Military Review

Heavy armored personnel carrier "Namer" ("Leopard"). Israel

279
As you know, Israeli military equipment designers have gained considerable experience in the field of creating highly protected military vehicles using as a base tanks: this is the Puma engineering vehicle (based on Centurion), Akhzarit BMP (based on captured T-55s), Nakpodon and Nagmash'ot armored personnel carriers (both also based on the Centurion tank). Now in Israel, a prototype of a heavy infantry fighting vehicle was created on the basis of the Israeli Merkava Mk1 main battle tank, which received the serial name "Namer" (Namer - Tiger). The first acquaintance with this machine occurred on March 7–10, 2005 in Tel Aviv at the Low Intensity Conflict 2005 arms exhibition. The prototype BMP "Namer", which was presented by Israel at the exhibition, according to the local representative of the editorial office of the popular JDW magazine, "is an exhibition model of technology with real components, which has passed all the necessary operational evaluation in a separate 84th brigade of the Israeli defense forces and will be used in the sector Strip after the exhibition. "


According to Western sources, in Israel, on September 2007, XNUMX, a five-year arms procurement plan was approved (earlier, the budget, like all other government spending, was drawn up strictly for one year). As local experts emphasize, this plan has one specificity - after many years of preference given to missile and aviation technology, the authorities today decided to first provide the necessary weapons and military equipment to their own ground forces and their armored base. Israeli experts note that such a turn is justified by the experience that was gained in the 2nd Lebanon war, which showed the Air Force’s inability to independently solve the complex tasks of combating perfectly disguised and fortified enemy positions. With all this, the ground forces suffered significant losses due to the poor protection of armored vehicles. In order to improve the situation, the Ministry of Defense allocated $ 1 billion for the purchase of several hundred new BMP “Namer”.



The prototype BMP "Namer" was made on the basis of the tank "Merkava" Mk1 by removing from it a tower with mounted cannon armament and technical equipment in the stern of the hull to prepare places for transporting 8-equipped infantrymen. In addition, the loading of a standard stretcher for the 1 of the wounded was provided (except for the landing force). Places still 3 crew members are located in the front of the hull. The paratroopers take and leave their seats through a special hydraulic ramp with a hydraulic drive installed, and the crew through the hatches in the roof. Periscopic tracking devices are located around the hatches, and in front of them are turrets for attaching weapons. The prototype presented at the “Low Intensity Conflict 2005” exposition was equipped with a 12,7-mm remote coaxial machine-gun radial rotation unit “Katlanit” manufactured by Rafael and a 7,62-mm manual-controlled machine gun. In the BMP used diesel power unit AVDS power 900 hp previously installed on the tank Merkava Mk1. Mounts for overhead dozer equipment or mine trawl are provided in the bow.

The BMP has a reinforced armored bottom protection (equipped with a mine guard system) and a hull upper hemisphere (multi-layer and posted booking). Frontal reservations are fully repackaged and enhanced, and the stern ramp has also been enhanced. Chassis and sides are locked folding iron screens. In the future, BMP is planned to equip the system of active protection "Trophy".

Heavy armored personnel carrier "Namer" ("Leopard"). Israel


It is assumed that the serial version of the BMP “Namer” will be equipped with a weapon module with remote control of the state company “Rafael”, including (in different versions) 7,62-mm or 12,7-mm machine gun, 30-mm mechanical gun, 40-mm mechanical grenade launcher. With all this, the installation can be installed both on the roof of the troop compartment itself and on the turrets in the area of ​​the hatches. The design and creation of the first prototype of the BMP "Namer" was carried out by the Merkava tank development department of the Israeli Defense Forces. However, according to the Israeli military, a radical re-equipment of the Merkava Mk1 tank chassis led to significant costs, comparable to the creation of a similar combat vehicle from scratch (estimated 750.000 $). Thus, it was decided to develop a series of BMP "Namer" on the basis of the chassis currently manufactured by the Israeli industry Merkava tanks Mk4.



BMP "Timer", made on the basis of "Merkava" Mk4, is much more different from the prototype. At first, this applies to bevelled side protection panels on fenced shelves (valid with integrated dynamic protection). In addition, the combat vehicle received a full-fledged commander's tower and a new remote-controlled machine gun installation caliber 12,7 mm. For the likelihood of tracking from the troop compartment closer to the stern of the sides were provided protruding at an angle viewing glass blocks. Above them were placed special 6-barrels of smoke grenade launchers. From the tank "Merkava" Mk4 BMP also inherited the engine, box and chassis.

Currently, several samples of BMPs have already been manufactured, and they have entered the test service to the troops. The first cars are equipped with a diesel power unit with an HP 1200 power. Similar engines are used in tanks Merkava 3, but in the future will consider other options. By such options should include an improved propulsion system AVDS-1790. The total number of machines required for IDF is the Namer 600 BMP.



Tactical and technical characteristics of the Namer BMP:
• Length - 7450 mm;
• Crew - 3 person;
• Combat weight - 60 tons;
• Landing Party - 9 people;
• Width - 3700 mm;
• Reservations - multi-layer composite;
• Specific power - 20 HP / t;
• Cruising on the highway - 500 km;
• Armament - 40-mm mechanical grenade launcher, 12,7-mm remote twin machine gun installation, 30-mm mechanical gun.
279 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lyapis
    Lyapis 21 September 2013 08: 03
    +11
    There was a feeling that the Israelis in terms of armored vehicles suffer from gigantomania (the first photo was very impressive belay )
    When shooting at such an infantry fighting vehicle, it is probably very difficult to miss.
    1. Alexey Prikazchikov
      Alexey Prikazchikov 21 September 2013 08: 05
      +27
      the main thing is that she is likely to protect the crew and the landing, but our second beh or treshka is already vryatli.
      1. astra
        astra 21 September 2013 09: 57
        +20
        Quote: Lyapis
        There was a feeling that the Israelis in terms of armored vehicles suffer from gigantomania (the first photo was very impressive) When shooting at such an infantry fighting vehicle, it is probably very difficult to miss.

        But the security is an order of magnitude higher than in our armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, although there is no way to overcome water barriers, but if such vehicles hold an RPG strike, then it costs a lot, the soldier’s life is above all. We could have some of the armored vehicles in the current version — light, part in a heavy version with enhanced protection.
        1. 31231
          31231 21 September 2013 21: 47
          +5
          Here I agree that a small number of them will not hurt us.
        2. Curaki
          Curaki 26 May 2014 00: 44
          0
          They have almost no rivers)
      2. Lyapis
        Lyapis 21 September 2013 13: 31
        +12
        In my opinion, comparing Israeli and ours (as well as most foreign) armored vehicles is not entirely correct. All the same, the Israelis make specific equipment for specific conditions ...
      3. 31231
        31231 21 September 2013 21: 46
        -3
        what will she protect from? From RPG ?! So on it from ATGMs they will beat and to tear HE HEs. It is much more expensive than BMP, respectively, their number per unit of staff is less.
        1. Artyom
          Artyom 22 September 2013 13: 44
          +1
          that's just from landmines he must protect! watch carefully the video from "anna news" where the areas are being assaulted, our old BMPs are doing well there, but more and more thanks to their speed and maneuverability, but protection is not enough, a simple high-explosive mine can catch fire!
      4. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 22 September 2013 02: 48
        +3
        Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
        the main thing is that she is likely to protect the crew and the landing, but our second beh or treshka is already vryatli.


        the story with the mouse tank comes to mind. he could also protect against an all-inclusive mudflow and earthquake.
      5. Artyom
        Artyom 22 September 2013 13: 33
        0
        our BMPs and BMDs were created on the condition that they should be transferred to AN 12 and swim, everything flows from here, it’s swimming among the Israelis hi but they don’t need it, ours also thought about the production of heavily armored infantry fighting vehicles, based on "Armata"
        1. old man54
          old man54 22 September 2013 21: 05
          -2
          Quote: Artyom
          our BMP And BMD created under the condition that they should be transferred to AN 12

          Well, don’t write to me immediately! No one created an infantry fighting vehicle for landing, especially for an airborne one, by parachute i.e.!
          I am surprised by the tendency for VO not to sign articles recently !!? What, again this "professor" Jewish defense industry glorifies ???
          1. Eugeniy_369
            Eugeniy_369 26 September 2013 13: 53
            +3
            Quote: old man54
            I am surprised by the tendency on VO not to sign articles recently !!? What, again this "professor" of the Jewish military-industrial complex sings ???

            In vain you are, the facts are alone. No analyzes, conjectures. A clear, detailed account of the new technique. And you are "chanting" ....
    2. Akim
      Akim 21 September 2013 08: 46
      +4
      Quote: Lyapis
      (the first photo was very impressive

      And I have a photo from the stern. How big he is!
      1. 77bob1973
        77bob1973 21 September 2013 13: 45
        +2
        Not only big but also very heavy.
    3. self-propelled
      self-propelled 21 September 2013 09: 48
      +8
      Quote: Lyapis
      the first photo was very impressive

      I don’t think that it’s possible to create something more or less compact on the basis of the tank
      1. Curaki
        Curaki 26 May 2014 00: 46
        -1
        Ukrainian development)
    4. Pimply
      Pimply 21 September 2013 13: 40
      -3
      For a start
      a) try to sit for several hours in a low-profile machine
      b) compare the profiles of tanks, for example, Western and Soviet. So radical a difference?

      Low-profile vehicles have become obsolete with the advent of normal optics and modern anti-tank systems.
      1. postman
        postman 21 September 2013 15: 38
        +15
        Quote: Pimply
        Low-profile vehicles have become obsolete with the advent of normal optics and modern anti-tank systems.

        -Well, this is not true, try to get from the gun into a shield of 2 square meters and 2,5 square meters
        == there is always scatter, and the larger the area of ​​the affected object, the less its impact

        - when changing the length / width / height of the tank body(rather the reserved volume) its mass varies in the proportion 1/3/7, i.e. a 10cm change in height will produce the same mass gain as a 70cm change in length.
        , which, in principle, proves the "catastrophic weight of the Merkava" /
        50s Tank Design Tutorial.

        position of the center of gravity
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 15: 53
          -1
          Quote: Postman

          50s Tank Design Tutorial.

          "sandwich".
          1. postman
            postman 21 September 2013 16: 03
            +5
            Quote: Aron Zaavi
            "sandwich".

            in the sense? with chicken or cheese? wink
            1. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 16: 59
              -3
              Quote: Postman

              in the sense? with chicken or cheese? wink

              Well type. hi
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 21 September 2013 22: 51
          +4
          And the same textbook to talk about the distribution of the mass of the tank over the area? And why is the weight of the Merkava "catastrophic"?
          1. postman
            postman 22 September 2013 21: 50
            +1
            Quote: Pimply
            on the distribution of tank mass over the area

            what is the distribution of mass over the area is unknown.
            AS NECESSARY - WE LIVE IN THREE DIMENSIONAL WORLD! if you distribute, then in volume

            and where does the mass distribution?
            we are talking about the position of the center of mass relative to the supporting surface (overturning moment)


            Quote: Pimply
            And why is the weight of the Merkava "catastrophic"?


            The only obvious drawback of the Merkava-4 is its large weight, which exceeds 60 tons. Experts believe that when operating on clay soil, this machine can be completely helpless. Although the creators developed the design of the tank exclusively for the conditions of their region - stony soils and deserts.


            By the way, about "rain" in Israel ... It all depends on the type of soil. Rain in the Leningrad region (which lasts, as you know, 13 months a year) is one thing, but on the soils of Israel it is another


            here is a complex for fans of Israeli weapons, people of Jewish nationality, or citizens of Israel:
            "all our best", and someone else's not very
            Israeli Merkava tanks are some of the most original in the world of tank building. This series of combat vehicles is not just an outstanding creation of the military-industrial complex, but the national pride of the country.

            Let me remind you: the coolest egg is boiled, probably from the time of writing, but trouble can’t be cooked, and they will not prove the coolest
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 22: 47
              -1
              Well, maybe because the tank will go where the horse fails?
              Will you give the names of the failure experts? Or is it an OBS again?


              You may not be aware, but about 5 months a year in Israel in those places where Merkava is based - impassable dirt.

              Well, among the admirers of "experts" the reality floats away somewhere far, far away. Israel is stones, muddle, and a solid plain. Isn't it funny yourself?

              None of the Israelis, if you have noticed, says that the Merkava is "indestructible", cannot get stuck in the mud, or does not have certain drawbacks. Only these shortcomings should be judged professionally and with a head, and not quoting nonsense, like a recent "expert" article in four parts, where the author harnessed the jamb, rode on the jamb, and drove the jamb.
              1. postman
                postman 23 September 2013 17: 42
                +1
                Quote: Pimply
                Well, maybe because the tank will go where the horse fails?

                I didn’t get into the dirt in the mud, I didn’t happen, I know that where Helen was planting to death, the horse passes effortlessly.
                And will MBTs, for example, pass through the Grimpen quagmire?
                http://img1.liveinternet.ru/images/foto/b/1/317/2931317/f_19326460.jpg
                Quote: Pimply
                exchange experts on failure lead? Or is it an OBS again?

                Am I on the exam? then I brought the whole extract (the words are not mine) do I need to search for a full name expert, insert in the search engine, there

                Quote: Pimply
                You may not be aware, but about 5 months a year in Israel in those places where Merkava is based - impassable dirt.

                no, not in the know. but a reasonable question arises- and on fig she (merkava) there (in the mud) is based then? ON FUY?
                Nothing to do?
                Or do contiguous likely opponents expect dirt?
                It looks like a madhouse, or window dressing

                Quote: Pimply
                Israel stones, muds, and plain plain. Himself not funny?

                So the geography textbook was broadcast to me, back in the USSR. Is it really a mistake?
                Quote: Pimply
                rather than quoting nonsense

                Something you wedge on delirium, nebo, h / w word, and in every comment.
                not nonsense (or phobia) by chance? You be careful
                1. Rumata
                  Rumata 24 September 2013 10: 15
                  +1
                  Quote: Postman
                  no, not in the know. but a reasonable question arises, is it on the fig (merkava) there (in the mud) is it based? ON FUY?

                  Because the Golan Heights is the main theater for them. And there, in the Golan, the average annual number of Osaks is twice as high as in Len. Areas as an example. And they are given out in three months, so count. More than once I have already met here about "Yes, in our mud they will not pass even a meter," although in winter there is sheer hell in this regard ...
                  1. postman
                    postman 24 September 2013 17: 54
                    -1
                    Quote: Rumata
                    And there, in the Golan, the average annual number of Osaks,

                    YES?
                    and you won’t think ... heights.
                    Well, I take my word for it, though about Len. reg. kind of pushed up?
                    annual precipitation 517-557 mm (adjusted for wetting and wind underestimation of 637-666 mm);

                    daily maximum precipitation –81,9 mm.


                    http://www.meteo.nw.ru/images/userimages/Osadki2.png
                    it happens on your golan up to 1000mm, but it’s local (let's not compare the territory of L.O. and the Golan?), and so 535-575mm


                    Quote: Rumata
                    although in winter there is hell in this regard ...

                    I can advise (although Israel is unlikely to follow my advice):
                    IMPLEMENT UN Security Council Resolution No. 497 of December 17, 1981.
                    and everything will be ok, no need to sit in the mud
                    1. FAO_48E
                      FAO_48E 4 October 2013 04: 14
                      +2
                      Quote: Postman
                      ... I can advise (although Israel is unlikely to follow my advice): IMPLEMENT UN Security Council Resolution No. 497 of December 17, 1981.
                      and everything will be ok, no need to sit in the mud
                      But then Tsakhal will have to storm these heights once again ...
            2. 31231
              31231 22 September 2013 22: 52
              0
              By the way, about "rain" in Israel ... It all depends on the type of soil. Rain in the Leningrad region (which lasts, as you know, 13 months a year) is one thing, but on the soils of Israel it is another


              I was in your Leningrad region. SEG built. Most of the sandy soil you have there.
              We have heavy clay in the Urals. Such carrots were clearly not seen in a water-saturated state.
              1. postman
                postman 22 September 2013 23: 10
                -1
                Quote: 31231
                Most of the sandy soil you have there.

                Are you talking about Toksovo and Sosnovo?
                Yes, I don’t have soil .. it’s kind of sand. Otherwise, a car with firewood sits down if it's damp
                NOT SAND-sandy loam there (A minor mistake in digging a well-rings donated to the earth). In Karelian-kamenyuki
                Try the other way around:
                This day came on September 21, when the 1st company was attached to the 170th Infantry Division. When Major Marker found out about the upcoming mission, his indignation knew no bounds. The commander was supported by all the officers of the company. The major demanded to cancel the order to attach to the infantry, not understanding why his newest tanks were driven to this sector of the front. The place where four Tiger tanks and one Pz.Krfw.III tank were sent were personally chosen by Hitler.

                With all his will, the master of strategy would hardly be able to choose a more unsuitable area for using heavy tanks: swamps, the only solid soil is a narrow winding dam several kilometers long, surrounded on both sides by a forest.

                .

                One "Tiger" tried to bypass the burning Рz.Крfw. III, but stuck in the mud.
                .
                One after another, the tanks stopped knocked out or stuck in the mud when trying to turn around.
                .
                One tank got stuck so tightly that it was not left in place by three 18-ton tractors connected by a train
                ...
              2. Pimply
                Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 34
                +3
                Slide to Israel in December and drive around the country.
                1. postman
                  postman 23 September 2013 17: 19
                  -1
                  Quote: Pimply
                  Roll to Israel in December

                  without fail, everything doesn’t succeed, either terrorist attack or aggravation.
                  is it possible in late October / early November or late March / early April?
                  (I'm just attached to school, and the habit is already 17 years in a row)
                  or the effect will not be the same?
      2. Lesnik
        Lesnik 25 December 2013 22: 26
        0
        Funny ZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
    5. honest jew
      honest jew 21 September 2013 13: 42
      +2
      Unlike Russia, in Israel we have a soldier’s life in price !!! Therefore, the protection of armored vehicles is appropriate! hi
      1. Perch_xnumx
        Perch_xnumx 21 September 2013 14: 13
        +11
        Quote: honest Jew
        Unlike Russia, in Israel we have a soldier’s life in price !!! Therefore, the protection of armored vehicles is appropriate! hi

        Firstly, it’s difficult, hence the difficulty in transporting by plane, the difficulty in moving along bridges, the complexity of transporting by rail. Large dimensions - the inconvenience of moving around city buildings, the inconvenience of moving around ruins and cluttered places, maneuvering and speed will be limited in such places - this is an excellent target. Reservations are certainly serious, but what about a defeat from above, or firing at vulnerable places with modern anti-tank weapons. In general, it’s normal in the desert, in the city I’m not sure if the enemy will be equivalent then it will be possible to understand whether this IFV is really useful or not, it’s not the right task to drive Arabs with machine guns.
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 14: 21
          +5
          Quote: Perch_1
          In general, it’s normal in the desert, in the city I’m not sure if the enemy will be equivalent then it will be possible to understand whether this IFV is really useful or not, it’s not the right task to drive Arabs with machine guns.

          (tired) It's not an BMP. This is TBTR. Development of the idea of ​​"Akhzarit", which was created under the concept of storming the Syrian fortified areas near Damascus in the 80s.
        2. atalef
          atalef 21 September 2013 14: 34
          +12
          Quote: Perch_1
          Firstly, it’s difficult, hence the difficulty in transporting by plane, the difficulty in moving along bridges, the complexity of transporting by rail.

          Well, with our 500 km length of the country (and the 14th) in the narrowest spot --- this is very actual laughing

          Quote: Perch_1
          Large dimensions - inconvenience of movement in urban areas, inconvenience of movement in ruins and cluttered places, maneuvering and speed will be limited in such places this is an excellent target

          Have you ever seen Gaza, Kasbah Shem or Jenin? There, streets 3-4 m wide are not such a rare occurrence. I would even say mostly. Nevertheless, he fights and is very successful.
          Quote: Perch_1
          Reservations are of course serious, but what about a defeat from above, or firing at vulnerable places with modern anti-tank weapons

          Merkava (4) the only tank in the world today that has an armored top of the tower (like a hatch), well, there’s no question about Namer (he has the whole top spaced, multi-layer armor)

          Quote: Perch_1
          In general, the desert is normal, the city is not sure

          They were created primarily for the city.

          Quote: Perch_1
          if the opponent is equivalent

          Is your concept equivalent? It is much easier to fight with the equivalent than with the asymmetric.

          Quote: Perch_1
          Arabs with guns to drive this is somewhat the wrong task

          Yes, it’s very simple. Assad cannot cope for 2 years, Chechnya and Dagestan are already 13 years old, but we somehow put out.
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 21 September 2013 15: 24
            +2
            Kasbah Schema I remember well back in 2002. The distance between the houses to zero - which allowed literally flashing it through the walls, passing through the holes between the houses.
            1. atalef
              atalef 21 September 2013 20: 16
              0
              Quote: Pimply
              Kasbah Schema I remember well back in 2002. The distance between the houses to zero - which allowed literally flashing it through the walls, passing through the holes between the houses.

              We have Shimon (the Protective Wall called for the operation), took a punch with him (such a healthy one) They punched the same walls in Scheme, and so they moved them from one house to another (he (Shimon) from Nakhal.
          2. terp 50
            terp 50 21 September 2013 20: 13
            0
            ... and where to transport it by plane? Israel is not Russia, nor those distances, and they don’t carry them with us, AMD, but that will be another story ...
          3. Vadivak
            Vadivak 22 September 2013 21: 37
            +1
            Quote: atalef
            Merkava (4) the only tank in the world today that has an armored tower top


            It’s strange that the Ukrainians didn’t throw you cons

            Since anti-tank weapons hitting the tank from the side of the turret’s roof presently pose a serious threat to tanks, the roof of the Oplot’s turret between the commander’s and gunner’s hatches is equipped with additional protection against the aforementioned weapons. Passive and dynamic.

            By the way, if anything, on domestic equipment (T-90), dynamic armor is installed on the roof.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 00
              +1
              Dynamic armor is not a panacea. The first serial appeared, by the way, on Israeli tanks. "Blazer". Why do you think they abandoned it?
              1. Kars
                Kars 22 September 2013 23: 14
                +1
                Quote: Pimply
                Blazer. ”Why do you think they abandoned her?

                And why was it abandoned?
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 35
                  -1
                  But this is a great mystery;)
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 22 September 2013 23: 43
                    +2
                    Quote: Pimply
                    But this is a great mystery;)

                    Let's assume that after the blazer nothing intelligible happened?
                    Otherwise, I do not understand the refusal of DZ. Even a simple contact-1 would increase the security of Carrots.
                    1. Pimply
                      Pimply 23 September 2013 02: 29
                      +1
                      With the level of industry in Israel would not work? Do not make me laugh. If you paid attention, they began to develop dynamic protection only in the post-Soviet space. Across the world, they abandoned her. And this despite the fact that these developments were conducted at one time. It’s just most likely that they came to the conclusion that the branch is dead-end and has too many shortcomings - and there are, agree.

                      Dynamic armor was actively used back in the Magi. But Merkava took a different path, and hardly from stupidity, Andrei.
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 23 September 2013 09: 32
                        +1
                        Quote: Pimply
                        With the level of industry in Israel would not work? Do not make me laugh

                        And what is it? Took and failed.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        If you noticed, dynamic protection began to develop actively only in the post-Soviet space

                        Not only
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Dynamic armor was actively used back in the Magi. But on Merkava they took a different path, and hardly from stupidity, Andrey

                        Well, the second Lebanese has shown that it is very similar.
                        But you can still reveal the secret.
                      2. Kars
                        Kars 23 September 2013 09: 44
                        +1
                        straight to the suit today.

                        The layout of the tower of the tank Black Panther, brown color marked elements DZ

                        http://topwar.ru/33618-bronya-chernoy-pantery.html
                      3. Pimply
                        Pimply 23 September 2013 16: 41
                        0
                        Dynamic defense elements are used by most tanks, Andrey. But the elements.
                    2. Pimply
                      Pimply 23 September 2013 16: 28
                      +1
                      Quote: Kars
                      And what is it? Took and failed.

                      Dad is joking. ;) A constantly howling country for 30 years has not been able to further develop what it developed first?
                      The secret is simple - DZ, unlike multi-layer modular armor, has much more disadvantages.
                      Quote: Kars
                      Not only

                      Remind me where it is actively used now? In addition to the tanks of the Soviet school?

                      Quote: Kars
                      Well, the second Lebanese has shown that it is very similar.
                      But you can still reveal the secret.

                      The second Lebanese showed that everything is very good. 53 defeats 24 penetrations. And this is taking into account the fact that they were planted with quite serious anti-tank systems.
                2. svp67
                  svp67 23 September 2013 02: 35
                  +1
                  Quote: Kars
                  Otherwise, I do not understand the refusal of DZ. Even a simple contact-1 would increase the security of Carrots.
                  And would make her not safe for his own infantry. "Modular" booking is the future. It is a pity that we were the first in this matter, but we stopped ... and others picked up the baton.
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 23 September 2013 09: 36
                    +2
                    Quote: svp67
                    And would make her not safe for his own infantry

                    ))))) Why would it? Surely the RPG explosion on the armor is absolutely safe for the infantry. At the same time, insufficient armor resistance forced Israel to put KAZ even more unloved by you.

                    Quote: svp67
                    "Modular" booking is the future.

                    In your DZ, is this not a modular reservation? At the same time, nothing prevents you from having a modular reservation from combined reservation.
                  2. svp67
                    svp67 23 September 2013 14: 08
                    0
                    Quote: Kars
                    Surely the explosion of RPG on the armor is absolutely safe for infantry
                    certainly not safe. But the beauty of the "module" is that it "absorbs" most of the RPG's energy, and a fan of fragments comes from the remote sensing, and the main thing is not clear in which direction ...
                    Quote: Kars
                    At the same time, insufficient armor resistance forced Israel to put even more disliked KAZ by you.
                    What if this is now the "most effective" way to increase armor resistance. But as soon as it is possible to create a KAZ using a method other than the kinetic method of exposure, they will immediately abandon this ...
                    Quote: Kars
                    In your DZ, is this not a modular reservation? At the same time, nothing prevents you from having a modular reservation from combined reservation.
                    Yes, the fact of the matter is that on our modern tanks, because of their small dimensions, this is so far the only affordable way ... But, what will happen next ... Let's see
          4. lucidlook
            lucidlook 23 September 2013 02: 59
            +2
            It was abandoned not only in Israel. In principle, the thing is convenient, but, as they say, there are nuances. for instance

            In August 2006, in al-Amara, a shot from a Russian RPG-29 damaged the lower part of the Challenger 2, despite triggering a remote sensing device in the driver's cabin, he lost part of his leg, and two more crews were injured. However, the driver was able to reverse 1,5 miles (2,4 km) to the location of the units and the first-aid post. The incident was not made public until May 2007. In response to the allegations, the UK Department of Defense said: "We never claimed the Challenger 2 was impenetrable." Following an analysis of the incident, the DZ was replaced with a Dorchester block (Dorchester multilayer armor) throughout the lower hull as part of the Streetfighter update.
            1. Kars
              Kars 23 September 2013 09: 30
              +1
              Quote: lucidlook
              Challenger 2, despite the operation of the remote sensing



              DZ they have the wrong system. However, it is not the fact that the grenade was an RPG-29, and not the usual RPG-7 fell into the gap between the extra protection of the forehead and the bottom, which indicates that the mech-water has damage to the feet. DZ this case has nothing to do, it existed in fact.
              1. lucidlook
                lucidlook 23 September 2013 13: 43
                +2
                Quote: Kars
                DZ they have the wrong system. However, it is not the fact that the grenade was an RPG-29, and not the usual RPG-7 fell into the gap between the extra protection of the forehead and the bottom, which indicates that the mech-water has damage to the feet. DZ this case has nothing to do, it existed in fact.

