Israeli Afvs

[Mighty_Zuk]

What happens to the reservists in the disbanded brigades - are they reassigned to other tank units?

 

Also the vehicles?

The army can decide on either of 3 options:

1)Dismiss them from reserve duties - army only calls in reservists when they need them.

2)Reassign them to another armored brigade.

3)Reassign them to any other duty but that.

 

Any option is as likely as the other.

[WRW]

how is the new brigade organisation progressing - forgot name of programme

[Mighty_Zuk]

how is the new brigade organisation progressing - forgot name of programme

Gideon plan, and the new structures are brigade combat teams, featuring inorganic elements of all maneuvering forces types to give the brigade independence. Artillery, engineers, armor, infantry, and recon.

[WRW]

yes -Programme Gideon

[Mighty_Zuk]

These photos were taken from a dedicated Facebook group:

 

 

[Mighty_Zuk]

Some of you may know RedEffect's channel. He is seen by the less knowledgeable (nothing wrong with that) enthusiasts as a reliable source because on the surface it appears as though he goes into great detail, greater than what his viewers are used to. But his view of AFVs in general is very shallow - all about the gun, engine, and physical thickness of armor, without accounting for the many core design decisions or onboard systems that create a unique synergy for any individual tank design. I've watched a couple of his videos on different tanks and all seem to contain more errors than truths, but my time is limited so I'll only comment on what I believe he was wrong about in the Merkava related videos, even though he spreads disinformation on basically any tank, especially western ones.

 

This is the more recent video about whether the Merkava is obsolete, which is somewhat of a series he already made about other tanks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiM3uA5Pxeg

 

1)His first words are "Merkava is a pretty old tank", which is false. As with every series of tanks originating in the cold war era, such as the Abrams, Leopard, Leclerc and so on, the current iteration and first iteration have little to nothing in common, and in many cases they include some clean sheet designs. The Merkava, in this regard, even stands out a little because unlike above mentioned tanks, it is impossible to upgrade older Merkava tanks to the current Merkava 4 variant. Only possible to turn Mark 1/2 to Mark 3, as the Mark 4 had a lot of components designed from scratch, including and especially the hull.

 

2)0:07 - 0:17 - Of course it wasn't the best, but still was deemed substantially superior to in-service Magach and Sho't tanks not only in protection, which is a function of its service in Lebanon alongside other tanks. The location of the engine has a multitude of reasons. The absence of composite armor production capabilities is only one of many equally important ones.

 

3)1:28 - Some weird sketch that has nothing to do with the internal layout of the Merkava 4's turret armor.

 

4)1:54 - 2:07 - A physical thickness of 200mm of armor angled at 75° is equal to ~770mm of LoS. That is substantial, most tanks would have lower armor thickness on the hull. The armor is made up of some form of NxRA, but we do not know its properties. And if thickness alone was a metric (it isn't, really), then he has the wrong conclusion on that. How well optimized the hull armor is for KE protection is the subject of another debate, with my personal conclusion that it's likely somewhat well optimized, but with no hard evidence for any direction.

 

5)2:08 - 2:24 - The approach of a wedge shaped hull front, giving more or less equal visual presence to the UFP and LFP, with a very well armored UFP but poorly armored LFP, is a British approach that although arguable in its relevance, has a very solid mathematical foundation.

 

As we can see, the hit probability, when aiming for center of mass, is less than 5% for the LFP (notice I'm not saying 2% because the division line is slightly below the 'nose'). When properly trained and proper tactics are employed, a tank will only expose its turret, and when the angle is problematic, will usually only expose the UFP part of the hull.

He shows hits to the LFP, demonstrating they're not unlikely, but fails to mention they occurred in a setting where tanks have to expose themselves more, not only the LFP, but their sides, top, and rear as well. In such setting, the LFP is really not going to be the issue but other parts of the tank. In both photos, the result was a fuel tank penetration, and in one of them an engine shut-down. A hit to the sides would be more catastrophic, potentially setting off the ammo or killing crew members.

 

6)2:25 - 2:28 - the hull armor consists not only of the front armor but also sides, rear, and belly, which he comfortably forgets.

 

7)2:29 - 2:39 - the engine in the front was deemed a successful design choice in every variant. With the Merkava 4 receiving a new hull design, there was no barrier that prevented it from having a rear engine. Unlike with the Merkava 3 that would require an expensive redesign as it recycled many components and decisions from the Mark 2, the Mark 4 had newly designed components and many redesigned areas, in a way that going for a rear engine would not have been significantly more expensive than staying with a front engine. And as mentioned before, it's impossible to upgrade a Mark 3 to a Mark 4 standard without disproportionate expenses.

