Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

Update: The turret does have an ATGM. It's just concealed.

A dual missile launcher exists in the center rear, below an elevatable hatch.

 

It would be nice if it'd be the Spike LR II with its greatly enhanced precision strike capability, but I maintain my opinion that it will not have a great effect on the realistic capabilities of the Namer, if the Namer is used the way it is already being used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New images.

Turret details:

19538260.jpg

 

Clockwise from the top:

1) Commander's sight.

2) Dual missile launcher.

3) 4x Trophy radar.

4) 60mm mortar.

5) Gunner's sight.

6) 30-40mm cannon with dual feed, 400 bullets.

7) Smoke grenades.

8) Coaxial machine gun 7.62mm, 700 bullets.

 

Illustration on the Eitan. Presentation had low res unfortunately:

26275047.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE:

In light of a low profile "scandal" in the Artillery acquisition program, to replace the M109 with an Elbit's solution, a commission was set in May this year, to debate the issue as well as the future needs of the artillery corps. Among the topics were also the number of artillery pieces eventually required by the IDF, in this 1.5 billion dollar program (likely price for first batches, as usual).

On 03/08/17, the commission brought its recommendations to the Minister of Defense and were approved. 

 

The recommendations were not released and are still classified, however it is assumed that some of them were to go ahead with Elbit's proposal and not renew the bid, in which South Korean and German firms were also involved, in cooperation with Israeli companies IMI and IAI. 

 

Approval of the recommendation allows to continue the development work of the Elbit's artillery piece, to be constructed in Soltam facilities in Israel.

 

Reasons for the necessity of the commission, brought by other Israeli defense companies (IAI and IMI) and various sources:

  • Elbit's solution is still developmental and not yet fielded elsewhere, whereas their solutions are proven and fielded, or no longer developmental.
  • Their solutions technically do meet all IDF's requirements for an artillery system, thus should not be so quickly disqualified.
  • The IMoD was not transparent with them on several topics including the decision to disqualify them.
  • Meanwhile the IMoD had been in constant talks with Elbit without the knowledge of these companies, and while the process with them was practically frozen due to lack of communication on IMoD's part.

 

TL;DR

The plan to equip the IDF with cannon artillery has been approved and embedded into the Gideon multi-year plan. However there's something fishy in this program, and I would not be surprised if we'll hear a corruption case eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE:

Israel may have opted for Elbit as a sole contractor for its future cannon artillery system because of a widely accepted ban on cluster munitions, according to a Ha'aretz report. The report says that Germany could ban the use of cluster munitions via its artillery system. 

 

I say we take this with a grain of salt, but here are a few things to keep in mind:

  • MAFAT (Israel's equivalent of DARPA) has officially said that one of the concerns, perhaps the main one, regarding a foreign system is the chance of embargo (whether on the system itself or munitions use).
  • Israel is not a signatory state of the treaty that bans cluster munitions.
  • Regardless, Israel has agreed to stop using munitions it can still legally use, such as cluster munitions and WP.
  • Cluster munitions were used primarily, if not exclusively, by the MLRS units of the artillery corps, but are now completely replaced by a wide host of other conventional munitions. 
  • Recently, IMI announced the completion of development of a cluster munition with a 99% reliability rate, making the treaty invalid for this type of ammo due to similar or even better success rates than most conventional munitions. The munition however is rocket based, not an artillery shell.
  • Ha'aretz is a hard left leaning source, and cluster munitions are universally regarded as "bad" without completely understanding their nature and use, thus they may leverage it for a political gain. To support this, no official statement on this exact issue has been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE:

The tradition of military parades in Israel could soon be resurrected, after being done for the last time in 1973.

Plans for a parade are already under-way, although official confirmation on them has not been made. 

The parade will be rather limited. Foot soldiers will walk in Jerusalem's main street, in parallel with the air force's sorties above the capital. 

Tanks and AFVs however, will perform a demonstration in a stadium as they're unable to drive in Jerusalem's main street due to light railway construction works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiran-6, 1970s.

2480477_original.jpg

Quote

   Tiran-6 is a designation for the captured T-62, modernized by the Israelis to the IDF standards. In total, during the war in 1973, Israel captured up to 200 T-62, of which about 100 machines were upgraded. Tanks were used until the early 90's, as part of one battalion of the 320th Reserve Tank Brigade, after which they were removed from the armament, and the unit was disbanded

 

Spoiler

2480811_original.jpg

 

2480984_original.jpg

 

2481357_original.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi LoooSerR,

 

After the end of the Six Day War, the IDF absorbed into service approximately 150 T-54s and T-55s as Tiran 4 and 5s. A substantial stock of other intact and damaged tanks were kept for spare parts.