                To listen to you, the brits do not understand the essence of the matter at all - and they have the wrong system, and they cannot determine the RPG, and the booking with holes, and the most important and incomprehensible is "it": "vet it in fact there was ".

                Nevertheless, it is Challanger-2 that is the very tank that did not suffer losses from enemy fire for the entire time it was used in wars in the bay. It says something about something. And if you remember that one of them withstood 14 hits from an RPG, was repaired and returned to service after six hours, then you probably have to agree that there’s nothing at all, but the shavers understand the tank armor.
              2. lucidlook
                lucidlook 23 September 2013 20: 42
                +2
                And to the question of the use of KDZ in urban battles (Grozny)

                Waging an intense battle in the narrow streets of the city, hiding from return fire, tank crews pressed cars to buildings or drove inside houses, demolishing bulwarks and crushing KDZ blocks. There was practically no time for repairs in a combat situation. The absence of new blocks made it impossible and pointless to install explosive plates brought from the rear.

                http://btvt.narod.ru/2/tanks_in_grozny.htm
    6. vahatak
      vahatak 28 September 2013 17: 32
      -1
      I understand this is a mobile bunker? If this machine is designed for transportation, then why does he need such armor? And for urban battles, it makes no sense to create cars, since in cities it is impossible to fight in principle. If the city (population) resists, take artillery and destroy it until it surrenders. Why enter the city? it will only increase losses.
  2. patrianostra
    patrianostra 22 September 2013 17: 50
    0
    The first Israelis created this and other armored personnel carriers on the basis of tanks specifically for their TVD of a river of 1-2,5 meters, in the south and center there are almost plain, north and east mountains crossed by deep gorges. The second in the army is constantly conducted exercises of all kinds and types of troops. Pictured Golan Heights.
  3. Lesnik
    Lesnik 26 December 2013 23: 51
    +1
    Quote: Perch_1
    Firstly, it’s difficult, hence the difficulty in transporting by plane, the difficulty in moving along bridges, the complexity of transporting by rail.


    As far as I understand, there were no restrictions on transportation conditions in those tasks.

    Large dimensions - the inconvenience of moving around city buildings, the inconvenience of moving around ruins and cluttered places, maneuvering and speed will be limited in such places - this is an excellent target.


    "As far as I understand," the IDF prefers not to walk along the streets, but to create new "highways" for itself with heavy bulldozers (not really bother with the "rules of war") and when cleaning up urban development, "large" with the ability to conduct anti-aircraft fire, all the more remotely controlled SIMPLY SONG!!!!

    Reservations are certainly serious, but what about a defeat from above, or firing at vulnerable places with modern anti-tank weapons.


    "As far as I understand that" the active defense system that stands there (I don't remember what it's called, but it's too lazy to look for) is very effective + the "big" I mentioned earlier + a promising combat control system (prompt delivery of orders and the situation) ... then ....

    In general, it’s normal in the desert, in the city I’m not sure if the enemy will be equivalent then it will be possible to understand whether this IFV is really useful or not, it’s not the right task to drive Arabs with machine guns.


    I will not comment on this paragraph because it is FUNNY .....
    And the machine turned out super !!!!!!! IDF respect and respect. I personally envy!
  • 7ydmco
    7ydmco 22 September 2013 00: 08
    0
    Naturally, therefore, and not because the size of the army is slightly larger but less money and the concept of use is slightly different smile
  • kotvov
    kotvov 23 September 2013 10: 51
    -1
    Well, hide them in their bunkers. And armored crap.
  • Pimply
    Pimply 21 September 2013 13: 42
    +2
    Or here's another - Mervakva and T-80

    1. lucidlook
      lucidlook 21 September 2013 14: 55
      0
      It is also important to consider that the closer the tank’s bottom is to the ground, the more destructive is the impact of mines and landmines. And if you pay attention to the V-shaped bottom of the Merkava, then the question of security from below somehow disappears by itself.
      1. postman
        postman 21 September 2013 15: 27
        +12
        Quote: lucidlook
        that the closer the tank’s bottom is to the ground, the more destructive is the impact of mines and landmines

        for these dimensions and powers (charges) ... 10 cm DO NOT PLAY ANYTHING, these are not meters


        Quote: lucidlook
        And if you pay attention to the V-shaped bottom of the Merkava,

        this "angle" will give absolutely nothing, and vice versa, if the initiation is under the gusli, then such a scheme is more to the normal from the point of detonation than for a flat bottom
        1. lucidlook
          lucidlook 21 September 2013 16: 16
          0
          Quote: Postman
          this "angle" will give absolutely nothing, and vice versa, if the initiation is under the gusli, then such a scheme is more to the normal from the point of detonation than for a flat bottom

          You already have some terrible landmines, mounted strictly at an angle of 15 degrees.

          How do you even imagine the propagation of a shock wave? It goes in all directions absolutely evenly if it does not encounter obstacles. And if she meets, then she still tries to continue moving and flows around obstacles. Those. if we assume the most unsuccessful blast for Merkava - 10cm inward from the truck, then the wave, yes, will certainly put pressure on the bottom. However, it will continue to move in all directions, including upwards, where the bottom is located at an angle, and not directly, as in the T-72/80/90. What is worse - I did not understand. Those. in extreme cases, this is the same. If the mine is not a mathematical point, it is undermined under the bottom, then everything is different, and the V-shape helps to disperse the wave.

          And about centimeters, you know, according to "The Physics of Explosion" (Baum F.A.) Chapter 11 paragraph 56:

          Indeed, it follows from the theory that in the case of spherical symmetry, the pressure in the explosion products decreases inversely with R ^ 9, where R is the distance from the source-explosion.


          Those. the count is not centimeters, but centimeters in the ninth degrees. We take into account.
          1. postman
            postman 21 September 2013 20: 45
            +3
            Quote: lucidlook
            You already have some terrible landmines,

            Well, actually they are directional (up or to the side), that's right
            Quote: lucidlook
            How do you even imagine the propagation of a shock wave? She goes in all directions absolutely

            No, not everything, the hemisphere, follows the path of least resistance. RADIALLY (out), from the initialization point.
            HERE now take from the point provide the radius in the direction of the bottom.
            Quote: lucidlook
            e. However, it will continue to move in all directions, including upwards, where the bottom is located at an angle, and not directly, as in the T-72/80/90

            just on a sheet using a ruler and a compass: draw, and understand what I mean.


            This angle is nothing, but rather even harm
            Quote: lucidlook
            We take into account.


            You, by the way, led Baum F.A. well, then read how it (the wave) spreads, and about PERPENDICULARS, at the same time:
            http://www.ngpedia.ru/cgi-bin/getpage.exe?cn=434&uid=0.684028234565631&inte=5

            Quote: lucidlook
            We take into account.

            sure read
            pv (to the degree of K) = const
            0,1 m in power 9 = 1 in minus 9 (power) (this is delta)
            multiply by the pressure at the point at the bottom of the T-80
            such will be the difference in pressure at the wave front for Merkava and for the T-80
            Well, think about it ..... is it a lot?
            UNTIL THE DISTANCE DOES NOT EXTEND 1 METER, THE DEGREE (THERE IS 9) FROM LESS THAN 1- NOTHING.
            SIMPLE MATH
            1. lucidlook
              lucidlook 21 September 2013 23: 24
              -1
              Quote: Postman
              0,1 m in power 9 = 1 in minus 9 (power) (this is delta)

              :-) And if you count in millimeters, it will be wow!

              You see, it describes the law of pressure drop depending on the distance, and the greater this distance, the lower, all other things being equal. And this very fall occurs according to the "x in the ninth" law. Those. in Russian speaking - very, very quickly.

              Quote: Postman
              SIMPLE MATH

              Do not argue with math, empty.

              But, if you don't like this kind of math, I have a more different one:

              Statistics of irreversible losses of armored personnel carriers during a high-explosive mine blast equivalent to an anti-tank mine (5.5-6.5 kg TNT): 17% of tanks, 59% of armored personnel carriers, 64% of infantry fighting vehicles, 100% of BMD (according to the actions of the USSR in Afghanistan).

              Compare:
              Statistics on tanks "Second Lebanese":
              Hezbollah used RPG-29 "Vampire", ATGM type "Cornet", "Metis", "Fagot", "Konkurs" and "Tau" during the war.
              In Lebanon, 350-400 tanks operated. 52 Merkava tanks were damaged - 50 ATGMs and 2 HEs.

              Percentage to calculate, or is it clear that in practice with a mine protection T-72/80/90 is still sadder than even in theory?

              And that we have not yet touched upon the issue of the location of the combat station.
              1. postman
                postman 22 September 2013 14: 12
                +3
                Quote: lucidlook
                :-) And if you count in millimeters, it will be wow!

                no need to jerk, we think in SI (and there METER), you want, mm, take not Pa ... the result will be the same.
                You wouldn’t spend time, just calculated the pressure difference in the front with a delta of 10cm
                Quote: lucidlook
                Those. in Russian speaking - very, very fast.

                Are you a reasonable person? Xv 9, if x = 0,1, return to 9 = fast?
                and now 1,1 to 9th =
                Quote: lucidlook
                Do not argue with math, empty.

                I don’t argue, I know her
                Quote: lucidlook
                Compare:

                and the number of detonated landmines both there and there? do not want to look?
                Quote: lucidlook
                in practice with the T-72/80/90 mine defense is still sadder than even in theory?

                we started about the "V-shaped bottom", which supposedly reflects
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 22 September 2013 14: 15
                  0
                  Well, apparently the whole world is dumb. Strange, why are they all building it?
                  1. postman
                    postman 22 September 2013 17: 01
                    0
                    Quote: Pimply
                    Well, apparently the whole world is dumb

                    why? why is your conclusion?
                    Quote: Pimply
                    Strange, why are they all building it?

                    Who is building it? And who is everyone?
                    (in my opinion I lost the thread of the dispute) recourse
                    1. Pimply
                      Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 01
                      -1
                      Quote: Postman
                      Who is building it? And who is everyone?
                      (in my opinion I lost the thread of the dispute)

                      Return to your post - you may find it.
                2. Professor
                  Professor 22 September 2013 14: 24
                  +3
                  Quote: Postman
                  we started about the "V-shaped bottom", which supposedly reflects

                  It would be more correct to say "stronger"
                  1. postman
                    postman 22 September 2013 16: 29
                    0
                    Quote: Professor
                    It would be more correct to say "stronger"

                    correct answer fellow
                  2. postman
                    postman 22 September 2013 16: 59
                    +3
                    Quote: Professor
                    It would be more correct to say "stronger"

                    The answer "ran away" faster than everything I could write.
                    It can also be assumed that cunning Israelis use:
                    "The average pressure over the entire surface is the ratio of force to surface area:"
                    ceteris paribus (explosion force) increasing the area (flat bottom or v-shaped), we reduce the pressure, both average and at this point (DIFFERENTIAL)
                3. lucidlook
                  lucidlook 22 September 2013 14: 43
                  +1
                  Quote: Postman
                  Are you a reasonable person? Xv 9, if x = 0,1, return to 9 = fast?
                  and now 1,1 to 9th =

                  Exactly. I’m reasonable with a higher mathematical education, although in this case it doesn’t matter - school course, 5th grade.

                  We consider F based on the distance from the point of detonation to the point of application of force R = 1. Suppose the value is X.
                  We consider the same for R = 1.1
                  Knowing that the quantity decreases according to the 9th power of R, we get X / 2.36
                  That is, the pressure will be 2.36 times lower!

                  Where am I wrong? Or do you prove to me now that with increasing distance and pressure increases? A billion times? good
                  1. postman
                    postman 22 September 2013 16: 51
                    +1
                    Quote: lucidlook
                    I’m intelligent with a higher mathematical education,

                    me that too shine?
                    judging by how you put mm and cm in SI, and you don’t see the difference, it seems time to go back to the fifth!
                    Judging by your logic, the speed of a revolver bullet (280-320 m / s) is MORE than the speed of 1 satellite (7,9 km / s) ... is it true, right? Based on this
                    Quote: lucidlook
                    :-) And if you count in millimeters, it will be wow!

                    ========
                    Quote: ook
                    Where am I wrong? Or do you prove to me now that with increasing distance and pressure increases?

                    why juggle? Did I write about this? Only 10 cm (0,1) in degree 9 = what, this is on your opus:

                    Quote: lucidlook
                    It is also important to consider that than closer tank bottom to the ground

                    lift it (bottom) by 1 meter or more from the surface ... yes, the result, just what kind of tank

                    consider the pressure difference at a distance (approximately, I’m not going to SEARCH) at a distance of 0,4m and at a distance of (, 4m + 0,1m). rather, of course, both this and that can be divided by sinА (And the angle between the intersurface and the radial vector of the calculation point), God bless him



                    Quote: lucidlook
                    We consider F
                    what does the force have to do with it?
                    we consider p (the jump and pressure drops in the shock wave depending on the distance to the initialization point)
                    Epov B.A. The Basics of Blasting: Manual - Military Publishing, 1974. - 224 p.
                    1. lucidlook
                      lucidlook 22 September 2013 18: 29
                      0
                      Quote: Postman
                      Quote: lucidlook
                      We consider F
                      what does the force have to do with it?

                      Well, yes, the letter is not the same, found fault. "F" - in this case denotes the result of calculating the function and nothing more.

                      About millimeters, I teased you, buddy. But, apparently, the humor was too subtle. I will consider for the future.

                      There is no error in my calculations. The drop in the value is calculated correctly up to the 2nd decimal place.
                    2. postman
                      postman 22 September 2013 22: 25
                      0
                      Quote: lucidlook
                      But, apparently, the humor was too subtle.

                      I'm sorry, it didn’t reach me
                      Quote: lucidlook
                      There is no error in my calculations

                      is, I wrote above
                      recalculate for 0,4 m and for 0,5 m (or better divided by sinus A). For meter please calculate
                      Chess word, I would have done. but I was bullied by my little local Internet (screenshot) -CRAZY, and having a current phone is complicated, there’s not even a separate curvulator.
                    3. lucidlook
                      lucidlook 23 September 2013 03: 40
                      +1
                      Quote: Postman
                      is, I wrote above

                      No, there is no mistake. You are trying to reduce everything to units of measurement (meters, centimeters, fractions of a meter, etc.) - and this is wrong.

                      If it is known that the ratio of one quantity to itself at different points varies according to a certain law (in this case, it is inversely proportional to the 9th power of the radius), then it is not necessary to calculate the value at each point - it is enough to calculate at one, and then substitute in the formula of decrease.

                      Since both the significant ones and the radius are not substituted in absolute values, but only in fractions (times) of themselves, the dimension in the numerator and denominator is the same, and can be reduced for ease of calculation.

                      Those. if it is known that with increasing radius R the value of a certain quantity X decreases according to the law R ^ 9, then it is easy to calculate the desired value.

                      Let the radius R1 refer to the radius R2, as 1 refers to 1.1, then the value of the unknown quantity X calculated at the point R1 will refer to the unknown value X2 at the point R2, as X / R to X / [R * (1.1 ^ 9) ] or X / (R * 2.36). Dividing one value into another, we obtain the ratio of quantities in the form of a dimensionless number = 2.36

                      This rule is called proportion. And the ratio when the coefficient R is placed in the denominator is back-proportional.

                      I replied?
                    4. postman
                      postman 23 September 2013 05: 23
                      0
                      Quote: lucidlook
                      You are trying to reduce everything to units (meters, centimeters, fractions of a meter, etc.)

                      IS
                      Well, think about it (figs with her, with mathematics and with a curvulator)
                      In your:
                      Quote: lucidlook
                      There is no error in my calculations. The drop in the value is calculated correctly up to the 2nd decimal place.

                      Quote: lucidlook
                      That is, the pressure will be 2.36 times lower!

                      ON THE DIFFERENCE IN 10CM (!) PRESSURE IN THE FRONT WILL BELOW IN 2,36 TIMES("WITH ACCURACY UP TO 2TH SIGN AFTER THE COMMA") !!! AND THIS IS 10CM! WELL THINK
                      Need to argue further?
                      A ONE METER? 1 TIMES (I AM).
                      WHAT DOES THIS FUGAS NEED?
                      Quote: lucidlook
                      I replied?

                      IF ONLY YOURSELF ...
                      Well, you are satisfied, after the verbiage described above, that the pressure in the front of the blast wave by 10 cm drops 2,36 times, well, let it be. you are probably 10cm (or rather: in a 40 cm chance to die, and in a 50 cm just a runny nose) from the explosion of a land mine feels comfortable .... what to do = your calculations to help you
  • atalef
    atalef 21 September 2013 16: 05
    -8
    Quote: lucidlook
    And if you pay attention to the V-shaped bottom of the Merkava, then the question of security from below somehow disappears by itself.

    In general, on Merkava (on the bottom) there is an opportunity to suspend additional protection, the so-called “gahon”, this is another 10 tons of armor, then no landmine will take it. But this reduces maneuverability.
    Mine protection. Undoubtedly, the Merkava 4 design itself is more resistant to undermining: firstly, it has a pronounced V-shaped bottom, and secondly, the tank design itself is optimized for "counterguerrilla" actions. The T-90 mine protection is worse not only because of the flat bottom, but also because of the characteristic feature of the third-generation Soviet tanks with AZ in the BO (in the case of T-72/90 - directly on the bottom in the form of a "carousel").

    Quote: Postman
    the first one will be struck by the one on the left (whether or not it pierces another question), EVEN IF THEY WILL STAND

    The first to be struck is the one who has worse OMS and thermal imagers. In this case, the T-72 did not even stand near Merkava.
    The fire control system of the Merkava Mk 4 tank includes an advanced television and thermal imaging channels and an automatic target tracking device, and a stabilized panoramic sight.
    Merkava target detection range 4500m, t-90 3300m. That says it all
    1. lucidlook
      lucidlook 21 September 2013 18: 02
      +4
      Quote: atalef
      The fire control system of the Merkava Mk 4 tank includes an advanced television and thermal imaging channels and an automatic target tracking device, and a stabilized panoramic sight.
      Merkava target detection range 4500m, t-90 3300m. That says it all

      Not quite everything. On T-90MS "Tagil" this parameter is the same, if not higher. Another thing is that these same tagilov - just too many recourse
      And the price - more than $ 4 million per item does not look so beautiful even against the background of 6 million per Merkava.
      1. atalef
        atalef 21 September 2013 19: 04
        +1
        Quote: lucidlook
        Not quite everything. On T-90MS "Tagil" this parameter is the same, if not higher. Another thing is that these same tagilov - just too many

        That's about it, Merkava - a serial tank. and Tagilov (with equal character) of target detection - once or twice and miscalculated. Yes, and they will not (because of the price) the same your words. So that the outcome is clear.
        No, tankers can certainly throw headsets, but then it will take a lot, because crush caps 60t - hard hi
        1. lucidlook
          lucidlook 21 September 2013 20: 15
          0
          Quote: atalef
          That's about it, Merkava - a serial tank. and Tagilov (with equal character) of target detection - once or twice and miscalculated.

          Well, there were (and by the way remained) options. Option one is to finish off the T-90 (new engine, new sighting system, new control system, communications, etc.) Or make a completely new tank, or rather a platform. Accordingly, the T-90MS has been relegated to the background and is kept as option "B", while the main emphasis is still on the "Armata".

          I do not see anything wrong or not logical in this. With the same Merkava-5 it turned out that way. Only, unlike Armata, it was canceled and returned to plan "B" - Merkava-4 hi
          1. atalef
            atalef 21 September 2013 20: 22
            +1
            Quote: lucidlook
            I do not see anything wrong or not logical in this. With the same Merkava-5 it turned out that way. Only, unlike Armata, it was canceled and returned to plan "B" - Merkava-4

            I agree. In general, industry should be flexible * like the Army - which should receive what it needs, and not what it is)
            Challenges and threats are changing. In our time, the role of the tank has changed, and if earlier the cities were simply lined with artillery and bombing, today tanks should go there, and in an era of strong and affordable anti-tank weapons, you need to think accordingly. Many are captured by the illusions of tank throws to Giblartar in a day, and the soldiers have nothing to fight. You have to be more flexible. if we thought so bony, a country like Israel would not have been on the map for a long time.
    2. postman
      postman 21 September 2013 20: 50
      0
      Quote: atalef
      The first to be struck is the one who has worse OMS and thermal imagers. In this case, the T-72 did not even stand near Merkava.

      until we consider the SLA!
      pure experiment: armor, corners, MBT contour
      1. atalef
        atalef 21 September 2013 21: 10
        +3
        Quote: Postman
        until we consider the SLA!

        And why ? Or does she have nothing to do with shooting?

        Quote: Postman
        pure experiment: armor, corners, MBT contour

        Well, how clean is it? Without the main thing? Without shooting capabilities. hi
        1. postman
          postman 22 September 2013 13: 41
          0
          Quote: atalef
          And why ? Or does she have nothing to do with shooting?

          Yes, because (let's say) France bought the Russian MBT, put its perfect suo on it, sold it to the hesbola, let's say: everything is not mercenary
          Quote: atalef
          Without shooting capabilities.

          identification, guidance
    3. 77bob1973
      77bob1973 21 September 2013 21: 42
      +4
      The table is crafty, I wonder how the "Merkava" can hit a tank at 6000m. "Tornado" is better to compare with MLRS, they are practically classmates. PzH2000 at 60 km shoots shells with a gas generator and with a very large spread, we must not forget our "msta-s" is 12 years older, and there are also controlled shells.
      1. atalef
        atalef 21 September 2013 22: 16
        -1
        Quote: 77bob1973
        The table is crafty, I wonder how the "Merkava" can hit a tank at 6000m.
        guided missile, there is such a possibility of firing through the barrel of a gun
        1. 77bob1973
          77bob1973 21 September 2013 22: 52
          +3
          Then the T-90 ATGM fires not at 3300 but at 5000m. And the range of a conventional projectile is almost the same
      2. svp67
        svp67 22 September 2013 14: 21
        0
        Quote: 77bob1973
        Table crafty

        "Each sandpiper praises its swamp ..."
    4. svp67
      svp67 22 September 2013 14: 20
      +2
      Quote: atalef
      The first to be struck is the one who has worse OMS and thermal imagers. In this case, the T-72 did not even stand near Merkava.
      This is all well and good, but in the question of who will be the winner, the most important factor is PREPARATION of the crew ... And don't be so proud, the T90 is not such an "easy nut to crack", in capable hands it can spoil a lot of "blood" to any enemy ..
    5. patrianostra
      patrianostra 22 September 2013 17: 52
      0
      enough to duplicate this nonsense
    6. The comment was deleted.
    7. Hoist
      Hoist 25 September 2013 11: 06
      0
      I always liked it when comparing weapons, neither the release date, nor the modifications, nor the ammunition used were taken into account, but it is immediately clear that the domestic weapons, in comparison with the western ones, are just slag. After all, is it laid out for this purpose?
      Can you tell me the source of this work?
  • 31231
    31231 21 September 2013 21: 53
    +1
    The higher the bottom of the tank, the greater the mass, the center of gravity walks strongly. What is relevant in the conditions of Russian off-road.
  • postman
    postman 21 September 2013 15: 42
    +1
    Quote: Pimply
    Or here's another - Mervakva and T-80

    here you don’t even have to be a specialist:
    -first one will be struck by the one on the left (whether or not it will pierce another question), EVEN IF THEY ARE STANDING, and if you move (compare the speed of the merkava and the T-80)
    -NLD in the case that will be broken on the left, with a high degree of probability, we must still try to find a natural protective element to hide the NLD, such
    1. lucidlook
      lucidlook 21 September 2013 16: 47
      +4
      Quote: Postman
      -first one will be struck by the one on the left (whether it will pierce or not pierce another question), EVEN IF THEY WILL STAND, and even if they move (compare the speed of the merkava and the T-80)

      I beg of you! Tank biathlon watched? Shooting watched? At the training ground, under ideal conditions of visibility, without return fire, from a place at the previously designated motionless targets, the best crews of districts - smear, smear and smear again. With three shots without a miss, only 1 (in words) in four was shot out, which caused a storm of delight among the public. And one never hit the target at all.

      And then what about ordinary tankers who are not the best-of-the-best? So let's not talk about getting into a weak spot of the tank in general and Merkava in particular with 4 km in motion and all that. Okay?
      1. postman
        postman 21 September 2013 20: 52
        +3
        Quote: lucidlook
        Tank biathlon watched?

        I myself was honored to pull, as much as twice (well, of course I missed, but a bunch of impressions and a helmet of a tankman)
        Quote: lucidlook
        Merkava in particular with 4 km in motion and all that. Okay?

        no one shoots from 4x. there’s a good record: a real fight, in my opinion, Syria or something like that. There everything is clear
        1. lucidlook
          lucidlook 21 September 2013 22: 59
          +1
          Quote: Postman
          no one shoots from 4x. there’s a good record: a real fight, in my opinion, Syria or something like that. There everything is clear

          Well, this is generally no way! Or you just lagged behind life.

          I know that the record of successful aimed tank shooting in combat 5.1km? From Challenger-2 they hit T-62 in Iraq.
          1. postman
            postman 22 September 2013 13: 33
            0
            Quote: lucidlook
            From Challenger-2 they hit T-62 in Iraq.

            Of course in the know ...
            only bad luck: the challenger is the only OBT in the world (at this moment) that has a rifled barrel.
            ------
            Yapro realities say, ane about the oddities.
            try with 4 km ......
            1. lucidlook
              lucidlook 22 September 2013 14: 49
              0
              Quote: Postman
              only bad luck: the challenger is the only OBT in the world (at this moment) that has a rifled barrel.

              And this is what side? Explain why the rifled barrel so damn strongly affects the range and armor-piercing?

              And if so, then why then will our goblin still not switch to this miracle trunk ?!

              Quote: Postman
              Yapro realities say, ane about the oddities.

              Realities have already been cited - for example, tank biathlon. And this famous shot also happened not in WoT.

              Quote: Postman
              try with 4 km .....

              Alas, I can’t try, because I don’t play WoT, and I didn’t get training in shooting from a tank. recourse
              1. svp67
                svp67 22 September 2013 14: 59
                +1
                Quote: lucidlook
                Explain why the rifled barrel so damn strongly affects the range and armor-piercing?
                It allows you to shoot more accurately ... but it is more expensive to manufacture, and less tenacious.

                Quote: lucidlook
                And if so, then why then will our goblin still not switch to this miracle trunk ?!

                Up to 115m T62 and T64 cannons, and we had rifled ones, but it was necessary to sharply increase the armor penetration of "kinetic shells", this allows us to make a "smooth" barrel en masse. Almost all world manufacturers of tank guns switched to it, with the exception of the British ...
                1. lucidlook
                  lucidlook 22 September 2013 15: 23
                  0
                  Quote: svp67
                  It allows you to shoot more accurately ... but it is more expensive to manufacture, and less tenacious.

                  But did the feathered armor-piercing-sub-caliber not solve the problem of accuracy? Emnip, feathered, can be used only from smooth-bore guns.

                  Quote: svp67
                  Almost all world manufacturers of tank guns switched to it, with the exception of the British ...

