Military Review

Israeli missile tank Pereh

58
In the summer of 2015, Israel officially recognized the presence of its previously classified type of military equipment - a mobile rocket launcher on a tracked chassis tank. At the same time, the first photos of this new product only got on the network in the spring of 2013, but the Israeli military did not give any comments on this subject. The first photos of the new combat vehicle were taken during the deployment of the IDF near the border with Syria. Before official information from Israel appeared, military experts and journalists put forward various versions of the new combat vehicle, for which the regime of increased secrecy was respected for many years. At the same time, over time, the most commonly used definition for a novelty was the definition of “missile tank”.


At present, there are no disagreements regarding the official name of this combat vehicle (Pereh), which is translated from Hebrew as “onager” (late Roman throwing machine, or a wild donkey). On the official page of the Israel Defense Forces on the social network Facebook 20 in July 2015, the following message was posted about the new missile system: “For 30 years we kept secret information about one of our most advanced and efficient military technologies. Last week we removed the secrecy regime from it and opened the Onagr tank to the world. This machine, armed with anti-tank missiles, changes the idea of ​​modern combat. ”



This rocket tank can be called the world's first over-the-horizon self-propelled anti-tank. The operator of a combat vehicle suggests a missile at a target on the television image transmitted to it. At the same time, the missile system is able to hit targets at a distance of up to 25 kilometers. In order to preserve secrecy, this combat vehicle moved only as part of armored columns. According to experts, “Onagr” is a formidable force, it is designed to hit stationary and well-protected mobile targets of the enemy.

The Israelis chose their own version of the American medium tank М48А5 (Patton III) as a base for their missile system. The Israeli name of this vehicle, which received a complex of dynamic protection, is Magach 5. Despite the emergence at the beginning of the 1980-s of much more advanced main battle tanks "Merkava", tanks "Magah" continued to be used and upgraded, remaining the basis of the IDF armored units until the end of the 1990-s. At the same time, these tanks remained in service with the 460 training brigade and in the army reserve. As of the 2009 year in Israel, there were 822 tank M60 (Magi-6 and Magi-7) and 561 tank М48А5 (Magi-5).



The main and only armament of the Pereh tank are the Spike-NLOS universal Spike missiles. They are also known in Israel as Rafael Tamuz. The rocket was created in Israel by Rafael concern (by 80%) together with other companies at the beginning of 1990's. The decision to remove the secrecy from it was made only at the beginning of October 2010. According to the 2011 year, the cost of one such rocket was 145 thousand US dollars. The effective range of these missiles is up to 25 km. The weight of one rocket in a shipping container is 71 kg. On the flight path, the average rocket speed is 130-180 m / s, armor penetration is up to 1000 mm steel homogeneous armor. These rockets can be effectively used at temperatures from −32 to + 49 degrees Celsius and stored at temperatures from −45 to + 71 degrees Celsius. Depending on the tasks to be solved, the rocket can be equipped with different types of warheads - fragmentation, cumulative or multi-functional.

Spike-NLOS is a multipurpose multiplatform electro-optical rocket system, which is designed to destroy enemy armored vehicles, well-protected objects (such as a bunker, a bunker, dots) and other engineering structures, as well as enemy personnel and surface targets. The missile system can be installed on land, air or sea carriers. The rocket of the complex was made according to the classical aerodynamic scheme with wings opening in flight. The Spike NLOS missile can be aimed at using a satellite or UAV. At the same time, the rocket has its own target-fixation system and remote control, which is implemented using a two-way electro-optical image transmission system, such a solution significantly increases the capabilities of combat use of the complex.

Israeli missile tank Pereh


Using a two-way electron-optical image transmission system allows the operator of the rocket complex to control the launched rocket in 3-s modes: “Shot and forget”, “Shot, rate and adjust”, “Shot and sent to the target”. The presence of different modes of launching missiles allows you to achieve maximum accuracy of hitting the target, even at long distances, and also allows you to redirect the missile to a more important target and minimize unwanted casualties during a missile strike. In addition, the operator is able to capture the target after launching the rocket from closed positions, thus reducing the risk of “friendly fire”. And the presence of the “shot and forgot” mode allows the operator to quickly switch to other targets immediately after launch.

