A second campaign awaits when the 506th regiment of my own 27th MRD in which only 200s had more than 400 tons and the composition was completely changed at least three times ... Urrya-patriotism against the background of the betrayal of the military and political elite is bearing fruit ... it would seem that something and then the machines should be enough. But no! In the second campaign, the boys waited until someone was wounded or killed before they got his machine gun ... 41-42 years old does not remind? Fiction? No brothers! Harsh reality!
    The T-72 is an excellent tank, and Syria is proof of that. But ... But since the beginning of its development it has been already about half a century .... Since then, the same vaunted Merkava has been reincarnated more than once. And the T-72 only has been modified many times, and continues to be modified ... though these new improvements are more like Potemkin villages and the taking away of finances by personal bins ...
    1. go
      go 14 December 2013 20: 14
      +5
      Quote: Aristocrat
      In general, one should learn from the Israelis (discarding hostility). They have vast experience, if not to say that for more than Russia ... Israel has been fighting without stopping for more than half a century ...
      It is worth adopting some of their approaches. For example, to finally learn to appreciate the life of a soldier more than his flask ... To finally teach a soldier to start (shame! There are so many misses and driving mistakes on the tank biathlon ... and these are the best crews specially selected for "show", and the worst then what ... ). Let the pimply bespectacled 9th graders throw stones at me, but I know not by hearsay how things are with the equipment, training, etc. in our army ... Being a patriot does not mean fanatically smile at the reforms in the army and shout that "the armor is strong and our tanks fast. " To be a patriot is to understand the harsh reality and mature at the root. Otherwise, the 41st is waiting for us again ... On New Year's Eve and the fate of the Maykop brigade + the 81st regiment (my colleagues from the 27th Guards). A second campaign awaits when the 506th regiment of my own 27th MRD in which only 200s had more than 400 tons and the composition was completely changed at least three times ... Urrya-patriotism against the background of the betrayal of the military and political elite is bearing fruit ... it would seem that something and then the machines should be enough. But no! In the second campaign, the boys waited until someone was wounded or killed before they got his machine gun ... 41-42 years old does not remind? Fiction? No brothers! Harsh reality!
      The T-72 is an excellent tank, and Syria is proof of that. But ... But since the beginning of its development it has been already about half a century .... Since then, the same vaunted Merkava has been reincarnated more than once. And the T-72 only has been modified many times, and continues to be modified ... though these new improvements are more like Potemkin villages and the taking away of finances by personal bins ...


      +10000000000000, we still need a system like idiots, distribution number; No.% ev, nonprofessionals and traitors should not be allowed to go to leadership positions.
  7. makarov
    makarov 14 December 2013 09: 15
    +1
    the author makes hasty and hasty conclusions: - if armored vehicles are no longer threatened by anti-tank missiles and shells, then the armor itself turns out to be useless.

    today, existing active protection means can hardly resist a shock core whose speed is less than the speed of the explosive itself (25-30 thousand meters per second), for example 10-15 thousand meters per second.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 December 2013 09: 33
      +5
      Quote: makarov
      against the shock core

      TM-83 is still relevant.
      During the explosion of the TM-83 mine, an impact core is formed that retains its penetrative ability at a distance of up to 30-40 meters from the site of the explosion.
      When testing the T-72 tank for the resistance of the armor to the TM-83 mine, it was found that the shock core pierced the side screen, side, opposite side, opposite side screen. The tank was located at a distance of 15 meters from the mine. The hole had a diameter of 3-3.5 cm.
      1. Rex
        Rex 15 December 2013 03: 05
        +1
        You and the author of the previous comment interfere with different systems.
        You are talking about breaking through the "standard" armor protection - without taking into account the "dynamic".
        The previous commentator apparently writes about "dynamic", not about AZ.
        "Active defense" involves the destruction or deflection of an approaching projectile before it hits the target, and, accordingly, before the appearance of a "shock nucleus".

        I took these terms in quotation marks, as they also have options for names and performances
    2. Prohor
      Prohor 14 December 2013 09: 40
      +6
      Dear, drink cold water! The detonation velocity of blasting explosives is slightly more than 10 km / s (hexanitrobenzene and some secret ones), and even then they are not used. The "fastest" industrial ones are RDX and HMX, 8,6 and 9,1 km / s, respectively. The impact core velocity is much lower, 2-3 km / s.
      1. makarov
        makarov 14 December 2013 10: 08
        +1
        Dear!
        Unlike you, before I say something, if necessary, I look at the table data of the explosives that are used in the explosion to create an attack nucleus. I’m sorry that you don’t have such an opportunity, sorry below, but I can’t help with knowledge .. for your development, the parameters and properties of the metal shell for creating the core have been changed for a long time ... update knowledge .. if this is naturally possible
        1. Prohor
          Prohor 14 December 2013 18: 51
          +8
          Truth? I’m actually an explosive technology engineer. Maybe behind the times? Name at least one explosive with a detonation speed of more than 10 km / s! I will take the liberty of asserting that there are none and, in principle, cannot be!
    3. Pimply
      Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 08
      +1
      The author likes to wave flags and throw caps into the air, without getting to the bottom of the matter.
      1. Thunderbolt
        Thunderbolt 14 December 2013 19: 11
        +3
        Quote: Prokhor
        I’m actually an explosive technology engineer.
        Now I have deciphered your avatar) Samara Polytechnic, not?
  8. Igor39
    Igor39 14 December 2013 09: 26
    +6
    The tank served, the tank serves, the tank will serve!
  9. Lyapis
    Lyapis 14 December 2013 09: 42
    0
    Question to the experts.
    Israel refused to create fifth generation tank.

    The expression about the fifth generation is just a beautiful verbal turn, or are the tanks really divided by the generation? And if so, by what signs is this separation happening?
  10. ed65b
    ed65b 14 December 2013 09: 44
    +3
    Quote: Aristocrat
    Merkava has reincarnated more than once. And the T-72 was only modified many times,

    Why can't a Jew reincarnate him with US money? And when did we need to do this at EBNe? One country prosrali, almost lost Russia.
    1. Professor
      Professor 14 December 2013 10: 32
      +2
      Quote: ed65b
      Why can't a Jew reincarnate him with US money?

      American aid goes to purchase American equipment. This does not apply to Merkava. So for example, armored personnel carriers based on Merkava-Namer are going to be manufactured in the USA for the needs of Tsakhal.
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 11: 31
        +2
        Quote: Professor

        American aid goes to purchase American equipment. This does not apply to Merkava. So for example, armored personnel carriers based on Merkava-Namer are going to be manufactured in the USA for the needs of Tsakhal.

        No longer going. The order is reduced and will be implemented in Israel.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 09
          0
          Proof, pliz. It is interesting to read the info.
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 13: 44
            +1
            Quote: Pimply
            Proof, pliz. It is interesting to read the info.


            http://www.israeldefense.com/?CategoryID=474&ArticleID=2271
            In the framework of the budgetary cuts, the IDF is expected to release an announcement according to which the production of the Merkava armored personnel carrier (Namer) will be halted. The decision will be accompanied by a payment of at least $ 15 million in compensation to the US company General Dynamics, which developed a production line for the APC in the US, while committing to produce a minimal amount which the IDF will not meet.
            The serial production of the APC began nearly two years ago in the General Dynamics' plants in the city of Lima, Ohio. A year ago, the Israeli Ministry of Defense decided to halt orders in the framework of the Merkava tank and Namer APC project. The Ministry of Defense has replied to IsraelDefense that no decision has been made to halt the production of the APC
            .
          2. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 14 December 2013 14: 50
            +1
            Quote: Pimply
            Proof, pliz. It is interesting to read the info.


            Namer APC Project in the US to be Canceled - Israel Defense

            By the way, in the states it was planned to produce buildings, not the whole machine.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. cayman gene
              cayman gene 14 December 2013 19: 07
              +2
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Quote: Pimply
              Proof, pliz. It is interesting to read the info.


              Namer APC Project in the US to be Canceled - Israel Defense

              By the way, in the states it was planned to produce buildings, not the whole machine.

              and why not make cases in the vast expanses of your vast country?
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 14 December 2013 19: 19
                +5
                There is a military assistance agreement with the States. Those are ready to pay for part of the military output - but only produced on its territory. Would you refuse to save three lyamas?
      2. 0255
        0255 14 December 2013 12: 06
        +1
        Quote: Professor
        So for example, armored personnel carriers based on Merkava-Namer are going to be manufactured in the USA for the needs of Tsakhal.

        and what, Israel has no opportunity to produce armored personnel carriers at home?
        1. Professor
          Professor 14 December 2013 12: 46
          +4
          Quote: 0255
          and what, Israel has no opportunity to produce armored personnel carriers at home?

          There are opportunities - as always, there is not enough money.

          Quote: Fat Man
          in any case, save a lot of money right?

          Here's how to look. The Americans gave the F-16 and Israel closed the project of its fighter Lavi, having lost more money than acquired ...
          1. 0255
            0255 14 December 2013 13: 41
            +1
            The Americans gave the F-16 and Israel closed the project of its fighter Lavi, having lost more money than acquired ...

            Isn't it the other way around? As far as I know, the Americans stopped funding Lavi and offered Israel more F-16s instead. Because Israel had no money for the Lavi, so they had to agree to the F-16. The Americans were clearly not interested in Lavi.
            Is it right that the United States gave the F-16 for free? Only the USSR supplied the Arabs with free equipment.
            As a result, the Lavi developments were useful only for the Israeli modernization of the ancient MiG-21 and F-4 Phantom
            1. Professor
              Professor 14 December 2013 13: 49
              +3
              Quote: 0255
              but isn't it the other way around?

              No, not the other way around. Free F-16 closed the project Lavi.

              Quote: 0255
              Is it right that the United States gave the F-16 for free?

              Allocated money for military assistance to Israel with the condition that they be used exclusively for purchases in America.

              Quote: 0255
              As a result, the Lavi developments were useful only for the Israeli modernization of the ancient MiG-21 and F-4 Phantom

              As a result, Lavi flies in China.
          2. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 14 December 2013 16: 10
            +2
            Quote: Professor
            ... Israel closed the project of its fighter Lavi having lost more money than acquired ...


            But this project cannot be called a waste of time and money either - it gave a very powerful impetus to the development of the military-industrial complex in Israel. And for the money - though indirectly, he paid for himself long ago. So in the "loss" I would not rush to write it down.
            1. Professor
              Professor 14 December 2013 16: 15
              +2
              Quote: And Us Rat
              And for the money - though indirectly, he paid for himself long ago. So in the "loss" I would not rush to write it down.

              Far not paid back. They spent a lot of time and money, and then thousands of engineers fired. With one of which I had to work subsequently. In general, the export potential was laid in the aircraft, for example, the possibility of installing not an American engine, but as a result ...
              1. And Us Rat
                And Us Rat 14 December 2013 16: 30
                +3
                Quote: Professor
                and then thousands of engineers fired.


                Due to which the formation and maturation of such companies as Elbit, Raphael, Elta, Tadiran, IMI took place - which export systems (many of which are rooted in the design of Lavi) for billions a year. The fact that the plane did not go into production is a separate conversation, but it cannot be said that "a truncated pipe has a pipe". wink
                1. Professor
                  Professor 14 December 2013 16: 40
                  +1
                  Quote: And Us Rat
                  Due to which the formation and maturation of such companies as Elbit, Rafael, Elta, Tadiran, IMI - which export systems (the roots of many of which are in the design of Lavi), to billions per year, took place.

                  Why are you writing nonsense? The firms you listed flourished before Lavi. Some developments were able to sell (for example, China), but these are drops in the sea from lost opportunities.

                  Quote: And Us Rat
                  The fact that the plane did not go into production is a separate conversation, but it cannot be said that "a truncated pipe has a pipe".

                  The mustache is gone, chief ...
                  1. And Us Rat
                    And Us Rat 14 December 2013 16: 54
                    +3
                    Quote: Professor

                    Why are you writing nonsense?

                    It's not me, it's them "write this nonsense"

                    - A corporate reorganization and reduction followed the end of the Lavi program. The Company embarked on a new and expanded scope of activities based on IAI's responsibility and central role in the economy and security of Israel. Advanced radar systems, EW systems, precision weapon systems, navigational and electro-optic systems, missiles, and unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) were developed.


                    Why so much arrogance to the interlocutors? Are you often offended?
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 14 December 2013 17: 01
                      +3
                      Quote: And Us Rat
                      Why so much arrogance to the interlocutors? Are you often offended?

                      In no case did not want to offend you. So they write nonsense. You can not compare individual subsystems and the whole plane. Lost jobs you hope to challenge will not?
              2. 0255
                0255 15 December 2013 11: 25
                +2
                Quote: Professor
                In general, the export potential was laid in the aircraft, for example, the possibility of installing not an American engine, but as a result ...

                so this is a good reason to give Israel an F-16 and ruin Lavi. After all, the F-16 was widely exported
                1. Professor
                  Professor 15 December 2013 11: 26
                  +1
                  Quote: 0255
                  so this is a good reason to give Israel an F-16 and ruin Lavi. After all, the F-16 was widely exported

                  no one needs competitors
                  request
            2. vinni
              vinni 14 December 2013 18: 43
              +3
              It's still a pity that the Lavi project was canceled. The plane was in many ways superior to the F-16 and who knows, perhaps it was he who could become the most massive light fighter of our time ... But, not destiny - overseas friends intervened, as they say "nothing personal, just business"
      3. The fat man
        The fat man 14 December 2013 12: 11
        +1
        Professor
        in any case, save a lot of money right?
    2. just exp
      just exp 14 December 2013 11: 04
      +1
      Duc Merkava of new versions is the same modernization of the 1 Merkava as the T-72.
      1. Professor
        Professor 14 December 2013 12: 47
        -2
        Quote: just EXPL
        Duc Merkava of new versions is the same modernization of the 1 Merkava as the T-72.