                  I believe that their friends in NATO: Germans, French and Americans - do not, and would not sacrifice accuracy (perhaps the main parameter). Apparently, this is not the point.
              2. postman
                postman 22 September 2013 17: 18
                +1
                Quote: lucidlook
                is that side here?

                it's about a unique case - a defeat at a distance of more than 5 km, a smoothbore - they won’t get into the mouth, talking about 4 km
                Quote: lucidlook
                And if so, then why then will our goblin still not switch to this miracle trunk ?!

                expensive, life cycle, ammunition nomenclature (ATGM barrel), technological capabilities, smoothbore mode (precisely because the defeat at such distances is not considered)
                Quote: lucidlook
                Realities have already been cited - on the example of tank biathlon

                this show, look for a record of a real battle (I wrote Syria or somewhere there)
                Quote: lucidlook
                Alas, I can’t try, because I don’t play WoT, and I didn’t get training in tank shooting

                The Römel division in Augusdorf, an open day, will not be given the original (well, only if you really like something) on ​​the simulator of the training center-will.
                Soon we have to open, together with the Germans
                1. lucidlook
                  lucidlook 22 September 2013 19: 12
                  0
                  Quote: Postman
                  this show, look for a record of a real battle (I wrote Syria or somewhere there)

                  To listen to you, so the conditions of the show are many times more difficult than in a battle. A return fire, limited visibility, etc. - not only do not complicate the work of the tanker, but on the contrary, simplify it. what

                  Again, I repeat - ceteris paribus, in particular, the aiming system in particular and the OMS as a whole - this is what it depends on whether the tank will hit the enemy or not. And if it does, then from what distance and from what shot. This is - obviously, I think no one will argue. A sighting system and SLA in Britons - if not the best, then some of them. This is what primarily explains accuracy. Well, and training, of course.

                  On most domestic tanks, the MSA, to put it mildly, does not reach the world level, and the T-90MS exists in single copies. As for training, I have already spoken about the "best of the best" performance.

                  So that slight difference in height and frontal area of ​​the tanks, about which so much noise, in this case is so small, I would not pay any attention to this at all.
                  1. postman
                    postman 22 September 2013 22: 33
                    +1
                    Quote: lucidlook
                    To listen to you, so the conditions of the show are many times more difficult than in a battle.

                    show is show, fight is fight.
                    1941, too, began unsuccessfully, then coached, although it was worth the sacrifice

                    Quote: lucidlook
                    A sighting system and SLA in Britons - if not the best, then some of them. This is precisely what explains accuracy in the first place.

                    the French are better off, they won’t hit the smoothbore, at such a distance (and other things the same, they won’t even bullet)
                    CASE In the trunk. And then they refused this:
                    -expensive, life
                    -no need at such distances
                    - Great initial speed for smoothbore

                    Quote: lucidlook
                    I've already talked about the "best of the best" performance.

                    the best of the best are now Americans, Israelis, well, and some of those from NATO are HOW TO WAR

                    Quote: lucidlook
                    So that slight difference in height and frontal projection of tanks,

                    15-20% is insignificant - this is a lot, this is significant
                2. Pimply
                  Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 04
                  +2
                  Quote: Postman
                  it's about a unique case - a defeat at a distance of more than 5 km, a smoothbore - they won’t get into the mouth, talking about 4 km

                  Not at all? Strange, but on the Gaza border at such distances, the guys were still working on Magah-7.
    2. Pimply
      Pimply 21 September 2013 23: 01
      +2
      Quote: Postman
      -first one will be struck by the one on the left (whether it will pierce or not pierce another question), EVEN IF THEY WILL STAND, and even if they move (compare the speed of the merkava and the T-80)

      Both the one and the other have a maximum speed of 70 km per hour. Well, the Merkava engine is more powerful. And then take an interest in the opinion of experts, what real difference now has a difference in profiles. It mattered when the sights were purely optical
      1. postman
        postman 22 September 2013 13: 37
        +2
        Quote: Pimply
        Well, the Merkava engine is more powerful.

        you always need to look at the specific parameter
        and maneuverability? and acceleration (speed gain) ???
        Quote: Pimply
        And then take an interest in the opinion of experts, what real difference now has a difference in profiles. It mattered when

        always and now interested
        and optics and stuff, the basis of the reflected signal. The area of ​​the attack object is larger, therefore ...
        Well, no arguing against physics.
        And about what does not play, this is a tale of amateurs
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 55
          -1
          Quote: Postman
          and maneuverability? and acceleration (speed gain) ???
          What kind of problems do you see here with maneuverability? Or overclocking? Merkava accelerates to 32 km in 9.6 seconds, T-72 - in 8.5. The colossal difference.


          Quote: Postman
          and optics and stuff, the basis of the reflected signal. The area of ​​the attack object is larger, therefore ...

          Are you laughing? Dimensions of tanks look again.
          1. postman
            postman 22 September 2013 14: 06
            +2
            Quote: Pimply
            . The colossal difference.

            almost 13%.
            let the merkava try to catch up or spin the T-72, especially on the ground, and not on the football field.
            And now try to get (at a distance) into a tank that has 13% more maneuverability, and then into a merkava
            Quote: Pimply
            Dimensions of tanks look again.

            what's so funny?
            you don’t even need to calculate the area = it will be more than 15%, this is the area, a square of linear size
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 14: 09
              0
              You don’t see the difference between acceleration and average speed, right? Or do you think that the tanks have some kind of street racing at 400 meters? Are you the difference in maneuverability that really trying to determine the speed of acceleration?

              You know, this is already real funny.
              1. postman
                postman 22 September 2013 17: 11
                +2
                Quote: Pimply
                Are you the difference in maneuverability that really trying to determine the speed of acceleration?

                including, this is not an unimportant factor
                Quote: Pimply
                You know, this is already real funny.

                let's try to simulate the behavior of the tank on the battlefield, at least on the basis of exercises (west-2013 will begin soon). Here and laugh,
                but maybe it won’t work, because for you 13% is a negligible amount, no matter how old.
                =====================
                Merkava is fighting in specific conditions and with a specific (one might say no) enemy.
                Well, Israel (before) fought the same thing with a specific adversary, what are Arabs, their qualifications, especially the Middle East spill - we all know (I certainly do), considering them as serious opponents of the Israeli armed forces is ridiculous, even despite the count -to study in the USSR and military specialists from the USSR.
                Had the Israeli Armed Forces collided (futuristically) with the Vietnamese Air Force (armed with USSR technology) at the time, I’d be sad the result would be sad


                Although no one says that the tank (Merkava) is bad. It is peculiar, regional, I would say.
                ========
                I hope I didn’t offend anyone from friendly Israel?
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 05
                  0
                  Quote: Postman
                  but maybe it won’t work, because for you 13% is a negligible amount, no matter how old.

                  For me, delirium sounds like focusing on one indicator and the conclusion about the maneuverability of the tank based on the speed of reaching 32 km.
                  1. postman
                    postman 22 September 2013 23: 26
                    0
                    Quote: Pimply
                    For me, delirium sounds

                    what is there to object, I will answer with a quote:


                    Quote: Pimply
                    Mom didn’t teach you to politely talk with adults?
                  2. Pimply
                    Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 55
                    +2
                    Excuse me, but in this case, for my part, do you see somewhere a transition to personalities? Rudeness?
                    I repeat - to judge the maneuverability of the machine based on one indicator, and to give interest to this maneuverability is nonsense. Maneuverability depends on several indicators: overall dimensions, gauge, marginal turning angles. The minimum turning radius is the main characteristic of maneuverability.

                    You didn’t remember either the transmission, the control system, or a bunch of other things. In with manic perseverance you dive in one second the advantages of temporary acceleration to 32 km. Yes, I think it’s nonsense.
                  3. postman
                    postman 23 September 2013 17: 08
                    +1
                    Quote: Pimply
                    Excuse me, but in this case, for my part, do you see somewhere a transition to personalities?

                    For my part, it was a joke, not an insult (I was limited in writing and on the Internet (I was) - it’s easier to skip past it than to poke around the screen
                    Quote: Pimply
                    Rudeness?

                    "Nonsense" is definitely rudeness, or I missed something ...
                    Quote: Pimply
                    I repeat - to judge the maneuverability of the machine based on one indicator, and to give interest to this maneuverability is nonsense

                    1. no one judged. Look how it started: the outline of the mercenary and the possibility of her defeat
                    2. I did not say that acceleration (you will not find), the main indicator of maneuverability, is only one of (including)
                    3. transmission, tracks, suspension - did not affect
                    4. I'm afraid to make a mistake, but it seems to me the maneuverability of the T-72 (80,90) - it will be better merkava.
                    5. 1 second (in this case), this is not a minuscule, it is 13%. Do not be cunning, it is a lot, sometimes life
                    6. Projection area (frontal lateral):
                    Quote: Pimply
                    And then take an interest in the opinion of experts, what real difference now has a difference in profiles. It mattered when

                    I’ll turn to your language: this is really nonsense, and I do not need to be interested in the opinion of any experts.
                    It's simple:
                    - whatever the suo: the area of ​​the irradiated object is very important, for Merkova these 15% -20% will be critical (compared to T. I honestly did not count (laziness with tracing paper to curl up, and laziness to look for the program, although rather total in Acad can be obtained), but hardly I am mistaken
                    -LBT of smaller sizes (height, width) is more likely to hide his body behind cover
                    -yes and visually the calculation of ATGM, or AT, in the event of damage to the equipment is easier to detect a carcass in 6kv. m (say) than 4,5
                    ================= This is an axiom.
                    7. about soil, rain in Israel ... I don’t know where you find this dirt, I have not been to Israel (unfortunately), all for 10 years:
                    Israel is located in an arid zone with prevailing rocky and sandy soils.(well, thereafter in the picture ..) / the picture did not stick, but it is a pity% as characteristic soils

                    I WILL BELIEVE IN SUPER MANEUVERABILITY AND PERFORMANCE, as I will see the successful merkava movement here:

                    I’m sure that they’ll manage here:

                    8. About experts and their nonsense:
                    Well, everyone is eating (and from you, including) "nonsense" that the location of the MTO Merkava in front DOES NOT DECREASE the IR visibility of the Merkava, in comparison with other (traditional) MBTs, all this is declared by your home-grown experts, with aplomb, etc. .d. Motivation - the exhaust is brought back, to the sides
                    But is this nonsense?
                    Introductory:
                    - hunchback and .. and let's say Tavria (or Porsche 911 and BMW M5)
                    - approach the front of the working automatic telephone exchange with a warm engine), put your palm (you can put it) to the hood (well, for the humpback and 911 it will probably be the trunk, not the MOST IMPORTANT FRONT) - WHAT DO WE FEEL?
                    Need to explain further?
                  4. postman
                    postman 23 September 2013 17: 17
                    0
                    Note: the exhaust system is all considered in the rear, and in the 911 the radiator is also in the front (if I did not forget)
                    or anyway, with the stubbornness of a person on the local branch (having a mathematical higher, proving that the pressure of the shock wave drops by 10 cm by 2,36 times) - you will say the same
                  5. Rumata
                    Rumata 24 September 2013 10: 42
                    0
                    Quote: Postman
                    Israel is located in an arid zone with prevailing stony and sandy soils. (Well, thereafter in the picture ..) / the picture did not stick, and it is a pity% as characteristic soils

                    I WILL BELIEVE IN SUPER MANEUVERABILITY AND PERFORMANCE, as I will see the successful merkava movement here:

                    And what is so special about the photo?


                  6. nerd.su
                    nerd.su 24 September 2013 17: 53
                    0
                    And what is special about these photos? I’ll go everywhere on foot ...
                  7. postman
                    postman 24 September 2013 17: 58
                    0
                    Quote: Rumata

                    And what is so special about the photo?

                    in what sense? Photos are good, yes, somewhere I have Leo in Augostorf, there is abruptly (mess)
                    Here I’ll pass by car
                  8. Rumata
                    Rumata 24 September 2013 18: 48
                    0
                    Quote: Postman
                    in what sense? Photos are good, yes, somewhere I have Leo in Augostorf, there is abruptly (mess)
                    Here I’ll pass by car

                    Wrote above
                    Quote: Postman
                    I WILL BELIEVE IN SUPER MANEUVERABILITY AND PERFORMANCE, as I will see the successful merkava movement here:

                    And a photo with a completely passable road, so I gave an example of mercenaries in the same, quite passable conditions =)
  • Saburov
    Saburov 21 September 2013 19: 20
    +2
    Some kind of nonsense, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles have one purpose: the rapid deployment of troops and support by fire, you can find out more about this in the Soviet training manual on the use of light armored vehicles, even in the city you can successfully use it, the presence of radio communications and front flank escort units, and all this talk about heavy infantry fighting vehicles is a fact that you initially rely on a weak enemy, and 152mm HE is mine ... er its weight, the trucks will fly off unambiguously, and after they finish it do not hesitate, in 96 I personally saw 72 as a HE mine undermined, tr the ki with the skating rinks flew away, although the armor could withstand, but after three Czechs with RPGs immediately got out of greens, they burned, the crew died and still do not forget about the weight, I was always surprised on this site by discussing tanks by those who did not even serve urgent, weight 50 tons are guaranteed to drive a car into the ground if there is a wet road and you will wait until the rain passes, at 1984 in a tank school, on a relocation in the rain we have 26 T-55 on the belly there are 18 cars, with its mass 37 tons and horseradish than pull it out when he’s on his belly, and here’s the tractor waiting for it to dry, I’ve also buried myself, I agree that the defense should be, but it should be in proper application and excellent training, and not in the dumb build-up of armor, the Germans have already embarked on this path, you know the result, and you have more chances for an APC skip past than on a heavy BMP. Yes, and if the Israelis fought let’s say Germany or even worse with us, they would completely reconsider their approach to armored vehicles, march in parade like in Palestine, tankers and pilots from the Arabs, even those .
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 September 2013 19: 39
      0
      Quote: Saburov
      , and all this talk about heavy infantry fighting vehicles is a fact that you initially rely on a weak enemy,

      Well, say this to the soldiers who fought in Chechnya. BPM (because you counted on a strong opponent - according to your words) burned like matches and, and Namers (some are weaklings around) are not.


      Quote: Saburov
      and 152mm landmine on .. er at its weight, the trucks will fly off unambiguously, and after they finish it do not hesitate

      the trucks may fly away, but they will finish it or not - I doubt it

      Quote: Saburov
      served urgent, the weight of more than 50 tons is guaranteed to drive a car into the ground if there is a wet road and you will wait until the rain passes,

      Specific pressure per square centimeter is planted in the ground - so some explanation. And it depends on the width of the tracks


      Quote: Saburov
      if the Israelis fought with Germany, or even worse with us, they would completely reconsider their approach to armored vehicles,

      Some kind of nonsense, but can we still fight with tanks in Australia?

      Quote: Saburov
      Walking in a parade march as in Palestine will not work, tankers and pilots from the Arabs, too, are those.

      Why are you so buggy?
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 September 2013 21: 18
          +1
          Quote: Saburov
          I myself have flown more than once, believe me, my paise friend

          Well, I don’t have pace and I’m not your friend and I probably won’t. laughing

          Quote: Saburov
          that you can’t be proud of the enemy, it’s like to be proud of a 10th grader in a victory over a first-grader,

          Are you talking about wars from Independence to Doomsday? How an officer might know. that all the equipment, training and instructors were from the USSR. Somehow you abruptly humiliated SA, not beautiful

          Quote: Saburov
          . Yes, and the mountain with which Abdul likes to shoot, you can’t answer from the T-90, because the tilt angles of the gun will not allow it.

          So it was necessary to do something more adequate for Abdullah to get. And then Abdullah with the Boer rifle of 1890, did what he wanted, but the T-72 could not get it.


          Quote: Saburov
          , but certainly not for anti-slaughter operations, where the tank is a mobile bunker and artillery.

          Well, of course, to conquer Europe (according to the plans it’s cool), only you have to fight with the weaknesses (as you said), and here it’s a complete failure

          Quote: Saburov
          in modern warfare, tanks are not needed, and only stealth pikhotintsy with pneumopikh are capable of punishing abreks effectively.

          Damn, something wrong with the officer corps is happening, then twice the major buggy is not childish. Now you.
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 21 September 2013 23: 10
          +3
          Quote: Saburov
          me my pace friend

          Mom didn’t teach you to politely talk with adults?
          1. Saburov
            Saburov 22 September 2013 18: 11
            0
            You rose to my rank, and then you tell me who I am and how to talk, wise guy.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 10
              +3
              Quote: Saburov
              You rose to my rank, and then you tell me who I am and how to talk, wise guy.

              So you were only taught to be rude in the army? And they didn’t teach that an officer, while communicating even on the forum, should keep his former rank, and not use expressions like "my friend's friend." What kind of officer are you after that? Sorry, you're so empty. It is not the stars that make a person, but deeds. You, at the moment, showed yourself to be a narrow-minded boor. Well, he rose to the rank. Sorry, I knew more than one or two of these with large shoulder straps. Walk in formation - it will help.
              Talk to mom, I think she will tell you the same thing. As you are with people, so are they with you.
      2. 31231
        31231 21 September 2013 22: 06
        +3
        Specific pressure per square centimeter is planted in the ground - so some explanation. And it depends on the width of the tracks


        I repeat, because in the topic about 72 wrote. You all take into account the specific pressure on the ground. But it is considered in statics, and not with a maneuvering tank. With active movement on rough terrain, the center of gravity mixes and pressure rises much.

        I’m not a tanker, but on construction in Russia I saw earthmoving machinery drowning. And the paradox is that the heavier one sinks more often, despite the same indicators of pressure reduction with a lower mass. In general, there is rich experience of the Second World War. Where tigers were not used everywhere.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 21 September 2013 23: 14
          +2
          Quote: 31231
          I’m not a tanker, but on construction in Russia I saw earthmoving machinery drowning.


          Much depends on the balance and weight distribution, the general design of the equipment.
    2. lucidlook
      lucidlook 21 September 2013 19: 55
      +2
      Quote: Saburov
      in the Soviet training manual on the use of light armored vehicles

      What exactly does the Soviet training manual say about protracted conflicts against partisans in urban and urban areas and in rugged terrain?

      You see, in Soviet times they did not prepare for such wars as in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel or the Caucasus, they did not work out tactics, they did not adapt weapons and equipment. This is the first.

      The second, wheeled vehicle (BTR) is important because it is able to drive 6 out of 8 wheels, and with reservations, 5 out of 152. Of course, there is a completely different specificity of application and booking, but XNUMXmm landmines are not laid on every corner. And to immobilize the car, it is not necessary to disrupt the rollers, it is enough to disrupt the truck.

      Third, they already wrote above about the detonation of an ammunition shell from a landmine - this is a problem that has not yet been solved in our tanks. No comments.

      Fourth, look at how the Jews fought during the Doomsday War or the Six Day War. Against whom and how, and then scold them and their approach.
      1. Saburov
        Saburov 21 September 2013 20: 35
        +1
        Well, there is much to argue about this, the Israelis fought well until the Soviet Union intervened, and the Jews began a black streak there.
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 21: 54
          0
          Quote: Saburov
          Well, there is much to argue about this, the Israelis fought well until the Soviet Union intervened, and the Jews began a black streak there.

          It is when?
          1. Saburov
            Saburov 22 September 2013 17: 56
            0
            Well, you are popping everywhere your articles about shot down instantly.
            There was no 20 vs 16 combat. On that day, there were several fights, separated in time and space - and every time MiGs fought many times superior enemy forces - when one Soviet four got into battle, the other four MiGs were already leaving the battlefield with a critical balance of fuel. The Israelis have calculated everything and were able to achieve a concentration of forces in the right place and the right moment.

            The first was shot down by Captain Yurchenko - his MiG exploded in the air from a Sidewinder rocket. A few minutes later, Captains Yakovlev and Syrkin had to eject - alas, when they landed, Captain Yakovlev fell into a crevice and crashed to death (there is a version that the canopy of his parachute was burned by a jet fighter flying by).

            It is still not known exactly how Captain Zhuravlev died - according to eyewitness recollections, he fought alone against four enemy aircraft, until he was hit by a crazy Mirage gun cannon. There is an opinion that two Israeli pilots, Ift Spector and Abraham Salmon, who barely reached the territory of Israel in a damaged car, almost fell victim to it.

            The explosion of "Mirage"

            Israel’s ace Asher Snir’s Mirage was also damaged - the P-13 rocket fired into the plane damaged the aircraft, but the warhead of the small P-13 was too small to stop the Mirage’s flight - Asher Snir left the battlefield and urgently sat at the airbase Refadim (this is what his combat colleague Amos Amir writes about in his book Fire in the Sky).

            Yurchenko - shot down, died; Yakovlev - shot down, died; Syrkin - shot down, he survived; Zhuravlev - shot down, died.
            But what about the fifth shot down Russian aircraft? And he was gone! About the downed aircraft and its pilot is not known.

            According to rumors, the Israelis managed to shoot down Captain Kamenev’s plane, but there is no evidence of this. In addition, Captain Kamenev himself subsequently continued to serve in the ranks of the USSR Air Force. Rumors, rumors ... sometimes they say that one of the MiGs made an emergency landing on one of the Egyptian airfields. No one knows what really happened.

            At the same time, there are witness testimonies, according to which, after the battle, the Israeli search and rescue helicopters were circling over the battlefield - did the “unbreakable” Hel Haavir suffer any losses? It is not excluded. The operation involved a lot of "Mirage" from 101, 117 and 119 squadrons, as well as multipurpose fighter "Phantom" from the 69 squadron of the Israeli Air Force. There is a high probability that the loss of one (or several) machines was carefully hidden, and the results of the battle were falsified.

            Without resorting to questionable conspiracy, the following reliable facts can be established:
            As a result of the 30.07.1970 battle, the 4 MiG-21 was shot down, and three Soviet pilots were killed.
            The credible loss of the Israeli Air Force was shot down by Asher Snir’s Mirage, which landed at Refadim airbase.
            1. Saburov
              Saburov 22 September 2013 18: 08
              0
              The 135th Fighter Aviation Regiment (106 IABR of the UAR Air Force) stationed at Kom-Aushim and Beni-Suef air bases and was set up to cover Cairo from the southeast direction, and industrial facilities in central Egypt and the Aswan waterworks from the northeast, between Sokhnenskaya and Zaafaran valleys. The depth of hostilities was limited to the Gulf of Suez of the Red Sea.

              The 35 Separate Fighter Aviation Squadron (108 UAR Air Force) located at the Janaklis airbase covered the Navy on the Mediterranean coast and industrial facilities in northern Egypt from Port Said to Mersa Matruh and south to Cairo. The aircraft carried identification marks and tactical numbers adopted by the Egyptian Air Force. Soviet pilots were forbidden to cross the Suez Canal, which was the boundary of the separation of the warring parties.

              The patrolling of Soviet pilots forced Israeli aircraft to limit their raids to the front-line zone. The first meeting of Soviet and Israeli pilots ended peacefully - the opponents dispersed, not daring to join the battle. It happened April 13 1970 year. Similarly, the meeting of 18 and 29 of April ended. By June 1970, Soviet pilots already had more than 100 sorties, but did not conduct air battles. Although by this time the Israeli aviation had a completely different experience and made more than 10 thousand sorties: for attacking - 86,8%, for air reconnaissance - 11,5%, for conducting air battles - 1,7%, the Israeli army command also preferred to avoid direct confrontation. But in the summer of 1970, the fighting in the canal zone intensified. The involvement of Soviet specialists in the conflict became inevitable. The first case of combat contact was recorded on June 25 1970 of the year. The MiG-21 pair (pilots Krapivin and Salnik), using low altitude, secretly approached the Skyhawk group, marching to Ismailia, and hit one of them with the R-3С rocket, but the damaged attack aircraft managed to escape to its air base. Another source claims that in this battle an Israeli attack aircraft was shot down and the pilot died.
              On 27 of July 1970 of the year, together with the Egyptians, an attempt was made to ambush the Israeli Mirages. According to the plan, the link of the Egyptian MiG-17 attacked the Israeli stronghold on the eastern bank of the canal, with the aim of provoking enemy fighters to pursue. Then they should be lured into their territory, where three links of the Soviet MiG-21 would be introduced into the battle. MiG-17 hit 12: 00, hitting a target and injuring four Israeli soldiers, but Israeli fighters did not even rise to repel this raid.
              The Egyptians repeated the attack in 16: 45, again hitting the target and injuring three more soldiers. The task was practically completed: the four MiG-17 captain Maher Kasima was attacked by Mirage fighters and was able to lure them into their territory, but the delay in taking off Soviet fighters allowed the Israelis to shoot down two Egyptian aircraft and calmly leave. One link of the Soviet MiG-21 managed to enter the battlefield and watched what was happening, requesting permission to attack, but the command forbade it to get involved in the battle until the other two links rose. Both Egyptian pilots successfully ejected
              1. Saburov
                Saburov 22 September 2013 18: 13
                +1
                On June 10, on June 1967, the USSR broke off diplomatic relations with Israel and, through a direct line of communication with Washington, informed the world public that if Israel did not stop the hostilities, the Soviet Union would not stop before taking military measures. On the same day, Israeli troops ceased fire.
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 11
                  0
                  Quote: Saburov
                  On June 10, on June 1967, the USSR broke off diplomatic relations with Israel and, through a direct line of communication with Washington, informed the world public that if Israel did not stop the hostilities, the Soviet Union would not stop before taking military measures. On the same day, Israeli troops ceased fire.

                  At the same time, Israel achieved all the necessary goals at that time, right?
                  1. Saburov
                    Saburov 23 September 2013 00: 38
                    0
                    The IDF neatly cut through the entire Syrian air defense system. At the same time, having spent not a frail number of drones used as meat. On the ground, Israeli tanks with at least three times the numerical advantage have achieved only a nail in the ass. With grief in half, a thousand Israeli tanks managed to encircle the 1st Syrian Division, consisting of 250 tanks. The Syrians, who had already spent all the shells and knocked out one and a half hundred Israeli tanks, had to abandon 200 of their tanks, half of which were serviceable. Israel, which decided that it had already won the war, did not even suspect that it was going to it from Damascus. Elite units, armed with new T-72s, rushed from the flank to the location of the "victorious" Israelis. "Pattons" were stretched on the very fucking mind and spread their legs in front of the araps. Having successfully frolicked, the T-72 regiment began to return back to Damascus, and the offended Jews came up with a cunning plan of how to catch these "seventy-two". In pursuit of them (the wise Israeli leadership decided that the Syrians were "retreating"), several more Patton battalions were thrown. It seems that everything was going smoothly, as, suddenly, on the road near the village of Sultan-Yakub, T-55 tanks of the 58th brigade began to perdol them from all sides. The unfair battle in which the Israeli Pattons had to flee, the soldiers will more than once reckon with their wise government. Now it was the turn of the Araps to launch a counterstrike, when suddenly the American delegates to the UN were hammered in the ass and they began to ask for a ceasefire. The truce was scheduled for 12:00 on June 11. Both sides rushed to the attack. Heaps of helicopters flew from both sides, giving in to the shushpanzers fighting on the ground. A well-aimed Syrian tanker on a T-62 even managed to shoot down one of these helicopters with cannon fire. The rest of the Syrian troops located along the border met their truce there, without launching a counterattack and believing the UN that the Jews would stop their attacks. For the Israelis, UN assistance came in handy. Having got rid of the Syrian threat, the Israelis set to work on the PLO, whose brave fighters for some reason stubbornly refused to surrender. The siege of Beirut, where the Palestinian headquarters was, began, with benchmark street fighting, ambushes and snipers. Sawing off Palestinian soldiers, the Israelis were reinsured and demolished entire skyscrapers if a single sniper sat down there. As a result of the epic battles, the capital of Lebanon was turned into a kind of Berlin in 1945 after the raids of allied bombers. In the picturesque ruins of the densely built-up city, about ten thousand corpses of unlucky civilian Lebanese remain. Oddly enough, the Americans intervened in the war and allowed the surviving militants to board ships and sail to Tunisia from a full drink of the PLO. Well, that the gallant Jewish soldiers, and who the instructors were and the planners of these operations, I hope you can guess.
                  2. Saburov
                    Saburov 23 September 2013 00: 46
                    0
                    Operation Peace of Galilee is also notable for the fact that the battle between the tanks of the latest generation Merkava and T-72 took place for the first time. More precisely, it did not quite take place. More precisely, it did not take place at all. It was like this - an Israeli tank brigade drove itself along the Lebanese hills, suddenly dust clouds were on the horizon! The Jews took a closer look, and see that these are the latest Soviet T-72! Brave Jewish tankers quickly pointed their guns, took aim and opened fire! A few hours later, a hundred Arab 72-k chad on the hills, everyone is happy, celebrating victory, when all of a sudden ... A breeze blew and a mirage scattered around not a single Syrian tank, not just wrecked! Jewish tankers vowed to fill the face of that moron who had poured powder with hallucinogen into them in tea and sadly trudged to the headquarters. True, before the tops figured out what was happening, one Jewish general managed to trumpet the whole world about another brilliant victory, and the world, who believed it. But the real story is about how a battalion of Syrian T-72 suddenly met with Merkav’s unit during a night march and accidentally sawed it out. Although, what is there to hide, the war cost the Araps the 12 T-72, the Jews the 34 Merkava.
                  3. Saburov
                    Saburov 23 September 2013 00: 51
                    0
                    Jews would not be themselves if, after the war, they did not leave part of the Lebanese lands for temporary use - just in case. And to be honest - southern Lebanon was occupied for a reason: in order for cunning Palestinians and sympathizers to fire less at the lands of sovereign Israel and leak less to the south. But the PLO was replaced in Lebanon by a new club for Arab youth - Hezbollah, which brought Jews a lot of trouble with elements of light and pyrotechnics. Thanks in part to Hezbollah, Israel repeated its fascinating tank and infantry trip to Lebanon in 2006. It turned out not so epic and bloody as in 82, but the Arabs were once again reminded that the Jews had not forgotten how to fight. Although the Arabs were quick-witted and hung a few lyuli in the form of fifty destroyed merkas (including fashionable mk4) and 14 armored personnel carriers. The epiciness of the second Lebanon war is clearly expressed in numbers.
                  4. lucidlook
                    lucidlook 23 September 2013 04: 45
                    0
                    Quote: Saburov
                    Although, what is there to hide, the war cost the Araps 12 T-72, the Jews 34 Merkava.

                    belay So even that ?!