The Israeli Spike NLOS missiles can be used both during the day and at night. The speed of deployment, compactness and firepower of the complex make it possible to reduce the dependence of small units of troops on air and artillery support on the battlefield, allowing them to effectively deal with tanks, fortifications and other difficult for ordinary weapons goals. Currently, in addition to Israel, this missile system is in service with only one country in the world. In 2011, South Korea acquired Spike-NLOS 67 complexes worth 43 million dollars. These missile systems were located on the border with North Korea, as well as on the islands in the Yellow Sea, which are a disputed territory.



The Israeli mobile complex Pereh can be properly categorized as a missile tank, since this heavy combat vehicle has no other weapons than missiles. This rocket tank is equipped with 12 container launchers for Rafael Tamuz missiles, which are installed in the rear of the slewing turret, and when fired, the launcher goes up. In all likelihood, these tanks have already been used by Israel in combat conditions. In particular, it is precisely known that the Spike-NLOS missile system was used in 2006 during the Second Lebanon War, as well as in Operation Cast Lead, which was carried out in 2008 in the Gaza Strip. Only for the Second Lebanon War, the Israelis used 500 order of such missiles.

History world tank building knew examples of the creation of missile tanks, so that the Israeli designers are not the first in this issue. Heavy tracked combat vehicles, whose main weapons were missiles, were built before, including in Germany and the USSR. The Jaguar-2 (Raketenjagdpanzer 4 Jaguar 2) missile tank was developed in Germany in the middle of 1980, and this combat vehicle was armed with the Bundeswehr until 1993 of the year (163 of such tanks were produced in total). It was a tank destroyer built on a tank chassis. In the USSR, similar developments were also conducted. In the Soviet Union, the IT-1 (Tank Destroyer-1 or “150 Object”) was mass-produced, which was armed with the “Dragon” anti-tank missiles and was built on the basis of components and assemblies of the T-62 tank. In total, 110 of such vehicles were produced, which were in service with the Soviet Army for only two years - from 1968 to 1970.



And although experiments with tanks arming missiles and using them as platforms for rocket launchers were carried out at different times and in different states, today only the IDF has a combat vehicle that can be attributed to rocket tanks. At the same time, anti-tank missile systems on tracked chassis, there is not only Israel. For example, the Russian army has a self-propelled anti-tank missile system "Chrysanthemum". The 9P157 combat vehicle of this complex is based on the BMP-3. However, all such vehicles are built on the basis of transporters or infantry fighting vehicles, but not tanks, possessing only anti-bullet armor.

Against this background, the Onagr missile tank is advantageously different. Its design feature is that even outwardly it is very difficult to distinguish it from the main battle tank "Merkava". Light elements were specially installed on the combat vehicle, “making up” it under another tank. The designers even installed on it an imitation of a tank gun. Such a "mimicry" should help to hide the Pereh missile tank in combat conditions, besides, it can move freely in the composition of the tank columns, without being detected by the enemy.

The creators of this combat vehicle deliberately went to all possible tricks to reduce possible combat risks. It is not a secret to anyone that on the battlefield, the enemy is first of all hunting for the most under-armored targets, which are the majority of mobile rocket launchers. At the same time, the thickness of the Pereh tank hull armor is approximately 100 mm, it was further enhanced by dynamic protection, the thickness of the armor in the stern of the tank does not exceed 60 mm. These are quite impressive figures compared with modern self-propelled anti-tank systems of other countries, but such armor will not save from modern anti-tank weapons. At the same time, the reputation of the MBT Merkava is added to the Israeli tank’s own armor, fulfilling the role of additional “invisible armor”. The enemy will think a few more times to shoot at this “pseudo-Merkava” or find an easier target to defeat.

