Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Who told you it's out of service? The Meitar unit, the one responsible for its combat use, was closed, but the missile itself is still in service. I don't know who got it, but the artillery corps still makes use of it.

Meitar has only reserve unit now.

Anything more than that is classifed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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

Couple more of the Mk.3-based Ofek    

1 hour ago, Belesarius said:

Classified doesn't mean much here on SH. We have some folks who have really keen noses.

 

Maybe you can conclude some details out of this article

 

THE ARTILLERY BRIGADE THAT CAN SEND MISSILES INTO A LIVING ROOM WINDOW

The David's Sling Brigade was originally created to strike advancing tank formations; Now it is preparing for urban warfare against Israel's asymmetrical enemies.

 
 JUNE 6, 2016 17:10
 
3 minute read.
Share on facebook Share on twitter
Hafiz missile launcher, used to fire the Tamuz
 
The story of the “David’s Sling” Artillery Brigade reflects, in ways few other units do, the radical transformation of Israel’s security environment over the past decades. Today the brigade has the ability to fire a missile through a living-room window.

Originally set up after the 1973 Yom Kippur War to destroy advancing enemy tank formations with antitank missiles, the unit today specializes in precision strikes in urban warfare settings, targeting enemies embedded in Lebanese and Gazan civilian population centers.
 
Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.
 
“The brigade is not an ordinary artillery unit,” Col. M., commander of the brigade, told The Jerusalem Post recently.

He noted its special components, including the Meitar and Moran units that fire guided surface-to-surface missiles, often hitting with pinpoint accuracy targets beyond the line of sight. The brigade also includes the Sky Rider Unit – the only one in the IDF’s ground forces that operates its own tactical drones.

“The challenge today is targeting an enemy in an urban setting, with all of the restrictions.

It is about identifying the enemy and striking it and it only, and not hitting noncombatants. We cannot bring down a whole building because of one suspect who is there. We must be very precise,” Col. M said.

Young officers have to know when to order strikes, and also, “when to stop,” Col.

M added, referring to their responsibility for making life and death decisions under intense pressure.

The brigade has become known as the most air forcelike unit in the ground forces, due to its precision fire capabilities and drones.

“Some in the air force jokingly calls us one of their best squadrons,” the commander said. The unit must forge and maintain close ties to the IAF, to ensure its drones do not collide with the IAF’s platforms. The brigade is also responsible for calling in air strikes to assist ground forces during engagements on the battlefield and in maneuvers.

In the 1970s, the unit was dubbed the “judgment day weapon” due to its role in stopping what was then an existential threat – the conquest of Israel by Syrian or Egyptian armored forces.

Now that this threat has vanished, the brigade faces the 21st century threats of Hezbollah and Hamas, and potentially jihadists in Syria.

These groups could attempt to overwhelm Israel’s home front with rocket barrages, and attack the country’s borders with suicide bombers armed with shoulder-fired missiles.

The brigade incorporated the Sky Rider tactical drone Unit in 2011. Today, the drone has become central to all IDF operations, Col. M. said.

“No battalion commanders will go anywhere without it,” he stated. “We deploy drone crews in every sector.

As young as it is, this unit is already highly valued.”

Drone unit soldiers carry the Sky Rider and its mobile command equipment on their backs, meaning they must navigate terrain carrying 50 percent of their body weight.

Today, drone-equipped soldiers can be found on all the country’s borders and in the West Bank, providing overthe- hill reconnaissance assistance to infantry and armored corps.

In 2014, the IDF revealed that Meitar Unit is responsible for firing the Tamuz, known outside of Israel as the Spike. The fourth generation man-portable fire-and-forget anti-tank guided missile and anti-personnel missile, which has a tandem-charged HEAT warhead, is manufactured by the Rafael Advanced Defense Systems. Most details on the brigade’s missile capabilities remain classified.

The missile units are composed of personnel “who work with their brains, less with their muscles,” Col. M.

said.

He declined to provide additional details, saying only that “They leave no stone unturned to generate new techniques. They are creating the next battle doctrine, and using their [combat] systems in ways that the system designers did not think of.”

 

https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/The-artillery-brigade-that-can-send-missiles-into-a-living-room-window-456065

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TokyoMorose said:

This is purely hypothetical speaking, but I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually find a Tamuz launcher on a Eitan or Namer. I also know there exists a Tamuz launcher for the Sand Cat, so that's a possibility.

I even posted PR videos and photos of those (Spike NLOS on Plasan SandCats for S.Korea, for example) in General artillery and long range ATGMs thread.