 

8)3:16 - 3:24 - the Merkava 4, for a very long time, held the title of tank with the best side armor. Both turret and hull.

 

Some other tanks may have gained parity, or exceeded the Merkava 4's side hull protection, including variants of the Leopard 2 and Leclerc, the Abrams M1A2 with the TUSK, or the Challenger 2 with TES. But how well they compare is unknown. What is known, is that it's impossible to say the Mark 4 has poor side protection when its base side armor exceeds every other tanks'.

 

9)3:40 - 4:08 - the gun is MG251LR, not MG253. I also believed that for a very long time, so I can't blame him. The MG251 is a gun developed for the Merkava 3. The MG253 was developed for the Sabra and sold to Turkey. The Merkava 4 uses the MG251LR, which is an upgrade of the Merkava 3's gun, with the LR standing for Long Recoil. The MG253 developed for the Sabra is designed with a lower weight in mind, because of the much stricter weight limitations of the M60 tank.

Shifting to an L55 gun is not as trivial as he makes it sound. The IDF fights in settings where most of the LoS is very short. Outside the Golan area, an L55 gun would do more harm than good.

The M338 is also IMI's parallel of the German DM63, albeit using a different propellant technology. Although the DM53 and 63 have similar performance, they are not to be confused.

 

10)4:15 - 4:26 - the Lahat is not in service with the IDF anymore.

 

11)4:30 - 5:38 - the Mark 4 has 3rd gen thermals. Not 2nd gen. It indeed lacks an RCWS, which is bad, but those two are not the only parameters for an FCS. Far from it.

 

12)6:46 - 6:50 - sure, nothing official yet. The Mark 4's sights were upgraded in 2012, and the program for a total midlife upgrade is supposed to bear its first fruits very soon, with the first battalion of Mark 4 Barak MBTs entering service in the next month (March 2020). They will have more than just upgraded sights.

 

 

Pretty comical is his video about the Oplot as well, saying it's the best protected tank in the world based on a simple marketing pitch, without even understanding the technology, but I'll leave the bashing for later. Wish I could write this on every one of his videos but time is of the essence by boys.

[Rod]

It seems the world over is reducing the numbers of MBTs in active service. While Israel may have fielded around 3500 tanks (Merkavas, M-60/Magachs, Centurions) given that the Egypt front is no longer a big strategic issue anymore, the Iraqi Army is a shadow of its Saddam Hussein height, and Syria's Army regular Army is pretty much gone, it can afford to re-organize its priorities where the next conflict will be: Gaza and Lebanon. There the tank's biggest nemesis will be advanced ATGMs such as Kornet. Thus every tank sent in combat must have an APS and be able to coordinate real time with Infantry and drone assets as the battle moves, thus the migration to the fusion technology being talked about. 1000-1500 newer Merkavas plus Eitans and Namers are a better balance.

 

While a big drop in actual numbers of MBTs , compared to most NATO armies in Europe, Israel will have one of the largest fleets of modern MBTs in service.

[Jim Warford]

This is a very interesting pic...one of these two captured Megach 3s (shown in Syria in 1982 with Russian advisors), is very likely the "key" tank that was captured by the Syrians and paraded through Damascus. It became the focus of Israeli POW/MIA organizations since the missing Israeli crew was unaccounted for. There were even rumors (which the Russian government has strongly denied), that crew remains and personal belongings were still on-board when the Syrian government provided the tank to the Russia. The tank was on display at Kubinka for many years until June 2016 when it was finally exchanged for a different less meaningful Megach 3 after an official ceremony at Kubinka. A link to the video of the ceremony is included below:

 

 

[Mighty_Zuk]

It seems the world over is reducing the numbers of MBTs in active service. While Israel may have fielded around 3500 tanks (Merkavas, M-60/Magachs, Centurions) given that the Egypt front is no longer a big strategic issue anymore, the Iraqi Army is a shadow of its Saddam Hussein height, and Syria's Army regular Army is pretty much gone, it can afford to re-organize its priorities where the next conflict will be: Gaza and Lebanon. There the tank's biggest nemesis will be advanced ATGMs such as Kornet. Thus every tank sent in combat must have an APS and be able to coordinate real time with Infantry and drone assets as the battle moves, thus the migration to the fusion technology being talked about. 1000-1500 newer Merkavas plus Eitans and Namers are a better balance.

 

While a big drop in actual numbers of MBTs , compared to most NATO armies in Europe, Israel will have one of the largest fleets of modern MBTs in service.

Israel has not fielded more than approximately 2,000 MBTs at any time, from what I know, and even that might be a stretch. Close to 5,000 tanks is what it bought, produced, and captured in over 70 years, with many of these tanks being phased out pretty quickly.