                    But Comrade Bulat writes a little different:

                    The Israelis lost more than 60 tanks, including the Merkava. The most distinguished helicopters and the 3rd Panzer Division. The Syrians lost more than 250 tanks, mainly from the 1st Panzer Division, which was surrounded on June 9. Large losses were sustained during an air strike inflicted by the Israelis during the declared ceasefire on June 11.
                2. lucidlook
                  lucidlook 23 September 2013 04: 34
                  0
                  Quote: Saburov
                  The IDF carefully cut out the entire Syrian air defense. At the same time, spending not a feeble number of drones used as meat.

                  Fun written, you can’t say anything. The main thing - in detail and indicating accurate data and sources.

                  As an alternative and antispasm, I recommend reading

                  WAR OF 1982 IN LEBANON - “THE WORLD OF GALILEE”. ON THE HISTORY OF ONE MYTH (IV)
                  http://otvaga2004.ru/voyny/wars-mid-east/wars-arab/mir-galilee-4/

                  Almost all tactical reconnaissance aircraft, AWACS, electronic reconnaissance aircraft and air command posts were lifted into the air. At 13:00, clouds of dipole reflectors (passive interference from the radar) were thrown out by planes on the front up to 200 km. At 13.30, the government received the final permission to conduct the operation. At 13.50, reconnaissance by the Fed air defense group promptly uncovered the rise of Israeli aviation from airfields and its concentration in the air above land and above the sea from Tsur to Tripoli. At 13:50 and 14:00, the Israelis completely suppressed the communication and control channels of the Syrian air defense system with active interference from Boeing 707 aircraft and ground stations (especially from the station on Hermon).

                  At 14:02 p.m. - 14:10 p.m., each position and command post was hit by 2-3 ground-to-ground missiles Zeev and Ivry (Fig. 9). At 14: 20-14: 22, more than 100 strike aircraft hit Shriik and Standard anti-radar missiles, as well as Wallai-2 guided bombs at air defense control and guidance points, 2-6 aircraft per point, after another 20 minutes, up to 80 aircraft hit ball bombs at anti-aircraft missile positions (Fig. 10). The attack lasted until 14.35.
                  Syrian fighters were called into the attack area, as a result of their appearance, part of the Israeli aircraft returned to the base without completing the mission.
                  At 14:40, the Rayak radar station was disabled. Syria has lost its aviation control system in the Bekaa Valley. After the first strike, reconnaissance flights were conducted to determine the damage caused by air defense.
                  After ascertaining that many batteries were not operational, at 15:45 p.m., the Israelis launched a second strike on missile launchers and ground forces stationed in the area. This attack lasted 30 minutes, using high-explosive and cluster bombs.
                3. Saburov
                  Saburov 23 September 2013 15: 40
                  +2
                  You know, I don’t read these nonsense, especially since I studied in Chelyabinsk under the supervision of a colonel, an instructor and a direct participant in those events, so he told me how the Jews blew dust in the eyes, two phantoms splashed, and from getting one rocket, the Jews took them at night and said that the Air Force had no casualties, Major Kopytin burned 4 merkava in place of the commander of the tank with the Syrian crew and made one back off, so she got into the moat and stayed there forever, but after two days the Jews were all the screws were taken apart and taken out and Syrians the cue crew then proved to the Soviet authorities that Kopytin wasn’t lying, thank God the Specialists found a record of that battle, so they figured out why should I read about tanks and their use, when I use them every day and use them at least once every two weeks?
                4. Saburov
                  Saburov 23 September 2013 15: 46
                  0
                  After the partitions of the Commonwealth, the Russian Empire included lands on which a large number of Jews lived. By the end of the 19th century, the largest Jewish community in the world existed in the Russian Empire (in 1880, 67% of the entire Jewish people [1] lived here). However, as a result of the mass pogroms from 1881 to 1906 years, and then during the Civil War, more than 2 million Jews left the territory of the Russian Empire, who mainly emigrated to the United States. Therefore, it is not surprising that the United States does not catch only lazy on lies.
                5. lucidlook
                  lucidlook 23 September 2013 16: 50
                  -1
                  Instead of stuffing yourself up and portraying the all-knowing and infallible, you would still read the link. There, essentially, and without water ... in contrast.

                  For example:

                  In total, on this day, the Syrians shot down 3 F-4Es, losing 2 MiGa-23 and 4 MiGa-21MF.
  • atalef
    atalef 21 September 2013 22: 20
    -2
    Quote: Saburov
    Well, there is much to argue about this, the Israelis fought well until the Soviet Union intervened, and the Jews began a black streak there.

    Pancake . like an officer. Where did you study at all? It’s a shame to read your opuses, you lower your level of knowledge of the officer corps below the plinth with your opus. What kind of officer are you. .
    1. Saburov
      Saburov 22 September 2013 17: 52
      +2
      Well, come to my division, I’ll drop you a nch and show me how erudite and competent a tanker you are, except how to sit and advertise your bulldozers with guns.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 14
        -1
        Quote: Saburov
        Well, come to my division, I’ll drop you a nch and show me how erudite and competent a tanker you are, except how to sit and advertise your bulldozers with guns.

        It's funny, but you can do something besides rudeness and bent fingers? 8) Type the option "go out and talk". Hmmm. Interestingly, after such a trash you think that someone should treat you with at least some respect?
        1. Saburov
          Saburov 23 September 2013 00: 11
          0
          Does your boy have stubble that has at least grown before moving on with me, am I your friend or acquaintance?
          1. Rumata
            Rumata 24 September 2013 10: 50
            0
            Quote: Saburov
            Your bristle boy has at least grown before moving on with me

            wassat For a long time I have not seen so much cheap ambition on the site. Get a medal, deserve it
          2. Pimply
            Pimply 24 September 2013 12: 55
            0
            Quote: Saburov
            Does your boy have stubble that has at least grown before moving on with me, am I your friend or acquaintance?

            No, you are not a friend and not familiar, you are a boor who believes that the stars make of you something more meaningful. When you get out of this illusion and learn to use the normal, then maybe you deserve to be addressed to you.
            Or do you think one here pulled an army strap and commanded people?
            1. Saburov
              Saburov 24 September 2013 21: 08
              0
              I pulled it, pull it, and I will pull it, and not sit piz ... eat in a chair, well ... you should talk to someone, go find an interlocutor of your age and do not go into other people's conversations.
            2. Saburov
              Saburov 24 September 2013 21: 14
              0
              Something the Jews on the site cuckered, to see for a quick start, Neher to deceive the people.
  • Pimply
    Pimply 21 September 2013 23: 08
    +1
    Quote: Saburov
    y, weight more than 50 tons is guaranteed to drive a car into the ground if there is a wet road and you will wait until the rain passes
    Sure? In Israel, it rains for 5 months a year. Such a weak one. Tropical.

    Quote: Saburov
    than on a heavy infantry fighting vehicle. Yes, and if the Israelis fought with Germany, or even worse with us, they would completely reconsider their approach to armored vehicles, it’s impossible to march in parade like in Palestine, tankers and pilots from the Arabs, too.

    Is the parade march against several armies, as a rule? Or against well-armed partisans?
    Do you know that parades have not been practiced in Israel for a long time?
    1. Saburov
      Saburov 23 September 2013 00: 55
      +2
      The opinion of the patriots: Well, how can we give our best equipment in the world to these unwashed Arabs, who almost surrender and even guess the joint of the 2 armies!
      The opinion of the Arabs: Well, how can you fight on a lousy scoop, where even the engine starts in the army way and there are no air conditioners!
      The opinion of the Jewish liberals: Do not quarrel, you are all right - and the Arabs are lousy warriors, and the soviet technique is shit.
      The opinion of Jewish shmuklera: Well, the Arabs had powerful, modern equipment, according to the best Soviet standards, and we have all the tanks (including even the M-60 O-LO-LO-LO!) Made according to World War II standards! We are just so cool that even on the Messerschmitts we will shoot down any MiGs!
  • Che
    Che 21 September 2013 14: 05
    +2
    Yes colossus depresses, you will not say anything. Interestingly in the foreground pots stands - the commander of the tank corps?
    1. Walking
      Walking 21 September 2013 18: 32
      +5
      Such an arba yes to Grozny in 1994-95 and see how much it would stretch against a more serious rival than the poor Palestinians.
      1. atalef
        atalef 21 September 2013 19: 18
        -2
        Quote: Hiking
        how much would she stretch against a more serious rival than the poor Palestinians

        Well, the Palestinians are not beggars at all.
        They have more weapons than the Chechens and Dagestanis (and especially the FSA) and more modern.
        and now about poverty
        There is such a thing as the "Population Poverty Index", which the UN has been calculating since 1997. And there are two methods for calculating it INN-1 for developing countries and INN-2 for developed ones.
        TIN-1 is considered based on the following
        http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/3909/mr-bison.2/0_49622_6a48b279_XL.jpg
        Well, let's see. Anyone on the list below is getting worse.
        http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/2814/mr-bison.2/0_49623_2ed6e0bc_XL.jpg
        as you can see, the poverty level in Palestine is lower than the Russian Federation. such is selvage, nor believe in rumors, and there is still a lot of curious about the poor, the poor. backward Palestinians
        Readers will be interested to know that the standard of living in Gaza is higher than in neighboring Egypt, Syria, Algeria, Morocco and many CIS countries (Moldova, Tajikistan). Life expectancy in Gaza is higher than in Russia, mortality is lower than in Russia and Israel.

        Lifespan:
        https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.h
        tml? countryName = Gaza% 20Strip & countryCode = gzRionCode = me & rank = 110 # gz

        Mortality:
        https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2066rank.h
        tml? countryName = Gaza% 20Strip & countryCode = gzRionCode = me & rank = 215 # gz
        The standard of living in Gaza and the PA (2007), 101 place, is the same as in Azerbaijan, but higher than Moldova, Algeria, Syria, Indonesia, Uzbekistan, Egypt, South Africa, Pakistan, etc. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_hum_dev_ind-economy-human-development-inde
        x
        1. postman
          postman 22 September 2013 22: 48
          +1
          Quote: atalef
          They have more weapons than the Chechens and Dagestanis

          Alexander, well, do not scoff at the truth.
          CAN YOU LIST WITH WHICH WEAPONS, MIS, MEANS OF COMMUNICATION, MEDICINE, SATELLITE DATA, AVIATION. UAF AND TD Possess the Palestinians?
          DOES ISRAEL'S DEFENSE MINISTERS (or rather, CORRUPTED BASTONS) GIVE DATA ABOUT OPERATIONS TO THE PALESTINES?
          YES ISRAEL FEELS HIMSELF AS IN THE SANDBACK, with deer
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 59
            0
            Quote: Postman
            CORRUPT BAGS

            More details, pliz.
            Quote: Postman
            CAN YOU LIST WITH WHICH WEAPONS, MIS, MEANS OF COMMUNICATION, MEDICINE, SATELLITE DATA, AVIATION. UAF AND TD Possess the Palestinians?


            Quote: Postman
            "BEREZOVSKY", a member of the Security Council who is financially interested in the war and sympathizes with Palestine?

            And a lot. You are not aware that one of the Arab deputies handed over to Hezbollah, for example, and another was Arafat’s personal adviser?
            On EU Sponsorship of Fellowships for Suicide Militants. About left-wing guys like Anat Kam who poured here and there the details of military operations?

            Or talk about communications, weapons, and so on, which were completely supplied to the Palestinians?
            1. postman
              postman 23 September 2013 18: 03
              0
              Quote: Pimply
              More details, pliz.

              What is the name of our bastards perichtly, Chechen times? Whether it is necessary?
              Prim, I didn’t mean Israeli, you messed up
              Quote: Pimply
              And a lot. You are not aware that one of the Arab deputies handed over to Hezbollah, for example, and another was Arafat’s personal adviser?

              the family is not without a freak, an exception to ... there is confirmation
              Quote: Pimply
              will we talk about communications, weapons, and so on, which were completely supplied to the Palestinians?

              what to talk about, compare with Israeli
        2. Saburov
          Saburov 23 September 2013 01: 13
          0
          On the night of 9 on 10 on June, the Syrians launched a powerful artillery counterattack on the enemy’s frontline positions, and at dawn the Syrian fire roll hit the second echelon of the Israelis. On June 10 their (the Israelis - WL) offensive, in practice, ran out of steam on the entire front. During these battles, Syrian ground forces destroyed more than 160 Israeli tanks.

          As a rule, tank battles began at ranges 1,500-2,000 m and ended at the line of approach to 1,000 m. According to the chief military adviser to the Syrian Ministry of Defense, General G.P. Yashkin, who personally took part in the leadership of the fighting in Lebanon, T-tanks 72 showed their complete superiority over the enemy’s armored vehicles. Affected by greater mobility, better security and high firepower of these machines. So, after the battle, in the frontal sheets of some “seventy-two” they counted up to 10 dents from the “enemy blanks” of the enemy, nevertheless, the tanks retained combat effectiveness and did not leave the battle. At the same time, X-NUMX-mm T-125 shells surely hit enemy vehicles in the forehead at ranges up to 72 meters. So, according to one of the eyewitnesses - a Soviet officer who is in combat formation of the Syrian troops - after a D-1,500TM cannon shell hit from a distance of approximately 81 m in the Merkava tank, the tower of the latter was torn off the shoulder.

          At the same time, fighting on the whole front resumed: the Israelis launched a “psychic” attack, trying to seize the most important strategic communication - the Beirut-Damascus highway. However, this attack was repelled with heavy losses on the Israeli side. Syrian T-72 from the 3-th Panzer Division again distinguished themselves. Its commander, Brigadier General F. Shafik, on his own initiative, advanced his connection from the second echelon and launched a powerful counterattack in the direction of the city of Adan. As a result, the 210-I tank division of the enemy was driven back from the highway at 18-20 km and actually defeated. Neighboring divisions were in a difficult situation. The Israeli front was threatened with collapse, but on 11 in June at 12 hours the fighting was stopped: the American emissaries Schulz and Habib, who arrived in Damascus, convinced the Syrian leadership to stop the counter-attack, guaranteeing that Israel would withdraw troops from Lebanon in 10 days and enter negotiations with Syria.
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 23 September 2013 18: 16
            0
            Stop spreading this nonsense. Please!
            1. Rumata
              Rumata 24 September 2013 10: 55
              0
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              Stop spreading this nonsense. Please!

              He lives in his own alternative reality, with an alternative history, and the facts seem to be drawn from what he had dreamed of lately ...
              1. Saburov
                Saburov 25 September 2013 17: 59
                0
                Nevertheless, if Russian, Western and Israeli sources do not contradict each other at some point, then precisely for this reason - all sources confirm the use of T-72 in the battles of the Lebanon war. These T-72s could only belong to the 3th brtd (consisting of the 47th and 81th brigades and 21th brigade), which replaced the remnants of the 1th brtd on the outskirts of Beirut-Damascus on the night of the 10th to 11 -June June (while the 47-I tank battalion suffered serious losses - 30 tanks from its composition were destroyed as a result of the bombing from the air on the 10-June). Therefore, we can say with absolute certainty: T-72 were used by the Syrians in battles only starting from the 11 of June 1982 of the year.
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 21 September 2013 23: 16
        +1
        Well, most likely she wouldn’t have run into it on her own 8) And do you seriously consider the Palestinians, armed and sponsored by the whole world, with huge support from the Arab states and Iran, as beggars? Or do you think the guys who laid the foundations of modern terrorism are not serious opponents?
      3. alone
        alone 22 September 2013 18: 21
        0
        Quote: Hiking
        Such an arba yes to Grozny in 1994-95 and see how much it would stretch against a more serious rival than the poor Palestinians.


        It’s not possible. Israel has a different tactic for conducting street battles. Tanks appear in the city only when there is no one to shoot at them. They have assault teams and armored bulldozers. And the tanks are supported by fire.
        1. postman
          postman 22 September 2013 23: 19
          0
          Quote: lonely
          .tanks in the city appear only when there is no one to shoot at them. they have assault groups and armored bulldozers.

          this is a true diagnosis of scanty losses of IDF + not at all a serious adversary, with no serious armaments and no support (art, air, etc.)
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 23 September 2013 00: 00
            +1
            Quote: Postman
            this is a true diagnosis of scanty losses of IDF + not at all a serious adversary, with no serious armaments and no support (art, air, etc.)

            This is a very serious opponent. An adversary who essentially shaped the current face of Islamic terrorism. With many years of experience.
            1. postman
              postman 23 September 2013 17: 31
              0
              Quote: Pimply
              This is a very serious opponent.

              I didn’t come across Palestinians, I came across supportive (sympathizing) and in Germany- my opinion is sheep
              I came into close contact with the Egyptian Armed Forces, there is no word ... I will not say anything. The RESULT OF THE WARS waged by modern Israel speaks for itself: the enemy sucks.
              Well, you have to be such noobs that you would have superiority in drugs, technology, geography, positonno-pump all the wars and waste even the advantage that they got, and this is with the support of the USSR! AND?
              at the same time, I consider Jews to be excellent warriors6 prudent, courageous, cold-blooded, do not abandon their own, professionals, history speaks for itself (if it does not lie of course), even in Nazi Germany:
              in the German army, up to 150 thousand Jewish soldiers fought on the fronts of World War II. Hundreds of Jews Awarded for Courage Iron crosses. Twenty soldiers and officers of Jewish descent were awarded the highest military award of the Third Reich - Knight's Cross.
              RK and ZhK just and anyhow anyone, especially people of Jewish nationality, at that time, were not awarded

              Quote: Pimply
              vast many years of experience.

              all this is relevant for wars of the type: nashkodil (and even hiding behind the civilian population) and fled.
              AND FOR A COMBINED OPERATION? What can they oppose the defense army And?
              Aviation, satellites, artillery, MBT, PT, MLRS, TR, UAV?
              what?
            2. vahatak
              vahatak 28 September 2013 18: 16
              0
              Serious opponents do not engage in tevror. Terrorism is the tactics of the weak, the one who cannot hold out in open battle. Not one side of the conflict, capable of serious resistance, will not resort to terror, especially the modern one.
  • bif
    bif 21 September 2013 21: 38
    0
    This miracle can be seen even from space ... crawling with the fact that the Palestinians do not have their companions.
  • alone
    alone 21 September 2013 22: 43
    +2
    Quote: Lyapis
    When shooting at such an infantry fighting vehicle, it is probably very difficult to miss.


    but as you can see, the infantry is sitting where it should sit, and not on the armor)) it means, though large, but reliable. And the main thing is that it justifies its name - the infantry fighting vehicle, and not the infantry fighting cemetery.
    1. Walking
      Walking 22 September 2013 00: 09
      0
      If you get a decent ammunition in the right place and intention, it will become the mass grave of Merkava.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 35
        +2
        Definitely. There are no invulnerable cars.
    2. Professor
      Professor 22 September 2013 07: 52
      +1
      Quote: lonely
      not an infantry fighting repository.

      More correctly, it is called the "Mass Grave of the Infantry". Therefore, the fighters strive to sit on the tombstone ...
  • Demetrius29
    Demetrius29 22 September 2013 13: 42
    0
    All the same, no matter what kind of policy Israel pursues. With whom they are not friends with the union, their attitude to the army and, in particular, to the soldier is excellent. Immediately I recall our furniture maker or Pasha Mercedes, but many who.
  • OffenroR
    OffenroR 22 September 2013 14: 30
    +1
    Quote: Lyapis
    There was a feeling that the Israelis in terms of armored vehicles suffer from gigantomania (the first photo was very impressive belay )
    When shooting at such an infantry fighting vehicle, it is probably very difficult to miss.

    A considerable number of "Jews" (namely the Ashkenazi) have it in their blood, because many of the ancestors were Germans, now it is clear where they got it from wink

    As for the size of the car ... with today's systems, hitting that Leopard 2 or T-90 will not be particularly difficult (and if they hit from an RPG they still hit, because they usually hit from a distance of no more than 50-100m). what .. size doesn't matter wassat
  • Alexey Prikazchikov
    Alexey Prikazchikov 21 September 2013 08: 08
    +1
    It is strange why the Israelis on Merkava 4 will not develop a full range of weapons from the KSHM to the Sau and the engineering vehicle. All brigades would be transferred to one platform and would not have steamed. And there something new would come in time.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 08: 38
      +8
      Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
      It is strange why the Israelis on Merkava 4 will not develop a full range of weapons from the KSHM to the Sau and the engineering vehicle. All brigades would be transferred to one platform and would not have steamed. And there something new would come in time.

      Money. A prototype ACS "Sholef" based on the Mk-3 was developed, but the Americans offered their own ACS, which would come from American military aid, and the government accepted this proposal. After all, the army is for the people, not the people for the army.
      1. Alexey Prikazchikov
        Alexey Prikazchikov 21 September 2013 09: 02
        +2
        Money. A prototype ACS "Sholef" based on the Mk-3 was developed, but the Americans offered their own ACS


        It is necessary to develop YOUR production. And the main costs go during the operation and modernization of equipment.

        After all, the army is for the people, not the people for the army.


        Can not argue.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 21 September 2013 13: 44
          0
          You can’t produce ALL-ALL of your own. This is pointless from an economic point of view - and not only that.
    2. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 21 September 2013 11: 44
      +4
      It is strange why the Israelis on Merkava 4 will not develop a full range of weapons from the KSHM to the Sau and the engineering vehicle. All brigades would be transferred to one platform and would not have steamed. And there something new would come in time.


      For SPGs, such a level of protection as that of the Merkava or Namer is completely redundant. And the weight of such a pepelatsa will be prohibitive. Therefore, a lighter chassis is needed.
  • bairat
    bairat 21 September 2013 08: 14
    +3
    You need to learn from the Israelis, they have a lot of combat experience and they use it. Well, how long our infantry will ride "on the armor", this is wildness. Why invest so much money in these boxes, despite the fact that they do not perform their main function.
    Another point: a different approach to arming BMPs, a 100 mm cannon paired with 30 mm was attached to our turret, the Israelis decided to get by with a heavy machine gun.
    1. Alexey Prikazchikov
      Alexey Prikazchikov 21 September 2013 08: 21
      +4
      You need to learn from the Israelis, they have a lot of combat experience and they use it. Well, how long our infantry will ride "on the armor", this is wildness. Why invest so much money in these boxes, despite the fact that they do not perform their main function.
      Another point: a different approach to arming BMPs, a 100 mm cannon paired with 30 mm was attached to our turret, the Israelis decided to get by with a heavy machine gun.


      The professor seemed to be talking more. This is because they work hard ALWAYS in conjunction with tanks. Therefore, the Azarchites have not yet begun to put a new cannon module uninhabited. They say that there was no temptation to use it as a tank or infantry fighting vehicle.
    2. Gladiatir-zlo
      Gladiatir-zlo 21 September 2013 13: 16
      +1
      Well, what is Israel's experience, the more so. Chasing Arabs armed with small arms - skill needs a wagon. Or I'm wrong. It’s not a problem for Jews to grind a couple of quarters with “militants”. Another story is that their operations are coordinated and provided with tactical intelligence. And the suppression of nodes of resistance occurs from afar, and not always with high-precision weapons.
      In addition, the theater of the Middle East is very specific. therefore, from there, I consider it unnecessary to consider the revelation of the twilight Jewish genius.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 21 September 2013 13: 48
        +1
        Quote: Gladiatir-Zlo
        Or I'm wrong.