        Yeah, and the T-72 is a deep modernization of the T-34 ... wassat
        1. just exp
          just exp 14 December 2013 17: 43
          +4
          no, the T-90 is the same modernization of the T-72 as the Merkava MK4 modernization of the Merkava MK1.
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 10
        +3
        I would recommend that you familiarize yourself with the project. The name merkava and tsiferka does not yet say that this is only modernization.
        1. just exp
          just exp 14 December 2013 17: 44
          +5
          Well, if you look at the T-90СМ, where only the part of the hull remains from the T-72, it can also be said that the T-90 is a completely new tank and has nothing to do with the T-72.
          1. atalef
            atalef 14 December 2013 20: 30
            +1
            Quote: just explo
            Well, if you look at the T-90СМ, where only the part of the hull remains from the T-72, it can also be said that the T-90 is a completely new tank and has nothing to do with the T-72.

            Well, in general, then we can say that any brand of car. no matter how advanced it is - just a modernization of the first Ford. (or some other first car) Or just carts laughing
            1. just exp
              just exp 14 December 2013 23: 00
              +3
              so T-90SM modernization of the T-72 or a new tank?
              it’s just that you have something strange logic, if the base of the old tank is taken from us, it’s the modernization of the old tank, and you have taken the same path, but for you your product is already considered a new product, double standards or a problem with logic?
      3. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 14 December 2013 16: 13
        +2
        Quote: just EXPL
        Duc Merkava of new versions is the same modernization of the 1 Merkava as the T-72.


        From Mk1 to Mk3 - with a stretch it is true, but Mk4 is a completely new machine, it is even visually distinguishable without any difficulties.

        MK-3 D



        Mk-4

        1. Professor
          Professor 14 December 2013 16: 17
          +1
          Quote: And Us Rat
          From Mk1 to Mk3 - with a stretch it is true, but Mk4 is a completely new machine, it is even visually distinguishable without any difficulties.

          Yah? You at least compare the first and three drives.
          1. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 14 December 2013 16: 59
            +1
            I've told - TENSIONED
            Your carelessness is not my fault. tongue
            1. 11111mail.ru
              11111mail.ru 15 December 2013 19: 39
              0
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Your carelessness is not my fault.

              Your carelessness is not my fault. It's your problems!
        2. bask
          bask 14 December 2013 16: 23
          +3
          Quote: And Us Rat
          From Mk1 to Mk3 - with a stretch it is true, but Mk4 is a completely new machine, it is even visually distinguishable without any difficulties.

          What is it new?
          Only electronic stuffing, KAZ, a new composition of abuse.
          Running, MTO remained archaic spring.
          The main attention during modernization in MK4 is given to protection against cumulative anti-tank systems, RPGs, and mine protection.
          Israel refused to create a fifth generation tank and is working on a "tank of the future"

          In Tsakhal, they simply don’t plan oncoming tank battles.
          And Mk 4 will be used exclusively asto the STORM TANK,in urban areas.
          1. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 14 December 2013 17: 13
            -1
            Quote: bask
            What is it new?
            Only electronic stuffing, KAZ, a new composition of abuse.


            Is this not enough?
            New transmission - Renk RK 325
            New engine - GD12 883 four-stroke water-cooled diesel engine
            In addition, the remote spring and hydropneumatic suspension is used on many tanks: Centurion, Chieftain, Challenger, Leclerc, Pz61 / 68 etc. It can be seen there are some reasons.
            1. just exp
              just exp 14 December 2013 17: 46
              +4
              this is called modernization.
            2. atalef
              atalef 14 December 2013 20: 36
              -3
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Is this not enough?

              Well, you can still add. that almost all controls are switched from a hydraulic system (which is combustible) to an electric one. I think it's clear what the difference is. And so belonging to the tanks remained the same. Is it really not clear what is the reason for such resistance from many comrades.
              because starting with t-72, nothing fundamentally new was created in RA (as far as I know) - all models were its modernization. And then someone has a new tank. moreover, at the same time, the 4 models were replaced - well, of course it cannot be.
              because the only thing that can be is only worse than in RA or much worse hi .
              1. just exp
                just exp 14 December 2013 23: 02
                +4
                I understand that Leo2A6 or A7 are completely new tanks that are the same new tanks as the MK4?
              2. Michael_59
                Michael_59 15 December 2013 16: 06
                0
                You're right, it's ridiculous to deny the obvious. "Plus" in this connection.
                For a couple of decades, new developments in the tank industry are simply not visible. The modernization of the remarkable Soviet vehicles carried out in the Russian army during the Grache-Serdyukov period raises more questions than gives answers. Why be surprised, the largest fragment of the once great country has been successfully trampled into the mud for 20 years.
                And even though many years later, it becomes clear to whom it was beneficial - this does not affect the tank building industry in principle for the country's defense capability, as we want.
          2. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 17: 52
            +1
            Quote: bask

            In Tsakhal, they simply don’t plan oncoming tank battles.
            And Mk 4 will be used exclusively asto the STORM TANK,in urban areas.

            The first is relatively true because besides Egypt, our neighbors did not have significant tank troops. And Egypt, in addition to breaking the peace treaty with Israel, must for a tank attack, to focus its troops in the Sinai, i.e. no unexpected attack is expected, and oncoming tank battles is the worst use of tanks and is used primarily to repel an unexpected attack.
            I do not agree with the second. Both Mk3 and Mk4 are the main strike forces of the SV AOI and will be applied depending on the need.
            1. And Us Rat
              And Us Rat 14 December 2013 17: 59
              0
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              The first is relatively true because besides Egypt, our neighbors did not have significant tank troops.


              Amendment - There are still Saudis, and Jordan will not stop them if it is impatient.
              315 M1A2S as of 2012 year.
              Germany agreed to supply Saudi Arabia 600 — 800 Leopard tanks 2A7 as of 2012.
            2. bask
              bask 14 December 2013 20: 09
              +2
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              I do not agree with the second. Both Mk3 and Mk4 are the main strike forces of the SV AOI and will be applied depending on the need.

              In the last 20 years. Carrots were used exclusively as assault tanks. In conjunction with BTR-T, combat engineer units.

              Quote: And Us Rat
              spring and hydropneumatic suspension are used on many tanks: Centurion, Chieftain, Challenger, Leclerc, Pz61 / 68 etc.

              Spring-balanced suspension only at Mk 1.2.3.4. And there is only one reason, maintainability and loose soil (sand).
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Germany agreed to supply 600-800 Leopard 2A7 tanks to Saudi Arabia as of 2012

              All these tanks will be destroyed by aircraft, UAVs, anti-tank systems (SPIK).
              Without entering into direct contact with the enemy (like the Americans in Iraq).
              1. And Us Rat
                And Us Rat 14 December 2013 20: 36
                0
                Quote: bask
                But there is only one reason, maintainability and loose soil (sand).

                All these tanks will be destroyed by aircraft, UAVs, anti-tank systems (SPIK).


                I agree, but the reason is often multifaceted.
                1. 11111mail.ru
                  11111mail.ru 15 December 2013 19: 47
                  0
                  Quote: And Us Rat
                  I agree, but the reason is often multifaceted.

                  Six arms of seven "uy? Nothing personal, everything is in the spirit of the works of the Strugatsky brothers: A.N.Strugatsky and B.N.Strugatsky!
          3. Pimply
            Pimply 15 December 2013 15: 12
            -2
            Quote: bask
            Running, MTO remained archaic spring.

            She remained spring-loaded for a very specific reason - intentionally.
            In 1973, they were once again convinced that trosions have small advantages in sand and roads, but are completely inferior to springs in rocky soils. The suspension has become vertical independent, but assembled in blocks in pairs. The three have already abandoned the blocks.

            "Israeli experts especially noted its resistance to mine detonation, so the use of a torsion bar suspension on the Merkava was not foreseen from the outset. The rejection of the torsion bar suspension allowed the hull bottom to be smooth, V-shaped, which, along with the spaced armor of the bottom, increases the hull protection during mine detonation. The independent spring-balanced suspension of the Merkava tank was developed with the involvement of foreign specialists.Each side is equipped with six rubberized road wheels with a diameter of 790 mm and five supporting rollers: two of them support the upper branch of the caterpillar for the part remote from the hull, and three - Suspension elements are located on the outer side of the hull. Hydraulic shock absorbers are mounted on two front and two rear suspension units. The dynamic travel of the road wheels is 210 mm. Each suspension unit is attached to the hull on four bolts and can be quickly replaced in case of failure due to detonation on a mine .... "

            M. Nikolsky (Equipment and armament, No 1, 2000)
          4. Evgenij.
            Evgenij. 16 December 2013 04: 10
            0
            They think only with the Papuans to fight, and just what will fall on their backs and raise their paws?
        3. just exp
          just exp 14 December 2013 17: 46
          +9
          and this tank visually resembles a T-72?
  11. Professor
    Professor 14 December 2013 10: 30
    0
    There are a couple of inaccuracies in the article, but in general "+". In addition, I advise you to read about the fate of Israeli tanks:
    Zahal reorganizes his armored forces

    The commander of the armored forces of Israel no longer relies only on tanks
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 11
      +4
      The article has many inaccuracies. Shulman, as always in his repertoire, scribbles propaganda in the spirit of Soviet newspapers, only on Jewish subjects.
      1. 11111mail.ru
        11111mail.ru 15 December 2013 19: 55
        0
        Quote: Pimply
        scribbling propaganda in the spirit of Soviet newspapers, only on Jewish subjects.

        Here, here - where are we, Siry, they are quick-moving, they will manage to get homespun without these gundavi guys. Without Marx-Engels and the grandfather of the sweetest Lenin - to us, life is not life!
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 15 December 2013 20: 42
          -1
          Quote: 11111mail.ru
          Here, here - where are we, Siry, they are quick-moving, they will manage to get homespun without these gundavi guys. Without Marx-Engels and the grandfather of the sweetest Lenin - to us, life is not life!


          Why this stream of consciousness, dear man? Gunny guys - are you talking about your level of cultural conversation?
          1. 11111mail.ru
            11111mail.ru 17 December 2013 19: 09
            0
            Quote: Pimply
            Why this stream of consciousness, dear man? Gunny guys - are you talking about your level of cultural conversation?

            About you and your opponent Shulman. Approximately, like Karl Marx: to write a lot, to mess up even more, but everything with a smart look, you look, and authority will appear in certain circles. If you still have a creative fuse, study V.I.L. "Materialism and empirio-criticism", you see, you will rest your soul.
    2. bask
      bask 14 December 2013 20: 18
      +2
      Quote: Professor
      The commander of the armored forces of Israel no longer relies only on tanks

      Not one stripping in Gaza cost pan .. prof. without MBT ,, Merkava ,,.
      It is clear that firing at the BTLA, militants without coming into direct fire contact with them is more preferable.
      But UAVs, so far, cannot solve all combat missions.
  12. From Germany
    From Germany 14 December 2013 11: 01
    19
    In Lebanon, the Jews lost 50 out of 400 tanks in a couple of weeks, after which they got out of there, only their heels sparkled (even the Soviet export junk in Syria holds RPG strikes, the sea on YouTube is vidak), so the example of Grozny is past the box office, if this should prove that the Merkava "is recognized as one of the best, if not the best main battle tank in the world." The armor is no better, but the tank is much heavier than the Soviet / Russian tanks (which is a huge disadvantage for both Jewish and American tanks, this is a big problem). And the crew is one more person, which in the case of a through defeat increases the loss of personnel. A fairy tale with elements of history, of course, is interesting, but these "chutzpas" are exits with "the best tank" and the fact that they have Russians, at the "tank gurus" (and this is not even funny, just in the face for such delirium to introduce hunting ), borrowed ideas, makes me put a minus article, it's a pity that there is only one. For sim I take my leave.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 11: 34
      -13 qualifying.
      Quote: From Germany
      . I am taking my leave for the sim.

      it is right. Better to take your leave than to write absurdities based on OBS, instead of studying the topic.
      1. Professor
        Professor 14 December 2013 12: 48
        0
        Quote: From Germany
        In Lebanon, Jews lost 50 tanks from 400 in a couple of weeks

        Not 50, but 500 !!! wink
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 13: 45
          0
          Quote: Professor
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          In Lebanon, Jews lost 50 tanks from 400 in a couple of weeks

          Not 50, but 500 !!! wink

          I didn’t write it! request
          1. Professor
            Professor 14 December 2013 13: 52
            0
            Quote: Aron Zaavi
            I didn’t write it!

            I sealed myself in the snow looking repeat
            1. Evgenij.
              Evgenij. 16 December 2013 19: 12
              0
              We export cold, inexpensively.
              Siberians.
        2. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 14 December 2013 16: 24
          0
          Quote: Professor
          Quote: From Germany
          In Lebanon, Jews lost 50 tanks from 400 in a couple of weeks

          Not 50, but 500 !!! wink


          Which 500 ??? belay 5000!!!! wassat
          1. Professor
            Professor 14 December 2013 16: 25
            +2
            Quote: And Us Rat
            Which 500 ??? 5000 !!!!

            Duc then including airplanes.
            1. atalef
              atalef 14 December 2013 16: 27
              0
              Quote: Professor
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Which 500 ??? 5000 !!!!