Information sources:
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/926240.html
http://nn.by/?c=ar&i=153274〈=ru
http://warspot.ru/1658-prisedayuschaya-samohodka-vermahta
https://www.facebook.com/idfonline
Materials from open sources.
Author:
58 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 4 February 2016 06: 32
    +1
    Against this background, the Onagr missile tank is advantageously different. Its design feature is that even outwardly it is very difficult to distinguish it from the main battle tank "Merkava". Light elements were specially installed on the combat vehicle, “making up” it under another tank. The designers even installed on it an imitation of a tank gun. Such a "mimicry" should help to hide the Pereh missile tank in combat conditions, besides, it can move freely in the composition of the tank columns, without being detected by the enemy.
    And then I first thought - why would he need a trunk, if armed only with missiles.
    1. Darkmor
      Darkmor 4 February 2016 11: 22
      +9
      But it seems to me that the Jews in this case outwitted themselves.
      Roughly speaking, they disguised the archer as a swordsman - putting on heavy chain mail and giving a fake sword, and hiding the bow behind a growth shield.
      He, as a swordsman, cannot fight, and bears the full load, limiting his maneuverability.
      I see the same problems with this missile tank.

      If you want to disguise it, then you must disguise it as the technique that is usually located behind the line of direct clash.
      BTR \ BMP, ARV, IRM or IMR - if you need something armored,
      a supply truck, or a trailer - if you need something relatively light.
      The fact is that the tank is in any case a priority goal for smart weapons. And the chance that your missile disguised tank will cause only suspicion, remaining outside the offensive order is very great.
      On the other hand, it is unlikely that enemy anti-tank missiles will be used by some armored excavator (IMR-2) or a tractor (BREM). Also, an armored personnel carrier, having landed infantry and standing somewhere in the bushes, is quite a common thing - and no one will spend a rocket for 100k on an empty car worth $ 200k. And a tank that costs under a million will be spent without much thought.
      Therefore, to summarize - disguising garbage - it rather has the opposite effect.

      And if you make a missile tank without camouflage, then you could achieve better platform characteristics, greater speed, less noticeability, etc.
      In general: 5 for inventiveness, 2 for invention.
      1. Mr. Pip
        Mr. Pip 4 February 2016 12: 48
        +3
        Quote: Darkmor
        In general: 5 for inventiveness, 2 for invention.

        I applaud while standing - such a "make-up" almost completely deprives the technique of its initial advantages, I also do not understand at all hi
      2. Petrix
        Petrix 4 February 2016 13: 34
        +3
        Quote: Darkmor
        masking garbage - it rather has the opposite effect.

        Not everything is true. The enemy, seeing tanks will assume the possibility of their action within a radius of 25 km. Even if there is no missile tank. Accordingly, a potential threat may affect the decision.
        For example, you need to get around Israeli tanks at a safe distance. It is one thing to draw a dangerous circle of 5 km, and 25 km is quite another. T.O. it is possible to block the border, conditionally, not with 5 tanks on the front, but with one.
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 29 February 2016 22: 24
          0
          Quote: Petrix
          The enemy, seeing tanks will assume the possibility of their action within a radius of 25 km

          Then why does the article say that it has been kept secret for many years?
          “For 30 years, we kept secret information about one of our most advanced and effective military technologies. Last week, we removed the privacy regime from her and opened the Onagr tank to the world. This machine, armed with anti-tank missiles, changes the idea of ​​modern combat "
          Doesn't fit.
      3. alpamys
        alpamys 4 February 2016 13: 48
        -2
        Quote: Darkmor
        In general: 5 for inventiveness, 2 for invention.

        to point laughing
        build tanks, it’s not the world’s diamonds to bank.
        1. Kars
          Kars 4 February 2016 14: 18
          +4
          Tank Hamas))))))))
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 4 February 2016 14: 21
            0
            Quote: Kars
            Tank Hamas))))))))

            Yes, there was a separate circus, especially considering that they represented it stolen and redone
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 4 February 2016 14: 20
          0
          Quote: alpamys
          to point
          build tanks, it’s not the world’s diamonds to bank.