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

This is purely hypothetical speaking, but I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually find a Tamuz launcher on a Eitan or Namer. I also know there exists a Tamuz launcher for the Sand Cat, so that's a possibility.

Namer? Highly unlikely. They didnt even serially produce the Namer's ARV version. 

Thing costs 3 million dollars in the baseline version.

 

Eitan? Also unlikely. Don't need all that weight for such a light launcher. 

 

Sandcat? Also unlikely. Ironically, Israel didnt purchase it other than a few for law enforcement.

 

For now HMMWV and M113 are the options and these should eventually be replaced by a sub 8-ton APC of yet unknown type, which will do many tasks including carrying the Spike NLOS.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2018 at 10:07 PM, Adraste said:

Maybe the shadow of the protuding sensor (?)  is a data-link antenna, the kind of the one on the defunct M60-based Pereh missile carrier. I found its weird the IDF chose to retire the type without bringing a worthy replacement.

 

They didn't really announce the pereh in the first place

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

 

Just to check the round on the far right is an M339 and the second from the right is an M329?

Yes.

From left to right:

M322, M325, M329, M339.

 

M329 is the APAM with 5 operation modes, limited service.

M339 is the Hatzav with 3 operation modes, full rate production and Armored Corps' favorite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's fairly common to have a lot of symbolism in exercises for such groups (Hams, PIJ, Hezbollah, IRGC etc). It looks great on the propaganda posters, and gets the kids excited.

Here's a typical Iranian Basij exercise:

Mideast-Iran-Israel_Horo-640x400.jpg

 

Their vismods are much better than Israeli ones. By far. Good craftsmanship they have there, which probably cost them a lot of money. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Kal said:

Hmmm

4 axles carrying the weight of a Namera?

 

Road damage

You got about 63 tons here spread over 16 wheels. It's not bad. Less pressure than what an Eitan would have (if wheel width is the same) which is supposed to be able to drive well on Israel's roads.

These new transporters are also rated for 80 tons, so you can even throw a Gavin in there and still have some spare weight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

General engineering principle for roads is called the 4th power.  Road damage is approximate to axle loads to the 4th power. So 60 tonne over 4 axles is roughly 5 times more damage than 60 tonne over 6 axles.

 

The boxer crv also makes me cringe for road damage. 

 

Maybe israeli roads are tougher than australian roads

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 Monochromelody
      IDF had kept about 100 Tiran-6/T-62s since 1973, and remain service until 1990s. 
       
      I wonder if there's any modification on Tiran-6, like changing the powerpack into 8V71T+XTG-411, adapting steering wheel. 
       
      I also heard that British ROF had produce a batch of 115mm barrel for IDF, while MECAR or NEXTER produced high-performance APFSDS for 115mm gun. Did IDF really use these barrels for original barrel replacement? 
       
      And about protection, did IDF put Blazer ERA on Tiran-6? Or they use more advanced APS like Trophy? 
       
      Thank you. 
    • By Sturgeon
      The LORD was with the men of Deseret. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had chariots of steel.
      —The Book of Latter Day Saints, Ch 8, vs. 3:10, circa 25th Century CE
       
      BULLETIN: ALL INDUSTRIAL-MECHANICAL CONCERNS
       
      SOLICITATION FOR ALL-TERRAIN BATTLE TANK
       
      The Provisional Government of the Lone Free State of Texas and The Great Plains issues the following solicitation for a new All-Terrain Battle Tank. The vehicle will be the main line ground combat asset of the Lone Free State Rangers, and the Texas Free State Patrol, and will replace the ageing G-12 Scout Truck, and fill the role of the cancelled G-42 Scout Truck. The All-Terrain Battle Tank (ATBT) will be required to counter the new Californian and Cascadian vehicles and weapons which our intelligence indicates are being used in the western coast of the continent. Please see the attached sheet for a full list of solicitation requirements.
       

       
      Submissions will be accepted in USC only.
       