 

Anyway, the global number of active service tanks is more like a wave. There is no indefinite reduction in numbers. Some decide they want smaller forces, and later realize they need to put some mothballed tanks back into service. Some want an increase and are looking for procurement as an opportunity to get 2 processes done simultaneously. And some are redefining the concept of MBTs and firepower in general.

 

But at its core, it is clear that with all the evolutions the tanks have undergone, and are set to go through, they are key to the combat maneuver in the forseeable future.

[Gavin-Phillips]

Fascinating. Has the IDF abandoned the idea of tank gun tube-launched ATGM's in favour of other platforms for this task or was the Lahat replaced by something else for use by MBT's instead?

 

 

10)4:15 - 4:26 - the Lahat is not in service with the IDF anymore.

[Mighty_Zuk]

 

Fascinating. Has the IDF abandoned the idea of tank gun tube-launched ATGM's in favour of other platforms for this task or was the Lahat replaced by something else for use by MBT's instead?

 

 

 

10)4:15 - 4:26 - the Lahat is not in service with the IDF anymore.

There was never really a combat need for gun launched ATGMs. As the tank threat was reduced, so was the need for such weapons. And unlike tanks or other platforms that serve for over 40 years, you can afford to play around with munitions like that.

 

Besides that, the IDF's standoff anti tank capabilities have grown tremendously in other venues, and are supposed to make yet another leap in the coming years so it's a bit redundant to have an ATGM that is only good for AT.

[Mighty_Zuk]

Although there were no news for a very long time about the new howitzer, and the project thought by many to have been cancelled, a recent speech had give a slight mention, saying the new howitzer will be named "Ro'em" (=Thunderous), same as the Sherman-based L/33 gun.

[Gavin-Phillips]

There was never really a combat need for gun launched ATGMs. As the tank threat was reduced, so was the need for such weapons. And unlike tanks or other platforms that serve for over 40 years, you can afford to play around with munitions like that.

Besides that, the IDF's standoff anti tank capabilities have grown tremendously in other venues, and are supposed to make yet another leap in the coming years so it's a bit redundant to have an ATGM that is only good for AT.

Thanks.

[Mighty_Zuk]

Update: Elbit Systems of America has won a $200 million contract for the supply of equipment related to the IDF's new howitzer.

This adds to the $125 million contract signed last March.

[Mighty_Zuk]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=3157178777648015&id=222459644453291

 

Photo from operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2009, showing main gun replacement.

[Wiedzmin]

 

Merkava 1/2 right hull side ?

 

​

​

 

and turret

 

M111 demostration and T-72 "model" in left corner ? plates look like 150+150+50, but 350/0 for M111 is possible only point blank, not from 1700 meters

 

M413 demo ? 350/0 from 2100 meters, and T-72 from 3100 ?

 

Edited April 1, 2020 by Wiedzmin

[Mighty_Zuk]

The hull height of the Merkava is often a subject of great debate when talking in general about that tank, so here's some perspective:

 

 

‹

[Mighty_Zuk]

 

​

[Mighty_Zuk]

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1076330976069160

 

Turreted Eitan roaming the Golan.

[Mighty_Zuk]

Update: The Merkava 4 Barak is delayed for an unknown reason, will enter service in 2023 and the 188th brigade will receive the latest Mark 4M instead.

 

The 460th brigade had just finished converting its last Mark 3 tanks to Mark 4M, and by 2023 the entire active arm of the armored corps will be using Trophy-equipped Merkava 4M tanks.

[Mighty_Zuk]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIMsqtMD_t0

 

Video from earlier this year, of the 188th armored brigade's last brigade-level exercise with the Merkava 3. In March this year the first battalion started transitioning to a Merkava 4M.

[Colin]

Where in Israel do they do their tank and live fire training?

[Mighty_Zuk]

Where in Israel do they do their tank and live fire training?

Tank units are deployed in set locations around the country where they have closed military sites with ranges available.

 

But most of the firing and activity is done in Shizafon, which is the training center of the armored corps, located in the Negev desert. So you'll see most of the firing done in the desert, but not all of it.

 

If you see a lot of green, wet mud, and puddles, it's probably the Golan.

Edited May 10, 2020 by Mighty_Zuk

[Mighty_Zuk]

​

[Mighty_Zuk]

The Merkava 2 has finished its last brigade level exercise. By next year, the last Merkava 2 will go to the graveyard, after which the first Merkava 3 tanks will be retired as well.

 

Although riddled with technical issues due to less frequent maintenance in reserve, and lower budget, the Merkava 2 has had an amazing service, spearheading in combat as recently as the 2006 Lebanon War which saw massive use of anti tank weapons. And despite that, it survived very well.

It also proved during the intifada the viability of heavy armor in urban terrain.

 

Farewell old legend.