          Right. Only here is the riddle - why do experts stably consider, for example, Merkava one of the best tanks in the world?
          1. Kars
            Kars 4 February 2016 14: 25
            +6
            Quote: Pimply
            Right. Only here is the riddle - why do experts stably consider, for example, Merkava one of the best tanks in the world?

            Are you throwing?
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 4 February 2016 14: 52
              0
              Quote: Kars
              Are you throwing?

              And then 8))
              1. Kars
                Kars 4 February 2016 14: 56
                +4
                Quote: Pimply
                And then 8))

                merkavasrach is one of my favorite tank serraches)) Do you have a fin support program for participants who are ready to hold the merkava image there? and so


                Thais will not buy T-90С. But the Chinese also broke off.
                Deputy Minister of Defense of Thailand General Udomdej Sitabutra said there was no interest in the procurement of Russian armored vehicles in the near future. A source



                According to the blog http://aagth1.blogspot.ru/2016/02/1.html, during the visit of a high-ranking Thai delegation to China on January 25-28, an offer was made, from which "they could not refuse" © some agreements. Although the financing of this deal is still in question. Looks like Thailand has decided to wait. But the Russian side, alas, has no chance.
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 4 February 2016 15: 10
                  +2
                  Quote: Kars

                  merkavasrach is one of my favorite tank serraches)) Do you have a fin support program for participants who are ready to hold the merkava image there? and so

                  You know our 8)))
                  By the way, one of the last topics - on Kamer finally washed down KAZ
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 4 February 2016 15: 16
                    +2
                    Quote: Pimply
                    You know our 8)))

                    Well, I want to hope for the best. And then I want a bulldozer, but))))
                    Quote: Pimply
                    By the way, one of the last topics - on Kamer finally washed down KAZ

                    saw

                    as well as the celebration of the anniversary)))
                    1. Pimply
                      Pimply 4 February 2016 15: 19
                      +1
                      Quote: Kars
                      Well, I want to hope for the best. And then I want a bulldozer, but))))

                      Soon they will soon have any additional equipment on the basis of the second Merkava - if not confusing, instead of "Pum". By the way, have you not released the "donkey" yet?
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 4 February 2016 15: 32
                        +1
                        Quote: Pimply
                        By the way, have you not released the "donkey" yet?

                        And who is this?

                        the latest novelty is the Nakladon
                        [img] https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTxGin4VLuqypLgaCPvw7Z
                        TnbljEcrtnX4gPmhzriGvSJA_ds4I [/ img]

                        but after the godless price tag for Puma it’s just information.
                        http://www.hobby.dn.ua/idf-apc-puma-p-73612.html
                      2. Pimply
                        Pimply 4 February 2016 16: 07
                        0
                        Quote: Kars
                        And who is this?

                        Well Pereh, the topic of our discussion is 8)))
                      3. Kars
                        Kars 4 February 2016 16: 20
                        +2
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Well Pereh, the topic of our discussion is 8)))

                        It’s not there yet. As there is no Merkava 4 with a trophy (you don’t even mention the conversion of the black dog), but another trio appeared
            2. vadim dok
              vadim dok 4 February 2016 20: 34
              0
              Iran also refused to purchase T-90
      4. alpamys
        alpamys 4 February 2016 14: 39
        +1
        Quote: Pimply

        Right. Only here is the riddle - why do experts stably consider, for example, Merkava one of the best tanks in the world?


        for me there’s just no riddle, a gun under a German license, a motor under a German license ... I can continue))) there are inscriptions and crew from the Yavrei current.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 4 February 2016 14: 52
          0
          Quote: alpamys
          for me there’s just no riddle, a gun under a German license, a motor under a German license ... I can continue))) there are inscriptions and crew from the Yavrei current.

