Mighty_Zuk

those two pictures are from this article https://www.idf.il/אתרים/חטיבת-הנחל/האיתן-של-הנחל/ 
which also has a video on Eitan. Some screenshots from this video:
 



some changes are noticeable comparing to this:


 
parts of the same footage also appeared a month ago in another video, which also has more footage from different angles and from inside the vehicle:
screenshots:




 

Quite a mesmerizing explosion.

It's where the crew will insert a faulty shell, instead of dumping it where an enemy can potentially grab it and sell it.

I don't know if I'm misinterpreting it, but I think MoD said it will be phased out within a decade from now. 
The worrying part is that they're building a new one for the active troops.
 
This is based on the info given here:
Link 1.
Link 2.
 
I assume they want the whole thing completed within a decade. Total of 192 vehicles for the entire army. Split into 2 batches, one of which will be faster produced than the other. Assume they take 2 years from now to complete design of the wheeled version and test it, and develop the tracked one during production phase of wheeled one. An average of 24 vehicles per year will be enough to phase out the M109 within 10 years. That includes reserves.
Feasible, considering that Merkava 4M and Namer are currently produced at an annual rate of 30 vehicles each.
 
But I don't expect too much from this project. It's been too politicized for a while because of the rivalry between companies, and may end with Elbit under-delivering. Maybe, just maybe, we will see a glimpse in Eurosatory this month, but the chances are slim.

I think I'm about a year late, but still. Was looking through new stuff from Plasan and noticed this:
https://www.plasan.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FlexFence-ENG.pdf
 
This is foam armor that is claimed to defeat all types of unitary charge RPGs with an 80% success rate, capable of 6 defeats per squared meter, and weighs only 10 to 12 kg per square meter, which is said to be only 25% that of traditional bar armor.
 
This is the same armor the Leclerc was displayed with:

It's where the crew will insert a faulty shell, instead of dumping it where an enemy can potentially grab it and sell it.

So that makes you pretty much entirely vulnerable to most modern ATGMs, especially the Russian Kornet which will get a serious overmatch. 
ATGMs are something you can swarm pretty easily, and is readily available to concealable infantry. Smoke will give a chance at evading them, for a while. But it's a very limited solution.
And APS is not enough to replace passive armor modules.
 
 
Want to add missiles? Give it to the IFVs, or have a gun-launched missile. Limiting yourself to using the gun only against medium-armored targets or soft targets, and only using ATGMs (HVMs) against tanks sounds a lot like what an IFV does. 
You know what's the good thing about NOT going your way? You actually have dual capabilities. You have the freedom to fire off missiles before you have a line of sight with an enemy, softening them up, and then reliably engaging them with a powerful main gun that you can know will pierce their armor. You don't limit yourself to just one capability that greatly limits you to a very certain range of engagement. If they get point blank, you're dead.
 
 
First, that depends highly on the APS itself. Developing a tank to use HVMs as its main anti-tank weapon is a very expensive undertaking. It takes billions. Updating an APS to utilize different launchers to avoid the physical restriction in time delay is nothing in comparison.
Second, this advantage in ambush situations is dwarfed by the fact that you never send a single tank to do anything alone. You send a platoon of 4 at the least, or you send a company, and even without HVMs they can deliver a LOT of firepower in a very short time. Short enough for a whole column to not realize what's hitting them. 
 
 
Hulls are already traditionally less armored than turrets. But it probably has nothing to do with sprinting from cover to cover. If you have still plenty of targets in LoS, that can also fire directly at you, you don't sprint anywhere. 
 
 
What you're essentially proposing is another Challenger 2. Not in its characteristics, but in its design philosophy. That's shit-tier. You leave no room for improvement. The UK MoD thought they could do with a tank gun that couldn't actually pierce modern armor properly. It was okay for a couple of years. But very shortly after, still when it was young, its gun became obsolete. And because of short-sightedness they need a crap-ton of money to put the firepower at a merely adequate level, for less than half their tanks. 
Same here. You want a tank whose firepower is easily countered but NOT easily replaced. You want a tank that is only lightly protected, but still go toe to toe with modern MBTs?
 
Just a little side note; The T-14's turret can be replaced. They won't do it for now, but if they'll feel it's necessary, they can either bolt on armor or have the turret replaced with something more mechanically resilient to add armor on it, whereas changing a gun to deal with such a change would require a tremendous logistical effort.
 

The difference is their use. Nagmasho't is the baseline version with a decently protected superstructure and slightly improved protection. Basically just a Sho't remade to become an APC.
 
Nagmachon was later developed with a higher superstructure called 'doghouse' with protective armored glass and 7.62mm machine guns. Few versions were made but this one is the latest one to which all were converted:
 
Nakpadon took armor protection even further and up-armored the front with composite armor instead of the outdated Blazer ERA, got new and better side armor, lower superstructure and better protection for it as well.
 
