The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - July 4, 2009



Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Merkava Mk V the finest tank in the world
ZealousZionist    11/21/2003 6:33:26 PM
With all due respect to the supporters of the Abrams, Challenger, Leopard and LeClerc, the finest tank in the world today is the Merkava Mk 4. Not only does it have one of the most sophisticated fire control systems out there (that even allows the tankers to bring down a helo with the main gun system), but its modular armour system provides the best defence out there, including against top attack ATGMs.

Compare the flanks of the Abrams, Challenger, Leo2 and LeClerc to the Merkava Mk4. During the mid 1990s a couple of Merkava Mk 2 were destroyed in Lebanon by Spandrel ATGMs that hit the side of the turret. The Israelis learned from this and upgraded their late model Mk 3 and Mk 4 Merkavas with a new armour package that renders the flanks of the tank impervious to ATGMS.

Also, note the fact that the turret roof of the Mk 4 has been heavily up armoured to protect against top attack ATGMS like the TOW-2b. The Israelis did away with the loader's hatch, and the only opening on the turret top is now the commander's cupola, which has been substantially reinforced.

It's simple really, Jewish ingenuity combined with the fact that Israel has the most extensive combat experience of any nation equal the finest MBT in existance today
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
WinsettZ    RE:Merkava Mk V the finest tank in the world   11/21/2003 7:45:38 PM
What are it's MOUT capabilities? The IDF will be fighting in urban areas from here on it (Palestinian territories). Can it take RPGs from the top, or in the engines? If it runs over a IED hidden in debris, will it be neutralized? What crew survival provisions are in place? I know the Merkavas have been pretty strong in this regard, but do they have belly plates to protect the bottom of tanks from this re-emerging threat of IEDs (more or less, road-side bombs.) We know the Palis can get explosives: they already have giant artillery rockets. The tank should be designed for what it expects to encounter. While ATGMs are expected if the IDF goes back into Beiruit, has to defend against Arab enemies or is on the attack: is there a chance their immediate enemy uses them? What systems and weapons does the Merkava have as a response to their *immediate* enemies, not just former or projected ones?
 
Quote    Reply

Scorpene    RE:Merkava Mk V the finest tank in the world   11/21/2003 7:46:19 PM
Other Western MBTs can bring down helos; the main gun and the APFDS round are quite capable of this in the M-1, Leopard, Challenger, and all; this has been a tanker contingency tactic for some years. The M-1 was going to carry an MPAT munition with a proximity fuze for this purpose before the program was bumped. The Merkava series are good tanks. However, the other Western MBTs are quite good as well, as well as proven. Armor packages on the M-1 and other tanks can also be changed, although there is a bit more work involved. Adding armor on the turret top is only a partial solution to defeating top-attack munitions; most of the armor is still needed on the turret front and glacis; and like it or not, it is heavy. I doubt that the Merkava is "better" in this category than the Abrams-- the Abrams is about as well armored as a tank can get without digging into it's mobility unacceptably. If the Merkava is the "best" tank in the world, I believe it is because of the crew, despite the obvious advantages of the weapon system.
 
Quote    Reply

Final Historian    RE:Merkava Mk V the finest tank in the world   11/21/2003 8:09:29 PM
The Merkava is designed to be a defensive tank, and in that role is is probably unmatched. The M1 is offensive, and very good at that. Its speed allows it a tactical flexibility not enjoyed by many other tanks. To say one tank is the best also neglects the most important part of the thank: crew. They are the ones who make the difference between a good tank and the best tank.
 
Quote    Reply

Final Historian    RE:Merkava Mk V the finest tank in the world   11/21/2003 8:10:18 PM
IIRC, the Merkava also has a built in mortar, something defensive in nature.
 