          Well, what to do my dear little friend, if you do not understand, and even so obviously flaunt your ignorance. Only regret, baby, only regret
          1. alpamys
            alpamys 4 February 2016 15: 04
            +5
            Quote: Pimply
            Quote: alpamys
            for me there’s just no riddle, a gun under a German license, a motor under a German license ... I can continue))) there are inscriptions and crew from the Yavrei current.

            Well, what to do my dear little friend, if you do not understand, and even so obviously flaunt your ignorance. Only regret, baby, only regret

            sorry or go nameplates on aggregates in merkava learn, you will be unpleasantly surprised wink
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 4 February 2016 15: 13
              +1
              Quote: alpamys
              sorry or go nameplates on aggregates in merkava learn, you will be unpleasantly surprised

              My friend, if you still do not know that there is no need to do everything yourself, when it is possible to buy a block or a license for it, then I will repeat again - I'm sorry for you.
              It is not a matter of ports, it is a matter of efficiency and competent layout of various engineering solutions, both new ones that were developed during the work on the project, and already existing ones. But you think that Ponte is more important. Well, who will argue with you? 8) Count
              1. alpamys
                alpamys 4 February 2016 15: 26
                +3
                Quote: Pimply
                Quote: alpamys
                sorry or go nameplates on aggregates in merkava learn, you will be unpleasantly surprised

                My friend, if you still do not know that there is no need to do everything yourself, when it is possible to buy a block or a license for it, then I will repeat again - I'm sorry for you.
                It is not a matter of ports, it is a matter of efficiency and competent layout of various engineering solutions, both new ones that were developed during the work on the project, and already existing ones. But you think that Ponte is more important. Well, who will argue with you? 8) Count


                and you don’t get sick, my Javrei writer laughing
  2. Lepila
    Lepila 4 February 2016 21: 50
    -1
    Pere allowed to halve the number of tank fleet. Indeed, one installation of Pere destroys a tank company with one salvo. Pere works great in Syria on mortar installations and artillery positions.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. iouris
    iouris 4 February 2016 22: 35
    0
    The complex was so secret for a long time that only Jews could see it, so you are right: "the Jews outwitted themselves." And so it was intended.
  • Yars
    Yars 4 February 2016 12: 03
    -1
    the dimensions of his tower are huge! easy target ....
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 4 February 2016 06: 49
    14
    There have already been several articles about this car. Today, in connection with a significant increase in the range of heavy ATGM systems, they are putting them on lighter and more mobile vehicles in Israel. So everything has its time.
    1. dokusib
      dokusib 4 February 2016 11: 16
      0
      Therefore, they declassified that it had lost its relevance. And most likely, as the exhaustion of motor resources, the chassis will be removed from service.
      1. Slobber
        Slobber 4 February 2016 12: 57
        +2
        No, the most secret development was stolen by Hamas. The tank is so secret that the caterpillars hang in the air, and the tank moves on wheels.
    2. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 4 February 2016 15: 03
      0
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      There have already been several articles about this car. Today, in connection with a significant increase in the range of heavy ATGM systems, they are putting them on lighter and more mobile vehicles in Israel. So everything has its time.

      This is just strange if there are light vehicles, ATGMs have over-the-horizon firing range, why build this "chicken coop" on a tank turret?
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 4 February 2016 15: 15
        0
        Because on the tank turret the chicken coop is retractable. And secondly, the 30 project is years old. Then the ATGM range was noticeably lower. Accordingly, the tactics of application was different.
  • Mera joota
    Mera joota 4 February 2016 07: 03
    +6
    A rather controversial decision to use a tank chassis for missiles with a range of 25 km. Work Spikes from the cutting edge? To enter the city with tanks? Why is this necessary, because range allows you to neutralize targets without coming into direct contact with them?
    In theory, there should be a Spike NLOS + UAV complex, i.e. at least two operators, one controls the UAV to identify targets, the second carries out target designation of the launched missile. For this, the tank is a bit cramped ...
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 4 February 2016 07: 40
      14
      Quote: Mera Joota
      A rather controversial decision to use a tank chassis for missiles with a range of 25 km. Work Spikes from the cutting edge? whether without coming into direct contact with them?
      in 1982, when the first samples were created, the range of the NLOS was 6km. This, taking into account the fact that they were supposed to strike at the second echelons of advancing tank troops, is quite a forward line of fire. As rocket range increases
      The need for tank platforms has disappeared.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 4 February 2016 11: 54
        0
        The need has not disappeared. The choice was simply made in favor of greater operational mobility to the detriment of security
      3. Pimply
        Pimply 4 February 2016 15: 17
        -1
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        The need for tank platforms has disappeared.