 

After the end of the Yom Kippur war, the original intention was to replace losses by introducing two entire, new armoured divisions (Division 440 and Division 880) made up of captured and then upgraded T series tanks. along with captured BTR-50, Topaz APCs and BDRMs. 

 

Of the 139 captured T-62s in running order 79 were in excellent condition and introduced into service as an independent brigade  of Tiran 6s to be allocated to Division 440. The Tiran 6s kept their 115mm weapons. Although the IDF was impressed by its performance,  the original intention was eventually to replace the 115 with the 105 mm gun because of ammunition shortages

 

Initially another 330 Tiran 4s and 5s were absorbed as war booty by the end of 1974. Upgrades were limited to new radios, optics and machine guns. The intent was that all the Tirans would have their gun replaced with the 105 mm , potential power-pack replacement and other profound upgrades as part of Project Samovar. Many hundreds of T-54s and T-55s in various states of repair were held as a store of spare parts.

 

The IDF planned to absorb another 400-500 Tirans by the end of 1976. This was never carried out, and Division 880 was not introduced with ex Soviet equipment, nor was Project Samovar  carried out. This was because the US sold sufficient M48s and M60s to rebuild the Armoured corps with Western equipment. If not for this, the Israelis would have been one of the largest users of T54s and T-55s outside of the Warsaw Pact. The irony.

 

The numbers are accurate. A friend of mine "Camera" translated the  Hebrew text to English from the second of volume of the History of the Ordnance Corps, written by the military historian Amira Shahar and offered for free download on the site of the Foundation of the Veterans of the Ordnance Corps. The Hebrew name of the volume is ‘The Ordnance Corps as a force multiplier – the history of the Ordnance Corps in the years 1967-1985’:http://himush.co.il/himush.co.il/ori...s1967-1985.pdf. The study is an excellent "warts and all" account pointing out serious shortcomings of the IDF, but also underlining just how important rapid battlefield recovery and vehicle repair was during the 1973 war.

 

cheers

Marsh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The future tank

Carmel, one of the impressive plans that MAFAT has been working on in recent years, together with the Ministry of Defense Tank Program Administration (TPA), involves the IDF's future tank. TPA is currently producing the most advanced version of the tank in use by the IDF Armored Corps - the Merkava 4. Dozens of these tanks rolling off the assembly line of the repair and maintenance center at the Tel Hashomer base each year are equipped with the most advanced technologies that make the Merkava an especially threatening, deadly, and well-protected war machine - due, among other things, to the Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd.'s Trophy active defense system, which is designed to intercept threats like advanced anti-tank missiles and RPG rockets.

The Carmel, however, will be completely different. MAFAT's plans are for a tank that will be small, agile, lightweight, easy to operate, and cheaper than the expensive tanks currently being sold on the market.

The top-secret tank's performance so far has been impressive. Demonstrations have been confined to Ministry of Defense simulations. "Its maneuvering capabilities will be very good, the team operating it will be substantially smaller - perhaps two or three soldiers, it will be powered by a hybrid electrical propulsion system, and it will also have an unmanned and groundbreaking version," Gold told the reporters.

MAFAT believes that a final decision on progress in the future tank program is about three years off. The parties who will make the decision about the program will be shown a deadly war machine that is the stuff of science fiction. It will be equipped with "transparent armor," so that the crew, which will be invisible inside it, will see events outside through an advanced system of touch screens constantly informing the crew of what the many cameras installed on it are photographing. Another possibility also currently under consideration by MAFAT is giving every crew member an advanced smart helmet, similar to the advanced helmets worn by airplane pilot, which constantly broadcasts and screen all the information needed by the soldier on the battlefield.

The future tank's most outstanding feature is its evasiveness, or as the Ministry of Defense puts it, its "invisible signature." For observation or detection systems, the tank's presence in the field will be so well hidden as to be completely invisible. "There are all sorts of methods that have enabled us to achieve this, but it won't happen tomorrow morning," Gold says. "The goal is to improve survival capabilities in the maneuvering of ground forces."

The future tank will be able to both defend itself with active defense systems and provide perimeter defense for vehicles following it if it is leading a battlefield convoy, including infantry forces operating around it. It will take the lead and detect the threat aimed at the forces, and destroy them in time. The tank will also have a solution for mines laid in its path; it will be able to detect and destroy them on the move. "As of now, we are not investing in the vehicle itself; we are investing in the technologies that will be installed on it. Several defense companies are involved in this," Gold says.

While the development of autonomous vehicles is attracting a great deal of fanfare, MAFAT is also looking ahead, with the aim of improving the capabilities of unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs), several models of which are already being used for missions such as border defense. The IDF has such vehicles, which are being used for border patrols, logistical transportation, and light engineering missions. Putting them into use is still slow, however, and their operational use is on a small scale.