        Wrong. For starters - an easy shooting constant trend only in recent years.
        Secondly, these are modern missile and anti-tank weapons, as well as guerrilla warfare techniques. Or do you still live the realities of World War II?
      2. Tourist Breakfast
        Tourist Breakfast 21 September 2013 13: 54
        +2
        What is the difference between theater and other conditions during the assault of some Jenin or Beirut from those during the assault of Grozny?
      3. atalef
        atalef 21 September 2013 14: 04
        +1
        Quote: Gladiatir-Zlo
        Well, what is the experience of Israel, the greater

        At least in the fact that the last war of the USSR-Russia was in 1945, and Israel has had 1947 major wars since 6. Further, than the conflicts (in which the RA is fighting today) is different from the IDF fighting?
        Chechnya, Ossetia - well, no different from IDF operations in Gaza, Jenin or Lebanon. (only smaller losses and a better result) The point is to rivet the submarines and clubs, if the main losses are infantry for which it has not yet been created (and has not been ported into the army) adequate (to threats) Protection - like heavy infantry fighting vehicles, communications. night vision. battle control. UAVs, and tactical support helicopters (I'm not talking about combat control methods in densely built-up areas), here we come to GLONASS navigation aids, electronic maps (all of this has already been written enough). First of all, it is necessary to minimize losses among the personnel of the Republic of Armenia (of course, nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers can be built in parallel), but the main threat and the main losses of the Republic of Armenia over the past 20 years are local conflicts in the built-up area (as is fair to say throughout the world).
        Therefore, we must first of all pay attention to improving the security of personnel of infantry formations, airborne forces, etc. And the Premier League is the same good Ya. But in my concept is not the most important thing at the moment.
        1. beard999
          beard999 21 September 2013 16: 24
          +16
          Quote: atalef
          the last war of the USSR-Russia was in 1945, and Israel from 1947 - 6 major howls

          First of all, your 6 “major” wars do not stand close in scale with the Great Patriotic War. Do not compare the incomparable. In 1941-1945 we fought with the strongest army in the world, which had huge combat experience. You have never had such an enemy close. All your wars are frankly small-town, on the same, very limited theater of operations, with the same, in fact, the enemy (Arabs). Secondly, what do you, in principle, call “major wars”? The Arab-Israeli war of 1956 lasted - 9 days, the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 - 6 days, the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 - 6 days, during the Arab-Israeli war of 1982, battles with the Syrian regular army continued - 5 days. In 2006, you fought with insurgents for 25 days (ground operation). Those. the last time you fought with the regular army 31 years ago. And Russia 5 years ago (August 2008).
          In addition, it is not clear why you have excluded Afghanistan and two Chechen companies from the list of wars. The USSR / RF did not fight there, do you think?
          Quote: atalef
          Chechnya, Ossetia - well, no different from IDF operations in Gaza, Jenin or Lebanon

          So nothing and "no different"? Well, let's compare. For example, our first Chechen company with your July war of 2006 (the largest operation of the three that you listed): 1. The active phase of the first Chechen war lasted 612 days, Israel in 2006, conducted military operations for only 33 days (in including only 25 days of land operation). 2. The area of ​​the theater of war (Chechnya) 15647 km sq. The positions of Hezbollah were located on a stretch of about 25 by 25 km (from the Israeli-Lebanese border to the Litani River). 3. The main hostilities against the Chechen separatists at the initial stage were carried out in large settlements. Grozny Square - 324,16 km2,5 (For example, it is 4,5 times more than Jerusalem, and 4,5 times more than Tel Aviv). Israel did not storm such large settlements at all. In the final phase of the first Chechen war, hostilities were fought in the mountains (altitudes up to 4 km). The IDF, on the other hand, waged military operations virtually on relatively flat terrain. 18. With the exception of aviation, the weapons of the Chechen separatists were practically the same as those of the Russian army. At the initial stage, the Chechens had 122 BM Grad MLRS, 152 and 41 mm howitzer artillery, XNUMX tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, MANPADS and ZSU. Hezbollah did not have full-time heavy weapons. Etc. Well, still do not see the "differences"?
          Quote: atalef
          in my concept is not the most important thing at the moment

          You judge from the position of a citizen of Israel. For you, the “beast” is worse than the insurgent (Lebanese Palestinian). Russia, however, is striving to withstand the most powerful armed forces in the world — the United States. Our and your scale of the tasks of military construction are a priori incomparable.
          1. Gur
            Gur 21 September 2013 18: 31
            +2
            Thank you very detailed laid out completely agree hi I would like to express my opinion on infantry vehicles in large-scale military operations with the number of soldiers disappearing in thousands will be a problem for the entire army, they probably have a place in battles with bandits, but I remember how the back support was taught how infantry vehicles were taught life in a battle disappearing for minutes and such an Israeli machine is really huge clumsy and weakly armed for normal battles meaning a bunch of armor not suitable for armor can be sent ahead of the armament a little the first tank that is encountered is the tank riglyadyvat and ispolzovat this technique as a taxi for the expensive infantry protection to what is behind the tank infantry land mines all worked on the tanks do not see the point but still the first river on foot to mine enemies neostavlyayut bridges. But Russian cars are nimble, they are called figs, they jump with a parachute, automatic cannons jump are expensive compared to the tank, and most importantly there are Heroes inside (I can give you a bunch of examples starting with the history of Kievan Rus when we defeated enemies superior in power several times) and if we need there were a hundred tanks, turn them off, even though they made from platinum, we need thousands, and so I think the minds sit and consider the price-effectiveness ratio (well, I doubt the truth about the personnel).
          2. Pimply
            Pimply 21 September 2013 23: 21
            0
            Quote: beard999
            First of all, your 6 “major” wars do not stand close in scale with the Great Patriotic War. Do not compare the incomparable. In 1941-1945 we fought with the strongest army in the world, which had huge combat experience.

            Correctly. But this war was 70 years ago, right? And the conversation is that wars do not stand still.
            1. beard999
              beard999 22 September 2013 16: 30
              +1
              Quote: Pimply
              But this war was 70 years ago, right?

              Right. But the Israelis themselves always remember their old wars. The last war with the regular army you had 31 years ago. But, for example, 7 years ago, in the war against insurgents, the IDF did not mark any special victories. This is a conversation.
              Quote: Pimply
              And the conversation is that wars do not stand still

              And what, it allows to compare the Second World War with small-town regional conflicts?
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 22
                0
                Quote: beard999
                Right. But the Israelis themselves always remember their old wars. The last war with the regular army you had 31 years ago.

                That's right, only now you are trying to compare different types of wars, apply what has changed more than once or twice.

                Well, how is it not marked? A war of a different type. There has been a lull on the northern border since the war. A completely different type of war.


                Quote: beard999
                And what, it allows to compare the Second World War with small-town regional conflicts?

                And what's the point of comparing wars of different types? Or do you suppose a war such as World War II? She is not, and is unlikely to be. Now the basis of wars is local conflicts.
                1. beard999
                  beard999 23 September 2013 15: 25
                  +2
                  Quote: Pimply
                  only now you are trying to compare different types of wars

                  Pimply, your manner of turning everything upside down is simply amazing. Where did I try to “compare different types of wars”? Your fellow countryman atalef himself wrote that the war in Chechnya is "no different" from the operation in Lebanon. It was them that I compared. Both there and there, regular armed forces fought against insurgents. The type of war (counter-insurgency) is exactly the same. But atalef's claims that these “conflicts are no different” are a lie. They differ and are very, very significant. And the timing of the war, and the theater of war, and the number of insurgents, and their combat training, and having weapons on the opposite side, and the level of external support (in the broadest sense of the word), etc. etc. In such matters it is necessary to understand in detail, and not put everything in a heap.
                  Quote: Pimply
                  Well, how is it not marked?

                  “Noted” except that a 20-day assault on the small town of Bent Jabil ...
                  And about the "lull" I have repeatedly said - Hezbollah defeated? Is her missile arsenal destroyed? Does it hurt her to strike Israel at any moment?
                  Quote: Pimply
                  And what's the point of comparing wars of different types?

                  It is necessary to compare the comparable. WWII in general in terms of scale is nothing to compare with. Nevertheless, this does not prevent the Israelis from placing the Arab-Israeli, purely regional conflicts on a par with the World War II. Why on earth? In the recent history of the USSR / Russia, similar conflicts simply did not exist in the Arab-Israeli wars. We, unlike you, are not constantly attacked. And then what do you propose to compare with? Get another ear pull. Any armed conflict should be considered objectively, including take into account the forces and means of the opposing side. Otherwise, it will be empty verbiage. Actually, the discussion of “Namer” by the Israelis demonstrates this. It is highly likely that the Namer is by far the most secure APC in the world. In order to drive Hamas in Gaza, this is what we need. All in full chocolate. And if the IDF is opposed by the regular army, and not by the insurgents, will everything be fine as well? Do you think the "Namer" can withstand the hit of more or less modern ammunition? Grenade and rockets with KBB - PG-30, PG-28, PG-32, 9M119M1, 9M120-1, 9M123-2, 9M127, 9M131M1, 9M133M2? Withstand a 3BM60 type BPS? Will withstand the hit of antifreeze ammunition: cumulative - PTAB-1M / U, KOBE 3B30, 3B34, ammunition with shell-forming warheads - 9N268, 9N282-2, SPBE-K? Explosions of high-explosive landmines TM-62D (in equipment with explosives MS or TGA) of cumulative high-explosive mines TM-89 and PTM-4, anti-aircraft mines with shell-forming warheads ТМ-83? The regular army is for you, not insurgents. Even land mines of military engineer units set up differently - 2 full-time SZ-6s in TG-50 equipment, and goodbye to "Namer" ...
          3. lucidlook
            lucidlook 21 September 2013 23: 43
            0
            Quote: beard999
            First of all, your 6 “major” wars do not stand close in scale with the Great Patriotic War. Do not compare the incomparable. In 1941-1945 we fought with the strongest army in the world, which had huge combat experience.

            Of course, you will excuse me, but I would prefer that in 1941 the Red Army acted as decisively, confidently and effectively as Tsakhal in the conflicts you mentioned.

            Quote: beard999
            The Arab-Israeli war of 1956 lasted 9 days, the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 6 days

            It would be very cool if, with the same balance of power between the parties, as it was in the Arab-Israeli wars, success in the Second World War would have been achieved in an equally short period of time, and not in 4 years.

            And now, with regard to the forces of the parties that attacked Israel from two fronts (on the example of the six-day war):

            Military personnel: 547 (Egypt - 000, Syria, Jordan, Iraq - 240)
            Combat aircraft: 957
            Tanks: 2504

            What Israel opposed them:
            Military personnel: 64 (000 regular troops, 50 reservists)
            Combat aircraft: 300
            Tanks: 800

            Continue or clear? Compare with the forces of Dudaev in the first Chechen one.

            The fact that the army of the Russian Federation in 1990 fumbled with Dudayev so much, made such monstrous miscalculations and mistakes on the verge of treason, does not honor either the war itself or the strategists. "To fight not by numbers, but by skill" - who said, do not remember?
            1. beard999
              beard999 22 September 2013 16: 33
              +5
              Quote: lucidlook
              I would prefer that in 1941 the Red Army acted as decisively, confidently and effectively as the Tsakhal in the conflicts you mentioned

              A very naive statement. Your army is acting as the enemy allows you. In 1941, the Wehrmacht was the strongest army in the world, with successful combat experience (in less than 2 years, almost all of Europe was conquered). Not a single Arab-Israeli war at the IDF equal in power to the Wehrmacht arr. 1941 the enemy, and was not close. I repeat to you - do not compare the incomparable.
              Quote: lucidlook
              if, with the same balance of power between the parties, as it was in the Arab-Israeli wars, success in the Second World War would have been achieved in an equally short period of time, and not in 4 years.

              Demagogy. Why did the Americans during the WWII fought with the Japanese for 4 years? There's also a “aspect ratio” that is quite comparable with your example (if not yet the best). And in Afghanistan, why have Americans been fighting the second decade, and they have no more successes than horseradish than the SA in the 80s? And this despite the fact that the Americans with NATO and other camarilla are in much better conditions in Afghanistan than the OKW was in 1979-1989.
              You always throw out the strength of the opposing opponent from the discussion. If the IDF had an enemy equal in strength to the German Armed Forces of 1941, it is still unknown how long they would have fought and whether Israel could win this war at all, or would quickly be blown away, like France and Great Britain in June 1940 (by the way , you can look at the “aspect ratio” in that campaign).
              Quote: lucidlook
              Compare with the forces of Dudaev in the first Chechen

              And why did you begin to compare the first Chechen one with the fighting of the Israelis with the regular Arab armies? If you suddenly did not notice, then atalef wrote the following: "Chechnya, Ossetia - well, it is no different from the IDF operations in Gaza, Jenin or Lebanon." And I objectively compared one of the examples he named with the first Chechen campaign. Talk about conflicts with insurgents !!! You are again trying to start comparing the incomparable.
              Quote: lucidlook
              "To fight not by numbers, but by skill"

              Where have you been with your wisdom before? You, this thought had to be prompted by the Israelis in July 2006, otherwise 176000 regular army, Israel, for some reason, was not enough, and they began to mobilize reservists, although they were opposed by only 2-4 thousand insurgents, without heavy weapons ... You don’t know , why is the IDF not counting on its “skill"?
          4. recrut6666
            recrut6666 22 September 2013 10: 31
            -2
            I am always struck by the position that our main enemy is the USA, you just compare our economies: 14 trillion against against trillions of dollars! a professional army against the workers and peasants, armed equipment of the 80s at best!
            you don’t believe the TV, Nato will not fight with us until we attack them ourselves!
            our main opponent is in Asia! which is slowly and stubbornly building its economy, more than 8 trillion, ten times the population, a huge overproduction of young men. compared with them we will soon look like pygmies who have a big club (nuclear triad) !!!!
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 26
              -3
              Though someone has sound thoughts
            2. beard999
              beard999 22 September 2013 16: 35
              +2
              Quote: recrut6666
              14 trillion versus trillions of dollars! a professional army against the workers and peasants, armed equipment of the 80s at best!

              From the side, your statement looks like: “Katz always offered to surrender, offered to surrender, offered to surrender ...”.
              Do you know how many nuclear war plans against the USSR / Russia did the USA have after WWII? And why the United States did not implement them, have no idea? Because in these conflicts the main thing is not “trillions of dollars”, but the presence of powerful strategic nuclear forces, which the Russian Federation, thank God, has.
              Quote: recrut6666
              our main opponent is in Asia!

              In fact, the last two most terrible wars in our country came precisely from the West, and not from Asia. The most powerful military bloc in the world with the largest number of nuclear weapons is located in the West, and not in Asia. A missile defense system that could potentially weaken the Russian strategic nuclear forces is located near our borders by the United States, not Asia. Do you give a damn about these circumstances?
          5. kirpich
            kirpich 23 September 2013 18: 12
            0
            Bravo! I did not see a more complete answer to the insinuations. Once again BRAVO!
          6. Rumata
            Rumata 24 September 2013 11: 01
            +1
            Quote: beard999
            All your wars are frankly small-town

            In fairness, it is worth noting that after WWII, the largest tank battles were in our shtetl wars
            1. beard999
              beard999 24 September 2013 17: 30
              +1
              Quote: Rumata
              after WWII, the largest tank battles were in our shtetl wars

              Are you sure about that? The last major tank battles in your shtetl wars were 40 years ago. Like all your wars, the fourth Arab-Israeli war of 1973 was very fleeting - only 19 days. Meanwhile, in the Iran-Iraq war, on both sides, 5500 tanks were involved and it lasted from September 1980 to August 1988, i.e. - 8 years. So, major tank battles, after WWII, were not only yours.
              1. Rumata
                Rumata 24 September 2013 18: 51
                0
                Quote: beard999
                So, major tank battles, after WWII, were not only yours.

                Double two, the largest, but not large, tank battles were here.
                Quote: beard999
                Are you sure about that? The last major tank battles in your shtetl wars were 40 years ago.

                I don’t understand how this contradicts what I wrote, even if it was 40 years ago, it happened after WWII
                1. beard999
                  beard999 25 September 2013 18: 14
                  +1
                  Quote: Rumata
                  Take two, the largest, not large

                  Come on without verbiage. By the total number of armored vehicles involved throughout the war and by the duration of the hostilities, the Iran-Iraq war is “the largest”. For example, a tank battle in the Kharhi Valley, in January 1981, was an absolutely ordinary episode of that war. And there have been many such fights over 8 years.
                  Quote: Rumata
                  I don’t understand how this contradicts what I wrote, even if it was 40 years ago

                  Your fellow countrymen, above wrote that you should not recall the old wars (in particular WWII). Like, everything has changed since then. And for 40 years, that nothing has changed? There were no more people or equipment from the 1973 war in the IDF. Nevertheless, for some reason you remembered her, especially the “tank battles”. What for?
                  1. Rumata
                    Rumata 25 September 2013 20: 46
                    0
                    Quote: beard999
                    Come on without verbiage. By the total number of armored vehicles involved throughout the war and by the duration of the hostilities, the Iran-Iraq war is “the largest”.

                    Do I have verbiage? I wrote three times, the largest tank battles, you tell me about the total number of tanks.
                    I don’t understand by chance you do it or on purpose -

                    The trick "stuffed animal" - a logical trick by which one of the parties to the dispute distorts any argument of his opponent, replacing it with a similar, but weaker one. The debater then easily refutes this distorted argument, while creating the appearance that the original argument was refuted. (Straw man)
                    1. beard999
                      beard999 26 September 2013 17: 08
                      +1
                      Quote: Rumata
                      you tell me about the total number of tanks

                      And what is the number of BTT is not an indicator? Your tank battles were sporadic and fleeting, and during the Iran-Iraq war, the largest tank battles took place periodically for 8 years. You have no such experience. Would you like to calculate the number of BTTs in one battle? OK. For example, the Americans claim that in the Battle of the 73rd Easting on February 27, 1991, about 2500 BTT units participated on both sides (3 mechanized divisions and 1 panzer from the Iraqi side and 2 panzer divisions and 1 armored regiment from the US).
                      And yet, why are you afraid to answer my question: why did you recall the “tank battles” 40 years ago?
                      Quote: Rumata
                      The stuffed trick

                      And you still ask someone verbiage. Absolutely obvious from anyone.
                      1. atalef
                        atalef 26 September 2013 17: 18
                        +1
                        Quote: beard999
                        ? Your tank battles were sporadic and fleeting, and during the Iran-Iraq war, the largest tank battles took place periodically for 8 years. You have no such experience. Would you like to calculate the number of BTT in one battle

                        A deuce to you in history - dear. The largest tank battles (after the Second World War) took place in the Sinai and the Golan.
                        The six-day war of 1967 was a true triumph of the Israeli armored forces. For the first time, Israeli tank formations operated simultaneously on three fronts. They were opposed by many times superior forces of the five Arab states, but even this did not save the Arabs from total defeat. On the southern front, a strike was inflicted by the forces of the three tank divisions of Generals Tal, Sharon and Ioffe. In the offensive operation, called the “March through the Sinai,” Israeli tank units, interacting with aviation, motorized infantry and paratroopers, made a lightning-fast breakthrough of the enemy’s defenses and moved through the desert, destroying the surrounded groups of Arabs. On the northern front, along the impassable mountain trails, the 36th Panzer Division of General Peled attacked, which, after three days of fierce fighting, reached the outskirts of Damascus. On the eastern front, Israeli forces knocked out Jordanian units from Jerusalem and liberated ancient Jewish shrines from foreign invaders. During the fighting, more than 1200 enemy tanks were destroyed, thousands of armored vehicles, mainly Soviet-made ones, were captured. The captured Soviet T-54/55 tanks underwent major modernization at Israeli tank factories and entered service with the tank forces under the name "Tiran-4/5".

                        Golan
                        The most difficult test for Israel was the Doomsday War, which began on October 6, 1973, on the day of one of the most important Jewish holidays, when most of the troops were on vacation. Israel was suddenly attacked on all fronts by many times superior forces of aggressors. On the open spaces from the Sinai to the Golan Heights, one of the largest tank battles in world military history unfolded - up to six thousand tanks took part in it from both sides.
                        A particularly dangerous situation prevailed in the Golan Heights - there, only 200 tanks of the 7th and 188th tank brigades were opposed on a stretch of 40 kilometers by almost 1400 Syrian tanks
                      2. beard999
                        beard999 27 September 2013 15: 36
                        0
                        Quote: atalef
                        A deuce to you in history - dear. The largest tank battles (after the Second World War) took place in the Sinai and the Golan.

                        Well, firstly, this is not a “story”, but a banal propaganda in the spirit of a crow bark that Shurik Shulman sprinkled on (I was surprised that you seduced her, I thought that of all the Israeli participants on topwar, you are the most sensible author ...). Secondly, and this is the main thing - COL for you for such a “history”. And this is why - in addition to cheap show-offs in this article, which you call “history” for some reason, there is no main thing - supporting links to sources. Meanwhile, even in Israeli sources http://guide-israel.ru/history/252-october-war-1973/, it is indicated that the total number of tanks (and combat-ready and sky-ready) in the armies of Egypt, Syria and Israel was only 5250 units Again, solely according to Israeli data, the largest battle in the Golan was the episode when 1200 tanks participated on the Syrian side (by the way, according to Syrian sources, about 750). Of course, that battle, October 6, 1973 can be considered the largest, but whether it was the largest after WWII, this is still a BIG question.
        2. Rumata
          Rumata 24 September 2013 11: 20
          -1
          Quote: beard999
          The main hostilities against the Chechen separatists at the initial stage were carried out in large settlements. Grozny Square - 324,16 km2,5 (For example, it is 4,5 times more than Jerusalem, and XNUMX times more than Tel Aviv). Israel did not storm such large settlements at all.

          Even so?
          The Gaza Strip is like one big city, it is practically impossible to enter Gaza itself, for example, by capturing Han Younes on the one hand, Rafiah on the other. On the example of the storming of the terrible. There were 5 to 12000 militants, in the Grozny region there were 12 armed forces troops, about 000 were inside the city itself.
          Take Cast Lead 20000 militants, 10 IDF soldiers.
          Operation Protective Wall, 20000 soldiers, against 10 militants (Not in Gaza). During my service life, we participated 000 times in operations of the "Days of Response" scale, when 7-3000 soldiers entered Gaza ...
          Israel has carried out operations on the scale of the storming of Grozny more than once, but here’s the resistance in Gaza, one of the most densely populated places on the planet, where every third house was mined, with underground passages that were built for years, suppressed in a week, and about the same in territory and the number of militants, Grozny, was taken under control only after 2.5 months. So you don’t have to go too far. This is one thing, local conflicts are another. I understand comparing an entire war over a large territory, it’s not an easy thing, but storming cities is not an argument, we do this every one and a half to two years ...
          1. Rumata
            Rumata 24 September 2013 11: 52
            0
            Quote: Rumata
            when 3000 to 3500 soldiers entered Gaza ...

            2000-2500, one copy ...
          2. beard999
            beard999 24 September 2013 17: 35
            0
            Quote: Rumata
            Gaza is like one big city

            To put it mildly, you exaggerate. Look at the maps: http://www.worldmapfinder.com/GoogleMaps/Ru_Asia_Gaza.html or http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Gaza_Strip_map.png?uselang=en
            . The entire Gaza Strip is 360 km square. Terrible alone, without suburbs (which he also has) - 324,16 km. sq. Obviously, the city of Gaza is not close to the scale of Grozny.
            Quote: Rumata
            There were from 5 to 12000 militants, there were 12 armed forces in the Grozny region, about 000 were inside the city itself. We take Cast Lead 3000 militants, 20000

            We will deal with the figures given. We accept numbers from 5000 to 12000 militants in Grozny. That's just in addition to Grozny, the militants were in other settlements. According to various estimates, their total number was from 25000 to 45000. Accordingly, the Russian Armed Forces conducted military operations throughout Chechnya (and partially in Ingushetia). Initially, according to official figures, 24000 people entered Chechnya. Half of the forces were deployed in Grozny (early January 2005). But by February 1, the number of UGA increased to 70,5 thousand.
            As for Cast Lead. 20000 militants are not only the strength of Hamas, but also the Islamic Jihad, the KNS, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, the Islamic Army http://www.vpk-news.ru/articles/5280 (by the way, from of this source, this figure also migrated to the wiki). How many militants were directly in Gaza is unknown, but obviously not 20000.
            Quote: Rumata
            Israel more than once, conducted operations of the scale of the storming of Grozny

            It's a lie. In the area of ​​the IDF, cities comparable in scale to Grozny have never been. Take the challenge - immediately bring the squares of the cities of Gaza.
            Quote: Rumata
            every third house was mined, with underground passages that were built over the years, crushed in a week, and about the same in territory and number of militants, Grozny took control only after 2.5 months

            Every “third mine house” is cheap demagogy. Similar to the fact that each "house in Grozny was turned into an impregnable fortress, with underground utilities."
            As for the timing of the taking of cities. Tell me, what was the armament for Hamas in 2008? What did they have besides the Qassam-1/2/3, Al-Quds-101 rockets (designed for firing on squares) and light small arms made on their knees? Were there tanks? Native BMRS MLRS were? Howitzer artillery was? Were there regular anti-tank and anti-personnel mines? And what was the anti-tank weapons? For example, Chechen fighters only from 24 warehouses in Chechnya took 51 Fagot ATGMs and 740 Metis ATGMs and 113 ATGMs for them, 7 RPG-7V and an unknown number of shots to them, including PG-7VL and PG-XNUMXVR.
            You have absolutely nothing to boast about. You had an opponent of equal strength to the Chechens in Grozny in 1995, and you weren’t close. When the Arabs appear more or less adequate weapons, your success is completely dull. I can remind you: when in 2006 the valiant IDF could not take the tiny Bent Jabil for 20 days. So do not bend your fingers.
            1. Rumata
              Rumata 25 September 2013 09: 34
              0
              Quote: beard999
              It's a lie. In the area of ​​the IDF, cities comparable in scale to Grozny have never been. Take the challenge - immediately bring the squares of the cities of Gaza.

              And why are we silent about the population? In one city of Gaza, it is one and a half times more than in Grozny. If we take the entire territory of the operation, the population there is 1.6 million, which is more than the population of ALL of Chechnya. That is, we have the same area, with a population of 8 times larger, which, unlike Grozny, did not leave its habitat. According to various sources, in Grozny, about 50-000 residents and 60 militants remained at the time of the assault, there were one and a half million and 000 militants in Gaza, doesn’t such a number of residents complicate the operation many times over? in Grozny smoked 15 months
              Quote: beard999
              As for Cast Lead. 20000 militants are not only the strength of Hamas, but also Islamic Jihad, the KNS, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, and the Islamic Army

              What's the difference whether they were under the same phage or called themselves differently ?? In Grozny, too, militants were divided into gangs, and so what? The fact remains that initially more than 15 militants were opposed, that they began to scatter on the third day of the IDF's merit, if the operation was less successful, with a large number of victims, there would be "peaceful "residents would join
              Quote: beard999
              Every “third mine house” is cheap demagogy. Similar to the fact that each "house in Grozny was turned into an impregnable fortress, with underground utilities."

              I personally saw how many houses were mined there, and how many underground passages were carried out, it was an impregnable fortress, and if there were another army, there would be hundreds if not thousands of victims. For all this, the IDF lost 10 soldiers, but how many died in Grozny? At least 15000 soldiers. This is one and a half times more than all the IDF losses during the six-day war, on all fronts ... I won’t even write about weapons, I read you like that Hamas Kasamami fired on soldiers ....
              1. Rumata
                Rumata 25 September 2013 09: 54
                0
                Quote: Rumata
                At least 15000 soldiers.

                1500 soldiers ....
              2. beard999
                beard999 25 September 2013 18: 20
                0
                Quote: Rumata
                In one city of Gaza, it is one and a half times more than in Grozny

                Another lie. The population of Gaza is 410000 people. (2006), the population of Grozny (1989) - 397000 people. Links to give?
                Quote: Rumata
                doesn’t this complicate the operation

                Firstly, not “civilians” are fighting, but armed militants. Secondly, unlike you, who were bombed and dumped, Grozny needed to clean, mine, feed and equip the population. So the presence of a myrrh was much more disturbing for us than you.
                Quote: Rumata
                What is the difference whether they were under one foag

                The only difference is that according to the link I gave, 20000 militants were concentrated throughout the Gaza Strip, and not only in Gaza, and in addition they were in different groups, unknown or not having a single command.
                Quote: Rumata
                initially opposed by more than 15 militants, the fact that they began to disperse on the third day of merit of the IDF

                1. The figure "15000" where? 2. According to Israeli data, the entire Cast Lead, throughout the Gaza Strip, killed 709 militants (3,5% of their total). In Grozny, according to the gene. Troshev, 7000 militants were killed and more than 600 were taken prisoner (G. Troshev. “My War.” 2001. - P. 44). And imagine, the Chechen fighters did not run away, unlike the Hamas chantraps. Does this not suggest any thought to you?
                Quote: Rumata
                "peaceful" residents would join

                With kitchen knives or something?
                Quote: Rumata
                I won’t even write about weapons

                Yes, I did not even doubt that you would not write. Because to write, you simply do not what. Hamas did not have any serious weapons, in large quantities. Compare with the Chechens who received only from army depots: 41538 units. small arms (including 28139 machine guns), SVD - 533 pcs. RPK-74 and PK / PKM machine guns - more than 2000 pcs., DSHK / NSV machine guns - 319 pcs., Hand grenades - more than 150000 pcs., AGS-17 "Flame" grenade launchers - 138 pcs., 590 units. anti-tank weapons (including: ATGM “Competition” - 2 units, - ATGM “Fagot” - 24 units, ATGM “Metis” - 51 units; RPG-7V - 113 units), PU MANPADS “Igla” -1 "- 7 pcs., ZU-2-23 and ZSU-4-23" Shilka "- 23 pcs., MT-LB - 44 pcs., BRDM-2 - 27 pcs., BTR-70 - 3 pcs. , BMP-1 and BMP-2 - 34 pcs., T-62 and T-72 tanks - 42 pcs., 139 artillery systems (including MT-12 guns - 18 pcs., D-30 howitzers - 30 pcs. ., Self-propelled guns 2С1 and 2С3 - about 10 pcs.), BM MLRS "Grad" - 18 pcs. Well, do not hesitate to list the weapons of Hamas?
                1. Rumata
                  Rumata 25 September 2013 21: 14
                  0
                  Quote: beard999
                  Another lie. The population of Gaza is 410000 people. (2006), the population of Grozny (1989) - 397000 people. Links to give?