Quote    Reply

bsl    RE:Merkava Mk V the finest tank in the world   11/21/2003 9:51:02 PM
There is an internal mortar. I'm not aware of any other MBT with one. I think it's essentially true that the Merkava is designed with more of a defensive role in mind than the typical MBT. OTOH, it has a notably slower top speed than any other modern MBT. Yes, it was designed with the specific circumstances of Israel in mind. Urban combat and battles in defensive positions, hull down, such as a war start scenario on Golan. The rear hatch allows evacuation and resupply under fire, easily, from a hull down position. The internal mortar provides an indirect fire weapon for suppression of infantry. This is a notable weakness of tanks, since the beginning, and especially important in one of those war start scenrios, where a defending force may have to face extreme odds in the beginning, such as in 1973. I disagree with Winsett, however, about future engagments. It's seriously risky to assume all future wars will be in built up areas, fighting Palestinians. The need to do so is a clear design requirement. However, the need to fight in the open, as happened in 1956, 1967, 1973 is no less a design requirement.
 
Quote    Reply

ZealousZionist    Response to Questions   11/21/2003 9:58:07 PM
Clarification - the reference to the MErkava V in this thread was a typo... the current version being manufactured is the Merkava IV, while the mark V is still in development. So take everything I said and apply it to the Merkava Mk IV. The attempt to differentiate between a "Defensive" and "Offensive" tank is really a distinction without a difference. Even tanks in a defensive role need the ability to manoeuver. Using tanks in the pillbox role is a recipe for quick destruction. Moreover, the 60mm mortar on the Merkava is just as much an offensive as a defensive weapon. The mortar provides the tank with an infantry suppression capability beyond the range of its coax, and at a far cheaper cost than using the main gun for that task. Moreover, the mortar allows a Merkava unit to hit enemy troops that are in defilade because of the high trajectory fire of the 60mm. The Merkava is the only tank in the world to have such an integral mortar system. As far as MOUT goes, the Merkava is more effective than other tanks because of its ability to serve as an infantry carrier in a pinch. If one removes the non-ready ammo, then the tank can accomodate 8 infantrymen in an environment that is much more heavily armoured, and thus much safer than the average APC/IFV. The key to a successful offensive MOUT operation lies in the practice of combined arms tactics, and the MErkava's infantry carrying ability gives it a decided edge.
 
Quote    Reply

marnedog    RE:Response to Questions   11/22/2003 6:10:36 AM
If you were looking for an effective (and cheaper) AP system why not simply use a beehive round? Adding another weapons system doesn't sound like a 'cheaper' alernative. Can you fire the mortar on the move? If so how accurate can that be? If you must fire stationary then by your own admittance "Using tanks in the pillbox role is a recipe for quick destruction". I am impressed with the ability to carry troops - Infantry love anything with the ability to protect them more. Does the lack of the additional ammo degrade the mission capabilities? There's got to be a few tradeoffs.
 
Quote    Reply

god of war    RE:60mm mortar   11/22/2003 7:08:24 AM
I think that the need for the 60mm mortar partially comes from the isralis lack of artillary. Their arab enemies have much more artillary. But that is on paper and we do not know in what condition the pieces are in... :)
 
Quote    Reply

bsl    RE:60mm mortar   11/22/2003 6:25:55 PM
Not a lack of artillery, in the large sense. A variety of potential engagment scenarios in which a tank or tanks might be short of artillery, or infantry support, or, just generally badly outnumbered by attackers including infantry. Again, review how the '73 War began for examples.
 
Quote    Reply

bsl    RE:Response to Questions   11/22/2003 6:29:07 PM
The point of the mortar is less general antipersonnel, then antipersonnel in ambush. The mgs are fine for antipersonnel use when you can see the enemy infantry. It's when they're down in foxholes, or behind barriers, in defilade. This is the unique capability. Also, they're *not* superAPCs. They don't have the internal space. When they're crewed, they don't have big empty space for infantry. If you wanted an MBT cum APC, you'd wind up with a beast two or three times the size of any MBT.
 