        There is a controversial topic. Especially given the recent military operations
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 4 February 2016 11: 53
      +7
      A firing range of 25 km does not mean that the installations will be located 20-25 km from the line of contact.
      This means that they will be located 2-5 km to work on targets in the depths of the battle formation of the enemy.
      Accordingly, they will be exposed to the same danger as self-propelled guns or self-propelled mortars. Which also try to make armored.

      Quote: Mera Joota
      In theory, there should be a Spike NLOS + UAV complex, i.e. at least two operators, one controls the UAV to identify targets, the second carries out target designation of the launched missile. For this, the tank is a bit cramped ...

      External target designation. No special problems. And no need to put the UAV operator in the installation of anti-tank systems
      1. gjv
        gjv 4 February 2016 13: 23
        0
        It is curious, but our designers are not planning to modify the Hermes ATGM with television guidance?
      2. gjv
        gjv 4 February 2016 13: 23
        0
        It is curious, but our designers are not planning to modify the Hermes ATGM with television guidance?
      3. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 4 February 2016 14: 07
        +4
        "This means that they will be located 2-5 km away in order to work on targets in the depth of the enemy's battle formation." ////

        Not necessarily so. You can position and mask installations
        10 km behind its main lines in relative safety
        and accurately hit approaching enemy tanks another 10 km from
        lines of contact.
  • Nix1986
    Nix1986 4 February 2016 07: 07
    +1
    There was already a similar article. The only question then was and now is what kind of mismatch between the platform and weapons and the way of movement. If its use is beyond the horizon then why does it need protection at the level of direct combat on the tank platform and, as a result, a crawler chassis? Here we ask for a wheeled platform with armor protection from caliber up to 12,7 mm, such weight and chassis lightening would have a very positive effect on the range of travel and its speed, and it would also be possible to make it floating (for example, our wheeled platform for the wasp washer). And with modern technology it could be equipped with a drone, a target designator for itself and it would have turned out to be a sort of tank hunter. The only explanation for the existing chassis is that the Patton tank was already available and the savings on chassis and the territory of Israel are not so big that the advantage in speed and range of the wheeled chassis was so critical.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 4 February 2016 11: 54
      0
      And you are not surprised by self-propelled guns?
      1. Nix1986
        Nix1986 4 February 2016 12: 57
        0
        For example Caesar or Archer ?! No, not surprising. And if we are talking about such things as the PzH 2000 or the paladin, then although the tracked chassis is there, the armor holds only heavy machine guns. And our cloves are so floating. There are no heavily armored monsters among them.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 4 February 2016 13: 34
          0
          The tracked chassis of these vehicles is for safety. So that when occupying and leaving a firing position not to be limited by poor cross-country ability.