                  And in 2002 the population was 210, in the mid-000s there was no census, but it is logical that the figure was approximately in the middle, in the region of 90 - 280. After the 000th, 300 years of the dashing 000s passed before the storming of Grozny, but according to your strange logic, the population has not changed.
                  Quote: beard999
                  The only difference is that according to the link I gave, 20000 militants were concentrated throughout the Gaza Strip, and not only in Gaza, and in addition they were in different groups, unknown or not having a single command.

                  It feels like I'm talking to a schoolboy. The points.
                  1. In the Gaza Strip, one city passes into another, and although they are called differently, most of the sector can be conditionally divided as two large cities.
                  2. You can’t enter Gaza without first clearing the cities around it, such as Jabaliya, Beit Hanoun, Beit Laiya and cut off from Dir al Baleh. They enter Gaza from different directions, but there is such a density that it looks like an assault on two cities, one in the north of the other in the south, each with a population of more than 700. On the territory of Grozny lives 000 times more. The photo was taken 7 years ago, during which time everything grew one and a half times. On Google it is clear that the separation between the cities is almost washed away ...
                  e people, so think.

                  Quote: beard999
                  1. The figure "15000" where? 2. According to Israeli data, the entire Cast Lead throughout the Gaza Strip killed 709 militants (3,5% of the total).

                  What is the relationship between how many were killed and how many initially participated? This is the problem, in Grozny it was possible to break up the whole city (see photo), and we have one and a half million civilians. He threw off the machine gun and had nothing to do with it, and in the evening he took out an action movie.
                  Even in your quote it says 709 - 3.5% of the total. Do you know math? We consider how much comes out 100%, more than 20?

                  1. beard999
                    beard999 26 September 2013 17: 13
                    0
                    Quote: Rumata
                    according to your strange logic, the population has not changed.

                    1. The 1989 census is closest to the beginning of the First Chechen (1994). There were no prerequisites for reducing Grozny before the outbreak of hostilities. Moreover, by 1994, the population of Grozny could have grown. In 1990 and 1992, I was there, and I saw both new buildings and the construction of new residential buildings. 2. Naturally, the population decreased after the storm. The city was seriously destroyed. However, initially, in terms of population, the cities of Grozny and the cities of Gaza are approximately equal. 3. The number of militants, their training and their armaments, the total area of ​​the operation, in any case more important, the number of civilians.
                    Quote: Rumata
                    It feels like I'm talking to a schoolboy.

                    Your truly stubborn stubbornness is not capable of changing reality. The Gaza Strip is not one solid city. The city of Gaza is clearly indicated on the map “Built-up area” - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Gaza_Strip_map.png?uselang=en
                    . And it is precisely separated from other settlements. The density of the agglomeration does not exactly change this fact. By the way, in Grozny, it is also not possible to get past Alkhan-Kala, Alkhan-Yurt, Pobedinskoe, Berkat-Yurt, Petropavlovsk, Goity, etc. http://rf-town.ru/map1124475_0_1.htm. But the main thing is not that. Grozny was prepared for defense as a single object, with three defense rings. There was no unified defense in the Gaza Strip.
                    Quote: Rumata
                    What is the relationship between how many were killed and how many initially participated

                    At the very least, this speaks of the intensity of the battles, and of the endurance of the enemy. Hamas, as you say, “ran away” after the loss of 709 militants (3,5% of the 20000 militants located throughout the Gaza Strip). Chechen fighters did not give up even after losses of orders of magnitude greater. The training of Chechen fighters is incomparable with Hamas. The Chechens served the same two years in the SA as the Russian soldiers. 1500 Chechens marched through Afghanistan, 400-500 Basayev’s fighters recaptured in Karabakh and Abkhazia. There were about 1000 mercenaries. And what kind of military training did Hamas have? Yes, no. Plus, they had nothing to fight with.
                    Quote: Rumata
                    and we have one and a half million civilians

                    Who has this “one and a half million civilians”? Yes, for you the population of the Gaza Strip is completely alien, you even take the word “peaceful” population in quotation marks. The loss of Palestinian civilians is “collateral damage” to you, nothing more. You are not responsible for them. And for us, the population of Chechnya is Russian citizens, we live with them in the same country, with all the consequences.
                    Quote: Rumata
                    Do you know math?

                    Did you decide to complain about the fact that I rounded 3,545% to 3,5%? You would better talk about the weapons of Hamas. And then I watch you stratically avoid this topic. Why?
                    1. Rumata
                      Rumata 26 September 2013 18: 46
                      0
                      Quote: beard999
                      Did you decide to complain about the fact that I rounded 3,545% to 3,5%? You would better talk about the weapons of Hamas. And then I watch you stratically avoid this topic. Why?

                      A lot of nonsense ... First you write that where the numbers of 15000+ militants come from, because according to the IDF, 705 died (3.5% of the total). Then I propose to solve a simple problem of the 5th grade, if 705 is 3.5%, then what is 100%. It turns out I blame the wrong rounding !!! Where? How can a person read the same thing three times, and understand it differently. Recent reports have caused me cognitive dissonance, but I thought to continue trying to get my point across until I read this.
                      Quote: beard999
                      The loss of Palestinian civilians is “collateral damage” to you, nothing more. You are not responsible for them.

                      I climbed into your profile, read that write and everything became even clearer. And I was wasting my time. Get well soon..
                    2. beard999
                      beard999 27 September 2013 15: 40
                      +1
                      Quote: Rumata
                      a lot of nonsense

                      On your part, delirium is certainly enough. The figure "20000", the total number of militants in the entire Gaza Strip, was called by you, in your first message. I did not argue with this, and by itself I considered the percentage of losses from it. Then, without any comment, you called a different number - “15000”. Naturally, I asked - where is she from? (by the way, you never answered). The fact that you yourself are confused is exclusively your problem, not mine.
                      Quote: Rumata
                      the messages caused me cognitive dissonance,

                      Another verbiage. It happens to you instantly, as soon as the topic of conversation, you have nothing to say.
                      Quote: Rumata
                      until I read this

                      So I can prove my words. Unlike you, I’m not writing. In a report of the UN commission, published on September 15, 2009, to investigate the conflict in Gaza, Israel was directly accused of: 1. Not distinguishing between military and civilian targets, 2. Intentional shelling of obviously civilians, 3. Intentionally and unjustified from a military point of view, the destruction of residential houses, industry and infrastructure; 4. The use of the Palestinian population as human shields; 5. The disproportionate use of military force. 6. The use of such anti-human weapons as white phosphorus. You can read here http://www.unrol.org/files/UNFFMGC_Report.pdf (I can remind you what tantrum this report of the UN Commission caused in Israel). So do not you dress in sheep's clothing. You always didn’t give a damn about the Palestinian population. In the Gaza Strip, you act without regard to civilians. I can remind you the practice called “knocking on the roof” when the charges of small explosive charges are dropped on the roofs of Palestinian houses. You claim that this is the IDF’s method of “warning,” but the UN commission considered this a form of attack on peaceful homes. I would say easier - this is real terror against the Palestinians.
                      Quote: Rumata
                      Get well soon

                      Your petty rudeness does not touch me much. And I know exactly why you are trying to translate the conversation into personalities. Your pale attempts to prove the similarity of the First Chechen campaign and Cast Lead have definitely failed. The argument is extremely fluid. You are engaged in banal writing, and the lack of evidence of your fantasies, you replace the banal rudeness.
                      I would wish you a “recovery”, but I’m sure that for characters like you, this is not treated.
        3. kirpich
          kirpich 26 September 2013 11: 25
          0
          Sadly, but admittedly, yes.
          That’s what impresses me in the Israelis, it’s a nonsense (you offended us? Well, maybe you’re to blame yourself), and they go all the way. We would have such a Minister of Defense.
          Ah, then we have Grachyov, Serdyukovs ...
    3. Flooding
      Flooding 21 September 2013 16: 44
      +3
      Quote: atalef
      The point is to rivet the nuclear submarines and clubs, if the main losses are infantry for which it has not yet been created (and has not been ported into the army) adequate (to threats) protection - like heavy infantry fighting vehicles

      Perhaps the point is that this is the only deterrent for the friends of Russia.
      Well, friends correspond to the scale of the country. Agree that if Israel were at least a tenth rich in natural resources (compared to Russia), then all this wonderful armored vehicles would suddenly become absolutely insufficient. The level of threats is very different.
      Of course, this does not negate the need to protect manpower.
  • ebrd
    ebrd 21 September 2013 20: 17
    +1
    Quote: bairat
    Well, how long our infantry will ride "on the armor", this is wildness. Why invest so much money in these boxes, despite the fact that they do not perform their main function.
    Another point: a different approach to arming BMPs, a 100 mm cannon paired with 30 mm was attached to our turret, the Israelis decided to get by with a heavy machine gun.

    I’m so tired of reading this rubbish - ,, infantry on armor ... savagery, Well, like children, by golly — they saw a photo or video with soldiers on armor - immediately the conclusion: they do not trust equipment, they are afraid! Yes, the unit is on the march , Or else, as if outside fire exposure! At the first fire contact or just shelling, everyone will immediately hide under armor, be sure! Have you tried inside the infantry fighting vehicle (in the fighting compartment) to drive well at least 15km over rough terrain in the heat of +40? Sure NO! And I’ve been in armor for two years in Afghanistan, as you say ,,, departed, Yes, I think the Israelis are also sitting on the armor t, when it is unlikely to catch a bullet - they are also hot there. In armament - as a machine gun, albeit a heavy one, will you fight with armored vehicles? there’s no hint, ATGM, and 12.7 bullets only click fleas on the tank .... PS ... don’t forget minus, I’m fucking ... and you’re pleased ....
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 September 2013 20: 32
      +1
      Quote: berd
      , Yes, I think the Israelis also sit on the armor when it is unlikely to catch a bullet - they are also hot there

      I’m disappointing that it’s cold in the tank (as in any Israeli armored vehicles, vehicles, etc.) there is air conditioning, in M-4 there is an individual air conditioner for each tankman (a hose is connected to the suit)

      Quote: berd
      In armament - as a machine gun, albeit a heavy one, will you fight with armored vehicles? there’s no intention of ATGM,

      There is (if necessary) see the post of the Professor and which modules can be put on Namer
      1. ebrd
        ebrd 21 September 2013 21: 29
        0
        Quote: atalef
        Quote: berd
        , Yes, I think the Israelis also sit on the armor when it is unlikely to catch a bullet - they are also hot there

        I’m disappointing that it’s cold in the tank (as in any Israeli armored vehicles, vehicles, etc.) have air conditioning

        but what are you really - air conditioning, not hot ... I didn’t mean it --- the soldiers are the same everywhere !!! ... and they all argue like this - what the x ... I’ll sit inside if Is there no danger? .. it’s more pleasant for me upstairs ... and I’ll take off my brandy vest (until the commander sees it) heavy and generally tired of it .... and don’t say that it’s not so and the Israelis are different ...
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 September 2013 21: 54
          +3
          Quote: berd
          and they all argue like this - what the x ... will I sit inside if there is no danger? .. I’m more pleasant upstairs ... and I’ll take off the brand vest (until the commander sees it) heavy and generally tired .... and don’t say that this is not so and the Israelites are different ...

          He will not roll, they will immediately surrender the offender and at least sit at the base on Saturday while his fellow soldiers are tumbling at home with young ladies.
        2. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 22: 12
          +4
          Quote: berd

          but what are you really - air conditioning, not hot ... I didn’t mean it --- the soldiers are the same everywhere !!! ... and they all argue like this - what the x ... I’ll sit inside if Is there no danger? .. it’s more pleasant for me upstairs ... and I’ll take off my brandy vest (until the commander sees it) heavy and generally tired of it .... and don’t say that it’s not so and the Israelis are different ...

          in order for the soldier to behave this way, the junior commanders and lieutenants must decompose below the baseboard.
    2. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 22: 10
      +3
      Quote: berd
      . In armament - as a machine gun, albeit a heavy one, will you fight with armored vehicles? there’s no hint, ATGM, and 12.7 bullets only click fleas on the tank .... PS ... don’t forget to minus, I’m fucking ... and you’re pleased ....

      but Namer should not be on the battlefield to fight armored vehicles. His task is to deliver the infantry after the tanks as close to the line of dismantling as possible. In general, infantry is moving in Namers, and so the last ATGMs are in service.
    3. Pimply
      Pimply 21 September 2013 23: 23
      +1
      Quote: berd
      and the unit is on the march, or else, as outside of the fire! At the first fire contact or just shelling, all at once under armor will be hidden, be sure

      Will they have time? Or mow down by fragments and a blast wave.
      1. 31231
        31231 22 September 2013 20: 01
        0
        Do we have fools in the army ?! Aren't you tired of these myths ?! that BMP can and infantry because of this ride on it.
        My friend on MT-LB and behhe served in 2000-2001 in Chechnya. I used to not be interested. Now I began to ask technical details.
        We rode on horseback, just the same for quick dispersal and the ability to survive when undermined by a mine or a land mine. As a result, the spirits began to install side bombs. But you can't put the side ones everywhere, and he said that the mechanics looked at such places with all their eyes in search of "candy".
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 23
          +3
          Quote: 31231
          We rode on horseback, just the same for quick dispersal and the ability to survive when undermined by a mine or a land mine. As a result, the spirits began to install side bombs. But you can't put the side ones everywhere, and he said that the mechanics looked at such places with all their eyes in search of "candy".

          This is called "if you want to live, you will not be so hot." Then the meaning of the armor disappears.
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 08: 34
    +3
    We discussed it a hundred times. "Namer" is not an infantry fighting vehicle, but an armored personnel carrier. Therefore, it has an orientation towards enhancing the protection of the crew and the landing force and lighter armament than the BMP.
    1. sergey72
      sergey72 21 September 2013 09: 05
      +1
      Please tell me Aron, is the location of the machine gunners regular or is the remote control provided? (I look at the second photo)
      1. atalef
        atalef 21 September 2013 09: 13
        +2
        Quote: sergey72
        Please tell me Aron, is the location of the machine gunners regular or is the remote control provided? (I look at the second photo)

        on the top photo the module is remote
        1. sergey72
          sergey72 21 September 2013 09: 21
          +1
          Thank you, so the second machine gun does not have a remote control?
      2. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 09: 19
        +1
        Quote: sergey72
        Please tell me Aron, is the location of the machine gunners regular or is the remote control provided? (I look at the second photo)

        The Catlanit module is installed there.
        http://www.army-guide.com/rus/product2097.html
        1. sergey72
          sergey72 21 September 2013 09: 25
          +3
          Thanks to you, too hi I repeat: the second remote control machine gun does not have?
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 09: 29
            +2
            No. This machine gun is not the crew, but the landing party and will be used only at close range.
            1. In the reeds
              In the reeds 21 September 2013 12: 05
              0
              I would like but do not put
          2. Professor
            Professor 21 September 2013 09: 58
            +9
            Quote: sergey72
            I repeat: the second remote control machine gun does not have?

            A remote-controlled turret with a 30-mm cannon, coaxial machine gun and Spike ATGMs is also installed on Namer.


            and more photos






            1. sergey72
              sergey72 21 September 2013 11: 10
              +1
              Thanks a lot, everyone!
            2. Che
              Che 21 September 2013 14: 01
              0
              Well, now everyone understood how they are preparing against us - seriously. And we smile good-naturedly in response - like we don’t have an adversary.
              1. Aaron Zawi
                Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 14: 29
                +1
                Quote: Che
                Well, now everyone understood how they are preparing against us - seriously. And we smile good-naturedly in response - like we don’t have an adversary.

                Do you mean AOI? request And how can she meet with RA? (IMHO) Only in a collision with the expeditionary force of the Russian Federation in the BV. For AOI on the borders of Russia cannot appear in any way.
                1. Che
                  Che 21 September 2013 15: 14
                  +3
                  Quote: Aaron Zawi
                  Quote: Che
                  Well, now everyone understood how they are preparing against us - seriously. And we smile good-naturedly in response - like we don’t have an adversary.

                  Do you mean AOI? request And how can she meet with RA? (IMHO) Only in a collision with the expeditionary force of the Russian Federation in the BV. For AOI on the borders of Russia cannot appear in any way.

                  No, you're just an example of serious preparation. Here, more NATO is attached to us.
                2. Ascetic
                  Ascetic 21 September 2013 19: 29
                  +8
                  Quote: Aron Zaavi
                  For AOI on the borders of Russia cannot appear in any way.


                  All countries that have nuclear weapons on carriers capable of reaching our territory, including Israel, will undergo a disarming strike on their territory during a special period. In Israel, this is Jerehon-3 rocket. In peacetime, if this complex is deployed and placed on a continuous database, operational bases and nuclear arsenals, the Dimon reactor, plants and the Palmakhim cosmodrome will immediately be included in the list of strategic nuclear forces of Russia (most likely strategic aviation, equipped with long-range air-launched missile systems and operational ICBMs reserve for the BRDS we have not deployed) and in a special period destroyed.
                  1. atalef
                    atalef 21 September 2013 19: 44
                    -2
                    Quote: Ascetic
                    All countries with nuclear weapons on carriers capable of reaching our territory, including Israel, during a special period will undergo a disarming strike on their territory.

                    those. America, China, France, England, India, Pakistan? I think the navel doesn’t overthrow to deal with them separately (and not with all in vain) And already we with our 8 million, equal to the provincial town of China - can sit back on the sidelines laughing

                    Quote: Ascetic
                    . In Israel, this is Jerehon-3 rocket. In peacetime, if this complex is deployed and placed on a continuous database, operational bases as well as nuclear arsenals, the Dimon reactor, factories and the Palkhalim cosmodrome will immediately be included in the list of strategic nuclear forces of Russia (most likely strategic aviation, equipped with long-range ALCM and operational ICBMs reserve because we have not deployed infantry fighting vehicles) and in a special period destroyed

                    If Russia has only 5000 warheads (or even less), I think there are so many strategic goals in the territories of the above-mentioned countries that it definitely won’t reach the cosmodrome in Palmachim hi
                    1. Ascetic
                      Ascetic 22 September 2013 02: 15
                      +3
                      Quote: atalef
                      If Russia has only 5000 warheads (or even less), I think there are so many strategic goals in the territories of the above-mentioned countries that it definitely won’t reach the cosmodrome in Palmachim


                      Under the START-3 Treaty, there should be no more than 1550. Now Russia has 1480 on 492 carriers. (900 in total). Hundreds are enough for the states, because protected objects in a retaliatory strike do not have to be hit and soaked in densely populated areas (10 Vojevoda missiles with 10 bg on each conditionally speaking they will destroy 80% of the states), in the most shitty scenario 1 out of 7 necessarily flies, which means only 800 maximum. All the remaining ones will be enough in excess. For us, they are preparing about 400 epicenters (for example, 80 to Moscow with its missile defense, based on the assumption that 10 will certainly fly). And 2500-3000 KR non-nuclear in the first strike. Count how many more remain with them.
                      I still don’t take this into account for which there is no open data.
                    2. Ascetic
                      Ascetic 22 September 2013 21: 39
                      +1
                      Quote: atalef
                      And we, with our 8 million, equal to the provincial town of China, may sit back on the sidelines


                      “Do you remember, this is the famous case when a nuclear engineer was put in prison, he served there safely and still continued to believe that he was right,” the Russian president began to reason. “Why? There is nothing anti-national and anti-Israel in his position, he is a Jew himself and a citizen of his country, but Israel's technological superiority is just such, it must be said frankly that it does not require the presence of nuclear weapons, Israel is already, in a technological military sense, several heads higher than all countries in the region. And nuclear weapons only make it a target, only create foreign policy problems for it. And in this sense, the logic of this nuclear physicist, who made public the presence of nuclear weapons in Israel, makes sense. "

                      Putin made it clear that the unconventional military potential of Israel should be discussed by the entire international community, and also recalled that having nuclear weapons, Israel would be under the sights of the headquarters - and - ah ... It wouldn’t work out in case of a big mess.
  • vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 21 September 2013 08: 47
    +9
    Many times it has already been explained to people that there is no such armor that will hold a modern grenade launcher, but they stubbornly rely on weighting. Even if you create a monster with an incredibly possible thickness of armor, you’ll still come up with a weapon that will pierce it. The task of the BMP is not to go ahead on the tank and tanks. Its task is to safely deliver infantry from point A to point B no more. Today it would be strange to see infantry or even infantry fighting vehicles attacking cannons, anti-tank missiles and grenade launchers. This is how one should be a stupid commander to come up with such tactics. Most likely we will come to armored cars without crew, remotely controlled, and the infantry will perform the function of only support and protection, it can storm the cities. Well, here and armored personnel carriers are not needed
    1. Alexey Prikazchikov
      Alexey Prikazchikov 21 September 2013 09: 07
      +5
      Many times it has already been explained to people that there is no such armor that will hold a modern grenade launcher, but they stubbornly rely on weighting. Even if you create a monster with an incredibly possible thickness of armor, you’ll still come up with a weapon that will pierce it


      What better way would you go to battle on Namer or on the 3 BMP, only honestly at least for yourself?

      The task of the BMP is not to go ahead on the tank and tanks. Its task is to safely deliver infantry from point A to point B no more. Today it would be strange to see infantry or even infantry fighting vehicles attacking cannons, anti-tank missiles and grenade launchers


      And the intention is not a BMP, but a heavy armored personnel carrier.

      This is how one should be a stupid commander to come up with such tactics.


      The lion's share of our officers is like that. To them and claims.
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 21 September 2013 13: 50
        +5
        Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
        What better way would you go to battle on Namer or on the 3 BMP, only honestly at least for yourself?
        I would answer you, Alexei, to this, - if I were an Israeli, and fight for the promised land, most likely on the "Namer", if the armored personnel carrier perceived it as a bomb shelter, then also on the "Namer". If I were in Russia, and remember that there are tanks for the first line, and a good BMPT vehicle for them, that I still need to get out of the armor for battle, no doubt I personally would prefer to be with the BMP-3. Maneuverability, cross-country ability, power reserve and firepower are more valuable for war. The Namer is undoubtedly a good vehicle for the Israeli army, adapted to the geography of the region and its military missions. That's all, there is no need to go into the absolute here, otherwise we will produce "Muses" in mindless imitation.
    2. In the reeds
      In the reeds 21 September 2013 12: 11
      0
      Therefore, they don’t put Catlanit so that they do not lie
    3. Tourist Breakfast
      Tourist Breakfast 21 September 2013 12: 33
      0
      The task of the BMP is not to go ahead on the tank and tanks. Its task is to safely deliver infantry from point A to point B no more. Today it would be strange to see infantry or even infantry fighting vehicles attacking cannons, anti-tank missiles and grenade launchers.


      Nowadays, almost no longer fight in the open field. Mostly fighting takes place in settlements where there is no clear front line. Tanks in a city without infantry support are doomed. And it is heavy armored personnel carriers called upon to deliver this infantry.
      1. vladsolo56
        vladsolo56 21 September 2013 18: 45
        0
        What is the difference between a heavy armored personnel carrier and a tank, only because there are more people there, if tanks cannot be without infantry in the city, then what is the use of the same armored personnel carrier. because the infantry will still have to land. something doesn't fit here
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 September 2013 18: 48
          0
          Quote: vladsolo56
          because the infantry will still have to land. something doesn't fit here

          The question is where and how to drop her ...
        2. Tourist Breakfast
          Tourist Breakfast 22 September 2013 11: 34
          +1
          because the infantry will still have to land. something doesn't fit here

          Why doesn't it fit? Naturally, the TBTR should land the infantry during the battle in the city. The infantry, in turn, will clean buildings and provide surveillance. And there the tanks will pass. Everything is logical.
    4. Pimply
      Pimply 21 September 2013 13: 52
      +2
      For a modern grenade launcher for this machine, KAZ is being developed. This is the first.
      Secondly, the Lebanese Second experience that the armor holds a good grenade launcher, or, at least, reduces the force of impact - out of 49 tanks hit, penetration was only 23x.
      Thirdly, first of all, such armor is designed to protect against mines and small arms
    5. Gur
      Gur 21 September 2013 18: 38
      +2
      I completely agree in the battle they are not intended; it turns out the infusion of the dough into something that should not go into battle
  • Professor
    Professor 21 September 2013 09: 19
    +9
    couple of photos for the article







    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 09: 31
      +2
      Something. With photos. The cars are unnaturally extended
      1. combat192
        combat192 21 September 2013 09: 45
        +4
        Click on the photo.
      2. Professor
        Professor 21 September 2013 09: 50
        +3
        The site is buggy. wassat Click on the photo and it will open.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 21 September 2013 10: 29
          +3
          Quote: Professor
          The site is buggy. Click on the photo and it will open.

          It’s not buggy, they just save the page, the machine is well thought out for the conditions in which it works.
    2. ivshubarin
      ivshubarin 21 September 2013 09: 55
      +1
      Professor, please tell me why the Israeli army does not use camouflage?
      1. Professor
        Professor 21 September 2013 10: 06
        +8
        Use, but not all. In general, every other day everything is in such dust or dirt that you will not see any camouflage.

        1. ivshubarin
          ivshubarin 21 September 2013 10: 36
          +2
          Thank. Dirt is the best camouflage (even such a translation)
        2. Che
          Che 21 September 2013 20: 29
          +2
          Professor, what kind of pepper is this with your finger?
          1. Professor
            Professor 21 September 2013 20: 34
            +2
            Quote: Che
            Professor, what kind of pepper is this with your finger?

            Ehud Barak, former prime minister, Moscow Region, early General Staff and the most awarded (deserved) soldier.
            1. Che
              Che 21 September 2013 20: 40
              +2
              Quote: Professor
              Quote: Che
              Professor, what kind of pepper is this with your finger?

              Ehud Barak, former prime minister, Moscow Region, early General Staff and the most awarded (deserved) soldier.

              That damn deserves respect. Interestingly, our Zhirinovsky seemed to look like?
              1. alone
                alone 21 September 2013 23: 05
                +2
                Quote: Che
                That damn deserves respect. Interestingly, our Zhirinovsky seemed to look like?


                no way. surely would swear. like in a thought))
            2. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 08
              +3
              There are a lot of funny information about his awards. I’ll tell you something. But if in short, at one time the saeret-matkal was almost a sedimentation tank, and in order to attract people there, they actively distributed awards. In particular, Baraku 8) Although he has several really brilliant operations behind him. But then the incident of 1997, the exit from Lebanon and Kever Yosef greatly damaged his reputation.
          2. atalef
            atalef 21 September 2013 20: 48
            +3
            Quote: Che
            Professor, what kind of pepper is this with your finger?

            Minister of Defense (former) Ehud Barak (as well as the former chief of the general staff), special forces commander of the general staff and the former commander of Netanyahu. (In the special forces of the General Staff)
      2. netMolotov
        netMolotov 21 September 2013 10: 54
        +2
        ivshubarin — why doesn't the Israeli army use camouflage?

        Professor - In general, every other day everything is in such dust or dirt that you will not see any camouflage.


        I think not only because of the dirt. The Israeli army is trying to use the military component as little as possible. Emphasizing that her soldiers are not professional killers. There are no ragged uniforms in the tzahal like the neighbors of the Arabs, and even the generals do not look much cooler than their soldiers. And the soldier spends less time in the barracks than in the civilian world. Therefore, on the streets and in buses, a man in khaki hurts his eyes less.

        Well, something like that I think.
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 September 2013 11: 38
          +3
          You are partly right, partly not. Nobody drives around in field uniform buses, but on weekends. There is still camouflage, I already laid out the photo. And the fact that the y of the chief of the general staff (pictured) and the private is the same form is a fact.




