Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

Yep, it's Trophy alright. 

 

11.jpg

 

Looking good!

 

Note: The smoke grenade launcher was removed and the gap that was usually taken by it was filled with armor. 

Notice the gap:

MERKAVA-3D-1.jpg

 

Shame they didn't take the opportunity to make a more serious overhaul. The Mark 3 could probably use a little rearrangement in its frontal section, some weight reduction wherever possible, and an improved frontal armor on the hull. I know it's more needed on the sides, but it can't be very economical to have the engine frequently damaged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Yep, it's Trophy alright. 

 

961809_bnekfa-jpg.71005

 

Looking good!

 

Note: The smoke grenade launcher was removed and the gap that was usually taken by it was filled with armor. 

Notice the gap:

MERKAVA-3D-1.jpg

 

Shame they didn't take the opportunity to make a more serious overhaul. The Mark 3 could probably use a little rearrangement in its frontal section, some weight reduction wherever possible, and an improved frontal armor on the hull. I know it's more needed on the sides, but it can't be very economical to have the engine frequently damaged.

Can you re-upload a first picture? For some reason i have 404 error now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lox said:

A bit more historically themed - a Magach (6?) Of the 46th battalion during the 1982 Lebanon war sporting dual coax 50 cals

68203333.jpg

 

 

Welcome to SH old friend! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a big demonstration of all sorts of technologies today to the IDF, of tech that will soon enter service (not just experimental stuff). As usual, the new artillery piece was not shown, because Elbit are still keeping it under covers, but they chose to give us, the peasants, some news:

 

The new howitzer will be built in an initial batch of 100 vehicles and will be based on a wheeled chassis. Follow-on howitzers may be based on tracked vehicles. 

Now, I don't quite remember the exact numbers, but if I'm not wrong, there are, in the IDF:

4 artillery brigades - 2 active, 2 reserve.

Each brigade consists of 4 battalion of howitzers each.

The 2 active brigades are both split with 2 active battalions and 2 reserve battalions in each of them.

This puts us at 4 active battalions, and 12 reserve battalions.

 

So there are:

Active - 72 howitzers.

Reserve - 216 howitzers.

 

Each howitzer will be manned by a yet undetermined number of crewmen ranging from 3 to 5, and an overall reduction of 25% to 40% is envisioned, though yet unclear whether it refers to manpower, vehicles, or both. 

My assumption is that each vehicle will be manned by 3 men, while another 2 (for a total of 5) will be in the ammo carrier vehicle. This is because it's normal to say the M109 has a crew of 9 to 11 (9 in the vehicle, and 2 in the resupply vehicle).

 

It is assumed that the typical battalion will reduce to 12 vehicles from 18, so a batch of 100 vehicles will be enough to fully equip 8 battalions, which are 2 whole brigades. And another 4 vehicles will be left for testing and demonstrations. 

 

And of course, it's likely the 2nd batch of 100 vehicles, which will complete the transition of the artillery corps to a new howitzer, will be based on a tracked platform. If that will be the case, the wheeled platforms will be transferred to the reservists, and the tracked platforms will take their place in the active brigades.

 

This is a good move for 2 main reasons:

1)Tracked howitzers are only needed for maneuver combat. With a total of 192 howitzers (after the transition), hardly half will be required to maneuver anywhere. So it would be ideal if the reservists will have a system that will be easier and cheaper to maintain. A wheeled platform cuts down expenses tremendously.

2)Wheeled platforms are easier and faster to make, not only cheaper. So it would allow the IDF to re-equip its artillery forces before the M109 turn into rust buckets. I mean, they already are. 

 

And because this has been an unpleasant wall of text, have some pictures:

 

Bunch of Namers amid a Golani brigade exercise along with the 188th armored brigade, in which a Mark 3 tank with a Trophy system was also showcased for the first time.

83772600990100640360no.jpg

 

Eitan, of course. Just an optical illusion though. It's not really that big.

resizedimg115086-jpg-jpg.71367

 

Namer with its new turret with 30mm gun, 2 Spike LR2 missiles, a 60mm mortar, a Trophy APS, and a damn good look.

83777200992398640360no.jpg

 

120mm low recoil mortar on a light 4x4 platform:

837772201001287640360no.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Judging by the watermark, this one is just an experimental kit.

 

28782764_1624356317640346_79446126548096

 

28783672_1624353914307253_33168810208164

lol, for some reason waronline is banned for me. The Dark Lord Pu don't want me to see them,  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Judging by the watermark, this one is just an experimental kit.