          On protection, there is another limitation, "weight". We would be happy to provide ACS with MBT-level protection, especially since they are very vulnerable in modern warfare. But such monsters in terms of their weight will far overtake the MBT. And the reduction of the transportable BC should not be allowed either. Its already barely enough, for 1-2 targets.
          1. Nix1986
            Nix1986 4 February 2016 15: 14
            +2
            In modern warfare, everything is very vulnerable. But this is not a reason to put MBT armor on a mobile ATGM, otherwise the adopted chrysanthemum is a failure in armor. And besides the dragon, we did not have a mobile ATGM heavily armored, either on the chassis of a motorcycle league or brdm. Each means of armor is consistent with its participation in a direct battle and its role in this. Self-propelled guns, by definition, are not involved in direct combat, therefore it is advisable to direct the weight released due to light armor to the placement of additional ammunition or automatic loading systems, and increase the rate of fire. And the experience of recent years suggests that almost all military operations are conducted in areas with a developed road network, therefore there is no need to constantly mix impassable dirt and there is no such acute need for a tracked chassis. Therefore, the development of self-propelled guns on a wheeled chassis has recently increased, tracked ones should remain for self-propelled guns going as support for tank units, but they should not have such an overwhelming quantitative superiority over wheeled ones in the arms structure. And besides, a light wheeled self-propelled gun is cheaper, weighs less, and due to this, you can transfer it with a large number of transport aircraft.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 4 February 2016 15: 20
              -1
              Quote: Nix1986
              And the experience of recent years suggests that almost all military operations are conducted in areas with a developed road network, therefore there is no need to constantly mix impassable dirt and there is no such acute need for a tracked chassis.

              Experience just says that there is. Because they like to mine roads, for example, and all sorts of bad guys tend to hide where there are no roads
              1. Nix1986
                Nix1986 4 February 2016 15: 51
                +3
                When you talk about mined roads, then we are talking about actions on enemy territory, respectively, about supporting tank units in an attack on enemy territory, I talked about a tracked chassis. I do not see any contradictions here. It was a question of a competent ratio of the self-propelled wheel and caterpillar chassis in the arms structure, each has its own advantages and disadvantages and each finds its own application, and not when all self-propelled guns are presented only with a caterpillar chassis. This imposes significant restrictions on mobility in case they need to be deployed quickly to a remote site. As an example, France is the same, they also have self-propelled artillery on a tracked chassis and there is Caesar. And when a conflict arose in Mali, deploying light Caesars there turned out to be much cheaper and faster than heavy AMX30 AUF1. Therefore, it’s good when there are light self-propelled guns at hand, which, if necessary, can quickly and in sufficient quantities be transferred to the desired area and tracked self-propelled guns that can support tank units at their pace of attack on poor terrain.
  • tchoni
    tchoni 4 February 2016 07: 30
    +1
    I agree with the previous comment. The machine, in fact, is an arm based on a tank chassis. From the article it is not entirely clear whether the drone is included in the machine kit. Apparently - no ... in this case, the machine itself is only part of the complex ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Kolyma
      Kolyma 4 February 2016 09: 48
      0
      If I understood everything correctly, then a drone is needed only in one of three modes, in the rest it’s a completely self-sufficient complex (in the presence of intelligence, of course. For over-the-horizon defeat)

      The use of a two-sided electron-optical image transmission system allows the missile system operator to control the launched missile in 3 modes: “Shot and Forget”, “Shot, Evaluated and Corrected”, “Shot and aimed at the target”.
  • Wedmak
    Wedmak 4 February 2016 07: 51
    0
    Something like that does not fit into the horizontal application and the range of the rocket in 25 km. And tell me how it is:
    The operator of the combat vehicle directs the missile at the target in the transmitted television image
    ?
    That is, you need a UAV that sees the target and transmits its coordinates? Then what for goat bayan in the form of reservation and disguise as a tank? Isn't it easier to place both UAVs and missiles on one or two highly mobile chassis? He arrived, disguised himself, launched the UAV, found the target, hit, knocked over.
    But such a pseudo-tank is a very tidbit, it is possible to distinguish it from a real Merkava.
  • 31rus
    31rus 4 February 2016 08: 03
    0
    Dear, yes, everything is clear, the main thing was indicated in the article was camouflage and action in linear units, hence the tank base, why create a new base, if you can successfully use the "old" ones, but with new weapons, besides, not on the base, neither in movement these tanks are not distinguished by anything, one does not suit the gun does not shoot
  • gla172
    gla172 4 February 2016 08: 19
    0
    Some kind of half measure (or stage passed). Not excluding and devouring a sea of ​​fuel which in this country is not.
    You can do with an armored personnel carrier, which is afraid at a distance of 25 km.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 4 February 2016 08: 44
      0
      what are afraid at a distance of 25 km.