          1. ivshubarin
            ivshubarin 21 September 2013 12: 06
            +3
            Why beg. General Staff without a helmet
            1. KG_patriot_last
              KG_patriot_last 21 September 2013 12: 10
              +9
              If you meet a guy in red boots, know that this is a high-ranking commander soldier
              1. In the reeds
                In the reeds 21 September 2013 12: 14
                +2
                No combat brigades
              2. Witold
                Witold 21 September 2013 12: 49
                +3
                Red shoes mean service in the Airborne Forces, only those who pass or miss service there have such shoes.
                1. ivshubarin
                  ivshubarin 21 September 2013 13: 01
                  +2
                  Where does this tradition come from?
                  1. Pimply
                    Pimply 21 September 2013 14: 00
                    +4
                    The English paratroopers had red boots. Since the IDF was originally built largely on the model of the English army, shoes migrated there. Red boots were lighter and more comfortable. As a result, the color of the shoes remained as a tradition.

                    In addition to the assault force, they are now worn by the Nahal and Kfir brigades (I had such), as well as units of trackers. It should be noted that the color of the shoes was not the last of the determining factors when choosing a unit.

                    Beni Ganz has red shoes, as he takes - he started right in Tsanhanim.
                2. Pimply
                  Pimply 21 September 2013 13: 58
                  +1
                  Not only. Also Nahal and Kfir.
              3. atalef
                atalef 21 September 2013 20: 39
                +3
                Quote: KG_patriot_last
                If you meet a guy in red boots, know that this is a high-ranking commander

                Red shoes are a distinctive form of the Airborne Forces, DShB and Kfir divisions. And only, by the way, only paratroopers have the right to wear a shirt not tucked into pants.
            2. astra
              astra 21 September 2013 13: 38
              +5
              The bags on the helmet look unusual) have you heard that they are called to hide the outlines of a round helmet or not?
              1. atalef
                atalef 21 September 2013 13: 44
                +1
                Quote: astra
                The bags on the helmet look unusual) have you heard that they are called to hide the outlines of a round helmet or not?

                So, a protective mesh of such an unusual shape breaks the helmet profile (hemisphere) familiar to the eye, significantly enhancing camouflage properties.
            3. Pimply
              Pimply 21 September 2013 13: 57
              +2
              Came to the exercises, and joined. Although right, a serious jamb.
          2. Che
            Che 21 September 2013 20: 32
            +2
            The pictures are not bad, good PR. bully
        2. Che
          Che 21 September 2013 14: 11
          +6
          A small country - everyone knows each other, the expansion is out of place. You can get the scoreboard. In our army, this would also not hurt. In general, the Jews have something to learn - there is no arguing with that.
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 14: 37
            +5
            Quote: Che
            A small country - everyone knows each other, the expansion is out of place. You can get the scoreboard. In our army, this would also not hurt. In general, the Jews have something to learn - there is no arguing with that.

            Well type. I recall a local joke.
            "An American and an Israeli general arrived at the IDF base with an inspection. There is an Israeli reservist at the gate. He got up from his chair, opened the gate, closed it behind the car and flopped onto a chair. The American is indignant about the discipline. The Israeli general says:" Right now I will tear it ! ". He approaches the reservist and says:" Haim, what are you doing, are you offended by me? " hi
            1. Che
              Che 21 September 2013 15: 18
              +3
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              Quote: Che
              A small country - everyone knows each other, the expansion is out of place. You can get the scoreboard. In our army, this would also not hurt. In general, the Jews have something to learn - there is no arguing with that.

              Well type. I recall a local joke.
              "An American and an Israeli general arrived at the IDF base with an inspection. There is an Israeli reservist at the gate. He got up from his chair, opened the gate, closed it behind the car and flopped onto a chair. The American is indignant about the discipline. The Israeli general says:" Right now I will tear it ! ". He approaches the reservist and says:" Haim, what are you doing, are you offended by me? " hi


              wassat Here is my answer.
      3. Pimply
        Pimply 21 September 2013 13: 56
        +1
        There are several reasons

        1) Surrounding armies go mainly in camouflage
        2) Israel has several climatic zones and abrupt changes in landscape. "Oliva" is quite satisfactory for most parameters
        3) Used in the 60s paratroopers
        4) For ambushes and snipers, hoodies are used, mesh double-sided camouflage colors. On one side is a desert, on the other a forest. To be worn over the main form.
  • Nayhas
    Nayhas 21 September 2013 09: 45
    +8
    So what the Jews can not refuse, so in practicality. Let's see what happens from Almaty.
    1. In the reeds
      In the reeds 21 September 2013 12: 17
      -3
      No dear, we have been fighting for a long time, you trade
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 21 September 2013 13: 18
        +6
        Quote: In the reeds
        No dear, we have been fighting for a long time, you trade

        And with whom are the Israelis fighting at the moment? And you don’t trade at all, only in 2007 Israeli companies exported arms worth $ 4,3 billion, which puts the country in fourth place in the world in the export of weapons and defense technologies (which honors the 8 millionth state), after USA, Russia and France.
        Russia is also at war with Japan, as is Israel with Syria.
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 September 2013 13: 36
          0
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          Russia is also at war with Japan, as is Israel with Syria.

          Not quite so, Russia is not at war with Japan (the presence of embassies, which visits of the heads of state confirm)
          Israel and Syria are in a state of ceasefire (not even a truce)
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 21 September 2013 14: 09
            +3
            Quote: atalef
            Not certainly in that way

            So even after your war 70 years have not passed.
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 21 September 2013 14: 06
          0
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          Russia is also at war with Japan, as is Israel with Syria.

          Ignorance of reality is a big mistake. Russia has signed with Japan all treaties that de facto and de jure record the end of the war. Japan capitulated. The peace treaty is just the last stroke. There are diplomatic relations between Russia and Japan.
          Syria and Israel have a fixed state of war. The ceasefire is indicated only in one territory, and it is emphasized that it does not constitute any kind of peace agreement.
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 21 September 2013 16: 26
            +2
            Quote: Pimply
            Ignorance of reality is a big mistake.

            C'mon, how pathetic you did. Are there ongoing hostilities in Israel?
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 09
              +2
              As if - on an ongoing basis. Like in Russia, by the way.
      2. astra
        astra 21 September 2013 13: 45
        +6
        Quote: In the reeds
        No dear, we have been fighting for a long time, you trade

        I like that the Israelis do not sell certain types of weapons, for example, Merkava tanks and other types of armored vehicles. I would like our armatures to be sold longer without the release of armata, why give others the opportunity to study our tank. We need to saturate our army, otherwise many plants priority is given to arms production for export, but there are already not enough capacities for themselves.
        1. Che
          Che 21 September 2013 14: 19
          +5
          When patriotism in Russia becomes the norm, then who will break us.

          At Boriske everyone liked the loot to fill their pockets, even the Israelis do not allow themselves such a fool.
  • ivshubarin
    ivshubarin 21 September 2013 10: 39
    +3
    The difference between Israeli tank construction and the world is that the protection of the crew, and then mobility, firepower, are put in the first place
    1. Akim
      Akim 21 September 2013 10: 46
      +4
      Quote: ivshubarin
      in that the crew’s protection comes first, and then mobility

      This is a British concept. In general, Israel does not freeze the lake, so they are not afraid to go out on the ice like the Teutons.
      1. ivshubarin
        ivshubarin 21 September 2013 11: 29
        +2
        British concept - The dominance of firepower over mobility
    2. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 10: 58
      +3
      Quote: ivshubarin
      The difference between Israeli tank construction and the world is that the protection of the crew, and then mobility, firepower, are put in the first place

      I apologize for disagreeing. It’s just based on significant combat experience, it was decided to create a car for the battlefield, where the maximum speed does not exceed 20-25 km / h, and not for a march-throw, which led to the decision to limit the marching speeds to 60 km / h. and 105mm and 120mm Israeli tank guns were created on the basis of NATO analogues and are in no way inferior to them. Moreover, with an emphasis on improving ammunition, they often presented surprises to our opponents.
      1. ivshubarin
        ivshubarin 21 September 2013 11: 35
        +1
        Yes, but Israeli tankers' losses decreased under Merkava
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 12: 19
          +2
          Quote: ivshubarin
          Yes, but Israeli tankers' losses decreased under Merkava

          So Merkava and participated only in local conflicts. All the great wars dragged on the M-48, M-60 and Centurions.
    3. In the reeds
      In the reeds 21 September 2013 12: 27
      +1
      In the first model, and then finished on all paragraphs
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 12: 57
    0
    Quote: saturn.mmm
    Quote: Professor
    The site is buggy. Click on the photo and it will open.

    It’s not buggy, they just save the page, the machine is well thought out for the conditions in which it works.

    I'm not sure that you need such cars.
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 21 September 2013 13: 28
      +3
      Quote: In the reeds
      I'm not sure that you need such cars.

      It’s quite possible to use it for counter-terrorism operations, I think something similar will soon appear in Russia. If you move the Egyptians to the Nile, then you will also think about the fronts.
      1. atalef
        atalef 21 September 2013 13: 40
        +1
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        If you move the Egyptians to the Nile, then you will also think about the fronts.

        Yegtpet is already there. It can only be a question of the Sinai Peninsula, the entry of forces into which the Egyptians 9 under a peace treaty) must agree with Israel. At the present stage . Egypt asked for permission to introduce 2 divisions to the Sinai to crush local Islamists and Hamas (walking freely around the Sinai 0 permission was obtained. As a result, 95% of the gangway tunnels (under 1000) were destroyed, the main Islamist nests were destroyed.
        1. Che
          Che 21 September 2013 14: 23
          +3
          Quote: atalef
          about. As a result, 95% of the illicit tunnels (under 1000) were destroyed, the main Islamist nests were destroyed.


          This is a good solution to the problems, because the Jews were able to agree with the Arabs.
        2. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 21 September 2013 14: 24
          +2
          Quote: atalef
          Egpet and so there is

          I’m generally talking about the territory between the Red Sea and the Nile. On the east side of the Nile, the Israelites and on the west Egyptians.
  • Selevc
    Selevc 21 September 2013 12: 57
    +5
    Merkava and Namer is probably a good technique - it has only been designed for a specific LDP ... Namely, for short-distance marches and time-limited use ... Such a technique for Russia, for example
    it’s absolutely not suitable - completely different distances, climate and probable remoteness from repair bases ... I think not every bridge can withstand such equipment in Russia ... I wonder if there is infa on the Tests for Walkable?
    It is clear that the Israeli designers (based on combat experience) sacrificed maneuverability for the sake of security ... But in the BMP-3, maneuverability is good, with satisfactory protection - but this is probably a more reasonable solution for the probable LDP of Russia ...
    And it’s interesting to try Namer Hook and Cornet and then it will be possible to judge how good his defense is !!! :)))
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 September 2013 13: 50
      +2
      Quote: Selevc
      Merkava and Namer is probably a good technique - it is only designed for a specific LDP ..

      So, first of all, we do it for ourselves, taking care of our soldier is above all. There is no sense in the universality of the T72, if in urban conditions (and this is primarily the war of today), it is of little use. And the armored personnel carrier is generally sucks (patriots forgive me). The soldier must be protected by armor. but armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles - this is not clear armored carts, where for some reason the landing is always on top.
      You can’t fool a soldier if you don’t drive him into the BMP and the armored personnel carrier, so he feels more confident from above (open and defenseless) than inside.
      In contrast to this. I have never seen. that the IDF infantry would ride on armor, Namers, Pum or Akhzaritov.
      We can reason here until the pulse is lost, but the behavior of the soldiers is a fact from which there is no escape, in one case (inside under protection) in another from above under bullets.
      1. Selevc
        Selevc 21 September 2013 14: 48
        +3
        Quote: atalef
        There is no sense in the universality of the T72, if in urban conditions (and this is primarily the war of today), it is of little use.

        The Syrian army is quite successfully using the same T-72s in urban battles ... Maybe it’s not about the specific armored vehicles but the tactics of its use? The T-72 tank, which is already about half a century old, will you hit him? The means of destruction of armored vehicles for these same half a century have stepped far forward ...
        And universality is just good for Russia, since the distance between cities is simply enormous + rough terrain on which the tank must conduct a successful offensive ...
        And an armored personnel carrier is generally sucks (patriots forgive me). The soldier must be protected
        So they ride on armor until they shoot at them - you look at any video that shows the use of infantry fighting vehicles in battle - no one sits on the roof there ... But if we say we go to the battlefield for more than one hour, then what's the difference - sitting inside or on the roof ?
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 September 2013 15: 05
          0
          The Syrian army quite successfully uses the same T-72 in urban battles

          did not notice, and in the continuation of the post you deny yourself
          And universality is just good for Russia, since the distance between cities is simply enormous + rough terrain on which the tank must conduct a successful offensive ...

          Merkava runs like this over rough terrain, but I don’t understand about the distance, are you going to drive tanks between cities?
          So they ride on armor until they shoot at them - you look at any video that shows the use of infantry fighting vehicles in battle - no one sits on the roof there ... But if we say we go to the battlefield for more than one hour, then what's the difference - sitting inside or on the roof ?

          I have never seen, infantry either on the armor or near under the guise of BMPs, I have never seen Russian infantrymen leading a battle from inside the BMP. share the link
          1. Selevc
            Selevc 21 September 2013 15: 56
            +4
            Full of videos on which the Syrians use T-72 in the city - type ANNA News on YouTube and watch as much as you like ... Honestly, I don’t understand what I’m refuting myself with?
            Merkava, like running across rough terrain,
            Watch the video Russian tank biathlon - old T-72s run and how else !!! Overcome at the speed of the ditches, eskarpy and water barriers - almost the depth of the tower !!! At the same time, water gets inside the cabin and nothing - the car rushes on ... Show me similar videos with Merkavas and I will say that I was wrong !!!
            but I didn’t understand about the distance, are you going to drive tanks between cities?

            And why not drive on their own? The T-72 covers a distance of up to 500 km - this is enough to make a march-throw between cities as well, if necessary ... The T-34 went halfway through Europe under its own power and nothing?
            I have never seen, infantry either on the armor or near under the guise of BMPs, I have never seen Russian infantrymen leading a battle from inside the BMP. share the link
            So they basically don’t fight from there because the BMP’s task - to deliver infantry to the battlefield - at the first opportunity, soldiers leave the BMP to disperse ... There is a video of Chechens firing Russian convoys of armored vehicles - something I’ve never seen in these videos I saw that the soldiers at the time of the shelling were on the roof of the BMP ...
          2. Gur
            Gur 21 September 2013 18: 54
            0
            No, we’ll take tanks in a train to chtol so that at once the slope doesn’t go; to bring a tank and kill two bandit kilns about the war. I remember I had to go to Berlin under my own power and arrived during the war, the forces of the parties can pass hundreds of kilometers in a day.
            1. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 20: 25
              +1
              Quote: Gur
              No, we’ll take tanks in a train to chtol so that at once the slope doesn’t go; to bring a tank and kill two bandit kilns about the war. I remember I had to go to Berlin under my own power and arrived during the war, the forces of the parties can pass hundreds of kilometers in a day.

              But didn’t they transfer on trains?
            2. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 12
              +3
              I will make a small discovery for you. For example, Czech Republic, 1945.
            3. M. Peter
              M. Peter 22 September 2013 07: 33
              +3
              Quote: Gur
              No, we’ll take tanks in a train to chtol so that at once the slope doesn’t go; to bring a tank and kill two bandit kilns about the war. I remember I had to go to Berlin under my own power and arrived during the war, the forces of the parties can pass hundreds of kilometers in a day.

              Even in the film "Belarusian Railway Station" at the very end of the film, where the heroes have dreams, it is clear that all the equipment is submerged on a railway platform. There is no need to wear out the service life of cars just like that.
          3. 77bob1973
            77bob1973 21 September 2013 20: 23
            +2
            The infantry is called infantry, the main protection of the infantryman is the folding of the terrain and camouflage and training.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 18
              0
              The main defense of the infantry is the head. Own, commander and defense ministry.
      2. Gur
        Gur 21 September 2013 18: 49
        +1
        As a soldier, the main goal of a soldier is to defend his homeland even at the cost of his life, and if he sits in a super-protected box he is alive and well but he didn’t catch the enemy who burst into the heart of his country
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 17
          +1
          Quote: Gur
          As a soldier, the main goal of a soldier is to defend his homeland even at the cost of his life, and if he sits in a super-protected box he is alive and well but he didn’t catch the enemy who burst into the heart of his country

          Are you now aware that you are talking hot bullshit? First of all, in order to protect the homeland, a soldier must complete a combat mission. And this armored box is designed to preserve it so that it fulfills this task as efficiently as possible.
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 22 September 2013 12: 33
            +1
            Quote: Pimply
            How nekruti the main goal of a soldier to defend his homeland, even at the cost of life

            And where is the hot delirium? Only I would formulate it like this "even, if necessary, at the cost of my life." I think that in Israel the same goal is a soldier.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 27
              +1
              Quote: saturn.mmm
              And where is the hot delirium? Only I would formulate it like this "even, if necessary, at the cost of my life." I think that in Israel the same goal is a soldier.

              Have you read anything further these phrases? If you read, you’ll understand why it’s hot delirium
              1. saturn.mmm
                saturn.mmm 25 September 2013 09: 20
                0
                Quote: Pimply
                Have you read anything further these phrases?

                A person, apparently, believes that with an increase in booking, the car will lose maneuverability.
      3. M. Peter
        M. Peter 22 September 2013 07: 30
        +1
        Well, the normal distance between cities of 500, or even more, km is considered normal. And how to overcome distances here? A throw march is impossible; capital before battle is somehow not right. Trailers and railway transportation remain, but how, for example, do this with your dimensions and weights of tanks and infantry fighting vehicles?
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 30
          0
          What is your problem? Any radical differences in size? Or a problem with railway platforms and tractors?
      4. 31231
        31231 22 September 2013 20: 22
        0
        We isolate ourselves and imagine. There is a column of equipment along the gorge or mountains of the Caucasus. Our armored bech and batrov, yours in Namers.
        The first plus of ours: 6-8 extra eyes per unit. Your armor is not enough to see.
        Second plus: Cumulative ptur flies. Our partially shell-shocked, or injured, on board
        from the shelling side. The ptur launch point will soon be detected. Yours in intent, partly 200s, partly 300s. While the living ones are recovering from a concussion, still birds or RGs can fly into Namer.
        We have a big minus: Accessibility to hit infantry with small arms during the first salvo by the enemy. During the following, everyone was already resolved, with the exception of the 200s and 300s.
        1. Tourist Breakfast
          Tourist Breakfast 22 September 2013 22: 27
          +2
          Ptur cumulative arrives. Our partially shell-shocked, or injured, on board
          from the shelling side. The ptur launch point will soon be detected. Yours in intent, partly 200s, partly 300s. While the living ones are recovering from a concussion, still birds or RGs can fly into Namer.


          The article says that the Trophy KAZ is being installed on the Namer. So "ours" are all pah-pah. You'd better tell me why, then, you need armor at all, if the infantry goes from above?
          Isn’t it easier in this case, an open body truck? At least sit comfortably.
          1. 31231
            31231 22 September 2013 22: 58
            0
            You better tell me why then do I need armor if infantry rides on top?


            It is rather a rhetorical question. Well, they will go to the Urals ?! Then the carrier will be taken out with simple small arms.
            In general, of course, I am for such an APC, BMP in our hot spots. Just look and compare how he shows himself. Moreover, our soldiers are probably the first decommissioned RPG to fire for experience and conclusions.

            The article says that the Trophy KAZ is being installed on the Namer.


            Trophy has already been in military conflicts ?! KAZ is ambiguous, especially when infantry flickers nearby.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 23 September 2013 00: 02
              0
              Yes, several times tanks from Trophy were fired from Gaza. The system worked normally.
            2. Tourist Breakfast
              Tourist Breakfast 23 September 2013 10: 38
              0
              Then the carrier will be taken out with simple small arms.


              The armor of the BTR-80 also, by the way, does not hold every bullet. In this regard, Kamaz "Typhoon" will be better. The only pity is that he is still not among the troops.
        2. Rumata
          Rumata 24 September 2013 11: 39
          0
          Quote: 31231
          Second plus: Cumulative ptur flies. Our partially shell-shocked, or injured, on board
          from the shelling side.

          And if another situation and 8 pairs of eyes missed an ambush in the bushes, the result is most of those who were killed or wounded on the armor. A double-edged sword ...
    2. Professor
      Professor 21 September 2013 13: 54
      +1
      Quote: Selevc
      .Is there any info on the tests of Namer on the passable?

      for example in the USA



      Quote: Selevc
      And it’s interesting to try Namer Hook and Cornet and then it will be possible to judge how good his defense is !!! :)))

      And what kind of technique can withstand Cornet?
      1. Selevc
        Selevc 21 September 2013 14: 29
        +2
        Quote: Professor
        And what kind of technique can withstand Cornet?

        There is a well-known video on YouTube - which shows the use of anti-tank anti-tank systems against Merkav ... And the Cornet is constantly shown ... I wonder how widely Hezbola was used and was used at all? Or is it a kind of Cornet advertisement?
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ourK4C355G8

        Moreover, one of the videos shows a shot from ATGM in the stern of Merkava - since this is probably the most vulnerable part of the tank ... Probably the shooters understood - where to shoot them and that they would hardly hit the target in the forehead or side?
    3. Pimply
      Pimply 21 September 2013 14: 10
      +1
      Quote: Selevc
      It is clear that Israeli designers (based on combat experience) sacrificed maneuverability for the sake of security ...

      What exactly do you see problems with maneuverability?
      1. Selevc
        Selevc 21 September 2013 14: 53
        +3
        The fact that this tank is brought to the battlefield by car, and by and large, they must get there themselves !!! For Israel, this may be normal, but for Russian realities, it is no good ...

        Now, if you arrange Merkav’s trials, let’s say in the Russian outback - with its mud and potholes, then I doubt that Merkava will prove to be excellent ...
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 September 2013 15: 14
          0
          Quote: Selevc
          The fact that this tank is brought to the battlefield by car, and by and large, they must get there themselves !!! For Israel, this may be normal, but for Russian realities, it is no good ...

          Now, if you arrange Merkav’s trials, let’s say in the Russian outback - with its mud and potholes, then I doubt that Merkava will prove to be excellent ...

          Do you know what a moto watch is? And driving a tank on your own is not a luxury at all
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 21 September 2013 15: 26
          0
          Quote: Selevc
          The fact that this tank is brought to the battlefield by car, and by and large, they must get there themselves !!!

          You're kidding, right? Have you seen enough movies? Not aware that the tank’s resource should be protected?

          About dirt - do you have fantasies that Israel is dry? 5 months of the year there are tropical torrential rains that turn everything into impassable mud.



          1. Selevc
            Selevc 21 September 2013 16: 01
            0
            Quote: Pimply
            You're kidding, right? Have you seen enough movies? Not aware that the tank’s resource should be protected?

            You’re a joke, dear, to talk about preserving the tank’s engine life with your Israeli distance means recognizing it as a fact that the Merkava tank is worse than the T-72 in reliability !!!
            About dirt - do you have fantasies that Israel is dry? 5 months of the year there are tropical heavy rains that turn everything into impassable mud

            A good photo - but it doesn’t show much dirt and actually it does not say anything about the very fact that Merkava overcame this dirt - it is more likely to see a tank that just failed due to the fault of the same dirt ...
            1. Professor
              Professor 21 September 2013 17: 14
              +5
              Quote: Selevc
              You’re a joke, dear, to talk about preserving the tank’s engine life with your Israeli distance means recognizing it as a fact that the Merkava tank is worse than the T-72 in reliability !!!

              A tank costs much more than a MAN or VOLVO trailer, I generally keep quiet about the need to save asphalt.

              Quote: Selevc
              A good photo - but it doesn’t show much dirt and actually it does not say anything about the very fact that Merkava overcame this dirt - it is more likely to see a tank that just failed due to the fault of the same dirt ...

              want dirt, dirt we have







              1. Selevc
                Selevc 21 September 2013 21: 49
                +1
                The professor here is not enough photos alone - you should watch the video because on some photos it seems that the Merkavs are stuck in this very mud ...
                1. Professor
                  Professor 21 September 2013 21: 54
                  0
                  Quote: Selevc
                  The professor here is not enough photos alone - you should watch the video because on some photos it seems that the Merkavs are stuck in this very mud ...

                  Get stuck like that
            2. Pimply
              Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 21
              +1
              Quote: Selevc
              You’re a joke, dear, to talk about preserving the tank’s engine life with your Israeli distance means recognizing it as a fact that the Merkava tank is worse than the T-72 in reliability !!!

              And again, it carries you into hot delirium. To save the tank’s engine life is to save the tank’s engine life, rather than waving flags and throwing caps into the air, not knowing what you are talking about. Have you ever stood near a tank close? Have you been to tank exercises?


              Quote: Selevc
              A good photo - but it doesn’t show much dirt and actually it does not say anything about the very fact that Merkava overcame this dirt - it is more likely to see a tank that just failed due to the fault of the same dirt ...

              Yeah There is already a diagnosis.
    4. lucidlook
      lucidlook 21 September 2013 15: 13
      -2
      Quote: Selevc
      And it’s interesting to try Namer Hook and Cornet and then it will be possible to judge how good his defense is !!! :)))

      Why are you so modest, hit immediately with a Maverick or ... and why trifle! Iskander into it! And what? Now, if it does, then yeah. wassat
      1. Selevc
        Selevc 21 September 2013 16: 20
        +3
        Quote: lucidlook
        Why are you so modest, hit immediately with a Maverick or ... and why trifle! Iskander into it! And what? Now, if it does, then yeah.

        Why rush to extremes - modern armored vehicles must provide reliable protection against modern means of destruction ... And if it does not provide this protection itself - then do not shout that our tank is the most protected !!!
        1. lucidlook
          lucidlook 21 September 2013 16: 39
          -1
          Quote: Selevc
          modern armored vehicles should provide reliable protection against modern means of destruction.

          What does Maverick not like? Modern? Modern? Anti-tank? Anti-tank. And the fact that he is flashing through Abrams, well ... worthless means Abrams!

          In general, I have not heard that someone "holds" the Cornet, or TOW-2, or Lahat. And you? So now - don't you want to compare bookings at all?
          1. Professor
            Professor 21 September 2013 17: 17
            +1
            Quote: lucidlook
            In general, I have not heard that someone "holds" the Cornet, or TOW-2, or Lahat. And you? So now - don't you want to compare bookings at all?

            Bravo! good
          2. Selevc
            Selevc 21 September 2013 22: 13
            0
            That's it - I want people who are knowledgeable to enlighten me on the subject of using Cornet in real military operations ... Because in addition to one video from YouTube on which it is still not clear which ATGM was used, I personally did not hear anything ...

            And what does it mean holding or not holding? There are more vulnerable areas of the tank - for example, feed or top, and vice versa less vulnerable places (you can still try to hit the same forehead with modern types of inclined armor + active armor) ... And neither Maverica nor the other ATGM systems you indicated have a probable enemy of Israel while it’s not and is not expected, but Cornet and maybe Hashim most likely already exists ...
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 13: 03
    0
    Quote: Aaron Zawi
    Quote: ivshubarin
    The difference between Israeli tank construction and the world is that the protection of the crew, and then mobility, firepower, are put in the first place

    I apologize for disagreeing. It’s just based on significant combat experience, it was decided to create a car for the battlefield, where the maximum speed does not exceed 20-25 km / h, and not for a march-throw, which led to the decision to limit the marching speeds to 60 km / h. and 105mm and 120mm Israeli tank guns were created on the basis of NATO analogues and are in no way inferior to them. Moreover, with an emphasis on improving ammunition, they often presented surprises to our opponents.

    Yes, the first-order plumage of ours and our hypers, too, are not on paper in life
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 21 September 2013 13: 39
      +2
      Quote: In the reeds
      Yes, the first-order plumage of ours and our hypers, too, are not on paper in life

      And is it true that in 2012 about 2000 tank shells were stolen from a base near the Negev?
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 13: 14
    +1
    Quote: Akim
    Quote: ivshubarin
    in that the crew’s protection comes first, and then mobility

    This is a British concept. In general, Israel does not freeze the lake, so they are not afraid to go out on the ice like the Teutons.

