Life_In_Black

How does the second one have seven road wheels?

When I found the second picture, it said that it was an actual T-72 turret mounted on a Leopard 1 sometime after unification. Whether that's true or not, I haven't a clue.

I'm pretty sure it's a Vick. Mantlet's totally wrong for a Cent.

Keep in mind, they re-used a lot of ancillaries from the Cent for the Vickers. The stowage boxes, skirts, etc.

Oh, fuck, it could be a Mark 13, now that I think about it.

The turret's too tall to be that of a Vickers MBT, and the roadwheels aren't spaced correctly for the Vickers either. Here's a video of a running Centurion that looks damn enar identical to the one in the photo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3TzZrEKIb0

It's a Vickers, not a Cent.

I'm pretty certain it's a Centurion, not a Vickers MBT.

Not exactly the same concept as the WoT forums or elsewhere, I figured this would be the place to post something unknown so as to get others' help in identifying it. Could be identifying the tank itself, a particular modification, , where the picture might have been taken, a user or unit, etc. I'll go first:

Obviously this is a Centurion with an 105mm L7, which is what perplexes me. It's not Israeli, as Israel didn't experiment with camouflage on their tanks until sometime in the '80s. And the presence of the 105mm L7 means this isn't during the Suez crisis in 1956 either. So where is it? And is it British, Australian, or some other country using it?

Figured you guys would enjoy these:

I haven't posted in this thread in a while, so have some photos I found the other day on fresh.co.il, of the wooden mockup:

And here's that same section of the glascis attached to a jeep:

And some photos of the wooden model taken at the Batey ha-Osef Museum in Tel Aviv:

Of note is the Sholef wooden mockup in the background which dates those last two as being sometime much later than the other photos. ANd while we're on the subject of Batey ha-Osef Museum, here's a photo of a Merkava prototype chassis there (among some other Merkava prototypes/variants IIRC):

And here are what appear to be stills from a video of a Merkava prototype moving under its own power, probably sometime in 1974 or 1975:

And I found better versions of some already available photos, this time of the Magach turret mounted on a Merkava prototype chassis:

And lastly, we come full circle with pictures of the Merkava's official unveiling in 1978:

Just an FYI, I haven't posted these to my Israeli tech tree thread over on the WoT forums yet, so I would appreciate not sharing them around too much until I get around to doing that.I mean, I know they're available online since I found them, but near as I can tell, most of these probably haven't seen the light of day in ages outside of some Israeli sites.

Both good questions.

 

I'm also curious how self-sufficient the Israeli defense industry is.

 

A few years ago when various companies were trying to bring a semi-auto TAR-21, there was a lot of concern about 922® compliance.  For those not fluent in the vagaries of US firearms import laws, a rifle like the TAR-21 would require a certain percentage of the parts to be made in the US.  Word about the street was that this was fairly easy to do; a large percentage of the parts of the TAR-21 were rumored to be built in the US already by Continental Machine and Tool.

 

(Sturgeon, refresh my memory; did the importer at SHOT confirm these rumors?)

 

How much of Israeli military tech just undergoes final assembly in Israel?

I'd be willing to bet (based on what I've looked into in researching Israeli tanks) that almost all but the armor plating itself, basic electronics and radios, guns, and ammunition (excluding missiles and other munitions like those listed in the OP) are imported.

I'd be curious to see what Israel has spent the last few years on US munitions and if this is significantly higher than that.

Hi,

 

A diesel fuel cell 7cm thick, will offer roughly 1cm protection equivalent of RHA against HEAT and slightly less against KE penetrators.

 

i have visited the production line for Merkava III when it was active, Merkava !V and the Namer. You are somewhat underestimating the protection of the tanks and are missing something. For obvious reasons I am not prepared to discuss this factor any further. 

 

Cheers

Marsh

I'm not so sure I believe that there's some top secret component that can't be shared, as such a secret wouldn't be shared with someone who's only visiting the plant, and if it really was shared with a visitor like that, that visitor would have been trusted enough to not use said information online to try proving someone wrong.

Last I'd read, raw diesel fuel is a little less effective than steel vs. shaped charges on a mass basis.  However, there are supposed to be some sort of integrated spaced armor/fuel tank designs that can raise this figure dramatically, at least against HEAT threats.

The pictures of the Namer didn't appear to show anything special, and while it theoretically is possible there's more to it, I get the distinct impression the entire Merkava line of vehicles have always used either the same or similar configuration as that frontal shape hasn't changed at all.

Israeli tank photos (link originally posted by guy on WoT forums); https://picasaweb.google.com/harabecw/Tanks

Some interesting stuff there. Like the information plate for the M-51:

How on earth did they stuff 55 105mm rounds into a Sherman and keep a 5 man crew?

 

Merkava 4 frontal part. Note LFP. I hope they have armor inserts between that and engine.