 

28782764_1624356317640346_79446126548096

 

28783672_1624353914307253_33168810208164

Fuel barrel is a must have. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all, 

 

first time poster here, looking for a little help with a cruel lady, please.... I need a photo of the engine bay of an Achzarit where the engine is removed; if anyone has a shot they can share, I’d appreciate it. I’m particularly interested in the teaching model of the Achzarit at the Golani Brigade training base, please. I did try several modelling forums before posting here.

 

thanks in advance,

 

Kylie

Share this post


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

Hello all, 

 

first time poster here, looking for a little help with a cruel lady, please.... I need a photo of the engine bay of an Achzarit where the engine is removed; if anyone has a shot they can share, I’d appreciate it. I’m particularly interested in the teaching model of the Achzarit at the Golani Brigade training base, please. I did try several modelling forums before posting here.

 

thanks in advance,

 

Kylie

I've done quite a bit of searching and found nothing. And if modelling forums couldn't help you, I don't think anyone can. 

Maybe try these books:

http://www.deserteagle-publishing.com/books.html

 

Their author, Michael Mass, is Israel's main historian on armored vehicles and the head of Israel's tank museum in Latrun.

 

I will also try looking up in a forum I know, but if that book doesn't have it, then the chances are slim to none.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Newtonk said:

Hello all, 

 

first time poster here, looking for a little help with a cruel lady, please.... I need a photo of the engine bay of an Achzarit where the engine is removed; if anyone has a shot they can share, I’d appreciate it. I’m particularly interested in the teaching model of the Achzarit at the Golani Brigade training base, please. I did try several modelling forums before posting here.

 

thanks in advance,

 

Kylie

This is what i have. These photos were taken at the Latrun Armored Corps Museum in Israel(not by me). The tank shown in this walk around is a prototype. It does not represent accurately the fielded units.

 CE10WS9GIic.jpg

New-Achzarit-Powerpack.jpg?id=9451012

 

achzarit_29_of_42.jpgachzarit_24_of_42.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cabinet approved this evening (11.03.18) an MoD and IDF plan for strengthening the ground arm, which includes 2 main projects that were decided in the Gideon multi-year plan (2015-2020): The purchase of 'hundreds' of Eitan combat vehicles, and the development of a new self propelled howitzer.

 

Eitan

On the Eitan, it was said it would enter service with the Nahal light infantry brigade in 2019, and will steadily start replacing M113 in 2020. Nahal was chosen to lead the Eitan project by being the first to test it. 

MANTAK say the Eitan will be the world's most advanced and protected wheeled combat vehicle, basing itself on technologies developed for the Merkava and Namer, and being designed with an open architecture to allow easy integration of upgrades in the future.

And its main advantage over the Namer would be its rapid rate of production.

 

MoD and IDF refrained from telling how many vehicles exactly will they need, which may be due to the fact that they have yet to see how much the budget allows them. Ideally, it would replace the M113 in as many roles as possible, while in some roles a light armored vehicle, preferably the JLTV, would replace the M113. 

 

The plan spans a decade, so even if the production rate of the Eitan is similar to the Namer, we can expect at least 300 vehicles. But it won't be, and will likely be twice as fast, which could mean north of 600 vehicles. Of course, many of them will not be frontline vehicles. 

 

MoD's contract with RAFAEL includes ~1,000 Trophy systems, of which ~90 will go to Merkava 3 tanks, ~600 will be evenly split between Merkava 4 and Namer vehicles, which leaves ~300 for the Eitan over the course of a decade. 

Admittedly, the IDF was only supposed to present its recommendations for an APS (Iron Fist or Trophy) in January 2018, which is long after the contract with RAFAEL was signed, so it remains until the 2018 fiscal report to understand how many more Trophy-equipped Eitans will we see.

 

SPH

MoD approves the continued project to develop and produce the next generation howitzer for the IDF, and promises that within the following decade, the IDF ground arm will undergo a revolution. 

Indeed, the howitzers are long overdue, and should have been produced and enter service over a decade ago! But budget cuts happened. Thankfully, the Gideon plan seems to be on track from start to end.

 

Oddly, as opposed to other programs in the IDF, the new howitzer entered prototype stage a while ago and begun test firing as well, without the public knowing the Hebrew name of the system, or seeing a prototype. The Eitan, Namer, Carmel, and Barak, were all named at the very early stages of their program and prototypes/concepts were shown very early on as well.

The fact that the IDF has only very recently concluded it would be best for it to make a first batch of wheeled howitzers shows the development program is still lagging behind, and Elbit's promises to get the system ready within half a year to one and a half years (in the worst case), were broken.