              Duc then including airplanes.

              But without helicopters !!! wassat
            2. And Us Rat
              And Us Rat 14 December 2013 17: 33
              -2
              Quote: Professor
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Which 500 ??? 5000 !!!!

              Duc then including airplanes.


              Nah !!! Then all 100500 !!! laughing
          2. atalef
            atalef 14 December 2013 16: 26
            +1
            Quote: And Us Rat
            Quote: Professor
            Quote: From Germany
            In Lebanon, Jews lost 50 tanks from 400 in a couple of weeks

            Not 50, but 500 !!! wink


            Which 500 ??? belay 5000!!!! wassat

            Which 5000 laughing 50000 !!!!!!!! wassat
            1. And Us Rat
              And Us Rat 14 December 2013 17: 45
              0
              Quote: atalef
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Quote: Professor
              Quote: From Germany
              In Lebanon, Jews lost 50 tanks from 400 in a couple of weeks

              Not 50, but 500 !!! wink


              Which 500 ??? belay 5000!!!! wassat

              Which 5000 laughing 50000 !!!!!!!! wassat


              PizzotTschschMilёnov !!! Including the Star (david) smarthy wassat
              This one :
            2. Eugeniy_369
              Eugeniy_369 14 December 2013 18: 23
              +9
              Quote: atalef
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Quote: Professor
              Quote: From Germany
              In Lebanon, Jews lost 50 tanks from 400 in a couple of weeks
              Not 50, but 500 !!!

              Which 500 ??? 5000 !!!!
              Which 5000 50000 !!!!!!!!

              Straight Israeli self-flagellation ... laughing laughing laughing
    2. Pimply
      Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 12
      +4
      Quote: From Germany
      lost 50 tanks out of 400 in a couple of weeks,

      The defeat of 50 tanks, of which the majority returned to service within a few hours - this is not the loss of 50 tanks. Five were lost. And even taking into account your numbers, the number of losses is much lower than losses in previous wars. More precisely - almost twice.
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 14 December 2013 14: 40
        +1
        And in Afghanistan for all the time 100 lost tanks with something, mostly T-55, T-72 then went to other places.
    3. 3.7.964
      3.7.964 14 December 2013 15: 41
      +8
      Quote: From Germany
      A fairy tale with elements of history, of course, is interesting, but these "chutzpas" are exits with "the best tank" and the fact that they have Russians, at the "tank gurus" (and this is not even funny, just in the face for such delirium to introduce hunting ), borrowed ideas, makes me put a minus article, it's a pity that there is only one. For sim I take my leave.

      good The best article review! Bravo! Only now will the collective, Jewish trolling begin. I'm sorry, I'm late. Collective, Jewish trolling has already begun. laughing
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 15: 51
        +1
        Quote: 3.7.964

        good The best article review! Bravo! Only now will the collective, Jewish trolling begin. I'm sorry, I'm late. Collective, Jewish trolling has already begun. laughing

        To you on the Maidan. lol And then there without you they decide who to sell themselves to.
        1. 3.7.964
          3.7.964 14 December 2013 16: 02
          +5
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          To you on the Maidan. And then there without you they decide who to sell themselves to.

          Aron! You, too, on the Maidan. Your Maidan is a geyparad, ask Kamenetsky, there are those up to the horizon ... The most massive parade in the world, and try to say that there are no Jews and Zionists there .... your brothers, by the way ... Right now again about donkeys and go .mi. you will go broke. Drink a pill before writing koment .., only soothing .. otherwise Viagra will be swallowed more .., you’ll eat your own screen and keyboard ... then you will tear it to pieces from overexcitation. laughing hi
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 17: 56
            +4
            Quote: 3.7.964
            Quote: Aron Zaavi
            To you on the Maidan. And then there without you they decide who to sell themselves to.

            Aron! You, too, on the Maidan. Your Maidan is a geyparad, ask Kamenetsky, there are those up to the horizon ... The most massive parade in the world, and try to say that there are no Jews and Zionists there .... your brothers, by the way ... Right now again about donkeys and go .mi. you will go broke. Drink a pill before writing koment .., only soothing .. otherwise Viagra will be swallowed more .., you’ll eat your own screen and keyboard ... then you will tear it to pieces from overexcitation. laughing hi

            Well, I don’t even know how to answer this tantrum. request Well, yes we have gay parades in Israel, only the difference between our parade and yours is that our gays are pea jesters, and yours on the Maidan set the vector for national politics.
            1. 3.7.964
              3.7.964 14 December 2013 20: 57
              +2
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              Well, I don’t even know how to answer this tantrum.

              Can you not answer what to take from you? Each state, or Internet resource, should have its own jester. And you are an unrivaled champion in this field. hi
              1. Aaron Zawi
                Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 23: 30
                0
                Quote: 3.7.964
                Quote: Aron Zaavi
                Well, I don’t even know how to answer this tantrum.

                Can you not answer what to take from you? Each state, or Internet resource, should have its own jester. And you are an unrivaled champion in this field. hi

                Personally, you can't take anything from me. "Svidomo" is not submitted. As for the jester, the cap with 37964 bells suits you so well that I cannot encroach on your calling.
        2. old rocket man
          old rocket man 14 December 2013 19: 30
          +4
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          m on the Maidan. lol And then there without you they decide who to sell themselves to.

          Aron, you ruined my impression of you today. fellow
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 20: 25
            +1
            Quote: old rocket

            Aron, you ruined my impression of you today. fellow

            I am the man request , which means the entity is endowed with many shortcomings.
            1. 3.7.964
              3.7.964 15 December 2013 11: 45
              +2
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              I am the man

              laughing Well, Arosh, you made me laugh, the truth is that you are, to put it mildly, the "youngest" in your kibbutz. What kind of am I am? You are a Jew! The person here is posing as a person. Arosha is not given to you.
            2. 11111mail.ru
              11111mail.ru 15 December 2013 20: 25
              +3
              Exactly: consent is a product with complete non-resistance of the parties.
              I. Ilf and E. Petrov. “He sets out well, dog,” whispered Ostap in the ear of Ippolit Matveyevich. - Learn.
    4. ATATA
      ATATA 15 December 2013 03: 59
      +3
      Quote: From Germany
      ideas borrowed, makes me put the article minus, it is a pity that there is only one. I am taking my leave for the sim.

      laughing drinks good
      Tired of reading these tales of Moses.
      They hang out all this Semitic blizzard here to put a "+" on each other, and then they are surprised at anti-Semitism.
      Long and super long-range shooting at 5, not at 11 !!! km !!! laughing
      And isn’t it a shame to lie so brazenly ?! request
      That's right, the article smacks of HUTSPOY!
    5. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 15 December 2013 19: 58
      +1
      Tanks rumbled across the field
      Tankers went to the last battle ...
      +, sing, brother!
  13. mountain
    mountain 14 December 2013 11: 18
    0
    I understood from the article that they will replace the concept and production itself, and therefore they will begin to create a completely new product, but which one? I read that similar developments are going on in our country too, I wonder what coincides and diverges, ours and their developments? And the fact that the tank itself, as such will change, I have no doubt.
    Thank you for the article.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 11: 35
      +1
      Quote: mountain
      I understood from the article that they will replace the concept and production itself, and therefore they will begin to create a completely new product, but which one? I read that similar developments are going on in our country too, I wonder what coincides and diverges, ours and their developments? And the fact that the tank itself, as such will change, I have no doubt.
      Thank you for the article.

      So far this is all so virtual that even the IDF does not know what they want.
    2. sevtrash
      sevtrash 14 December 2013 12: 00
      +1
      Drones to the maximum, what else.
  14. common man
    common man 14 December 2013 11: 29
    13
    The trouble with Grozny is not in the characteristics of our tanks, but in the strategy and tactics of their application. (This is if without a mat).
    After all, the already existing means of active protection of armored vehicles that destroy anti-tank missiles on approach allow you to safely abandon thick multi-layer armor, which reduces the speed of the tank, and also increases fuel costs and production costs.
    Reduce the thickness of the armor and see how the vaunted active defense will cope with bursts from the same 30 millimeters.
    1. Lestat
      Lestat 14 December 2013 11: 56
      10
      I agree with the author - Grozny cannot a priori serve as an example of the shortcomings of Russian tank technology. 99% of the losses were precisely due to the stupid planning of the operation and cap-slaughter by the generals — to tie the execution of tasks to the holidays, not taking into account the subtleties of urban battle. This criminal negligence was for such if not a military tribunal, but at least many had to sit down. And as for the level of tank technology — if the most modern tank was handed over to the enemy without an operation plan, the development of competent tactics and thoughtful coordination of the forces involved — in such circumstances, any Abrams and Merkaba could be cut into pieces by grinders, not to mention a competent anti-tank complex of actions .
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 14 December 2013 12: 34
        +8
        in such conditions, any Abrams and Merkaba can be cut into pieces by grinders, not to mention a competent anti-tank complex of actions.

        Doom is resting with his chainsaw.
        wassat
        Give the battle grinders and ... the Bulgarians!
        And you can foam him all the viewing means with foam. And grab the manhole covers by welding from the outside. And you don’t even have to knock out, let yourself live there inside. Humanism, you see.
        wink
        PS For the most zealous I explain: this is a joke of humor
        1. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 14 December 2013 13: 39
          +1
          Quote: abrakadabre
          wassat
          Give the battle grinders and ... the Bulgarians!
          And you can foam him all the viewing means with foam. And grab the manhole covers by welding from the outside. And you don’t even have to knock out, let yourself live there inside. Humanism, you see.


          Thanks, I haven’t laughed like that for a long time laughing good
      2. alex86
        alex86 14 December 2013 21: 21
        +2
        Quote: Lestat
        99% of the losses were precisely due to the stupid planning of the operation and cap-hatred by the general

        Do you have confidence that there will be any other actions in future hostilities by the generals?
  15. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 14 December 2013 11: 35
    +3
    The concept of the tank must be reviewed, no doubt. Since the throw to the English Channel has been postponed, tanks of the T-80 type are not very relevant, if only for a raid on Beijing. WWII tanks were made to break through a powerful defense, WWII tanks, for a breakthrough and mainly for throwing to the rear. Now we need a city battle tank. See the main clashes underway in urban development or for its possession. 152 mm mortar howitzer (mortar), something like AK-630, ATGM (SAM), active defense and a powerful communications, reconnaissance, target designation and guidance system. The second so far not very obvious problem is lasers. It’s clear they won’t burn through the armor yet, but even those that are now will destroy all optics. And the tank without surveillance can not even touch. On a mine under a caterpillar and a plug in the trunk). The third problem, also not yet obvious, is electromagnetic guns. If it works out, and that’s all, that’s why, from the high-speed projectile there is no protection at all. And the fourth already existing - drone UAV, there is no need to even explain anything. I think almost everyone here will come up with a couple more reasons.
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 14 December 2013 12: 46
      +2
      152 mm howitzer mortar (mortar), something like AK-630, ATGM (SAM),
      AK-630 is too gluttonous. To him replenishment of the ammunition will have to be delivered by railcars. It’s easier for the opponent to launch a couple of gifts from Pinocchio.
      On a mine under a caterpillar and a plug in the trunk)

      You can also push the channel thicker into the caterpillar under the sprocket. But I wonder how destructive for a tank to make fun of a gun if you push it into the barrel ... well, for example, 2-3 bricks?
    2. wanderer_032
      wanderer_032 14 December 2013 15: 38
      0
      In the context of modern combat in the territory of a settlement, a BMPT-type machine is needed more.
      1. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 14 December 2013 17: 04
        0
        BMPT - tank support combat vehicle, and here they write about the tank itself. In addition, BMPT was born in response to the non-adaptability of modern tanks to urban battles, but if you make an adapted tank, the need for it will disappear.
  16. Strashila
    Strashila 14 December 2013 11: 37
    12
    Such loud statements ... the Israelis abandoned the 5 generation tank. What is the purpose of the 5 generation tank if they are satisfied with the previous model, which can be upgraded practically for ridiculous means ???
    It’s more correct to say that they took a time out to comprehend the concept of using the tank in changing conditions, taking into account the experience of recent years. They will think, formulate, develop, manufacture.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 11: 50
      +2
      Quote: Strashila
      Such loud statements ... the Israelis abandoned the 5 generation tank. What is the purpose of the 5 generation tank if they are satisfied with the previous model, which can be upgraded practically for ridiculous means ???
      It’s more correct to say that they took a time out to comprehend the concept of using the tank in changing conditions, taking into account the experience of recent years. They will think, formulate, develop, manufacture.

      Absolutely.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 14 December 2013 13: 04
        +3
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        Quote: Strashila It’s more correct to say they took a time out to comprehend the concept of using a tank in changing conditions, taking into account the experience of recent years. They will think, formulate, develop, manufacture.

        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        Absolutely.