      Artillery. And against such a machine it’s not a sin to use aviation.
      1. gla172
        gla172 4 February 2016 08: 52
        0
        Well, it must be calculated at the beginning, and even more so as a free hunter, it is unlikely to move around.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 4 February 2016 14: 11
      +3
      gla172
      "Not uklyuzhivaya and devouring the sea of ​​fuel which is not in the entoy country." ////

      Tank Patton eats fuel no more than other tanks. And it moves no worse than others.
      And fuel is now cheap.
      So saving fuel is not the case. Killing enemy tanks pays for everything.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 4 February 2016 08: 47
    0
    But the prices ... $ 150000 per rocket. If there are enemy tanks, then it’s still normal. and in Lebanon for what purposes did they shoot? Enemies probably surrendered from each shot ... The last installation option was in a container with a vertical launch, could shoot from a wheeled platform, or could be autonomously unloaded. Somewhere the analogues of Spike from China and Slovakia shone. The car occupies a niche between a powerful ATGM (such as Chrysanthemum C) and the Howitzer with GLONNASS or GPS projectile.
  • Belimbai
    Belimbai 4 February 2016 09: 16
    +1
    It seems to me this controversial statement: "It's not a secret for anyone that on the battlefield the enemy is primarily hunting for the most weakly armored targets ..."
    First of all, the most dangerous targets are destroyed .... but weak or strong ... how it turns out, and this is determined by the commander ... of a tank, platoon, company ...
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 4 February 2016 09: 21
    0
    if you have 3 guns (such as MT-12) and you find a tank and two armored personnel carriers, then two guns will be given a tank target, and one or two armored personnel carriers.
  • Kaiten
    Kaiten 4 February 2016 13: 36
    +8
    Each army prepares for a new war based on the experience of the previous one. I think that this missile tank was created on the basis of frontal tank battles with Syria in 1973, when the enemy in certain sections of the front had an advantage of more than 10 times (I advise those interested in reading about battles on the Oil Road). The use of such a tank in such a battle allows you to shoot enemy tanks without coming into direct contact with them.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 4 February 2016 19: 56
      0
      If you have Apaches and then this is also a solvable problem ...
      1. King
        King 9 February 2016 03: 07
        +1
        But in fact, the ATGM in 1973 was put by the Syrians and Egyptians ...
  • ProkletyiPirat
    ProkletyiPirat 4 February 2016 14: 52
    0
    rbt-5 are you this?

    ps could not resist :)
  • vadim dok
    vadim dok 4 February 2016 20: 37
    +1
    Quote: alpamys
    Quote: Pimply
    Quote: alpamys
    sorry or go nameplates on aggregates in merkava learn, you will be unpleasantly surprised

    My friend, if you still do not know that there is no need to do everything yourself, when it is possible to buy a block or a license for it, then I will repeat again - I'm sorry for you.
    It is not a matter of ports, it is a matter of efficiency and competent layout of various engineering solutions, both new ones that were developed during the work on the project, and already existing ones. But you think that Ponte is more important. Well, who will argue with you? 8) Count


    and you don’t get sick, my Javrei writer laughing
  • mvg
    mvg 4 February 2016 20: 54
    +2
    Quote: Mr PIP
    Quote: Darkmor
    In general: 5 for inventiveness, 2 for invention.

    I applaud while standing - such a "make-up" almost completely deprives the technique of its initial advantages, I also do not understand at all hi

    Well, you, the Jews are much stupider than you and the darkmore ... and even put together. Just think, won all the wars in which we participated. In vain did not consult with such "experts". I'm sure the logs bite ..
  • shans2
    shans2 5 February 2016 02: 26
    +1
    and shaw, my son, did it help you in Lebanon in 2006?)))
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 5 February 2016 11: 25
      0
      Quote: shans2
      and shaw, my son, did it help you in Lebanon in 2006?)))

      Actually, yes. The complex was active there