The Ministry of Defense sees all the autonomous vehicle ventures being developed in the civilian sphere, but aimed at other purposes. While the future autonomous vehicles are designed to travel on paved roads, the IDF wants UGVs able to travel in field conditions and battle conditions, and which will have highly developed navigability capabilities, and also with remote firing capabilities.

Another development revealed yesterday by MAFAT is designed to make it possible to control an area without a presence there through the use of many hundreds of miniature sensors dispersed in it. The sensors will monitory, photograph, and listen to everything that moves in the area. "These sensors can be dropped from the air, which makes it possible to disperse them in the area and use them for monitoring. We're making great progress in this area, and have already conducted a very large and successful trial," Gold declares. Asked whether these sensors or others like them will also be able to explode next to a human target defined for them and destroy it, Gold said yes.

 

https://www.globes.co.il/en/article-defense-ministry-unveils-stealth-tanks-unmanned-submarines-1001203971

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://oleggranovsky.livejournal.com/67621.html

   Some Nagmapop schematics (Nagmapop is reconnaissance variant "Nagmakhon" with a telescopic mast with recon equipment installed on it, early 2000s, only several were made). Recently, on the official site of the IDF, a file in pdf format has been uploaded - "Parts Catalog for Nagmapop", which is where those schematics were found. Some details in the link.

 

Photos of this thing:

41077848.jpg

 

Spoiler

92905796.jpg

 

43852023.jpg

 

Spoiler

21812906.jpg

 

40967373.jpg

 

71216099.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

 

https://oleggranovsky.livejournal.com/67621.html

   Some Nagmapop schematics (Nagmapop is reconnaissance variant "Nagmakhon" with a telescopic mast with recon equipment installed on it, early 2000s, only several were made). Recently, on the official site of the IDF, a file in pdf format has been uploaded - "Parts Catalog for Nagmapop", which is where those schematics were found. Some details in the link.

 

Photos of this thing:

 

 

  Hide contents

92905796.jpg

 

 

 

Just like in anime!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a few more if you want.

 

Merkava 3 MRS:

https://www.idf.il/media/12069/000903698.pdf

 

Compass for Merkava 3 (also retrofitted on Mark 2, Magach 6/7):

https://www.idf.il/media/12166/000907324.pdf

 

Nagmapop long range observation system:

https://www.idf.il/media/12149/000907014.pdf

 

AFV curtain (?):

https://www.idf.il/media/12083/000904368.pdf

 

Bore-sight for 120mm:

https://www.idf.il/media/12094/000905070.pdf

 

MLRS Hull part 1:

https://www.idf.il/media/12187/000907600.pdf

 

MLRS Hull part 2:

https://www.idf.il/media/12188/000907618.pdf

 

MLRS Launcher part 1 (part 2 missing):

https://www.idf.il/media/12687/000905135-מנתץ-משגר-כרך-א.pdf

 

M109 "Rochev" hull+turret electric systems:

https://www.idf.il/media/12205/000907987.pdf

 

M109 "Doher" hull+turret electric systems:

https://www.idf.il/media/12116/000906042.pdf

 

M109 "Dores" hull+turret electric systems:

https://www.idf.il/media/12204/000907979.pdf

 

Merkava 1/2/3/4 special working tools:

https://www.idf.il/media/12702/000908169-כלי-עבודה-ייעודיים-למרכבה-סימן-3-4-בז-1-2.pdf

 

Magach 7 electric systems:

https://www.idf.il/media/12700/000908142-מגח-7-חשמל.pdf

 

Magach 7 modernized electric systems:

https://www.idf.il/media/12750/000908363-מגח-7-מערכת-חמשל-חדישה.pdf

 

That's about it for today folks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By 2805662
      The following is derived from various wanderings, discussions, & tyre kicking, and covers an opinion on the forthcoming Land 400 Phase 3 Request for Tender, and is as per June 2018.
       
      General: Phase 2 will significantly shape participation in Phase 3. Costs for the two bidders that weren’t short listed for the Risk Mitigation Activity (GDLS & Elbit Systems) ran into the tens of millions of dollars. Costs for the losing BAE bid could rightly be assessed as double that. Combined with Rheinmetall’s Phase 2-driven “perceived incumbency”, nobody wants to waste money to be a stalking horse on the Commonwealth’s behalf. There is a plausible risk that only Rheinmetall will bid. 
       
      Reorganisation of infantry sections: When Land 400 was conceived, Australian infantry sections consisted of two fire teams of four. This drove the initial “eight dismounts” requirement that has subsequently been relaxed. Now comprising three fire teams of three, one of those teams will be the vehicle crew, the other two will dismount, for a total of six dismounts. Recent operational experience has highlighted the need for temporary attachment of specialist personnel, so a platform that has some spare seating could still count for it. 
       