    Well, yes, Chrysos used to walk around without ice and eat nothing fish
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 13: 25
    -1
    Quote: Vitold
    Red shoes mean service in the Airborne Forces, only those who pass or miss service there have such shoes.

    There is a battalion of airborne forces in every combat brigade. And Golani and Givati ​​and Nahal not to mention the Tsanhanim
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 14: 09
    -1
    Quote: saturn.mmm
    Quote: In the reeds
    No dear, we have been fighting for a long time, you trade

    And with whom are the Israelis fighting at the moment? And you don’t trade at all, only in 2007 Israeli companies exported arms worth $ 4,3 billion, which puts the country in fourth place in the world in the export of weapons and defense technologies (which honors the 8 millionth state), after USA, Russia and France.
    Russia is also at war with Japan, as is Israel with Syria.

    And how they sold them territories in exchange for peace
  • kirpich
    kirpich 21 September 2013 14: 15
    +3
    Quote: Professor
    And what kind of technique can withstand Cornet?



    Cornet can withstand it, but the Vampire will gnaw through this armor easily.
    1. Professor
      Professor 21 September 2013 14: 19
      +2
      Quote: kirpich
      Cornet can withstand it, but the Vampire will gnaw through this armor easily.

      and again, who can stand it?


      1. Che
        Che 21 September 2013 14: 30
        +3
        Professor, and this is what kind of women saddled equipment.
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 September 2013 15: 18
          +2
          Quote: Che
          Professor, and this is what kind of women saddled equipment.

          IMHO instructor
          1. Akim
            Akim 21 September 2013 15: 38
            +2
            Quote: Professor
            IMHO instructor

            It’s like women traffic cops. Beautiful and ruthless at the same time. Guys do not get fooled!
            1. Professor
              Professor 21 September 2013 15: 42
              +1
              Quote: Akim
              It’s like women traffic cops.

              The instructors of the armored forces teach fighters how to use equipment.
        2. atalef
          atalef 21 September 2013 15: 43
          +3
          Quote: Che
          Professor, and what kind of ladies saddled equipment

          The bulk of tank driving instructors (as well as their maintenance) are girls. And this is probably dressed up for Purim holiday (such as carnival)
          1. Che
            Che 21 September 2013 20: 37
            +1
            I crap from girls, we would have more of these. The donkey will stop in the burning hut. wassat
          2. Rumata
            Rumata 24 September 2013 11: 43
            0
            Quote: atalef
            The bulk of tank driving instructors (as well as their maintenance) are girls. And this is probably dressed up for Purim holiday (such as carnival)

            We were also brought to the Akhzarits by girls. Their favorite fun was to put 5-6 Akhzaritov in line, and who is the first to the base =))))
      2. kirpich
        kirpich 21 September 2013 14: 56
        +2
        Well, Merkava 4, Leopard, T-80, T-72 (maybe). Perhaps that's all. Cornet successfully fights with the rest.
      3. Gur
        Gur 21 September 2013 19: 05
        +1
        Guys if only in our army such girls went into battle, we would have also come up with some kind of refrigerator for them (good)
        1. kirpich
          kirpich 22 September 2013 12: 46
          +2
          Pick up the drooling. There are only MILITARY personnel in the army. Fucks only in the civilian world.
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 14: 27
    0
    Quote: saturn.mmm
    Quote: In the reeds
    Yes, the first-order plumage of ours and our hypers, too, are not on paper in life

    And is it true that in 2012 about 2000 tank shells were stolen from a base near the Negev?

    Well 2ooo-4000 I don’t know, but cousins ​​steal everything iron, even sewer manholes
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 21 September 2013 15: 51
      +2
      Quote: In the reeds
      Well 2ooo-4000 I don’t know, but cousins ​​steal everything iron, even sewer manholes

      We also have some kind of brother hatches, so they began to make hatches of hard rubber.
  • Perch_xnumx
    Perch_xnumx 21 September 2013 14: 34
    +1
    Quote: Aaron Zawi

    (tired) It's not an BMP. This is TBTR. Development of the idea of ​​"Akhzarit", which was created under the concept of storming the Syrian fortified areas near Damascus in the 80s.

    The machine must be versatile and capable of performing the task independently. Or do you think that "we will always be better equipped and armed than the enemy," the Arabs whose weapons are worse by an order of magnitude is normal, but will it always be so? The cost of a car, its complexity, speed and cost of repair, its mobility, as it will be if difficult circumstances arise.
    BMP - 3 for example has serious weapons on board.
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 September 2013 14: 50
      -1
      Quote: Perch_1
      The machine must be universal

      Universality cannot be a priori. Miscellaneous tasks

      Quote: Perch_1
      able to independently perform the task

      How's that?

      Quote: Perch_1
      Or do you think that "we will always be better equipped and armed than the enemy"

      Yes, it was, is and will be

      Quote: Perch_1
      Arabs to drive whose weapons are worse by an order of magnitude only if it always will be.

      It already was, when the Arabs had better armament and the number of military forces was many times greater (believe in the Wiki that it was 6 days old, that the Doomsday War), but the result was the same. Now, no state in the region alone can technologically surpass AOI, and no country can buy so much equipment, and no one can.


      Quote: Perch_1
      The cost of the machine, its complexity, speed and cost of repairs, its mobility, as with this, if difficult circumstances arise

      In Russia began to count grandmothers? We definitely have enough money.

      Quote: Perch_1
      BMP - 3 for example has serious weapons on board.

      Like the personnel moving on it (above), but it should kind of like inside.
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 14: 54
    0
    Quote: honest Jew
    Unlike Russia, in Israel we have a soldier’s life in price !!! Therefore, the protection of armored vehicles is appropriate! hi

    And the rest of the field marshal?
  • Perch_xnumx
    Perch_xnumx 21 September 2013 15: 18
    +3
    Quote: atalef

    Well, with our 500 km length of the country (and the 14th) in the narrowest spot --- this is very actual laughing

    Actually, it is always relevant, even with a truck it will be difficult to transfer 60 tons, and when it needs to be done urgently and quickly.
    Quote: atalef

    Have you ever seen Gaza, Kasbah Shem or Jenin? There, streets 3-4 m wide are not such a rare occurrence. I would even say mostly. Nevertheless, he fights and is very successful.
    It will be very convenient to drive such a colossus through narrow streets littered with debris, reinforcement and beams, and it will be even better to maneuver and ride this good. Do not confuse the shooting of weakly armed Arabs with a serious clash.
    Quote: Perch_1
    Reservations are of course serious, but what about a defeat from above, or firing at vulnerable places with modern anti-tank weapons

    Quote: atalef

    Merkava (4) the only tank in the world today that has an armored top of the tower (like a hatch), well, there’s no question about Namer (he has the whole top spaced, multi-layer armor)

    This does not mean that he has no weaknesses.
    Quote: atalef

    They were created primarily for the city.

    There may be protection, but not speed and maneuverability. In a word, shoot Arabs.

    Quote: atalef

    Is your concept equivalent? It is much easier to fight with the equivalent than with the asymmetric.

    It’s neither easier nor better. Peaceful Israel can easily get the equivalent. Asymmetric always fought only on its land, Israel was out of reach.


    Quote: atalef

    Yes, it’s very simple. Assad cannot cope for 2 years, Chechnya and Dagestan are already 13 years old, but we somehow put out.

    Asad bayonets have as many if not less than rebels - terrorists, there is no advantage for a successful attack, including in terms of armament. Rebel terrorists are bombarded with weapons, they calmly drive themselves through neighboring countries, are treated there, and have training camps. And then they calmly cut their throats and blow up civilians. And the most interesting world democracy supports them. That's what is dancing out, soon you probably need to wait for a new version of Nazism. As for Chechnya, the enemies delivered such a blow to Russia with the collapse that it is worth wondering how Russia survived after this.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 21 September 2013 15: 31
      +2
      Is it like this?
      1. Gur
        Gur 21 September 2013 19: 24
        +2
        Dear, you’ve seen the road somewhere in the war zone there, UAZs will not go everywhere this time and in peacetime there is a bunch of equipment and Russian Railways and Airplanes and Tyagochi, and there will be passages through this and I’ll look like squads with shoulder blades all the way. It's like a warrior paralytic catch the enemy hold him and I will come later and kill everyone let volvo here and so 500km
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 September 2013 19: 33
          +2
          Quote: Gur
          Dear you, have you ever seen a road in a war zone

          Here is one?

          Trailers on the Negev and Golan mountain streamers drag these monsters without any problems.
          1. lucidlook
            lucidlook 21 September 2013 20: 33
            -1
            I understand that this bun on top is one of the Trophy radars?
            1. Professor
              Professor 21 September 2013 20: 37
              0
              Quote: lucidlook
              I understand that this bun on top is one of the Trophy radars?

              And there is. On the right tank, the system is in a combat position.
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 25
                +1
                In the training, prof, in the training. Radar - a rectangular thing there. And this is a block with anti-bombs. Little blue, training.
                1. Professor
                  Professor 22 September 2013 08: 02
                  0
                  Quote: Pimply
                  In the training, prof, in the training. Radar - a rectangular thing there. And this is a block with anti-bombs. Little blue, training

                  In training, he is blue (tank on the left), but on the right, is he of a different color? wink
                  1. Pimply
                    Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 32
                    0
                    There he is also blue, if you increase the picture - you can see the edging
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 22 September 2013 13: 44
                      0
                      Quote: Pimply
                      There he is also blue, if you increase the picture - you can see the edging

                      Black with a red stripe.
                      1. Pimply
                        Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 56
                        -1
                        Prof. cant. I repeat again - edging
                      2. Professor
                        Professor 22 September 2013 14: 14
                        -1
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Prof. cant. I repeat again - edging

                        Show me, I don’t see.
                      3. Pimply
                        Pimply 22 September 2013 14: 28
                        0
                        just to the right of the band, see
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 24
          0
          Not a radar. This is the system itself. In the training version.
      2. Che
        Che 21 September 2013 20: 45
        +1
        You do not have roads, but grace, rubble and stone, no trailer will pass into the mud in our front line.
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 September 2013 20: 47
          +2
          Quote: Che
          You do not have roads, but grace, rubble and stone, no trailer will pass into the mud in our front line.

          I already posted a photo with dirt, be careful. wink



    2. M. Peter
      M. Peter 22 September 2013 07: 48
      0
      Quote: Gur
      Dear you, have you ever seen a road in a war zone

      The reason is:

      Railway tunnel
  • Gur
    Gur 21 September 2013 19: 49
    +2
    Here is some more information the most terrible war of the Second World War light T-34s against heavy tigers and panthers as an example to all examples an example mobility means a lot
    The T-34 tank had a huge impact on the outcome of the war and on the further development of world tank building. Due to the combination of its combat qualities, the T-34 was recognized by many experts and military experts as one of the best tanks of the Second World War.

    Well, that does not resemble anything
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 21 September 2013 20: 30
      -1
      Quote: Gur
      Here is some more information the most terrible war of the Second World War light T-34s against heavy tigers and panthers as an example to all examples an example mobility means a lot

      Who would argue. But the experience of the AOI tank battles in 56/67/73/82, proved to our military that a more protected vehicle maneuvers better on the battlefield.
      As for the Great Patriotic War, take an interest in who wrote the most of the German PTO or BTV machines on their account.
    2. Pimply
      Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 30
      -1
      Have you read what usually happened in such a fight? As a rule, carcasses were actively burning, unfortunately. Their advantage compared to tigers and panthers was simplicity, mass character, cheapness. Tigers were released a little more than a thousand pieces, they were difficult to manufacture and expensive. T-34 - several tens of thousands. Look at the losses in the Battle of Kursk, for example, and much will become clear.
      1. 31231
        31231 22 September 2013 09: 23
        0
        What's happened?! The question here is in proper application, not in a gentlemanly duel. The first meeting of the 34th with the royal tigers is widely known. If ours prepared for it and attacked these silver carp in the right place and from the right angles, then there were no losses in the 34-ok.
    3. kirpich
      kirpich 22 September 2013 16: 12
      0
      NOT A CORRECT COMPARE !!! T-34 is a medium tank.
      T-VI (TIGER) is a HEAVY tank. In principle, they can be compared, like David and Goliath. But I just don't understand WHY ???! Compare. Was there really not enough of our KVs for "tigers"?
  • atalef
    atalef 21 September 2013 15: 38
    +1
    Quote: Perch_1
    By the way, this is always relevant, even on a truck it will be difficult to transfer 60 tons, and when it needs to be done urgently and quickly.

    In light and without problems, tanks are driven by throttles
    By the way, my friend’s daughter called up and now she is learning from the Army to be the driver of the thriller, she will carry tanks, I don’t know how 50 kilograms of weight in it and it’s probably with boots and a mobile phone, and growth of 1.60 in the best case

    Quote: Perch_1
    Do not confuse the shooting of weakly armed Arabs with a serious clash.

    And Assad, or the storming of Grozny - a serious clash?

    Quote: Perch_1
    There may be protection, but not speed and maneuverability. In a word, shoot Arabs.

    Well, T72 is understandable - for conquering Europe and America - that's why it's cool, but the fact that the soldiers have nothing to fight in the city - well, who believes. Once a week we capture Europe, but Chechnya or Dagestan - once every 50 years

    Quote: Perch_1
    Asad bayonets have as many if not less than rebels - terrorists

    Check out WIKI’s Syrian Armed Forces and security services. + 3000 tanks, 9000 BMPs, MLRS, Aircraft, Helicopters, etc. Truly equal forces laughing


    Quote: Perch_1
    As for Chechnya, the enemies delivered such a blow to Russia with the collapse that it is worth wondering how Russia survived after this.

    Chechnya could destroy Russia? Well, just nonsense.
    1. 31231
      31231 22 September 2013 08: 58
      0
      It is a pity there is no ice. Do you have a Carrot descent when stopping the saddle with a trawl on the rise that way at 60-80 ppm?
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 34
        0
        And what do you see as radical problems?
        1. 31231
          31231 22 September 2013 20: 29
          0
          I’m wondering, is the trawl capable of unloading it on a slope? Or cling to a tractor and pull it out to level ground?
          In our ice, when equipment is transported heavier than 40 tons, as a rule an assistant comes in the form of a dump truck with sand. And in the back of a couple people sprinkle a lift. If the saddleman could not row on the top, then they catch him with this bastard.
  • M. Peter
    M. Peter 22 September 2013 07: 44
    +1
    Quote: Perch_1
    Actually, it is always relevant, even with a truck it will be difficult to transfer 60 tons, and when it needs to be done urgently and quickly.

    Yes, no reason not weight, but in size. And here by the way the main violin is played by the railway platform. In our country, they led to the fact that the equipment has its current dimensions. What do you think, it’s impossible to make a tractor and a platform that can withstand the weight of the tank, nonsense, do mine excavators and trucks to them, there one bucket merkavu swallows and does not choke. But the railway platform with the tank may not crawl into the tunnel, and how can it be, is there a tunnel to remodel under the tank?
    1. 31231
      31231 22 September 2013 09: 00
      0
      There are autoplatforms and they carry around 200 tons (transformers). Only it is slow and troublesome. Well, of course, not in winter conditions with us.
    2. Pimply
      Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 35
      0
      The above dimensions are given to you, t-80 and Merkava. Look at them again.
      1. M. Peter
        M. Peter 22 September 2013 17: 02
        +1
        Quote: Pimply
        The above dimensions are given to you, t-80 and Merkava. Look at them again.

        Are you me What should I look at them? The railway platform does not allow, the same weight also plays a role, and here alas. And change, increasing, as it were, is impossible, the receiving and sending routes do not allow this to be done, it is necessary to redo the entire infrastructure, for many this is unknown, if only to reproach it. Israel does not have a similar problem.
        And so I think ours would quite like both the Nameers and the Merkavas. But the appearance of our armored vehicles is dictated not only by battle, but also by the method of its delivery to this battle. We have a large country and we do not have the ability to transfer such machines similar to Namer or Merkava. You can post pictures about the dimensions here, but the problem is at least in the same cargo yards, where and how to unload ... Yes, there are a lot of things to consider if you start digging.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 22 September 2013 23: 30
          0
          Quote: M.Pyotr
          Are you me What should I look at them? The railway platform does not allow, the same weight also plays a role, and here alas.

          Why doesn’t it allow, if there are platforms for transporting weight up to 95 tons? And the height is up to 5.8 meters?
          1. M. Peter
            M. Peter 24 September 2013 12: 56
            0
            Well, there is Mriya, only not every airfield will accept it and if the landing strip can somehow increase, still most of the airfields are outside the city, then there is no railway station. Most stations, stations were built in imperial times, when cities were even smaller. Time passed and the cities began to squeeze the railway, the possibilities will no longer expand. There are just a lot of things around.
  • Perch_xnumx
    Perch_xnumx 21 September 2013 16: 38
    +1
    Quote: atalef

    In light and without problems, tanks are driven by throttles
    By the way, my friend’s daughter called up and now she is learning from the Army to be the driver of the thriller, she will carry tanks, I don’t know how 50 kilograms of weight in it and it’s probably with boots and a mobile phone, and growth of 1.60 in the best case

    When you need a lot and quickly, each flight has a lighter value, you can transfer 2 or 3.

    Quote: atalef

    the fact that the soldiers have nothing to fight in the city - well, who believes. Once a week we capture Europe, but Chechnya or Dagestan - once every 50 years
    T-72 in the city is quite combat-ready, only on condition that everything is done wisely, reconnaissance, modern communications, artillery, experienced fighters. In formidable tanks, even dynamic protection was not installed. What is it? How many traitors were who sold their soldiers.

    Quote: atalef

    Check out WIKI’s Syrian Armed Forces and security services. + 3000 tanks, 9000 BMPs, MLRS, Aircraft, Helicopters, etc. Truly equal forces laughing

    Terrorists fight in urban conditions, often hiding behind residents, junk that can be burned from RPGs mostly from Assad, there are much fewer modern tanks. Secondly, their tactics are semi-partisan, they hit and fired, they retreated and they are spread all over the territory. Ground forces of several hundred thousand, again losses over the years of the war. And finally, part of the forces should be ready to repel the threat from Israel, Turkey, Jordan, the United States, respectively, in reserve. What could significantly help the Syrians is artillery - 200-300 pieces non-s (svk).

    Quote: atalef

    Chechnya could destroy Russia? Well, just nonsense.

    Chechnya is being separated, Tatarstan is being separated, and so on, what the West planned for Russia.
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 September 2013 19: 52
      +1
      Quote: Perch_1
      When you need a lot and quickly, each flight has a lighter value, you can transfer 2 or 3.

      Believe me, there are enough thrillers. They are just a sea (do not forget civilians) that will be mobilized in a second. In Israel, all owners of jeeps are ordered in case of war to come to mobilize and turn in cars (for this the state will pay them somewhere around 80 bucks a year) - for readiness

      Quote: Perch_1
      In formidable tanks, even dynamic protection was not installed. What is it? How many traitors were who sold their soldiers.

      It’s strange. and then they simply threw everyone their hats. Not a matter of traitors, it simply did not exist. and the attitude to the life of a soldier is different. Therefore, tanks are lighter and there are no heavy armored personnel carriers

      Quote: Perch_1
      Terrorists fight in urban environments often hiding behind residents

      Like in Gaza, Jenin, Lebanon.

      Quote: Perch_1
      Secondly, their tactics are semi-partisan, they hit, they fired, they retreated, they are smeared throughout the territory

      Of course

      Quote: Perch_1
      And finally, part of the forces should be ready to repel the threat from Israel, Turkey, Jordan, the United States, respectively, in reserve

      Papua New Guinea still remember. The point is to keep troops in reserve if you lose strategically at home

      Quote: Perch_1
      Chechnya is being separated, Tatarstan is being separated, and so on,

      You cannot hold anyone by force. By the way, who should have separated after Chechnya? Or Tatarstan in Russia only from fear?
  • Perch_xnumx
    Perch_xnumx 21 September 2013 17: 01
    +3
    Quote: atalef

    Yes, it was, is and will be

    Will not be. People assume and God disposes. The masters of the world believe that they can decide everything for God, they are terribly mistaken. The more the world turns into soda, the faster its end.
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 17: 10
    -2
    Quote: Pimply
    Quote: Selevc
    The fact that this tank is brought to the battlefield by car, and by and large, they must get there themselves !!!

    You're kidding, right? Have you seen enough movies? Not aware that the tank’s resource should be protected?

    About dirt - do you have fantasies that Israel is dry? 5 months of the year there are tropical torrential rains that turn everything into impassable mud.


    There is dirt where it is not, but the scale is completely clean. Bring 5000 tanks to the western border on seven-trailer ...
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 17: 23
    +2
    Quote: Professor
    Quote: Che
    Professor, and this is what kind of women saddled equipment.

    IMHO instructor

    Yes, they need to be driven by a rotten broom; there’s no use from them, just like on the roads you go to the ring and you look who is driving a woman or she is an instructor alone
  • Urri
    Urri 21 September 2013 17: 30
    +3
    Quote: lucidlook
    on the V-shaped bottom of the Merkava, then the question of security from below somehow disappears by itself.


    We take a physics textbook for Grade 5 and consider at this angle of inclination of the bottom the impact attenuation. Laugh.
    But if the bottom is of a variable section with a thickening towards the center, then everything is in the mind, according to the compromising principle and the theory of equal strength. But inside the floor is flat. An increase in security is evident, but not because of the angle of inclination.
    Reducing the thickness of the bottom to the edges is aimed at reducing the mass of the bottom with equal strength.
  • sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 21 September 2013 17: 33
    +1
    Quote: honest Jew
    Unlike Russia, in Israel we have a soldier’s life in price !!! Therefore, the protection of armored vehicles is appropriate! hi


    I COMPLETELY AGREE! +++ good

    ANY army at the forefront must PUT the life of a SOLDIER and develop "IRON" based on this rule ... and do it IRON ...
    1. 7ydmco
      7ydmco 22 September 2013 00: 22
      0
      But it’s interesting that it’s better to have four less protected armored personnel carriers or one more protected armored vehicle and whether the remaining soldiers will keep up with the run under the bullets behind one but protected armored personnel carrier smile
      1. atalef
        atalef 22 September 2013 00: 27
        0
        Quote: 7ydmco
        But it’s interesting that it’s better to have four less protected armored personnel carriers or one more protected armored vehicle and whether the remaining soldiers will keep up with the run under the bullets behind one but protected armored personnel carrier smile

        better on horses, they are definitely enough for everyone
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 17: 35
    0
    Quote: In the reeds
    Quote: Professor
    Quote: Che
    Professor, and this is what kind of women saddled equipment.

    IMHO instructor

    Yes, they need to be driven by a rotten broom; there’s no use from them, just like on the roads you go to the ring and you look who is driving a woman or she is an instructor alone

    It's like women's football ...
  • Arkan
    Arkan 21 September 2013 19: 27
    0
    Will the Tiger survive a hit from an RPG-32? In urban conditions, this is very possible.
  • Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 21 September 2013 21: 24
    0
    I read the article with interest. The question immediately arose: why the domestic industry does not produce heavy infantry fighting vehicles for the Russian army? Well, firstly, because the main customer - the Ministry of Defense does not order this equipment. But why the Russian military ignore this type of military equipment? The question is very interesting. It is interesting what experts on this issue will say.
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 21 September 2013 21: 54
      0
      You can answer the question - Do bridges suitable for this very heavy armored vehicle have been built everywhere? Or, when passing a convoy of such infantry fighting vehicles along an old bridge, will they be transported one at a time so as not to risk it again?
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 33
        +1
        There is such a thing - engineering service. Its tasks include, if necessary, the rapid construction of bridges.
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 21 September 2013 22: 25
    +1
    Quote: Perch_1
    Quote: atalef

    Yes, it was, is and will be

    Will not be. People assume and God disposes. The masters of the world believe that they can decide everything for God, they are terribly mistaken. The more the world turns into soda, the faster its end.

    So people are created imperfect. But I repeat more than 2000 years ago these days in the Temple of Jerusalem 70 cows were sacrificed for the atonement of the sins of 70 nations of the World. Sukhoth is called. And this is no longer done.
  • 7ydmco
    7ydmco 21 September 2013 23: 38
    0
    Quote: atalef
    Yes, it’s very simple. Assad cannot cope for 2 years, Chechnya and Dagestan are already 13 years old, but we somehow put out.


    Are you sure that these three conflicts have such equal conditions that they can be compared with such a striking conclusion? smile
  • fimusito
    fimusito 21 September 2013 23: 48
    0
    It’s interesting, what determines the number of rinks when creating tanks: for example, Leopard and Abrams have 7 pairs, Merkava and Russian tanks have 6 pairs?
    And a question for Israeli friends: if I understand correctly, this soldier is from the Orthodox. What can they do, and in the army you can serve with such beards and walk in a bale (knitted hat)? And how do they comply with the ban on work on Shabbat in the army?
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 22 September 2013 02: 39
      0
      More likely even from ultraorthodoxes - ordinary orthodoxy rarely wear a beard and pace.
      Working on Shabbat has some concessions for "pikuah nefesh" - that is, saving a life. It is a priority. Saving lives is just such a pikuah nefesh. But they try to do what is not necessary for operational activities to the minimum.
      The beard is allowed in the army - but permission is needed either from the doctor or from the unit or unit commander.
    2. Professor
      Professor 22 September 2013 07: 58
      0
      Quote: fimusito
      And how do they comply with the ban on work on Shabbat in the army?

      As they say in the Tsakhal, "every Saturday has a Saturday outcome." Will finalize his starting Saturday night. In general, during the fighting on Saturday, they don't bother - life is more important.
  • In the reeds
    In the reeds 22 September 2013 02: 53
    +1
    Quote: Hiking
    Such an arba yes to Grozny in 1994-95 and see how much it would stretch against a more serious rival than the poor Palestinians.

    Against the Chechen Panzer Division
    1. lucidlook
      lucidlook 23 September 2013 20: 39
      0
      Quote: In the reeds
      Against the Chechen Panzer Division

      ONE !!! lol
  • Xroft
    Xroft 22 September 2013 08: 13
    -5
    How many Jews ran to the Russian military forum .... To compare the WWII and the weekly military conflict in the spirit of the ungrateful nation that survived on this planet, thanks to the victory of the Soviet army (Russian). Specifically, authors who write such a heresy are disgusted.
    And about the technology, to compare the universal Russian / Soviet (70-80s) BMP / BTR that successfully operate all over the world from Siberia to the tropics, and a 60 ton piece of iron at the price of a modern tank that carries 8 soldiers so that their natives from AK do not shoot. ... well, at least they’ll be surprised if people consider on an equal footing a week-long shootout with the area (Gaza, etc.) and the 5 year old world war.
    ps If something serious will always be possible to lick amers, help? :)
    1. cooper
      cooper 22 September 2013 12: 58
      -1
      I think that if our troops acted as Israelis, then the Second World War would be recalled as an ordinary border conflict.
    2. Pimply
      Pimply 22 September 2013 13: 40
      0
      I recommend that you, a visitor to the Russian military forum, go back to the rules section and familiarize yourself with it. It is written in Russian quite clearly.
      1. cooper
        cooper 22 September 2013 14: 50
        0
        And what is there of Kramolny ??? Who did I manage to offend? The Israeli army fought at the same time practically with the whole Arab world. And notice it is well armed. T54 and the latest T62 against modernized centurions. And it was ABILITY that won. There were a lot of courage in 41 but no tactics or strategies. And we were at least armed better than the Nazis. So what's the problem ???
        I just don’t give a damn about minuses, but it’s kind of ridiculous to read when they insult nations and get pluses for koment, but they absolutely do not tolerate opinions that differ from their personal worldviews.