       
      Supplementary Out of Canon Information:
       
       
      I.     Technology available:
      a.      Armor:
      The following armor materials are in full production and available for use. Use of a non-standard armor material requires permission from a judge.
      Structural materials:
                                                                    i.     RHA/CHA
      Basic steel armor, 360 BHN. The reference for all weapon penetration figures, good impact properties, fully weldable. Available in thicknesses up to 4 inches (RHA) 8 inches (CHA). 
      Density- 0.28 lb/in^3.
                                                                   ii.     Aluminum 5083
      More expensive to work with than RHA per weight, middling impact properties, low thermal limits. Excellent stiffness.
       Fully weldable. Available in thicknesses up to 4 inches.
      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 1 vs CE, 0.9 vs KE.
      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.33 vs CE, 0.3 vs KE.
      Density- 0.1 lb/in^3 (approx. 1/3 of steel).
      For structural integrity, the following guidelines are recommended:
      For heavy vehicles (30-40 tons), not less than 1 in RHA/1.75 in Aluminum base structure
      For medium-light vehicles (<25 tons), not less than 0.5 in RHA/1 in Aluminum base structure
      Intermediate values for intermediate vehicles may be chosen as seen fit.
      Non-structural passive materials:
                                                                  iii.     HHA
      Steel, approximately 500 BHN through-hardened. Approximately 1.5x as effective as RHA against KE and HEAT on a per-weight basis. Not weldable, middling shock properties. Available in thicknesses up to 1 inch.
      Density- 0.28 lb/in^3
                                                                  iv.     Fuel
      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 1.3 vs CE, 1 vs KE.
      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.14 vs CE, 0.1 vs KE.
      Density-0.03 lb/in^3.
                                                                v.     Assorted stowage/systems
      Mass efficiency vs RHA- 1 vs CE, 0.8 vs KE.
                                                               vi.     Spaced armor
      Requires a face of at least 1 inch LOS vs CE, and at least 0.75 caliber LOS vs fullbore AP KE.
      Reduces penetration by a factor of 1.1 vs CE or 1.05 vs KE for every 4 inchair gap.
      Spaced armor rules only apply after any standoff surplus to the requirements of a reactive cassette.
      Reactive armor materials:
                                                                  vii.     ERA
      A sandwich of 0.125in/0.125in/0.125in steel-explodium-steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 2 sandwich thicknesses away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 81% coverage (edge effects).
                                                                  viii.     NERA
      A sandwich of 0.25in steel/0.25in rubber/0.25in steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 1 sandwich thickness away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 95% coverage.
      The details of how to calculate armor effectiveness will be detailed in Appendix 1.
      b.      Firepower
                                                                    i.     Bofors 57mm (reference weapon) - 85,000 PSI PMax/70,000 PSI Peak Operating Pressure, high quality steel cases, recoil mechanisms and so on are at an equivalent level to that of the USA in the year 1960.
                                                                   ii.     No APFSDS currently in use, experimental weapons only - Spindle sabots or bourelleted sabots, see for example the Soviet BM-20 100mm APFSDS.
                                                                  iii.     Tungsten is available for tooling but not formable into long rod penetrators. It is available for penetrators up to 6 calibers L:D.
                                                                  iv.     Texan shaped charge technology - 4 CD penetration for high-pressure resistant HEAT, 5 CD for low pressure/ precision formed HEAT.
                                                                   v.     The subsidy-approved GPMG for the Lone Free State of Texas has the same form factor as the M240, but with switchable feed direction.. The standard HMG has the same form factor as the Kord, but with switchable feed direction.
      c.       Mobility
                                                                    i.     Engines tech level:
      1.      MB 838 (830 HP)
      2.      AVDS-1790-5A (908 HP)
      3.      Kharkov 5TD (600 HP)
      4.    Detroit Diesel 8V92 (400 HP)
      5.    Detroit Diesel 6V53 (200 HP)
                                                                   ii.     Power density should be based on the above engines. Dimensions are available online, pay attention to cooling of 1 and 3 (water cooled).
                                                                  iii.     Power output broadly scales with volume, as does weight. Trying to extract more power from the same size may come at the cost of reliability (and in the case of the 5TD, it isn’t all that reliable in the first place).
                                                                  iv.     There is nothing inherently wrong with opposed piston or 2-stroke engines if done right.
      d.      Electronics
                                                                    i.     LRFs- unavailable
                                                                   ii.     Thermals-unavailable
                                                                  iii.     I^2- Gen 2 maximum
                                                                  vi.     Texas cannot mass produce microprocessors or integrated circuits
                                                                 vii.    Really early transistors only (e.g., transistor radio)
                                                                viii.    While it is known states exist with more advanced computer technology, the import of such systems are barred by the east coast states who do not approve of their use by militaristic entities.
       
      Armor calculation appendix.
       
      SHEET 1 Armor defeat calculator 4in-54 1200 yd
       
      SHEET 2 Armor defeat calculator 4in-54 2000 yd
       
      SHEET 3 Armor defeat calculator 6in HEAT
       
      Range calculator
       
    • 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. 
       

×
×
  • Create New...