Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Couple more of the Mk.3-based Ofek    

Consider the geometry of actual armor without ignoring the LFP. In addition, the mass of the ammo is almost insignificant (25 kg per round and 40 or so rounds in the hull is 1 ton, vs 2 tons each

Something interesting about Merkava III's armor protection(in Chinese): Some of these images are come from Chinese course book《装甲防护技术基础》(The basic technology of armor protection), and others are

Magachon, based on M60 chassis.

 

Reportedly, it was decided not to put it into service because the Centurion and T-55 were seen as much more suitable for such a conversion. 

Exactly what made the M60 unsuitable, I'm not sure. I am guessing it might be because of the size of the powerpack.

Magashon_002.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M60 was still considered an upgradable, if obsolescent, tank. The Centurion was considered obsolete and at the end of its service life.  On the other hand, the torsion bar suspension of the M60 was not as well liked as the Horstmann suspension of the Centurion which was seen as easier to repair and more suited to the rough terrain of the Golan. Given this, it was always more likely that the Centurion would be the vehicle likely to be retasked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2019 at 7:09 AM, Marsh said:

The M60 was still considered an upgradable, if obsolescent, tank. The Centurion was considered obsolete and at the end of its service life.  On the other hand, the torsion bar suspension of the M60 was not as well liked as the Horstmann suspension of the Centurion which was seen as easier to repair and more suited to the rough terrain of the Golan. Given this, it was always more likely that the Centurion would be the vehicle likely to be retasked.

At the time, M60 vehicles were already being steadily withdrawn from service, one battalion per year.

The IDF apparently had enough vehicles to spare as far back as the 80's to create Pereh AT vehicles.

 

The suspension is also not the main issue, IMO. What supports my opinion is that around the 90's the IDF developed a light tank, similar to what the US Army wanted of the FCS program at some point.

This light tank used torsion bar suspension, designed by the same guy who made the Merkava 3's suspension. 

At no time since the 70's has the IDF changed its reference terrain from the Golan, especially not only a decade after a war with Syria (1982).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Zuk,

The Centurion was obsolete and had already begun withdrawal from IDF front line service well before the M60. Hence ready availability of hulls. the M60 was obsolescent, but still upgradable, even though the intention was to replace them with the Merkava as they became available.

 

I thought the Pereh was based upon the M48?

 

I know of the light tank proof of concept vehicle. I don't think the intent was to use it on the Golan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

It's 120mm. There is a little information inside a book of commemoration for the designer of the suspension system. It's in Hebrew but very interesting nonetheless. I don't have the link to hand, however, I am sure Mighty Zuk does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 minutes ago, Marsh said:

a book of commemoration for the designer of the suspension system. It's in Hebrew but very interesting nonetheless

short summary of information about this project (in russian) https://oleggranovsky.livejournal.com/27287.html has among its sources link to that book https://www.himush.co.il/himush.co.il/originals/ספר יחיעם.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I note that the light tank also has double pin tracks.  The Merkava is unusual, possibly singular among modern MBTs in that it uses single pin, non-rubber-bushed tracks.  Double pin tracks last longer, but the experience in the Golan Heights was that the volcanic rock there chews up the end connectors too quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Marsh said:

Hi Zuk,

The Centurion was obsolete and had already begun withdrawal from IDF front line service well before the M60. Hence ready availability of hulls. the M60 was obsolescent, but still upgradable, even though the intention was to replace them with the Merkava as they became available.

 

I thought the Pereh was based upon the M48?

 

I know of the light tank proof of concept vehicle. I don't think the intent was to use it on the Golan. 

Yes you're right, the Pereh was based on M48 hulls, not M60.

But for quite a long time the IDF has been looking to convert old vehicles to APCs. Even the Merkava 2 was repurposed, and perhaps the main reason why no more Achzarit HAPCs were made was because there were no more usable tanks to make them from.

The M60 APC conversion, judging by the image quality, came somewhere between two points in time in which the need for converted tanks was quite substantial.

 

Another aspect to consider is the US aid to Israel. Today the aid is used very efficiently. Not one dollar is spent on unnecessary stuff. When it's not used to purchase the most high end aircraft, it's used to produce outsourced parts for indigenous projects like Merkava tanks, Namer APCs, Eitan AFVs, even the new howitzer, as well as the very expensive air defenses like Iron Dome or David's Sling.

 

But in the 90's that was far from the case. Huge chunks of the aid money were used on equipment and weapons that the IDF really had no need for. They just took them so the money won't be completely wasted. A lot of stuff went directly from the port into scrap yards.

 

Surplus M60 hulls could be purchased in the hundreds in just a couple years.

 

The only explanation I see here is some untold engineering obstacle that is not related to the engine and suspension.

6 hours ago, Lord_James said:

Is that a 105 or 120mm gun? 