 

It is however important to understand that Elbit is now tasked with 2 development programs - 1 for a wheeled howitzer, 1 for a tracked howitzer. 

 

The news here, are that the project can now proceed as planned. It was previously stalled as the MoD had to review it for fears of corruption, and due to a new law that calls for routine program reviews for deals worth 100 million NIS and 400 million NIS, each with different parameters set for the reviews.

 

Now, considering the fact that they claim a decade will be needed for the full (?) transition, and the facts that today there are ~300 howitzers in service, of which 100 will be cut as the new ones will be able to more than compensate for the lower numbers, we're looking at a production rate of roughly 20 units per year. A more precise figure would likely be 24 howitzers, which would equate to 2 battalions per year, or if there are any plans to produce new dedicated ammo carriers, then 12 howitzers and 6-12 carriers which would equate to 1 battalion.

 

Source:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, gents; I appreciate the effort and the info. And I have the book mentioned; it is what inspired me to do the build I’m working on. 

 

Best regards, 

 

kylie 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

The cabinet approved this evening (11.03.18) an MoD and IDF plan for strengthening the ground arm, which includes 2 main projects that were decided in the Gideon multi-year plan (2015-2020): The purchase of 'hundreds' of Eitan combat vehicles, and the development of a new self propelled howitzer.

 

Eitan

On the Eitan, it was said it would enter service with the Nahal light infantry brigade in 2019, and will steadily start replacing M113 in 2020. Nahal was chosen to lead the Eitan project by being the first to test it. 

MANTAK say the Eitan will be the world's most advanced and protected wheeled combat vehicle, basing itself on technologies developed for the Merkava and Namer, and being designed with an open architecture to allow easy integration of upgrades in the future.

And its main advantage over the Namer would be its rapid rate of production.

 

MoD and IDF refrained from telling how many vehicles exactly will they need, which may be due to the fact that they have yet to see how much the budget allows them. Ideally, it would replace the M113 in as many roles as possible, while in some roles a light armored vehicle, preferably the JLTV, would replace the M113. 

 

The plan spans a decade, so even if the production rate of the Eitan is similar to the Namer, we can expect at least 300 vehicles. But it won't be, and will likely be twice as fast, which could mean north of 600 vehicles. Of course, many of them will not be frontline vehicles. 

 

MoD's contract with RAFAEL includes ~1,000 Trophy systems, of which ~90 will go to Merkava 3 tanks, ~600 will be evenly split between Merkava 4 and Namer vehicles, which leaves ~300 for the Eitan over the course of a decade. 

Admittedly, the IDF was only supposed to present its recommendations for an APS (Iron Fist or Trophy) in January 2018, which is long after the contract with RAFAEL was signed, so it remains until the 2018 fiscal report to understand how many more Trophy-equipped Eitans will we see.

 

SPH

MoD approves the continued project to develop and produce the next generation howitzer for the IDF, and promises that within the following decade, the IDF ground arm will undergo a revolution. 

Indeed, the howitzers are long overdue, and should have been produced and enter service over a decade ago! But budget cuts happened. Thankfully, the Gideon plan seems to be on track from start to end.

 

Oddly, as opposed to other programs in the IDF, the new howitzer entered prototype stage a while ago and begun test firing as well, without the public knowing the Hebrew name of the system, or seeing a prototype. The Eitan, Namer, Carmel, and Barak, were all named at the very early stages of their program and prototypes/concepts were shown very early on as well.

The fact that the IDF has only very recently concluded it would be best for it to make a first batch of wheeled howitzers shows the development program is still lagging behind, and Elbit's promises to get the system ready within half a year to one and a half years (in the worst case), were broken.

 

It is however important to understand that Elbit is now tasked with 2 development programs - 1 for a wheeled howitzer, 1 for a tracked howitzer. 

 

The news here, are that the project can now proceed as planned. It was previously stalled as the MoD had to review it for fears of corruption, and due to a new law that calls for routine program reviews for deals worth 100 million NIS and 400 million NIS, each with different parameters set for the reviews.

 

Now, considering the fact that they claim a decade will be needed for the full (?) transition, and the facts that today there are ~300 howitzers in service, of which 100 will be cut as the new ones will be able to more than compensate for the lower numbers, we're looking at a production rate of roughly 20 units per year. A more precise figure would likely be 24 howitzers, which would equate to 2 battalions per year, or if there are any plans to produce new dedicated ammo carriers, then 12 howitzers and 6-12 carriers which would equate to 1 battalion.

 

Source:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/defense-ministry-approves-new-armored-vehicles-for-idf/

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
×