A recon version is called Nagmapop:
 
A Combat Engineering Vehicle is called Puma:
 
And a specialized (also made in very low quantities) transport for the special engineering unit Ya'alom is called Nakpilon:
 
All these are used in very low quantities, and only where some unit must have heavy armor but doesn't yet have the Namer.

The difference is their use. Nagmasho't is the baseline version with a decently protected superstructure and slightly improved protection. Basically just a Sho't remade to become an APC.
 
Nagmachon was later developed with a higher superstructure called 'doghouse' with protective armored glass and 7.62mm machine guns. Few versions were made but this one is the latest one to which all were converted:
 
Nakpadon took armor protection even further and up-armored the front with composite armor instead of the outdated Blazer ERA, got new and better side armor, lower superstructure and better protection for it as well.
 
A recon version is called Nagmapop:
 
A Combat Engineering Vehicle is called Puma:
 
And a specialized (also made in very low quantities) transport for the special engineering unit Ya'alom is called Nakpilon:
 
All these are used in very low quantities, and only where some unit must have heavy armor but doesn't yet have the Namer.

The difference is their use. Nagmasho't is the baseline version with a decently protected superstructure and slightly improved protection. Basically just a Sho't remade to become an APC.
 
Nagmachon was later developed with a higher superstructure called 'doghouse' with protective armored glass and 7.62mm machine guns. Few versions were made but this one is the latest one to which all were converted:
 
Nakpadon took armor protection even further and up-armored the front with composite armor instead of the outdated Blazer ERA, got new and better side armor, lower superstructure and better protection for it as well.
 
A recon version is called Nagmapop:
 
A Combat Engineering Vehicle is called Puma:
 
And a specialized (also made in very low quantities) transport for the special engineering unit Ya'alom is called Nakpilon:
 
All these are used in very low quantities, and only where some unit must have heavy armor but doesn't yet have the Namer.

The difference is their use. Nagmasho't is the baseline version with a decently protected superstructure and slightly improved protection. Basically just a Sho't remade to become an APC.
 
Nagmachon was later developed with a higher superstructure called 'doghouse' with protective armored glass and 7.62mm machine guns. Few versions were made but this one is the latest one to which all were converted:
 
Nakpadon took armor protection even further and up-armored the front with composite armor instead of the outdated Blazer ERA, got new and better side armor, lower superstructure and better protection for it as well.
 
A recon version is called Nagmapop:
 
A Combat Engineering Vehicle is called Puma:
 
And a specialized (also made in very low quantities) transport for the special engineering unit Ya'alom is called Nakpilon:
 
All these are used in very low quantities, and only where some unit must have heavy armor but doesn't yet have the Namer.

The difference is their use. Nagmasho't is the baseline version with a decently protected superstructure and slightly improved protection. Basically just a Sho't remade to become an APC.
 
Nagmachon was later developed with a higher superstructure called 'doghouse' with protective armored glass and 7.62mm machine guns. Few versions were made but this one is the latest one to which all were converted:
 
Nakpadon took armor protection even further and up-armored the front with composite armor instead of the outdated Blazer ERA, got new and better side armor, lower superstructure and better protection for it as well.
 
A recon version is called Nagmapop:
 
A Combat Engineering Vehicle is called Puma:
 
And a specialized (also made in very low quantities) transport for the special engineering unit Ya'alom is called Nakpilon:
 
All these are used in very low quantities, and only where some unit must have heavy armor but doesn't yet have the Namer.

Any Israeli airstrikes in Syria are legal as of 1948. That includes the use of Lebanese airspace for that purpose as well. 
Military actions by and against warring factions are permissible.

From Syrian parade in 1956:

 

 
Both were armed with the (supposedly) Breda SAFAT 12.7mm machine guns.

As we can see, it has everything a turret might need but I caught a few unconventional things, for the better and worse:
  Commander seems to have an MWIR night sight with a recognition range of 5km on the main vision block (FLIR), while the gunner has an EMWIR sight with a somewhat longer range, neither of which however are mentioned specifically on Elbit's site. Their HDTV cameras are also different, probably the gunner also having a longer range, higher quality one.  
There are 2 MATADOR anti-bunker/materiel/personnel short range rockets for up to several hundred meters, primarily for urban warfare scenarios where you may need a little more punch than a 30mm gun can provide. These are, of course, fully interchangeable with Spike LR 2 missiles.  
The Trophy system does not seem to have an autoloading mechanism on this one. We know the IDF required, about a decade ago during trials of the Trophy against the Iron Fist, for both contenders to have 3 interceptors per side, for a total of 6. This meant the autoloader would accommodate either 3 munitions, or 2 with 1 already loaded. It would be quite ridiculous for it to only have 1 charge per side.            We do not know yet if this was intentionally left out from this presentation, or a temporary                  design choice. But we can see that the mortar's autoloading mechanism was also omitted.
 