        In general, everyone is waiting for "Armata"
    2. just exp
      just exp 14 December 2013 17: 56
      +5
      Well, what is it right to say, they will wait until the Russians develop new tanks, then look at new ideas and copy to themselves, but for now, the Russians have not shown anything in public, yes, you have to wait and make sense.
  17. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 14 December 2013 11: 43
    +9
    My opinion: the Israeli general's concept of a tank crew is correct. After all, the loss of several that went through the fire and water and copper pipes of the rallied crews is much more significant than the loss of just a few tanks. Replacing the lost with greener crews is unequal and leads to an even greater increase in casualties. After all, any commander will say that I do not need your reinforcements, return my people to me. And after all, sometimes the loss of experienced crews occurs not through the fault of this commander, but because of the incompetent command or mistakes from above. And in view of the ratio of human resources in Israel and the surrounding Arab countries, Tal's idea becomes clear.
    The most significant, in my opinion, battle for the Midway Atoll, where Japan lost the best, experienced and flown pilots. Of course, the United States would have won anyway due to a more powerful economy, but the losses would have been much greater. Yes, and during the years of the Great Patriotic War at lower levels of the structure of the armed forces, i.e. in companies, battalions, experienced crews were much more valued. And their proper use caused the enemy higher harm than the mass of untrained youths.
    1. Lestat
      Lestat 14 December 2013 13: 33
      +7
      But the instinct of self-preservation in rear-engine tanks brings the skills and reaction of the crew in battle to a higher level - as one character said, "you want to live and you won't get too excited")))
  18. 416sd
    416sd 14 December 2013 11: 43
    +3
    Everything is well described, only the author forgot to mention the fate of General Tal after the Yom Kippur War.
    He was removed from all posts, largely making him a scapegoat.
    It is not significant in the context of the article, but it is important since the author affects the fate of a person.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 14 December 2013 11: 49
      +1
      Quote: 416sd
      Everything is well described, only the author forgot to mention the fate of General Tal after the Yom Kippur War.
      He was removed from all posts, largely making him a scapegoat.
      It is not significant in the context of the article, but it is important since the author affects the fate of a person.

      What do you mean removed? Firstly, he was already in reserve and he was called from there. Secondly, well, wow "scapegoats". The man has led the largest Israeli military-industrial complex project for 20 years.
      1. 416sd
        416sd 14 December 2013 12: 53
        +2
        Aron, after Judgment Day, he, along with the leadership of military intelligence, was held responsible for the events of October 1973. This does not detract from his achievements in the military-industrial complex. And being in the military-industrial complex in Israel, it should be known to you, is not uncommon both in retirement and in disgrace. There is a different structure of the establishment, people and after disgrace can benefit the country.

        Are you sure you have read the book by Chaim Herzog "The Arab-Israeli Wars: War and Peace in the Middle East". The whole story with Tal is perfectly described there.
      2. 416sd
        416sd 14 December 2013 13: 00
        -3
        It was during this period that Tal gained respect for his moral stance when he refused an order by the then IDF chief of staff David Elazar and Israel's defense minister, Moshe Dayan, to engage Egyptian forces after the 1973 war had officially ended. Dayan wanted Tal to respond aggressively to any skirmishes with Egyptians, which could have led to further hostilities, but Tal stood fast, wanting authorization from then Prime Minister Golda Meir and the Supreme Court.

        His stance cost him the position of Chief of Staff, and so in 1974, aged 50, he retired from the military and joined the Strategic Research Center at Tel Aviv University. He also served as a security consultant to Shimon Peres, later Prime Minister. In 1978, Tal returned to service and developed a new organizational plan, the establishment of a field-forces command.

        Major-General Israel Tal: Military strategist known as the godfather of Israeli tank warfare

        http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/majorgeneral-israel-tal-military-st
        rategist-known-as-the-godfather-of-israeli-tank-warfare-2081554.html
        1. old rocket man
          old rocket man 14 December 2013 19: 43
          +3
          Quote: 416sd
          It was during this period that Tal gained respect for his moral stance when he refused an order by the then IDF chief of staff David Elazar and Israel's defense minister, Moshe Dayan, to engage Egyptian forces after the 1973 war had officially ended. Dayan wanted Tal to respond aggressively to any skirmishes with Egyptians, which could have led to further hostilities, but Tal stood fast, wanting authorization from then Prime Minister Golda Meir and the Supreme Court.

          His stance cost him the position of Chief of Staff, and so in 1974, aged 50, he retired from the military and joined the Strategic Research Center at Tel Aviv University. He also served as a security consultant to Shimon Peres, later Prime Minister. In 1978, Tal returned to service and developed a new organizational plan, the establishment of a field-forces command.

          Major-General Israel Tal: Military strategist known as the godfather of Israeli tank warfare

          http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/majorgeneral-israel-tal-military-st

          rategist-known-as-the-godfather-of-israeli-tank-warfare-2081554.html

          Of course, if desired, everything can be translated, but this Russiansite, therefore it is advisable to express themselves in Russian.
          Sorry, but minus that is why request
  19. Lestat
    Lestat 14 December 2013 11: 46
    +2
    It's all great, unmanned tanks, drones, a minimum of armor due to active protection, but such funds for introducing this into one project and bringing all this technology to the brink of fiction are not just in series, but even in one working prototype there isn’t Israel and not even the States. That's all for 20 years theory. And a new generation of tanks is being prepared in the next few years by both Americans and Russians. So it’s laudable Israeli desire for the ideal, but one must be realistic.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 14 December 2013 13: 32
      0
      Quote: Lestat
      It's all great, unmanned tanks, drones, a minimum of armor due to active protection, but such funds for introducing this into one project and bringing all this technology to the brink of fiction are not just in series, but even in one working prototype there isn’t Israel and not even the States ...


      SUDDENLY winked


  20. TS3sta3
    TS3sta3 14 December 2013 12: 05
    +4
    "Israel refused to create a fifth generation tank," but does not refuse to use tanks of previous generations. then what does the "end of the tank era" have to do with it? perhaps this is "the end of the era of development of the Israeli fifth generation tank"?
  21. q_556
    q_556 14 December 2013 12: 12
    +4
    It is not clear, firstly, with what an interchange Merkava became the best MBT in the world. I don’t understand what is so special about it - the usual modern MBT. Suitable - yes, the best - no.
    Secondly, why this hysteria about the "tank of the future"? It will be called Merkava VI, Merkava XXXVI, "Merkava of the future" - what's the difference, call it a pot, it won't shoot better.
    Thirdly, and most importantly, if the development of the Merkava V was stopped, it means that the stop of the Merkava V was stopped, and not that this notorious "Tank of the Future" is being developed.
  22. The fat man
    The fat man 14 December 2013 12: 13
    +1
    Quote: Aron Zaavi

    American aid goes to purchase American equipment. This does not apply to Merkava. So for example, armored personnel carriers based on Merkava-Namer are going to be manufactured in the USA for the needs of Tsakhal.

    No longer going. The order is reduced and will be implemented in Israel.


    no, they will be produced in Azerbaijan
    the matter remained with the smallest price and quantity
  23. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 14 December 2013 12: 27
    +7
    Tovarisch Shulman mixed everything a little in a heap ...

    - If he wanted to retell the story of Tal in 1000 times - this is normal.
    - If you decide to make an assumption about the concept of development of Israeli armored forces, this is normal.
    But why should one of the opinions in Tsakhal be thrown at ALL world tank building?
    Why should one of the assumptions about the tactics of using tanks by Israel be considered an axiom for rewriting the Charter in all other countries?
    Somehow everything is a little immodest.

    Article about the tank master: Thale. That's all.

    Other calculations and reasoning in the article do not stand up to any professional criticism. Infa looks like a dilettante journalistic cut about the "fashionable" topic of the "death of tanks" (heh), but even new trends in Tsakhal (for justification) are not really disclosed.

    Commenting on each proposal by the author, indicating his mistakes or gross inaccuracies, you will simply get tired.
    And in general: why write so "noddingly"?
    I'm really interested in Israel's new concept of using tanks in future wars, but this article ... well, neither in the "Dugu" nor in the "Red Army" at all.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 16
      0
      Quote: Aleks tv
      Tovarisch Shulman mixed everything a little in a heap ...

      Comrade Shulman likes to scribble agitation. For serious articles on the topic, especially with a historical background, it is better to go to the LJ user http://david-2.livejournal.com. Here he often has a really unique info.
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 14 December 2013 13: 24
        0
        Quote: Pimply
        For serious articles on the topic, especially with a historical tour,

        Thanks, Eugene.
        I’ll have a look.
  24. And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 14 December 2013 12: 38
    +3
    What is the article about? request An article is a dummy.

    About canceling MK5? - A couple of years ago they announced.

    About creating a new kind of tank? - also not news for a long time.

    About the wars of Israel? - kutso and tyap-blooper.

    About the development of Merkava? - only the lazy did not read.

    What will be the "tank of the future" in Israel? Cheap and unmanned - no need to be an analyst for this.

  25. ATATA
    ATATA 14 December 2013 12: 43
    +2
    becoming a true innovator in introducing tower guns of tanks over long and ultra-long distances into tank troops of sniper fire - up to 5-6 kilometers and even 10-11 kilometers.

    After that I quit reading ...
    Brad.
    1. 416sd
      416sd 14 December 2013 13: 12
      0
      In vain. Extremely long range fire was practiced in the IDF's armored forces as early as the 1960s, before the Six Day War, when the Syrians began work on their territory with the aim of changing the riverbed and dehydrating eastern Galilee. Israeli tanks and self-propelled guns then fired precisely at very long distances at Syrian tractors and bulldozers.
      1. ATATA
        ATATA 15 December 2013 03: 51
        +1
        Quote: 416sd
        In vain. Extremely long range fire was practiced in the IDF's armored forces as early as the 1960s, before the Six Day War, when the Syrians began work on their territory with the aim of changing the riverbed and dehydrating eastern Galilee. Israeli tanks and self-propelled guns then fired precisely at very long distances at Syrian tractors and bulldozers.

        Stop telling the tales of Moses. Do not annoy.
        Even 5km is not possible, and even about 11 it is generally from the realm of fantasy.
    2. 416sd
      416sd 14 December 2013 13: 16
      +1
      The "centurions" of the Israeli army first took part in the hostilities in November 1964, in the so-called "war for water." These battles became historical from a different point of view - as the last battle in which the German tanks Pz.Kpfw fought. IV. The war came down to duels of Syrian and Israeli tanks, sometimes artillery took part in shelling.

      Syrian T-34-85 and Pz.Kpfw. IV occupied positions in the Golan Heights, from which most of the territory of Israel was controlled. Syrian war machines were opposed by the "centurions" that were armed with the IDF. More modern, in comparison with Pz.Kpfw.IV and the “thirty-fours”, armed with 105-mm guns, they had the advantage in duels at long distances. However, the first attempt to hit Syrian vehicles was unsuccessful: the Arabs' artillery entered the battle, all the neighborhood was clouded with dust and smoke - as a result, Israeli crews were unable to find targets.

      The commander of the Israeli armored corps, General Tal, believed that the reason for the failure was not in limited visibility, but in the insufficient training of tankers. He immediately organized training in long-range shooting. When the Syrian tanks re-opened fire on Jewish settlements on August 12, 1965, the centurion crews gave a decent response. Pets of General Tal hit the enemy’s tanks with their first shots (there is a legend that the general himself made the very first accurate shot), after which they switched to construction equipment engaged in the construction of the drainage canal. Syria tried to divert the channels of the two main tributaries of the Jordan River, thereby depriving Israel of two-thirds of its water flow. Tanks and construction equipment "centurions" were shot from a distance of about 10 km. The “water war” ended with the victory of the Israelis.

      http://armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/Modern/Centurion/txt3/?page=4
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 23
        +1
        Here is more detailed here.
        http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/water_battle.htm
        1. 416sd
          416sd 14 December 2013 13: 24
          0
          In in :)
          They themselves proved it.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. 416sd
      416sd 14 December 2013 13: 22
      0
      As for the references to "shooting rules" and "combat regulations", which "were never in the hands of the writer." Well, yes, maybe they weren't. But:

      1. The shooting rules and IDF charters were also not in the hands of any of us, except if we exclude the Israelis from what they write here.

      2. The IDF of the Arabs always won precisely because it violated generally accepted rules and charters, and the monkeys mechanically and ram-like followed these rules and charters.
    5. Pimply
      Pimply 14 December 2013 13: 23
      +1
      http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/water_battle.htm
      Here is more detailed - and it is explained how and why it was possible to achieve such results.
  26. bubla5
    bubla5 14 December 2013 12: 56
    0
    And tanks of the 5th generation aren’t this the future, and then the future of tank building will probably be without crews, without a turret, or maybe even without it, * smart * guided shells and a tank operator somewhere in the rear, excuse me
  27. EvilLion
    EvilLion 14 December 2013 13: 03
    +7
    Tanks turned out to be defenseless against anti-tank weapons of terrorists acting contrary to the laws of "symmetrical" wars.


    Stop writing nonsense. In the Second Chechen bandits were completely helpless against heavy weapons. Because in the new 95th year, the boys were sent just to be killed, and they did everything for this, and in the 99th they really went to wet the beast. And it turned out that the RPG-7 practically didn’t take the T-72B into the forehead, and tankers weren’t fools to shine with the stern. And against the howitzers and aircraft, there’s no chance at all.
  28. Panikovsky
    Panikovsky 14 December 2013 13: 36
    0
    Israel is big, he knows better.
  29. IslamMoyReligion
    IslamMoyReligion 14 December 2013 13: 40
    0
    Quote: Panikovsky
    Israel is big, he knows better.