Near as I can tell having looked at various pictures and what I could find, the only thing filling that space is the armored fuel tanks filled with diesel.

More pictures here. I honestly don't think that's changed at all from the Mk. 1 up through now. Could really use someone who's good at this sort of thing to chime in at how good diesel is at stopping tank rounds.

I really need to watch this movie again.

Here's the Aberdeen document on the T24 Light Machine Gun: http://www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/t24%20report.pdf

OH MY GOD YOU'RE RIGHT

Is there some secret Music Illuminati that reaches out and grasps decent bands in their metaphorical fists, and then crushes them until they're absolutely dull mass market shit?

Is this like how MBAs keep ruining my favorite restaurants?

Pretty much. Halestorm used to be a local Pennsylvania band that played their asses off until somewhere along the line they became famous. After the first album, it all went downhill, where literally the best thing they've done since the first album were covers of the aforementioned Skid Row song Slave to the Grind, and Guns 'N' Roses', Out Ta Get Me.

[Halestorm is bad m'kay?]

Having seen Halestorm live a few years ago, they're not bad live. Hell, I even liked a number of songs off of the first album, despite it being much more pop than I usually listen to. But their second album was abysmal and had nothing really interesting on it at all. The third album is even worse than the second, which is actually quite impressive in its own way. The truly sad thing of all of this is that Halestorm's cover of Skid Row's Slave to the Grind was actually pretty damn good in my opinion, and Lzzy Hale (yes, that's actually how her name is spelled. Because reasons.) would have been perfect as the new singer of Skid Row since they got rid of Johnny Solinger and won't bring back Sebastian Bach. Instead Skid Row went with Tony Harnell formerly (several times now) of TNT, who while a phenomenal singer and much better than Sebastian Bach and Johnny Solinger could ever hope to be, is most definitely taking a step back career wise with this decision. I don't know, I keep hoping Halestorm will get better eventually, but all they've done is get worse.

help, I'm trapped in the early 1980s

You're acting like this is a bad thing.

I think a lot of people start thinking in the wrong direction when they read the title of the article.  What he's describing is not a pattern unique to the labyrinthine and inscrutable Oriental mind.  Compare the sorts of political considerations he describes to, say, Nazi Germany and you see the same patterns.  Duplication of military services because the government distrusts them?  Check.  Political loyalty, independent of competence a major factor in promotions?  Check.  Paranoid leader who tries to play underlings off each other because they're afraid they might be plotting a coup?  Check.

Yeah, that's something else that stuck out to me, his article is centered on just Arabs waging war when like you say, it can apply to other regimes and beaurocracies throughout history. On top of that, he even mentions things like countries being underestimated based on past military performance and then surprising everybody, and yet doesn't ever elaborate on that further.

One thing that immediately comes to mind having read the article is that the author barely mentions Jordan in regards to most of his points, and even when Jordan is mentioned, it's almost never in regards to ability, training, or combat history. This despite the author mentioning having been on a combat operation with Jordanian forces against the PLO in 1970. I wish I knew more about this because while I believe he's left out Jordan because Jordan disproves the overall point of the article, I don't know enough to definitevely say as such. Even if Jordan does disprove the points he's making, including them would have been beneficial as it provides a contrast against the other examples he provides, thereby making the article seem less biased. I don't know, my $0.02 on the matter.

Nope, definitely not for me. Last time I was on a bike, I'm pretty sure Bush Sr. was president of the United States.

Very interesting.

Found this online earlier tonight: http://www.ww2f.com/topic/16506-post-war-use-of-axis-afvs-and-vehicles/?p=205624 I wonder what the Swedish thought of the German vehicles (and the lonely M4) they tested?

Still not as manly as this:

 

 

Many horses died to bring you this movie.

Figured I'd post this here in case you missed it on TS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluda_Majaka

Yeah, I saw some of those threads over on TN. Looking at these sets of photos, I'm not convinced the Mk. 1 turret had that much spaced armor. True, later marks appear to have lots of NERA around the turret and the turret appears much bigger than on the earlier marks, but the Mk. 1 looks like anything that doesn't hit the turret front or upper glascis is going to go right through.

The more I look into the Merkava, the more it seems that its armor is quite bad compared to contemporary Soviet and Western MBTs, all for a vehicle that weighs more than even the Chieftain does. My personal tinfoil hat theory is that the armor actually being garbage is the main reason information on the vehicle is still classified. It doesn't help when even the relatively new Namer APC which is built on the Merkava IV chassis, uses welded interlocking plates like the Germans did during WWII. Anyway, thoughts on the Merkava? Is there any definitive data out there on armor thickness that could shed some light on this, or is the Merkava only really suited for defensive hull down work where the extreme slope of the upper plate negates its downsides? And is it just me, or does the turret look like a giant shot trap waiting to happen?