May be it somethink like this? 

As we can see, it has everything a turret might need but I caught a few unconventional things, for the better and worse:
  Commander seems to have an MWIR night sight with a recognition range of 5km on the main vision block (FLIR), while the gunner has an EMWIR sight with a somewhat longer range, neither of which however are mentioned specifically on Elbit's site. Their HDTV cameras are also different, probably the gunner also having a longer range, higher quality one.  
There are 2 MATADOR anti-bunker/materiel/personnel short range rockets for up to several hundred meters, primarily for urban warfare scenarios where you may need a little more punch than a 30mm gun can provide. These are, of course, fully interchangeable with Spike LR 2 missiles.  
The Trophy system does not seem to have an autoloading mechanism on this one. We know the IDF required, about a decade ago during trials of the Trophy against the Iron Fist, for both contenders to have 3 interceptors per side, for a total of 6. This meant the autoloader would accommodate either 3 munitions, or 2 with 1 already loaded. It would be quite ridiculous for it to only have 1 charge per side.            We do not know yet if this was intentionally left out from this presentation, or a temporary                  design choice. But we can see that the mortar's autoloading mechanism was also omitted.
 

As we can see, it has everything a turret might need but I caught a few unconventional things, for the better and worse:
  Commander seems to have an MWIR night sight with a recognition range of 5km on the main vision block (FLIR), while the gunner has an EMWIR sight with a somewhat longer range, neither of which however are mentioned specifically on Elbit's site. Their HDTV cameras are also different, probably the gunner also having a longer range, higher quality one.  
There are 2 MATADOR anti-bunker/materiel/personnel short range rockets for up to several hundred meters, primarily for urban warfare scenarios where you may need a little more punch than a 30mm gun can provide. These are, of course, fully interchangeable with Spike LR 2 missiles.  
The Trophy system does not seem to have an autoloading mechanism on this one. We know the IDF required, about a decade ago during trials of the Trophy against the Iron Fist, for both contenders to have 3 interceptors per side, for a total of 6. This meant the autoloader would accommodate either 3 munitions, or 2 with 1 already loaded. It would be quite ridiculous for it to only have 1 charge per side.            We do not know yet if this was intentionally left out from this presentation, or a temporary                  design choice. But we can see that the mortar's autoloading mechanism was also omitted.
 

As we can see, it has everything a turret might need but I caught a few unconventional things, for the better and worse:
  Commander seems to have an MWIR night sight with a recognition range of 5km on the main vision block (FLIR), while the gunner has an EMWIR sight with a somewhat longer range, neither of which however are mentioned specifically on Elbit's site. Their HDTV cameras are also different, probably the gunner also having a longer range, higher quality one.  
There are 2 MATADOR anti-bunker/materiel/personnel short range rockets for up to several hundred meters, primarily for urban warfare scenarios where you may need a little more punch than a 30mm gun can provide. These are, of course, fully interchangeable with Spike LR 2 missiles.  
The Trophy system does not seem to have an autoloading mechanism on this one. We know the IDF required, about a decade ago during trials of the Trophy against the Iron Fist, for both contenders to have 3 interceptors per side, for a total of 6. This meant the autoloader would accommodate either 3 munitions, or 2 with 1 already loaded. It would be quite ridiculous for it to only have 1 charge per side.            We do not know yet if this was intentionally left out from this presentation, or a temporary                  design choice. But we can see that the mortar's autoloading mechanism was also omitted.
 

As we can see, it has everything a turret might need but I caught a few unconventional things, for the better and worse:
  Commander seems to have an MWIR night sight with a recognition range of 5km on the main vision block (FLIR), while the gunner has an EMWIR sight with a somewhat longer range, neither of which however are mentioned specifically on Elbit's site. Their HDTV cameras are also different, probably the gunner also having a longer range, higher quality one.  
There are 2 MATADOR anti-bunker/materiel/personnel short range rockets for up to several hundred meters, primarily for urban warfare scenarios where you may need a little more punch than a 30mm gun can provide. These are, of course, fully interchangeable with Spike LR 2 missiles.  
The Trophy system does not seem to have an autoloading mechanism on this one. We know the IDF required, about a decade ago during trials of the Trophy against the Iron Fist, for both contenders to have 3 interceptors per side, for a total of 6. This meant the autoloader would accommodate either 3 munitions, or 2 with 1 already loaded. It would be quite ridiculous for it to only have 1 charge per side.            We do not know yet if this was intentionally left out from this presentation, or a temporary                  design choice. But we can see that the mortar's autoloading mechanism was also omitted.
 

From Syrian parade in 1956:

 

 
Both were armed with the (supposedly) Breda SAFAT 12.7mm machine guns.

NERA & ERA from South-Africa
 

 

Ingwe ATGM being tested against armor

And what did I ever do to deserve such hostility?

And what did I ever do to deserve such hostility?