 

Also, you have peaked my interest; is there a name or more info, preferably in English? 

 

No name. As was said, it was only once mentioned by the deceased Yehiam Harpaz, when he talked in a book about his experiences with torsion bar suspension.

 

3 hours ago, Karamazov said:

Tell me, does the IDF use Magah’s tanks? Or did IDF go completely to the merkava tanks?ÐаÑÑинки по запÑоÑÑ Ð¼Ð°Ð³Ð°Ñ-6 Ð±ÐµÑ Ð³Ð°Ð»Ñ Ð±Ð°ÑаÑ

 

The Magach tanks were officially retired in 2014, and the Pereh was retired in 2017.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The contract for Trophy systems for the IDF in 2016 was $285 million for ~1,000 systems plus development.

It grew in 2017 to $312 million. 

Date of contract completion remained unchanged - 2027.

This is an approximately 100 systems more, and adds to the production rate quite substantially. 

If the date of contract completion is not delayed, then we're talking about 1,040 systems over 10 years, instead of 950 systems over 11 years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, SPARTAN ARMED said:

The U.S. military set an April target for leaving Syria, even without a plan in place to protect Kurds from Turkish attacksWhy idf didnt have the new JLTV and when they have in service the new MRAP from the FMTV and how many trucks the army will have , i wonder if you serve in lebanon you have only zelda and nagmachons and not a light MRAP.

 

1)The JLTV costs quite a lot of money and is still a lower priority for replacement at the moment. First a critical mass of heavy Namer APCs and medium Eitan APCs have to enter service. Only then, when their production and budget are secured, the IDF can start allocating resources to replace the old APCs in support roles. But replacement of the Zelda in combat roles is top priority!

 

2)The FMTV truck is already in service and the IDF so far placed contracts for 200 units, although it also said it intends to purchase a further 'hundreds more' trucks for medium and heavy loads, which includes the HEMTT trucks as well.

 

3)Serving in Lebanon is no longer a thing since 2000. Any maneuvering combat unit going into either Lebanon or Gaza, or any other hostile territory, as part of a military operation, will be going in heavy APCs/IFVs. First go the units equipped with Namers. Then go the units with the 2nd best armor and so on.

 

The units patrolling the border near Lebanon, in areas of high risk, are constantly driving in heavy APCs. Although in any case of war they do not enter Lebanon, or at least are not the first to enter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, skylancer-3441 said:

that video with 3d models and crew in mockup of future vehicle's interior kinda reminds me of FCS adverts from mid-00s,
The main difference is - monitors got bigger.
bx12d38.jpg

The difference is not in the size of monitors, but what they are supposed to feed back to you.

 

Rafael's concept is kinda like Elbit's IronVision, giving you a full hemispheric view of the vehicle's surroundings, but instead of using a helmet, using very large touch screens, which also allows interfacing with mission aid software which is limited on the IronVision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By SH_MM
      Found a few higher resolution photographs from the recent North Korean military parade. We didn't have a topic for BEST KOREAN armored fighting vehicles, so here it is.
       
      New main battle tank, Abrams-Armata clone based on Ch'ŏnma turret design (welded, box-shaped turret) and Sŏn'gun hull design (i.e. centerline driver's position). The bolts of the armor on the hull front is finally visible given the increased resolution. It might not be ERA given the lack of lines inbetween. Maybe is a NERA module akin to the MEXAS hull add-on armor for the Leopard 2A5?
       
      Other details include an APS with four radar panels (the side-mounted radar panels look a lot different - and a lot more real - than the ones mounted at the turret corners) and twelve countermeasures in four banks (two banks à three launchers each at the turret front, two banks à three launchers on the left and right side of the turret). Thermal imagers for gunner and commander, meteorological mast, two laser warning receivers, 115 mm smoothbore gun without thermal sleeve but with muzze reference system, 30 mm grenade launcher on the turret, six smoke grenade dischargers (three at each turret rear corner)
       


       
      IMO the layout of the roof-mounted ERA is really odd. Either the armor array covering the left turret cheek is significantly thinner than the armor on the right turret cheek or the roof-mounted ERA overlaps with the armor.
       


      The first ERA/armor element of the skirt is connected by hinges and can probably swivel to allow better access to the track. There is a cut-out in the slat armor for the engine exhaust. Also note the actual turret ring - very small diameter compared to the outer dimensions of the turret.
       
      Stryker MGS copy with D-30 field gun clone and mid engine:

      Note there are four crew hatches. Driver (on the left front of the vehicle), commander (on the right front of the vehicle, seat is placed a bit further back), gunner (left side of the gun's overhead mount, next to the gunner's sight) and unknown crew member (right side of gun's overhead mount with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher mounted at the hatch). The vehicle also has a thermal imager and laser rangefinder (gunner's sight is identical to the new tank), but no independent optic for the commander. It also has the same meteorological mast and laser warner receivers as the new MBT.
       
      What is the purpose of the fourth crew member? He cannot realistically load the gun...
       
      The vehicle has a small trim vane for swimming, the side armor is made of very thin spaced steel that is bend on multiple spots, so it clearly is not ceramic armor as fitted to the actual Stryker.

       
      The tank destroyer variant of the same Stryker MGS copy fitted with a Bulsae-3 ATGM launcher.
       

      Note that there is again a third hatch with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher behind the commander's position. Laser warning receivers and trime vane are again stand-out features. The sighting complex for the Bulsae-3 ATGMs is different with a large circular optic (fitted with cover) probably being a thermal imager and two smaller lenses visible on the very right (as seen from the vehicle's point of view) probably containing a day sight and parts of the guidance system.
       

      Non line-of-sight ATGM carrier based on the 6x6 local variant of the BTR, again fitted with laser warning receivers and a trim vane. There are only two hatches and two windows, but there is a three men crew inside.
       
       
      There are a lot more photos here, but most of them are infantry of missile system (MLRS' and ICBMs).
    • By Monochromelody
      Disappeared for a long period, Mai_Waffentrager reappeared four months ago. 
      This time, he took out another photoshoped artifact. 

      He claimed that the Japanese prototype 105GSR (105 mm Gun Soft Recoil) used an autoloader similar to Swedish UDES 19 project. Then he showed this pic and said it came from a Japanese patent file. 
      Well, things turn out that it cames from Bofors AG's own patent, with all markings and numbers wiped out. 

      original file→https://patents.google.com/patent/GB1565069A/en?q=top+mounted+gun&assignee=bofors&oq=top+mounted+gun+bofors
      He has not changed since his Type 90 armor scam busted. Guys, stay sharp and be cautious. 
       
    • By Beer
      I am sure there are many very interesting stories to share about this topic. Let's start with couple of articles about the weird and sometimes downright crazy history of Czechoslovak assistance which helped Israel to survive its early days. It's true that Czechoslovakia asked a lot of money for bypassing the UN embargo but it doesn't change the fact that it helped in the critical time - before the change of course was ordered from Kremlin in 1949. It's also worth mentioning that the arms-smuggling to Israel brought up to 1/3 of all foreign currency income of Czechoslovakia at that time! It's all in Czech but well understandable with the google translate. 
       
      Here in short the story of the secret Czechoslovak operation DI - the military asistance to Israel from the website of the Czech Institute of the military history. The article contains rare historical photos from the covert military training for army specialists (pilots, tankers, mechanics and even an infantry brigade made of volunteers from the former Czechoslovak Army Corps in USSR). 
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vhu.cz%2Fprubeh-a-podrobnosti-cs-vojenske-pomoci-izraeli-na-konci-40-let%2F
       
      If you really like the topic, you can learn many more details from these six chapters of this superlong article (sure worth studying for anyone interested in the topic).
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14222-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-I%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14223-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-II%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
      https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14230-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-III
      https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14236-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-IV%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
      https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14242-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-V%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
      https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14246-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-VI%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
       
      After that we have the totally crazy story of the Cairo bombing raid actually performed from the communist Czechoslovakia in 1948. Why don't we have yet any movie about three B-17s smuggled from USA, crewed by American-Jewish airmen, armed with former German machineguns and bombs and operating from an airfield located in then communist Czechoslovakia? If that doesn't deserve to be filmed than what does? 
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.idnes.cz%2Fzpravy%2Fdomaci%2Fnalet-zatec-kahira-b-17-izrael.A130712_105045_domaci_jw
       
      Most of you likely know that the first combat aircraft of the Israeli airforce were Czechoslovak Avia S-199 fighters. This stillborn stop-gap modification of the leftover Bf-109G airframe was rather useless in fact (Czechoslovakia had loads of Bf-109 airframes but no spare DB-605 engines whose reliability was absurdly low due to bad late-war steel, so the engines were replaced with Jumo-211 bomber units - completely unsuitable but available) but nevertheless it helped to stop the Egyptian attack on Tel Aviv and brought a very important psychological advantage on the Israeli side. More about these planes here. 
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.idnes.cz%2Ftechnet%2Fvojenstvi%2Fizrael-ceskoslovensko-vyroci-izraelske-letectvo.A180526_235424_vojenstvi_erp
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.idnes.cz%2Ftechnet%2Fvojenstvi%2Fceskoslovenske-letectvo-stihaci-letadlo-avia-s-199.A200116_174150_vojenstvi_erp 
       
      To add to the absurdity of that time... the man behind the support for the Israel was Czechoslovak FM Vladimír Clementis who was executed just few years later as a result of an intra-communist power struggle.  
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

×
×
  • Create New...