Quote    Reply

bsl    RE:Response to Questions   11/22/2003 6:29:19 PM
The mortar is tied into the main gun's computerized fire system? And, is auto-stabilized? If not, it's useless when the tank is in motion. And, what's it's range? A 50 caliber co-axial mg is good to about 1000 meters, IIRC. The mortar and coax aren't really interchangable. You use the mg for targets in line of sight, or which are moving (since you can hose them with fire, which makes up for a lack of automatic aiming aids). The mortar, otoh, is good for targets in defilade, but wouldn't be much use if either the tank or the target is in motion. I'm not dogmatic about "offense" versus "defense" since there's a lot of overlap. Still, the mortar seems an essentially defensive weapon, to protect a tank which has stopped, or, especially dug in.
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    Mortar   11/22/2003 6:35:52 PM
>>Moreover, the 60mm mortar on the Merkava is just as much an offensive as a defensive weapon. The mortar provides the tank with an infantry suppression capability beyond the range of its coax, and at a far cheaper cost than using the main gun for that task. Moreover, the mortar allows a Merkava unit to hit enemy troops that are in defilade because of the high trajectory fire of the 60mm. The Merkava is the only tank in the world to have such an integral mortar system.<< And the inclusion of the 60mm mortar slightly offsets the IDF's traditional neglect of artillery. The Merkava uses the 60mm for the same sort of roles the M1, Leo2, and Challenger 2 use 155mm SP guns for. Nobody else fields one, because everybody else expects their combined arms teams to include adequate indirect fire assets.
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:60mm mortar -- BSL   11/22/2003 6:43:27 PM
>>Not a lack of artillery, in the large sense. A variety of potential engagment scenarios in which a tank or tanks might be short of artillery, or infantry support, or, just generally badly outnumbered by attackers including infantry. Again, review how the '73 War began for examples << This is a false assertion -- it's rather like saying that since I don't own a shotgun, it is natural to assume that I have to be outgunned by a thief breaking into my house armed with a shotgun. I'm only outgunned because I opted not to buy a shotgun, not because of the inherent nature of a scenario when a thief breaks into a house. The IDF has traditionally been weak on combined arms concepts, aided and abetted in no small part because their opponents are too incompetent to make them pay for that weakness -- and aided by the fact that the IDF is flexible enough to adapt when tanks can't carry the day by themselves (i.e. operations in Lebanon). However, it's hard to adapt on the fly in regards to big ticket weapons systems like SP artillery pieces.
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    MPAT round   11/22/2003 6:54:00 PM
>>The M-1 was going to carry an MPAT munition with a proximity fuze for this purpose before the program was bumped.<< I was under the impression that MPAT had been used in Iraqi Freedom, with generally good results (of course it was only being used against land targets).
 
Quote    Reply

ZealousZionist    RE:Mortar   11/22/2003 9:05:24 PM
Ok.... responding to questions. The Merkava's 60mm mortar is not stabalized and cannot be fired on the move. It is used when the Merkava is used as a base of fire while other units advance against the enemy. It has a range of roughly 3,000 meters. It is true that the IDF has traditionally had a relatively weak artillery arm, especially when compared to the Arab armies that operate on the basis of Russian doctrine. A Russian style Syrian brigade, for example, has its own integral artillery battalion, usually of D-30 122mm howitzers. The Israelis traditionally compensated for their weak arty arm with airpower, given that the IAF is certainly the best airforce in the region, and arguably in the world. Yet, in recent years the Israeli army has done a lot to upgrade its artillery arm, acquiring many more M-109 Palladins and MLRS systems. The integration of the 60mm mortar into the Merkava had less to do with a lack of artillery, and more to do with a desire to give maneouver units an integral indirect fire capability of their own. In order to carry 8 infantrymen, the Merkava must remove all its maingun ammunition except its 12 ready rounds. Thus, if a platoon of tanks were designated to serve in the infantry-carrying role (in MOUT, for example) it would have to be accompanied by another platoon with a full complement of ammo in case serious trouble were encountered. But, isn't that the nature of combined arms ops? Makes sense to me.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy