The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 25, 2009




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.
 
 
 
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: New Trend of Armour
Bronix    5/9/2004 4:56:18 AM
A lot of people consider Merkava4 a MBT due to its heavy armour,powerful guns.But have u take a closer study of its function that Merkava 4 actually evolves from a MBT to a IFV but with heavy protection and firepower! Is this a trend we r going to see of future armour?
Let's look at Merkava4 specs:
-67tons
-120mm gun capable of firing projectiles and LAHAT ATGM
-has a compartment to accomodate 7 fully equip infantry and a additional casualties(if require)

Does the capablities show a MBT or a IFV? I know the Ukarine is also working on a same model like Merkava4 of a T-84U MBT plus additional compartment for troops,firing ATGM! The Russian is also working on a BMT-72 HIFV which looks like a MBT but in fact a Heavy Infantry Fighting Vehicle(HIFV). May be in future ,this will be the standard armour arsenal in most army and MBT will continue to play a part in the 21th century armour warfare in other form!
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Siddar    RE:New Trend of Armour   5/9/2004 6:52:46 AM
I think were about to see a swtich in way west and east design tanks. I doubt you will any western tank over 40 tons while at same time I think maybe you could see 80 ton heavys start to emerge in countrys like russia china and india. reason is west has no treat that requires tanks on its borders anymore except korea so its tanks are going to have to travel to any conflict this will push wieght of future western tanks downward. While in east (and I use the term vey loosely more on line of countrys that want tanks to use to defend there borders) will start to favor heavy tanks with mutiple functions adding say inderict artilary ability to tanks and a ability to carry infantry are just very good armor protection this can be done because wieght isnt the driving issue as it is in west. Shame really how many countrys are fixated on how US and Europe aproach design that they ignore what would probaly be best for there own purposes. Isreal is one country that seems willing to state publicly that it is embracing heavy tanks (65 ton western tanks are all heavy tanks I dont care if there called medium tanks are not. Go look at specs of the ww2 heavys there really close to the modern mediums.).
 
Quote    Reply

Mark F    RE:New Trend of Armour   5/9/2004 10:06:18 AM
Carrying infantry in a Merkava is not a great idea. For one, half the ammunition load has to be discarded to do it. For another, the infantry have no way to see what's going on outside the vehicle. When they dismount, they are going into the unknown. The facility, when it is used, has been by far the most valuable in evacuating wounded, not in transporting assault troops.
 
Quote    Reply

Bronix    RE:New Trend of Armour   5/9/2004 12:51:01 PM
The infantry dismount from the tank is to protect the armour from ATGM team. With this capabilities,IFV armour is eliminate and merkava fire power can better protect the infantry from MBT.Cost saving from having both MBT and IFV!
 
Quote    Reply

ksheuk    RE:New Trend of Armour   5/9/2004 1:05:56 PM
In the IDF situation, the need for main gun ammo is minimal. Besides, resupply is not far away. Also, the track commander should be on his toes to the point that he advises the dimount team the direction of the dismounted threat.
 
Quote    Reply

Mark F    RE:New Trend of Armour   5/9/2004 6:13:44 PM
Situational awareness is everything. If know one in the dismount element, including the dismount leader can see ANYTHING going on outside, that is a REAL problem. Knowing that "the bad guys are on the left" doesn't cut it. Watch video from OIF. Every guy that can is sticking his head (and a weapon) outside a roof hatch so they can see what's going on and respond to it. That's why for all the hype, the IDF don't use Merkava's as troop transports. And what's this about main gun ammo loadout not being important to the IDF? That was a key driving requirement of Merkava in the first place!
 
Quote    Reply

Vossiewulf    RE:New Trend of Armour   5/9/2004 6:37:37 PM
I think the question is more about the concept behind the Merkava 4 rather than its execution of that concept. As to that, if you could have all the functionality of the Bradley and the Abrams in one vehicle, with no negative effects on survivability, combat power, maneuverability, tranportatbility, etc., who wouldn't say that was a great idea? Maneverable MBTs with organic infantry support. Or infantry squads with organic MBT fire support, depending on your point of view;-) Problem is that the technology doesn't exist yet, as evidenced by the Merk 4's compromises, to really make it work. New, lighter armor and better powerplants would be needed. Space-wise, it probably won't work until rail guns are practical, and ammo sizes shrink enormously. It's not so far off to not think about, though. The Brits are playing with their electric armor which could do a huge amount to removing the threat of shaped-charge warheads. All we need is a breakthrough in lighter materials with the same kinetic protection as current systems, and we're in business. Gosh, it's fun to solve gigantic numbers of engineering problems with a wave of the hand like that. Powerplants I don't know too much about. I've read quite a few things on rail guns, and the consensus seems to be that they will work, it's just a matter of engineering. It may be another 10 or 15 years before we see them, but we will. So in the not too distant future, it may be possible for a first-line MBT to carry around a squad of infantry. If that's the case, at that point do IFVs and MBTs stop being two things entirely, or do you still build vehicles that specialize in one or the other? You're merging an MBT platoon with an infantry platoon, and having them operate in complete cooperation as a single unit. For MOUT, at least, that would seem to be a pretty effective arrangement. You might limit the mobility of your MBTs on the advance, though, because if the grunts deploy, they have to be rounded up again before the MBT can charge off for the next objective. And while we're at it, all we need then is ultra-light, small, insanely fuel-efficient little turbofans, and we have...HOVER TANKS! Woohoo! And powered body armor, we need that...
 
Quote    Reply



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