    He is more profitable!
  30. Slon1978
    Slon1978 14 December 2013 13: 42
    10
    The IDF’s decision to halt the further development of Merkava’s theme is not at all paradoxical, it is just direct evidence that this tank did not live up to the hopes of the Israelis themselves. There was a lot of advertising that some believed so strongly that they truly considered Merkava MK-4 the best tank in the world. But the project was closed, and closed without too much noise - to save face. The tank simply did not live up to the hopes of the Israelis themselves and the impasse of their concept became obvious to them for quite some time. Too expensive, too overweight, with mediocre combat effectiveness, mediocre technical reliability, and, most interestingly, mediocre security, although this is why it was mainly advertised. In fact, the Israelis could not create a good tank, even for their own - a highly specialized theater of operations. About 50 wrecked cars in the last war with Lebanon - this is a lot, a lot and sobering. Merkava’s MK-4 apologists usually respond to this - they say that there were only 6-8 cars that were irretrievably lost according to various sources, but friends, let's face it - the tank was withdrawn from battle due to loss of fire, loss of course, partial or complete destruction of the crew, destruction of a tank - this is all the loss of a tank in battle, and ceteris paribus all of these tanks would be destroyed and lost forever. The fact that most of the cars were able to be evacuated and restored (fortunately, the factories are located no more than 100 km from the battlefield) and only less than 10 cars burned out irretrievably is not due to Merkava at all, but let’s say - the exceptional geographical position of Israel. And this, I emphasize, in the battle with the rebels, whose most modern weapons were the RPG-29 Vampire and the ATGM Cornet, and basically it was only RPG-7. Neither howitzer artillery, nor anti-tank artillery, nor aviation, nor helicopters, nor enemy tanks worked on Merkava - Merkava fought with the rebels and 50 cars were shot down ....
  31. Slon1978
    Slon1978 14 December 2013 13: 43
    +4
    We go further, the tank is overweight (under 70 tons), unreliable - even at short mobilization distances (how many broken ones were evacuated during the war with Lebanon, again due to weight), innovative solutions did not justify themselves (crew compartment, front engine, making it difficult to aim at long distances through ascending heat fluxes, it’s not for nothing that they almost always appear in the photo halfway to the enemy), it is unnecessarily expensive, poorly transportable, and still vulnerable. After all, it would seem that if the tank was really good, as they said about it, then after equipping it with a SAZ Trophy - why turn off the project? It is necessary to mass-produce for the IDF and sell for export, this is a triumph, to develop new systems with the money raised! But no ... The Israelis are well aware of the shortcomings of the Merkava MK-4, as well as the fact that the SAZ Trophy will NOT seriously increase the protection of the tank - this expensive system worth under $ 250 thousand is vulnerable to conventional small arms (at first it will simply be shot from SVD or RMB, and then they will let Cornet into the tank), does not protect the tank in all projections, does not protect against promising ATGMs with a warhead detachable when approaching the target, is vulnerable to the use of anti-tank and electronic warfare systems (radio-electronic suppression, do not forget - at Trophy radar, which can be crushed by interference, despite the fact that electronic warfare equipment is becoming increasingly compact and cheaper) from elementary tank BPS (except for the frontal projection, with the exception of the cannon mask zone, the tank is still vulnerable to armor-piercing shells). The Israelis, we must pay tribute to them, perfectly understand all of his ALREADY existing flaws and the fact that Trophy is not a panacea at all - that's why they are curtailing the project.
    And the author clearly confuses cause and effect. In the projectile against Armor, the latter can only win a short-term victory. Talking about laser and electro-magnetic tanks is nothing more than a sweet pill for the public. They say curtailing funding is ridiculous)) Maybe it is worth getting financing from the export of the Merkava MK-4 miracle tank, and develop a laser tank with the proceeds? :)))
  32. Slon1978
    Slon1978 14 December 2013 13: 43
    +6
    We go further, the tank is overweight (under 70 tons), unreliable - even at short mobilization distances (how many broken ones were evacuated during the war with Lebanon, again due to weight), innovative solutions did not justify themselves (crew compartment, front engine, making it difficult to aim at long distances through ascending heat fluxes, it’s not for nothing that they almost always appear in the photo halfway to the enemy), it is unnecessarily expensive, poorly transportable, and still vulnerable. After all, it would seem that if the tank was really good, as they said about it, then after equipping it with a SAZ Trophy - why turn off the project? It is necessary to mass-produce for the IDF and sell for export, this is a triumph, to develop new systems with the money raised! But no ... The Israelis are well aware of the shortcomings of the Merkava MK-4, as well as the fact that the SAZ Trophy will NOT seriously increase the protection of the tank - this expensive system worth under $ 250 thousand is vulnerable to conventional small arms (at first it will simply be shot from SVD or RMB, and then they will let Cornet into the tank), does not protect the tank in all projections, does not protect against promising ATGMs with a warhead detachable when approaching the target, is vulnerable to the use of anti-tank and electronic warfare systems (radio-electronic suppression, do not forget - at Trophy radar, which can be crushed by interference, despite the fact that electronic warfare equipment is becoming increasingly compact and cheaper) from elementary tank BPS (except for the frontal projection, with the exception of the cannon mask zone, the tank is still vulnerable to armor-piercing shells). The Israelis, we must pay tribute to them, perfectly understand all of his ALREADY existing flaws and the fact that Trophy is not a panacea at all - that's why they are curtailing the project.
    And the author clearly confuses cause and effect. In the projectile against Armor, the latter can only win a short-term victory. Talking about laser and electro-magnetic tanks is nothing more than a sweet pill for the public. They say curtailing funding is ridiculous)) Maybe it is worth getting financing from the export of the Merkava MK-4 miracle tank, and develop a laser tank with the proceeds? :)))
    1. Professor
      Professor 14 December 2013 13: 44
      -1
      Quote: Slon1978
      aiming at long distances through ascending heat fluxes, it’s not for nothing that they almost always appear in the photo halfway to the enemy

      Further I do not read this nonsense and I do not advise you. fool
      1. The fat man
        The fat man 14 December 2013 15: 32
        +2
        Quote: Professor
        Quote: Slon1978
        aiming at long distances through ascending heat fluxes, it’s not for nothing that they almost always appear in the photo halfway to the enemy

        Further I do not read this nonsense and I do not advise you. fool

        Professor
        but then what is the reason? because in the photographs there really are a lot of tanks half a turn? teaching that the exhaust manifold is also in front
        1. Professor
          Professor 14 December 2013 15: 58
          +4
          Quote: Fat Man
          Professor
          but then what is the reason? because in the photographs there really are a lot of tanks half a turn? teaching that the exhaust manifold is also in front

          The reason why not?
          Look, shoots from any provisions.


          Wow!!! It shoots right on course. probably pre-cooled the engine ... laughing




          But in Lebanon:


          When moving forward:


          When moving backward:


          PS
          on the road:

          1. Slon1978
            Slon1978 15 December 2013 04: 02
            +5
            Professor, it wasn’t worth bringing so many videos that prove nothing. What do these videos show - that the Merkava MK-4 tank can shoot from the frontal projection? Did I write that I can not? If this were so, then the Merkava MK-4 would not be a tank at all, but something like an awkward self-propelled gun. Read carefully - I wrote about the difficult aiming at long distances due to the ascending heat fluxes from the engine. And this is a well-known fact. At what distances tanks shoot on the video - it’s not visible, or rather it’s visible - that for short. Why are you distorting the facts? By the way, I wrote not only about this flaw of the Merkava MK-4, but you ignored it and chose to unsubscribe by meaningless clips. Well, well - we will dwell only on this aspect. Can you clearly and clearly answer - what is the reason that the MK-4 Merkava are in stationary positions almost always half a turn to the enemy (I substitute the enemy for a part of the less protected side projection of the tank)? What is the reason? Give a simple and clear answer. I'm waiting. Sincerely yours...
            1. maxvet
              maxvet 15 December 2013 10: 08
              +1
              Quote: Slon1978
              Can you clearly and clearly answer - what is the reason that the MK-4 Merkava are in stationary positions almost always half a turn to the enemy (I substitute the enemy for a part of the less protected side projection of the tank)? What is the reason?

              In WoT, it is advised to stand to the enemy with a rhombus in order to increase ricocheting wink laughing
            2. Professor
              Professor 15 December 2013 10: 43
              0
              Quote: Slon1978
              Read carefully - I wrote about the difficult aiming at long distances due to the ascending heat fluxes from the engine.

              Before this nonsense I read, then did not.

              Quote: Slon1978
              And this is a well-known fact.

              Then give up. A fact known to everyone. lol Surely it won't be difficult for you to give proofs of this "fact"? For example, to what temperature does the "hood" above the engine heat up in the Merkava and without it in teshkas (and on a sleepyhead in the desert)? wink

              Quote: Slon1978
              At what distances tanks shoot on the video - it’s not visible, or rather it’s visible - that for short.

              Is it because the gun is not raised 45 degrees? laughing

              Quote: Slon1978
              Can you clearly and clearly answer - what is the reason that the MK-4 Merkava are in stationary positions almost always half a turn to the enemy (I substitute the enemy for a part of the less protected side projection of the tank)?

              How many photos do you need to post Merkava where it is not worth half a turn in stationary positions? Let's agree, for each photo you posted where she stands on a stationary position half a turn to the enemy (I substitute the enemy with a part of the less protected side projection of the tank), I will post a photo where she stands with a gun located along the axis of symmetry of the tank. Then let's talk about "almost always". wink
          2. Slon1978
            Slon1978 15 December 2013 04: 02
            +1
            Professor, it wasn’t worth bringing so many videos that prove nothing. What do these videos show - that the Merkava MK-4 tank can shoot from the frontal projection? Did I write that I can not? If this were so, then the Merkava MK-4 would not be a tank at all, but something like an awkward self-propelled gun. Read carefully - I wrote about the difficult aiming at long distances due to the ascending heat fluxes from the engine. And this is a well-known fact. At what distances tanks shoot on the video - it’s not visible, or rather it’s visible - that for short. Why are you distorting the facts? By the way, I wrote not only about this flaw of the Merkava MK-4, but you ignored it and chose to unsubscribe by meaningless clips. Well, well - we will dwell only on this aspect. Can you clearly and clearly answer - what is the reason that the MK-4 Merkava are in stationary positions almost always half a turn to the enemy (I substitute the enemy for a part of the less protected side projection of the tank)? What is the reason? Give a simple and clear answer. I'm waiting. Sincerely yours...
          3. Andreas
            Andreas 15 December 2013 04: 09
            +1
            The main thing is not to shoot, but to get laughing
    2. Rex
      Rex 15 December 2013 03: 46
      0
      Everything written is as if true, but with many options.
      It is clear that the article was outraged and written in counterbalance.

      The tank in its current form is a serious military unit.
      When they write about their shortcomings, vulnerabilities from PTR, aviation, etc. many factors are forgotten.
      Apart from the anti-tank systems, the tank unit with 1,5-2 km has nothing to oppose, but for him it’s a normal working distance
      There is practically no ATGM company level. The exception is those installed on the BMP / BTR themselves, which is in smaller numbers of the total.
      At the level of the company ATGM 4-8 units and their calculations are no less vulnerable to tank fire.
      The bulk of the PRTK involves flight control or target illumination. To do this, they put on the equipment the determining backlight with a laser, after which it is recommended to shoot smoke grenades and change the position.
      Yes, a lot of things.
      We should talk about the disadvantages and advantages of any type of weapon in the complex
    3. Andreas
      Andreas 15 December 2013 04: 07
      0
      Everything is absolutely correct, except for the weight of the Israeli tank - "Merkava 4" in the urban configuration weighs 80 tons.
  33. IslamMoyReligion
    IslamMoyReligion 14 December 2013 13: 55
    -4
    Quote: EvilLion
    Tanks turned out to be defenseless against anti-tank weapons of terrorists acting contrary to the laws of "symmetrical" wars.


    Stop writing nonsense. In the Second Chechen bandits were completely helpless against heavy weapons. Because in the new 95th year, the boys were sent just to be killed, and they did everything for this, and in the 99th they really went to wet the beast. And it turned out that the RPG-7 practically didn’t take the T-72B into the forehead, and tankers weren’t fools to shine with the stern. And against the howitzers and aircraft, there’s no chance at all.

    There they burned the boys and 95 and 99 in armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, and whoever managed to get out was killed by a rifle!
  34. dpurpur
    dpurpur 14 December 2013 15: 20
    +6
    It is worth driving Merkava once into the Voronezh chernozem after rain and the end of the dream tank.
    1. smersh70
      smersh70 14 December 2013 15: 22
      +3
      Quote: dpurpur
      It is worth driving Merkava once into the Voronezh chernozem after rain and the end of the dream tank.

      what words) BRAVO))) and still give war in the post-Soviet space ..))))
      1. dpurpur
        dpurpur 14 December 2013 15: 28
        +4
        God forbid, no wars in Russia mother. I mean, what has been said more than once. The Merkava tank is good there, for what places it was designed: the Middle East.
    2. Aleks tv
      Aleks tv 14 December 2013 15: 41
      +6
      Quote: dpurpur
      It is worth driving Merkava once into the Voronezh chernozem

      And ... "Fuck" it near Voronezh?
      request

      In the mud, all tanks can get stuck. Our dirt is just ... a little dirtier.
      wink
      1. dpurpur
        dpurpur 14 December 2013 15: 47
        0
        I agree, some videos on the Internet are simply amazing.
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 14 December 2013 19: 15
        -2
        Quote: Aleks tv
        In the mud, all tanks can get stuck. Our dirt is just ... a little dirtier.

        You know you'll have to upset you. The fact is that the whole winter in Israel, as a rule, is an incessant downpour. How it roughly looks like - watch the film "Kippur" (Kippur), there the centurions are crawling through the winter - October - mud.
      3. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 14 December 2013 19: 58
        0
        Quote: Aleks tv
        In the mud, all tanks can get stuck. Our dirt is just ... a little dirtier.


        What?

        1. luiswoo
          luiswoo 14 December 2013 21: 34
          +4
          This is not dirt - it’s a bit messy boots. Dirt, shit, more precisely - it's here:
          1. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 15 December 2013 02: 51
            +1
            Quote: luiswoo
            This is not dirt - it’s a bit messy boots. Dirt, shit, more precisely - it's here:


            So I talked about adequate conditions, in such a poor ... as in the video, any tank will get stuck.


            1. luiswoo
              luiswoo 15 December 2013 06: 58
              0
              So I talked about adequate conditions, in such a poor ... as in the video, any tank will get stuck.

              What does adequate conditions mean? :) Slaughter is a given, especially in the north and in the foothills. The same DT-30 in service has not so easily appeared - precisely because of the shit.
              1. And Us Rat
                And Us Rat 16 December 2013 04: 22
                0
                Well, DT-30 is not a tank wink
                1. luiswoo
                  luiswoo 16 December 2013 18: 48
                  0
                  And it was not about them, but about the dirt. I apologize if I was misled.
            2. wanderer_032
              wanderer_032 15 December 2013 20: 28
              +1
              And there are also low temperatures, it is interesting that Merkava will start at least at -25С, and will the LMS and other electronics work at this temperature? Or will it fail and go out before spring? What snow cover can this machine overcome?
              And then everything is the best in the world and the best in the world.
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 15 December 2013 20: 44
                +1
                Quote: wanderer_032
                And there are also low temperatures, it is interesting that Merkava will start at least at -25С, and will the LMS and other electronics work at this temperature? Or will it fail and go out before spring? What snow cover can this machine overcome?
                And then everything is the best in the world and the best in the world.

                Do you know how much modern military equipment is being developed? Do you really think that it is made for greenhouses? Standards for her are actions in extreme conditions, usually from + 50 to - 60.
              2. And Us Rat
                And Us Rat 16 December 2013 00: 37
                0
                Quote: wanderer_032
                And there are also low temperatures, it is interesting that Merkava will start at least at -25С, and will the LMS and other electronics work at this temperature? Or will it fail and go out before spring? What snow cover can this machine overcome?


                Well, if on "Eytan", which flies at 15+ km altitude, the electronics work, and temperatures there reach -70, (I generally keep quiet about satellites), why should it be worse on the tank? Another myth of spiteful critics is that Israeli technologies are not adapted to low temperatures, but this myth is based on the fact that, in order to save on production, some small systems not intended for export do not really seek to make them particularly frost-resistant, but this does not mean a lack of opportunities. export products are adjusted to any temperature parameters, at the request of the customer. And on account of the snow cover - let me remind you that the landing of the merkava is higher than that of the same T-90.
                1. wanderer_032
                  wanderer_032 16 December 2013 19: 18
                  0
                  We are talking about production models, which are in service.
                  Soviet and Russian cars passed a full cycle of tests in different climatic zones (from dry to hot to arctic) and at the same time all the units and equipment standing on them, these tests stood up and were installed in serial machines.
                  That is, each serial tank produced in the USSR or the Russian Federation can immediately work in any climatic zone without any alterations or serious preliminary preparation.
                  I'm not sure about your cars.
                  You talked about the higher clearance of the Merkava-4 tank, but when passing areas with deep snow, this is not an indicator (as well as when driving on wet soil) because Merkava-4 has a weight of 23.5 (on average) tons heavier than tanks T-72,80,90 and therefore greater pressure on the ground and where the owls pass. or Ross. tanks, Merkava-4 will not work at all. wink
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 16 December 2013 22: 25
                    0
                    Quote: wanderer_032
                    You talked about the higher clearance of the Merkava-4 tank, but when passing areas with deep snow, this is not an indicator (as well as when driving on wet soil) because Merkava-4 has a weight of 23.5 (on average) tons heavier than tanks T-72,80,90 and therefore greater pressure on the ground and where the owls pass. or Ross. tanks, Merkava-4 will not work at all.

                    And you consider the specific ground pressure and specific power. wink
                    1. wanderer_032
                      wanderer_032 18 December 2013 23: 47
                      -1
                      When driving in difficult conditions (deep snow, wet soil, etc.), the power of the internal combustion engine plays a secondary role, because if the car is very heavy, it simply fails under the influence of its weight, sits on the bottom and will not be able to move further.
                      So when moving in such conditions, the pressure exerted by the mass of the machine on its supporting surface comes to the fore.
                      It’s strange that you don’t understand this, because it’s elementary. And you’ve taken a nickname for yourself. laughing
                      Regarding the patency of the Merkava tanks, there are problems that the tankers themselves expressed:
                      танк

                      Due to the congestion of the front rollers, Merkava is perfectly stuck in the mud.

                      танк

                      Due to the large mass, the Merkava tank does not move on its own roads, but is transported exclusively on tank carriers. wink
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 19 December 2013 09: 38
                        0
                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        It’s strange that you don’t understand this, because it’s elementary. And you’ve taken a nickname for yourself.

                        It turns out that I don’t understand not only me, but all the people who are little bit savvy in technology. Likbez to you or a task for a first-grader:
                        Two people, a child weighing 15 kg without skis only in boots (effective surface area 2x0.15x 0.05m = 0.0015 sq.m) and an overweight man weighing 150 kg on wide skis (effective surface area 2x2x0.1m = 0.4 sq.m) move in deep snow. Attention to the question: which of them will fall deeper into the snow?

                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        So when moving in such conditions, the pressure exerted by the mass of the machine on its supporting surface comes to the fore.

                        Hooray!!!! CEP This is the specific pressure on the ground. So you consider the specific ground pressure and specific power.

                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        Regarding the patency of the Merkava tanks, there are problems that the tankers themselves expressed:

                        They showed pictures, but where are the statements of Merkava tankers about problems with patency?

                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        Due to the congestion of the front rollers, Merkava is perfectly stuck in the mud.

                        Fantasy, fantasy, fantasy. Backfill question: what is heavier, an engine or a turret?

                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        Due to the large mass, the Merkava tank does not move on its own roads, but is transported exclusively on tank carriers.

                        I’ll add this to my collection. Bravo. You will be quoted. It turns out from Beer Sheva through the center of the country the Merkava does not go under its own power "Because of the large mass", and not because of the fact that it would save the service life and most importantly not to smash the asphalt roads with its tracks and run over a couple of cars during rush hours. Could you tell me, in Russia, tanks are delivered from the factory to their deployment sites on their own, or are they delivered in the old fashioned way by railway transport? wink

                        Learn materiel !!!
                      2. wanderer_032
                        wanderer_032 20 December 2013 22: 16
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        They showed pictures, but where are the statements of Merkava tankers about problems with patency?


                        They are on the faces of those guys in the photo, the censorship does not miss the rest.



                        Quote: Professor
                        in Russia, tanks under their own power from the factory to the places of deployment are delivered

                        Sometimes yes laughing
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 20 December 2013 22: 20
                        0
                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        They are on the faces of those guys in the photo, the censorship does not miss the rest.

                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        Regarding the patency of the Merkava tanks, there are problems that the tankers themselves expressed:

                        You are however a dreamer. fool
                        Teach materiel about specific pressure on the ground, etc.
                      4. wanderer_032
                        wanderer_032 22 December 2013 20: 34
                        0
                        You don’t say anything about the materiel, but it will sit on the Merkava-4 abdomen in mud and snow despite the width of the tracks.
                        Just 70t of weight (and taking into account the transported junk all 73t) will crush it there.
                        There is little hope for a powerful engine when crawling on the belly.
                        The whole secret lies in the bearing surface of the ground on which the tank (and in general all ground equipment) walks.
                        You can only drive such a car where Mother Earth can hold it, otherwise it will not work.
                        And there are few such places that can withstand such a weight on Earth (like bridges, roads, etc.).
                        Therefore, she ride only in Israel and nowhere else, and thank God.
                      5. Professor
                        Professor 22 December 2013 21: 59
                        0
                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        You don’t say anything about the materiel, but it will sit on the Merkava-4 abdomen in mud and snow despite the width of the tracks.

                        About the child and the skier again to tell? And about the specific pressure on the ground? wink

                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        Therefore, she ride only in Israel and nowhere else, and thank God.

                        For example, in the swamps of the Hula Valley. There, after all, solid, dry soil does not smell like dirt. wassat

                        In the background is the Golan Heights.
                      6. wanderer_032
                        wanderer_032 22 December 2013 22: 29
                        0
                        Oh hard work
                        From a swamp drag a hippopotamus
                        (K.I. Chukovsky, Phone)

                        Dear Professor, stop engaging in verbal flood.
                        In the swamp, no tank in the world will pass.

                        To do this, you need another technique, such as:

                        Screw walker






                        [img] http://www.avto-sib.ru/asib/images
                        /vezdehod_arktika_3dk.jpg [/img]






                        [img] http://gallery.greedykidz.net/get/1006552/motostrelki_2011_compressed_zDSC_

                        1192-2.jpg? G2_serialNumber = 1 [/ img]
                      7. Professor
                        Professor 22 December 2013 22: 33
                        0
                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        Dear Professor, stop engaging in verbal flood.
                        In the swamp, no tank in the world will pass.

                        The swamps near the Golan are an educational program for you, otherwise you think that the dirt happens exclusively in ... wink

                        Photo of snow and ... Merkava. wassat



                        PS
                        bully
                      8. wanderer_032
                        wanderer_032 22 December 2013 22: 51
                        0
                        But in these photos not Merkava-4, but I specifically spoke about it.
                        And please tell me where are these photos taken?
                      9. Professor
                        Professor 22 December 2013 22: 53
                        0
                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        But in these photos not Merkava-4, but I specifically spoke about it.

                        You "specifically" did not talk about anything, and so - around the bush. Specifically, what is the specific pressure of the four on the ground? Only specifically. wink
                      10. wanderer_032
                        wanderer_032 26 December 2013 20: 26
                        0
                        Specifically, what is the specific pressure of the four on the ground?



                        T-90A = 0,94 kg / cm²
                        T-90SM = 0,97 kg / cm²
                        Merkava 4 (with gain against min 71t) = 1,23 kg / cm² wink

                        Bul-bul.
                      11. Professor
                        Professor 26 December 2013 21: 30
                        0
                        Quote: wanderer_032
                        Bul-bul.

                        Do not read Soviet newspapers before dinner. wink
                        Merkava's specific power is one of the highest, and the specific ground pressure of 0,94 kg / cm² is slightly less than that of the T-90CA.

                        Comparative analysis of the 4 best modern tanks.
  • Pimply
    Pimply 14 December 2013 19: 14
    -2
    Have you ever been to Israel during the winter months? 8) Type "merkava dirt" into the search for pictures, for example
    1. atalef
      atalef 22 December 2013 22: 41
      +1
      Hello, Zhen, tomorrow I’m coming back from Jerusalem, the whole email is here for a week. the company eliminates the effects of snowfall, 50 cm of snow, tomorrow - the day after tomorrow I will post pictures of what snow happens
  • And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 14 December 2013 20: 04
    +1
    Quote: dpurpur
    It is worth driving Merkava once into the Voronezh chernozem after rain and the end of the dream tank.


    1. Andreas
      Andreas 16 December 2013 12: 43
      -1
      "Merkava" - the best highway tank in the history of the use of armored vehicles laughing

      On February 14, 2002, in the Gaza Strip, near the Karmi-Nitsarim road, a Merkava-3 Baz tank was blown up by a land mine. Palestinian militants attacked a convoy - a civilian bus in a co-operation with two army jeeps - on the Karni-Netzarim highway in the Gaza Strip. The terrorists set in motion a small land mine planted near the road, and opened machine-gun and automatic fire on the convoy. The soldiers escorting the bus entered a firefight and called for help - a nearby Merkava-3 tank.

      The tank began moving along the access road to the scene of the incident, and about halfway through the road, the militants launched a land mine buried on the road. A cumulative charge with a total weight of about 100 kg was laid in a metal tank for heating water, buried under the road. For the bookmark, a tunnel was used, dug from a nearby building, which was used as a cover.

      From the force of the explosion, the "Merkava" walk-behind tractor (engine + transmission), located in front and weighing more than three tons, was torn from the mountings and thrown upwards. At the same time, he crashed into the cannon and, turning it into a lever, tore off the turret (weight 22 tons) of the tank, which flew off 10 meters. The tank commander and loader who were in it were killed when the turret landed and crushed them with its weight. The driver was killed by the thrown back steering wheel. The loader survived.

      Three days later, the press reported that additional armor plates, usually installed on the bottom of the tank to protect against mines and demonstrated high effectiveness in Lebanon, were removed this time. Speaking on Israeli television on 17.02.02, a senior officer of the armored forces confirmed this information and said that the sheets were removed after his personal order, since in the conditions of the sand dunes of the Gaza Strip, turning into mud after winter rains, the use of the Merkava-3 is simply impossible , due to fall to zero patency of the tank.

      http://www.waronline.org/analysis/merkava.htm
  • wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 14 December 2013 16: 17
    +3
    The article is empty.
    There are a lot of legends about General Tal (probably even in Israel itself, which does not detract from his merits, and even vice versa) and reliable information about his biography remains only in the IDF personnel archive, but only a limited number of people (probably unflattering) know it .

    The fact that the Israeli tank Merkava is a good machine, no one doubts (but it is good only for one theater of action).

    In the Soviet Union and in Russia in particular, there is a very strong design school of their own, they did not need any "gurus" there, do not need, and I hope they will not need.

    What kind of armored vehicles will be in the near future is known only to specialists who are working on it today in design bureaus, laboratories and training grounds, around the world. The only thing left to do is to guess and try to unravel their plans.
  • Cat
    Cat 14 December 2013 16: 51
    +4
    The end of the tank era? Israel refused to create a fifth-generation tank and is working on a "tank of the future"

    Another shydevr next PR man (journalist, populist, balabol, etc).
    Whatever they say about the IDF in general and about the Merkava tanks in particular, the fact remains: both this army and these tanks are fighting in the specific conditions of a specific theater of operations. Moreover, this war over the past decades has been exclusively anti-partisan in nature, that is, if tanks are needed, then it is far from the first (and not even the tenth). This means that making loud statements about the end of the "tank era" based on the experience of this war is, at the very least, silly.
    As for the actual refusal of the Israelis from the further development of the "Merkav" ... the tank is very original, one can argue about its advantages and disadvantages even before the second coming - that's just the Russians and the Germans, who (unlike the Israelis) have a huge experience of tank battles, for some reason they build completely different tanks - Leo and T-shki do not resemble a "carrot" even from a distance. Apparently, there are some cunning considerations for this, based on the above experience. And what "authoritative experts" say there - so we have a whole site of such "experts" here, one more authoritative than the other ... =)))
    In general, it may well turn out that the Jews have already come to the conclusion from their own experience: they do not need such a tank, or maybe they don’t need any at all - the Akhzarites and other Namers are better suited for the war with the partisans, or else to read something like that. However, the Israeli military did not bother to inform PR people about their logic, or the PR people themselves did not delve into these small, in their terms, nuances. Or, everyone knows everything, but the family ambition does not allow refuting their own old enthusiasm about "the very, very tank in the world" - therefore, they write tales about "the end of the tank era" and "the effect of an exploding bomb." Kind of like Khrushchev - at one time "buried" almost all types of troops except missile.
  • Ustian
    Ustian 14 December 2013 17: 01
    +1
    The design of the most modern Russian tank "Armata" also implements the ideas of the Israeli "tank guru".
    Isn't it too "loud"? Where does the information come from? And if everything is just inside out? No.
  • iConst
    iConst 14 December 2013 17: 30
    +2
    I apologize, but put a minus, because:
    Quote: author
    1. The Israeli tank engine compartment is located in front of the machine, being an additional protection of the crew against anti-tank weapons - in the frontal projection of the tank, according to statistics, most of the shells fall.

    2. “A tank is the crew’s home in wartime.” Tankers can not get out of battle for several days, experiencing severe overload from fatigue and nervous exhaustion. Therefore, Tal proposed the concept of round-the-clock use of a tank, for which the fighting compartment must be large and accommodate two crews - one is resting, the second is at war, or it can be used to transport a tank landing.

    In order for even a wounded tankman to leave the wrecked car, the landing hatch must be large and located at the rear of the tank.

    A fire in a padded tank leads to the death of the crew, so the fire extinguishing system must be reusable, because during the battle the tank may have multiple hits.

    3. Statistics showed that in the event of a detonation of ammunition and fuel, the crew perishes completely. Therefore, the combat compartment should be separated from the fuel tanks and ammunition with armor, and the ammunition assembly should be placed in a separate container and automatically shoot out from the tank if it is defeated by anti-tank weapons. Fuel tanks should be in the aft part of the tank, in the zone of the least likely damage from anti-tank weapons.

    4. The tank must have a modular design - by replacing the modules, a wrecked tank can be quickly restored on the battlefield. In addition, the modernization of the tank can be easily implemented by replacing outdated modules with more advanced ones.

    1 - in principle, I don’t know any tanks with this configuration. Maybe innovation. Maximizing crew survival is a top priority. However, if the engine fails, then perhaps the issue of survival will become more problematic - a stationary tank is easy to "finish off".

    2 - Well, complete, I’m sorry, crap - one is fighting, the second is resting ... They arrived ... I try to imagine this picture. And, in addition, probably, there is an inexhaustible supply of fuel and ammunition for a month of battle (+ toilet, shower ... luxury hotel, in a word).

    3 - It is difficult to name this innovation. All advanced tanks have already been designed that way (unfortunately, not in Russia).
    One moment - the engine in the front, the fuel in the back. So the fuel line (probably two!) Goes past the inhabited compartments (not from the outside!).
    Hatch in the rear - an innovation!

    4. - Also not the first one came up.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 14 December 2013 19: 17
      0
      Quote: iConst
      1 - in principle, I don’t know any tanks with this configuration. Maybe innovation. Maximizing crew survival is a top priority. However, if the engine fails, then perhaps the issue of survival will become more problematic - a stationary tank is easy to "finish off".

      Are you really the first time you hear about the Merkava layout?
  • understudy
    understudy 14 December 2013 18: 13
    +1
    As they would say in other times - "Enemy propaganda!" Sniper (!!!) fire for 10-11 km ... yeah, right now. lol
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 14 December 2013 19: 17
      +1
      That was the story. It is worth noting that topography played a significant role there.
  • Power
    Power 14 December 2013 18: 47
    +1
    What is the fifth generation? We have long been ready for the sixth. You forgot about RUSNANO and Chubais. Here we are talking, and Chubais’s nanotanks may now be in Washington, Berlin and Tel Aviv. It's just that they are so small that more than one enemy will not notice them.
  • vinni
    vinni 14 December 2013 19: 04
    +4
    Friends !!! I urge everyone to maintain a high site ranking! Let's do without mutual insults and phobias !!! All are equal in the right to express their thoughts and judgments - this is the basis for discussions. Pay attention - the article on the content, of course, "not a fountain", but what a discussion it caused !!! So, the topic touched a heart! Tanks of the "Merkava" family are undoubtedly a masterpiece of design thought. However, it should be noted that it was created specifically for this particular theater of operations (relief, weather conditions, etc.) and for a specific enemy ... After all, except for Israel, these tanks were not used anywhere else, they were not purchased by anyone. By the way, in my opinion, the Merkava Mk2010 tank was presented at the Eurosatori exhibition in Paris in 4, which aroused great interest among specialists (a special presentation was made for our then chief of armaments Popovkin)
  • Leshka
    Leshka 14 December 2013 19: 39
    0
    oh fools with the coils fool
  • The fat man
    The fat man 14 December 2013 19: 50
    +1
    Quote: vinni
    By the way, in my opinion, in 2010, at the Eurosatori arms exhibition in Paris, the Merkava Mk4 tank was presented, which aroused great interest among specialists (a special presentation was made for our then chief of armaments Popovkin


    I feel that the armata will be slightly changed merkava
  • Turkestan
    Turkestan 14 December 2013 19: 52
    +3
    Actually, it would be interesting to see the competitions at the TANK TIATLON with the participation of tanks of various designs. That's where it will be possible to get the answer which tank is better.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 14 December 2013 20: 09
      0
      Quote: Turkestan
      Actually, it would be interesting to see the competitions at the TANK TIATLON with the participation of tanks of various designs. That's where it will be possible to get the answer which tank is better.


      I would love to see good
    2. Aleksey_K
      Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 20: 38
      0
      It would be much better if real tank battles were organized using anti-tank weapons at special training grounds. But so that no offense and no declaration of war. Since technology allows, then without the participation of people, using computers and automation (instead of people). Then it will be clear who is ahead of the rest here.
  • Aleksey_K
    Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 20: 14
    +1
    the enemy fought according to the Soviet tank regulations and instructions, which prescribed to open aimed fire only at a distance of 1,5 km.

    The author of the article never fired from guns, nor a tank, nor from cannons. Fire is always aimed, even if you aim through the barrel of a gun. Non-target fire - only a raven scare. There is a concept - the range of a direct shot. This is when at this distance with the appropriate adjustment of the sight you aim the marks on the target and under ideal conditions the projectile flight path will not exceed the height of the target and the target will be hit.
    The second in the charters does not say anything about the firing range. At what maximum distance cannon and projectile allow you to hit the target - from there and shoot. And you know, that something between the legs interferes with a bad gunner. The author does not even know that different shells fly at different ranges and therefore there are several aiming scales in the sight. There is no concept in the sight - 1,5 km.
  • Aleksey_K
    Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 20: 32
    +1
    Today, almost all armored vehicles produced in different countries of the world are built on the basis of concepts first tested in the Merkava tank.

    To lie is not to smear the wheels.
    Soviet tank builders became pioneers in the development and implementation of systems for the active protection of tanks. The idea of ​​active protection of the tank was first formulated in one of the Tula design bureaus at the end of the 50's. The first Drozd active defense system was installed on the T-55AD tank and was put into service in the 1983 year. Drozd - the first complex in the world, adopted for service and produced in series.
    Jews have not even thought about their Merkava tank. But during the repatriation of Jews from the USSR, some Jews precisely stole the development of Soviet tank construction. Jews must pay Russia for this.
    1. Professor
      Professor 14 December 2013 20: 43
      +1
      Quote: Алексей_К
      To lie is not to smear the wheels

      100%

      Quote: Алексей_К
      Soviet tank builders became pioneers in the development and implementation of systems for the active protection of tanks.

      Let's talk about the homeland of elephants or discuss the KAZ installed by the Americans before the "Soviet designers"?


      Quote: Алексей_К
      Drozd - the first complex in the world, adopted for service and produced in series.

      Serially? wink
  • cayman gene
    cayman gene 14 December 2013 20: 56
    0
    Quote: atalef
    Quote: just explo
    Well, if you look at the T-90СМ, where only the part of the hull remains from the T-72, it can also be said that the T-90 is a completely new tank and has nothing to do with the T-72.

    Well, in general, then we can say that any brand of car. no matter how advanced it is - just a modernization of the first Ford. (or some other first car) Or just carts laughing

    zealous, you, we don’t love us Russians, well, so we, too, forgive you, we are not obliged to love. I am Russian, the rest are only my Russian relatives.
  • Aleksey_K
    Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 21: 41
    +1
    Quote: Professor
    Let's talk about the homeland of elephants or discuss the KAZ installed by the Americans before the "Soviet designers"?

    On February 8, 2006, Raytheon issued a press release stating that their "Quick Kill System [was] the first Active Protection System (APS) to be able to destroy rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) fired at close range using precision-launched anti-missile missile systems. directional explosion "during live fire tests carried out the day before. However, this was not the first time that an active defense system successfully hit incoming ammunition. Soviet active protection systems Drozd were installed on Soviet tanks in the early 1980s and were widely used by Soviet troops in Afghanistan on old tank models. Later, during a special conference on armor in Kubinka in 1995, the Soviet T-72 tank equipped with an updated version of the SAZ (most likely the Arena system) successfully defended the Competition and RPGs from ATGMs.
    1. Professor
      Professor 14 December 2013 21: 54
      0
      Again with Wiki, copy-paste? wink
      For those who are in the tank, here is another photo of the American M-60 tank with the KAZ installed on it.
  • Aleksey_K
    Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 22: 23
    +4
    Quote: Professor
    Let's talk about the homeland of elephants or discuss the KAZ installed by the Americans before the "Soviet designers"?

    By the way, "professor", you at least translated the text under the photo of the M-60 tank. It looks like no. Here is the text: "For the purposes of testing the US Army proposed" MAKET automatic protection system "on an early model of the M60 tank. The system is designed to detect anti-tank missiles, as well as to launch smoke grenades or thermal flash grenades as a countermeasure."
    Apparently the "professor" considers MAKET to be a working model. Moreover, this MODEL of active protection does not imply the destruction of anti-tank missiles, and even less does it imply the destruction of any incoming shells at all.
    1. Professor
      Professor 14 December 2013 22: 38
      +1
      Quote: Алексей_К
      By the way, "professor", you at least translated the text under the photo of the M-60 tank. It looks like no.

      I don’t speak languages ​​... wink

      Quote: Алексей_К
      Apparently the "professor" considers MAKET to be a working model.

      What surprises you that the KAZ softkill layout was shown to reporters?

      Quote: Алексей_К
      And besides, this MAKET of active defense does not imply the destruction of anti-tank missiles, and moreover does not imply the destruction of any flying projectiles at all.

      As you know, KAZ come in two forms: softkill and hardkill. And the first does not cease to be KAZ.

      So if the Soviet tank builders were pioneers, and the American October. wink

      PS
      Wow!!! LAYOUT works. fellow
    2. Andreas
      Andreas 15 December 2013 05: 02
      +2
      1. Let me thank you for your attention to the picture. The professor had already brought him, but to my shame I did not bother to read the caption in small print - I relied on the competence of the Professor.

      2. You are absolutely right - the device shown in the picture is not an active protection system (SAZ) for tanks. According to the Soviet / Russian classification, the device is a complex of optoelectronic counteraction (KOEP) due to the radar detection of attacking ATGMs and the installation of a smoke curtain / firing blinding grenades on the route of their guidance.

      3. Clarification of the Profesor that according to the Western classification of the KOEP belongs to "soft" active protection systems, it makes sense only to defend the western priority in the creation of the KOEP. In relation to the "hard" SAZ itself, such a statement is a falsification of history and an attempt to deny the obvious - the priority of the USSR in the creation of an SAZ of the "Rain" type in 1970 (see http://topwar.ru/31710-sistemy-aktivnoy-zaschity-bronetehniki .html)

      4. In addition, in contrast to the current Dozhd system, the American technical solution is not a working device, but a mock-up of the device, which does not allow us to speak of Western priority in the creation of a KOEP.

      5. And about attempts to falsify Soviet military-technical achievements - the Drozd active protection system was not only the first serial system in the world, but also the first one put into service, but was also used for the first time in the world in hostilities in Afghanistan http: //armor.kiev.ua/ptur/azt/drozd2.html
      1. Professor
        Professor 15 December 2013 11: 03
        +1
        Quote: Andreas
        relied on the competence of the Professor

        But he was a vile deceiver. belay

        Quote: Andreas
        Clarification of Profesor, that according to the western classification of KOEP

        This is KAZ i.e. The Active Defense Complex (every word from this definition is true in relation to this complex) and it was created in the late 1960s i.e. BEFORE Soviet KAZ / SAZ hence the pioneers and october and "falsification of history." You can, of course, come up with your own classification for anything different from the world one and be always the first, for example, always add "C" - "Soviet". SKAZ is a Soviet active protection complex ... laughing There have already been such attempts, for example, not an aircraft carrier, but an aircraft-carrying cruiser. Nevertheless, the Americans were the first to create KAZ and were the first to test it (this is about the "non-working layout"). The fact that this KAZ did not go into production is another story, by the way, there is no KAZ on Russian tanks either.
        1. Andreas
          Andreas 15 December 2013 11: 35
          +1
          A layout, by definition, cannot be tested.

          If it’s not a secret, do you have a journalism diploma?
          1. Professor
            Professor 15 December 2013 11: 50
            0
            Quote: Andreas
            A layout, by definition, cannot be tested.

            If it’s not a secret, do you have a journalism diploma?

            I have an engineering degree. Under the photo it is written about "sample", not about "layout". breadboard experimental model; prototype. Can a prototype be tested? wink

            PS
            The test photo is not impressed? Should I scan and spread the whole book?
            1. Andreas
              Andreas 15 December 2013 12: 13
              0
              The impression is that you did not use it - a diploma for 25 years (pedaling "Octobrists / pioneers").

              The prototype, prototype and experimental device are two different things from the point of view of both Soviet and American engineering schools. The layout serves only to demonstrate the layout (a radar on the roof, standard grenade launchers, manually firing grenades at the command of the radar operator) and is not operational in the declared automatic mode.

              If it doesn’t bother you, quote from a source of photographs about the presence of a computing device in the US CEP and the content of the so-called tests.
              1. Professor
                Professor 15 December 2013 12: 20
                0
                Quote: Andreas
                The impression is that you did not use it - a diploma for 25 years (pedaling "Octobrists / pioneers").

                Believe it or not. I work in my specialty. It was not me who started about the "pioneers".

                Quote: Andreas
                The prototype, prototype and experimental device are two different things from the point of view of both Soviet and American engineering schools.

                Where did you all see the word "layout"? breadboard in the military field translates as "experimental model; prototype".
                http://www.multitran.ru/c/m.exe?HL=2&l1=1&l2=2&s=breadboard

                Quote: Andreas
                If it doesn’t bother you, quote from a source of photographs about the presence of a computing device in the US CEP and the content of the so-called tests.

                I’ll write an article, everything will be there. hi
                1. Andreas
                  Andreas 15 December 2013 12: 50
                  +1
                  This is for you for an article - the world's first active protection system for tanks "Porcupine" developed by the USSR:
                  - 1965 the beginning of scientific research (demonstration layout);
                  - 1970 the beginning of development work (experimental sample December 1974);
                  - 1977 began the work on the manufacture of a prototype;
                  - state tests of the finished product from March 1981 to April 1982, putting into service under the index 1030M and the title "Drozd" on the T-55 tank with the AD index.

                  KAZ "Drozd" was mass-produced from 1982 to 1988, was used in Afghanistan and was withdrawn from service in connection with the signing by the USSR of the Agreement on the reduction of conventional arms in Eurora

                  http://www.npostrela.com/ru/products/museum/89/227/
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 15 December 2013 12: 59
                    0
                    Quote: Andreas
                    http://www.dogswar.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=77&p=21617#p21617

                    On the website topwar.ru, one of the Israeli commentators posted a photo of a model of the American optical-electronic countermeasures (KOEP) - Breadboard automatic defense system, equipped with radar and smoke / blinding grains and dated from the 1960s, claiming that this device is evidence of the western priority in the development of active protection systems (SAZ) of tanks on the basis of the fact that according to the western classification, KOEP is classified as a softkill system, in contrast to the SAZ itself, which is classified as a "hard" protection (hardkill)
                    http://topwar.ru/37220-konec-tankovoy-ery.html

                    This is not only an attempt to pass the layout as a working device ...

                    Once you decided that this is a "layout" and even "not working"
                    Maybe I don’t need to write anything at all? request

                    PS
                    Israeli KAZ from the distant 1970s:

                    1. Andreas
                      Andreas 15 December 2013 13: 17
                      0
                      Do not report the title "KAZ" and, at the same time:
                      - smoke grenades?
                      - grenade launching is carried out manually, as in the picture you provided?
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 15 December 2013 13: 22
                        0
                        Quote: Andreas
                        Do not report the title "KAZ" and, at the same time:
                        - smoke grenades?
                        - grenade launching is carried out manually, as in the picture you provided?

                        Grenades can be rubber though, from this KAZ does not cease to be KAZ. The picture shows the remote control on which the azimuth of the attack is displayed, the shooting of countermeasures occurs automatically.

                        PS
                        System automatically shot off smoke grenades, flashes, baits, anti-personnel grenades, high-explosive fragmentation grenades or other special ammunition.
                      2. Andreas
                        Andreas 15 December 2013 14: 20
                        +1
                        No need to cast a shadow on the wattle fence.

                        The device in your photo called POMALS is an autonomous system for electronic detection of attacking ATGMs and rocket-propelled grenades (Self-screening system) and requires for its work as a special-purpose vehicle additional specialized ballistic computer, which Israel did not have in the 1970s
                        http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3820.html

                        Therefore, after the automatic notification from POMALS about the azimuth of the attack, the tank operator was forced to manually press two buttons: select the type of grenade (smoke or fragmentation) and the direction of its shot. The effectiveness of this regime when firing high-speed ATGM from a long range or rocket-propelled grenades from a short distance is close / equal to zero.

                        The IMI company, which developed this unit on an initiative basis, immediately refused advertising assurances about the possibility of its use for intercepting missiles / grenades and subsequently issued on its basis only an optical-electronic countermeasure station MAJIC-1
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 15 December 2013 15: 42
                        +1
                        Quote: Andreas
                        No need to cast a shadow on the wattle fence.

                        That's for sure. Do you have to translate everything or is it enough from my words? KAZ automatically fired off countermeasures by issuing warnings to crew members about the sector of the firing source. I repeat: automatically.

                        Quote: Andreas
                        Therefore, after the automatic notification from POMALS about the azimuth of the attack, the tank operator was forced to manually press two buttons: select the type of grenade (smoke or fragmentation) and the direction of its shot.

                        When a signal is detected, the POMALS instantly responds by launching smoke grenades, chaff and / or flares, decoys, anti-personnel grenades, high-explosive grenades or other special munitions.

                        Quote: Andreas
                        The effectiveness of this regime when firing high-speed ATGM from a long range or rocket-propelled grenades from a short distance is close / equal to zero.

                        Is there info on efficiency?

                        Quote: Andreas
                        The IMI company, which developed this unit on an initiative basis, immediately refused advertising assurances about the possibility of its use for intercepting missiles / grenades and subsequently issued on its basis only an optical-electronic countermeasure station MAJIC-1

                        A lot has been done on its basis:
                      4. Andreas
                        Andreas 15 December 2013 21: 31
                        +1
                        Words just do not need, the image is quite enough:
                        - in the only quote from army-quide.com (which you yourself quoted) nothing is said about the automatic mode of firing from the tank mortar, but in the original source there is a photo with tame remote firing grenades.

                        The zero efficiency of manual guidance of a fragmentation grenade at a target flying at a speed of 100 m / s (cumulative RPG) to 300 m / s (ATGM) is unknown only to you and, earlier, to POMALS developers laughing
                      5. Professor
                        Professor 15 December 2013 22: 37
                        0
                        Quote: Andreas
                        Words just do not need, the image is quite enough:

                        No, let me ... I quote again When a signal is detected, the POMALS instantly responds by launching smoke grenades, chaff and / or flares, decoys, anti-personnel grenades, high-explosive grenades or other special munitions. Not an operator, not a fighter, but "POMALS immediately reacts by launching ...", but you can not read this and draw conclusions from the pictures. wink

                        And here is what the bourgeoisie write about the "hand-held remote firing grenades": It also provides threat identification, visual directional display of the threat source using a digital and clock-type display and an auto alert to the commander and crew.

                        Quote: Andreas
                        The zero efficiency of manual guidance of a fragmentation grenade at a target flying at a speed of 100 m / s (cumulative RPG) to 300 m / s (ATGM) is unknown only to you and, earlier, to POMALS developers

                        And we decided about manual guidance on the picture? Then I wash my hands and go tell the tankers from Merkava that POMALS had manual control on their tank, let them laugh heartily. hi

                        I almost forgot, I would also tell the developers of the Pedestal Operated Multi Ammunition Launching System that they do not understand anything about aiming at a target flying at a speed of 100 to 300 m / s, but unfortunately I am not familiar with it. They created poor KAZ without understanding what they are doing.



                        PS
                        In your opinion, is this an optical-electronic countermeasure station? lol Oh well. It is strange why they put it only on the command tank, and even on the four ... The rest are not people? recourse

                      6. Andreas
                        Andreas 16 December 2013 01: 28
                        0
                        Once again - POMALS was developed by IMI on its own initiative as just a sensor of attacking targets. It was assumed that in the future it will be docked with a specialized ballistic computer (which was not developed then) and the tank’s mortars. In the absence of a calculator, IMI suggested that tankers limit themselves to a mimic diagram (in the form of a dial), which displayed the azimuth of the approaching attacking target, after which the operator had to activate the corresponding mortar and shoot a smoke grenade on the approach route. IMI's advertisements about the possibility of using fragmentation grenades belonged to an uncertain future. There were no people who wanted to use or modify an incomplete system, so it remained a CEP without leaving the prototype stage.

                        The first photo shows a completely different system - the Israeli Iron First SAZ, created a quarter of a century after the adoption of the Soviet KAZ "Drozd". Iron First lost in its characteristics to another Israeli CAZ Trophy and, therefore, remained at the level of the prototype.

                        The second photo shows an ultraviolet radiation sensor for ATGM flame torches and MAJIC-1 rocket-propelled grenades, developed on the basis of the PONALS COEP series, which did not go into the COEP series. It serves to determine the direction in the azimuth of the flight of attacking targets. This collective sensor is attached to the commander tank of a tank platoon, information is automatically transmitted to each platoon tank.
                      7. Professor
                        Professor 16 December 2013 19: 03
                        0
                        Quote: Andreas
                        Once again - POMALS was developed by IMI on its own initiative as just a sensor of attacking targets.

                        I see which sensor.


                        Quote: Andreas
                        Iron First lost in its characteristics to another Israeli SAZ Trophy and therefore remained at the level of the prototype.

                        "Prototype" (earlier you called prototypes in general "mock-ups") is installed on a machine in regular troops.


                        Quote: Andreas
                        The second photo shows an ultraviolet radiation sensor for ATGM flame torches and MAJIC-1 rocket-propelled grenades, developed on the basis of the PONALS COEP series, which did not go into the COEP series. It serves to determine the direction in the azimuth of the flight of attacking targets. This collective sensor is attached to the commander tank of a tank platoon, information is automatically transmitted to each platoon tank.

                        good
                      8. Andreas
                        Andreas 17 December 2013 00: 06
                        0
                        1. This is an advertising fake, not a sensor.

                        2. The American device of the 1960s, the authors themselves called the breadboard. I called Iron First an experimental device (development type) due to the fact that it was not adopted for service.

                        3. drinks
                      9. abrakadabre
                        abrakadabre 17 December 2013 09: 29
                        0
                        Oops on!
                        Before, you called prototypes

                        And the men do not even know.
                        In fact, a mock-up is a non-functional copy of something that repeats the appearance, dimensions, and sometimes the mass of the original object. In vernacular - a cardboard fool.
                        A prototype is one or several fully functional copies of an object intended for serial replication, made for the purpose of trial operation, final refinement, for advertising, etc.

                        If you illustrate the topic of tanks, then the difference between the concepts: an inflatable mock-up simulator of a tank for the purpose of misleading the enemy and a prototype of a tank sent to a tank training ground.

                        As they say, feel the difference.
                      10. Professor
                        Professor 17 December 2013 10: 57
                        0
                        Quote: Andreas
                        1. This is an advertising fake, not a sensor.

                        Strong argument. There is nothing to cover. The main thing is detailed, with evidence. In short, they convinced. wassat

                        Quote: Andreas
                        2. The American device of the 1960s, the authors themselves called the breadboard.

                        You do not have much English, and you ignore my links. Last resort: http://www.multitran.ru/c/m.exe?HL=2&l1=1&l2=2&s=breadboard
                        breadboard is a war. experimental model; prototype
                        This "model" was tested and, moreover, it was successful.

                        Quote: Andreas
                        I called Iron First an experimental device (development type) due to the fact that it was not adopted for service.

                        The fact that Trophy stands on Merkava does not mean that Iron First remained an experienced device. Last time, Iron First was on Namer in regular troops, and not on the experienced M113.
  • I think so
    I think so 14 December 2013 22: 34
    +1
    If Jews refuse tanks, this does not mean that the tanks have come to an end. On the contrary, the one who abandons the tanks is waiting for the end ... What kind of article is pure nonsense and advertising of second-class goods (Israel) ...