      GFE Turrets: One possible tactic that the Commonwealth may seek to use is that of mandating that the Lance Turret, as used on the Phase 2 Boxer CRV, be used as Government Furnished Equipment (that is, purchased from Rheinmetall and provided to suitably configured hulls by competitors). This would simplify the turret training and offer spares commonality across both phases. Perceived savings for “buying in bulk” were (apparently) unable to be realised as Rheinmetall was reluctant to discount its turret. 
      Costs aside, if an offerer has a GFE turret, who owns the systems integration risk? Who does the customer turn to solve potential issues between the turret and hull when they, the customer, has mandated that particular turret? Commercially, this is a high risk proposition. 
       
      Unmanned turrets: Only GDLS offered an unmanned/remote turret for Phase 2, the Kongsberg MCT-30, as has been adopted in small numbers (81) by the US Army to meet an immediate operational need. A bias against unmanned turrets is unlikely to manifest itself in Phase 3 due to the likely presence of the PSM Puma IFV. Of course, that’ll likely to open the door to GDLS bidding the ASCOD fitted with Elbit’s optionally manned/unmanned MT-30 turret....should they decide to bid at all. 
       
      Likely bidders: This brings us to the inevitable list of potential bidders and their platforms. 
       
      BAE: Unlikely to bid. If they win SEA 5000, that may get them off the bench, as would a requirements set that looks a lot like CV90. In the event that they do bid, the CV90 Mk4 is the most likely platform. 
       
      GDLS: More likely to bid than BAE, but still waiting to see what the RFT looks like. (Tellingly?) Their ASCODs at Eurosatory were painted for upcoming European opportunities, not in the distinctive Australia disruptive pattern. 
       
      Rheinmetall: likely to offer the Lynx and maybe also the Puma. With the reorganisation of Australian infantry sections (see above) the eight dismounts of the KF41 version of the Lynx are less relevant. Still, the modularity of the KF41 demonstrated at Eurosatory 18 definitely left an impression. 
       
      PSM: As a JV between KMW & Rheinmetall, Puma may be offered separately (unlikely if the Boxer =\= ARTEC in Australia model is followed). In the event that is is offered separately, it’s high unit cost, without the associated modularity of Boxer, may be a disadvantage. Also, PSM has no experience with industrial partnerships in Australia: a significant disadvantage. 
       
      Hanwha Defense Systems: Korea has been a bit “off” Australian defence opportunities, largely due to the cack-handed way in which the cancellation of the K-9/AS-9 was handled in 2012. The AS-9 was viewed as a loss leader, primarily as Australia has a reputation of being a discerning (aka difficult) customer. If Hanwha bids their K21, it’ll be interesting to watch. 
       
      Whilst by no means exhaustive, the above outlines some less-obvious factors currently at play for the 450-vehicle opportunity that is Land 400 Phase 3.  
       
    • By Sovngard
      Meanwhile at Eurosatory 2018 :
       
      The Euro Main Battle Tank (EMBT), a private venture project intended for the export market.
       


    • By Alzoc
      Topic to post photo and video of various AFV seen through a thermal camera.
      I know that we won't be able to make any comparisons on the thermal signature of various tank without knowing which camera took the image and that the same areas (tracks, engine, sometimes exhaust) will always be the ones to show up but anyway:
       
      Just to see them under a different light than usual (pardon the terrible pun^^)
       
      Leclerc during a deployment test of the GALIX smoke dispenser:
       
      The picture on the bottom right was made using the castor sight (AMX 10 RC, AMX 30 B2)
       
      Akatsiya :
       

       
      T-72:
       


       
      A T-62 I think between 2 APC:
       

       
      Stryker:
       

       
      Jackal:
       

       
      HMMWV:
       

       
      Cougar 4x4:
       

       
      LAV:
       

    • By Walter_Sobchak
      I realized that we don't actually have a thread about the British Chieftain tank.  
       
      I posted a bunch of Chieftain related stuff on my site today for anyone who is interested.  The items include:
       
      Magazine Articles
       
      1970 article from ARMOR
      1970 article from IDR  - Chieftain-Main Battle tank for the 1970s
      1976 article from IDR - The Combat-Improved Chieftain – First Impressions
      1976 article from IDR - Improved Chieftain for Iran
       
      Government reports
       
      WO 194-495 Assessment of Weapon System in Chieftain
      WO 341-108 Automotive Branch Report on Chieftain Modifications
      DEFE 15-1183 – L11 Brochure 
      WO 194-463 – Demonstration of Chieftain Gun 
       
      WO 194-1323 – Feasibility study on Burlington Chieftain
×