Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Toimisto said:

BTW does anyone have sources on Merkava 1 turret armour?

The Merkava 1 turret armor seems to consist of at least 3 visible spaced plates (most likely there's more, due to the length) of various thicknesses, each angled in a different way. Sufficient against anything the T-62 could throw at it.


Here you can see a large gap:



It was designed this way mostly to create a very steep angle of impact. 


If you want actual numbers, you can forget about any sekrit documents. 



Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

The Merkava 1 turret armor seems to consist of at least 3 visible spaced plates (most likely there's more, due to the length) of various thicknesses, each angled in a different way. Sufficient against anything the T-62 could throw at it.


Here you can see a large gap:



It was designed this way mostly to create a very steep angle of impact. 


If you want actual numbers, you can forget about any sekrit documents. 



Why in the world would the Merkava 1 still be classified ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Laviduce said:

Why in the world would the Merkava 1 still be classified ?

It's less about 'why not' than it is about 'why'. Why would the IDF just publish documents it has on the Merkava 1? 

And unless none asked the IDF to publish it, it would probably still be classified simply because the expiration date hasn't passed. Though it's probably not hard for some fanboy to go to the Czech Republic with some special gear and measure the armor all around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Though it's probably not hard for some fanboy to go to the Czech Republic with some special gear and measure the armor all around.


@Laviduce Don't we also have a Mk 1 at the Saumur museum?

Though I guess the museum may have to ask the permission of Israel before letting someone do whatever he want's with it.






Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alzoc said:


On this scale model it looks more like a protected (against what?) area around the rear trap for dismounts.


It also has those small boxes attached to cage. What they are for? This area looks interesting for me, no idea why or what it is supposed to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

It also has those small boxes attached to cage. What they are for? This area looks interesting for me, no idea why or what it is supposed to be.


Maybe a sort of rioting device?

Like protecting soldier who needs to peek out in crowd control operation against various projectiles (cans, rocks,...)

In that case the boxes would be there simply for structural resistance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can probably rule out the possibility of a hatch for dismounts to fire from (that usually exists in other AFVs), as the IDF is now pushing hard with the closed hatch combat thing.


Best guess is it's an open storage space for backpacks and other light gear, that could be covered with a net that would be fastened to the cage's bars.


Akin to the Bumerang's side wall attachment points for example.


Also, that's a really good model! Where did you find it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2018 at 2:26 PM, Mighty_Zuk said:

The Merkava 1 turret armor seems to consist of at least 3 visible spaced plates (most likely there's more, due to the length) of various thicknesses, each angled in a different way. Sufficient against anything the T-62 could throw at it.






Did the Arab forces ever get BK-15M ammunition?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, but if any of them got advanced armaments from the USSR, it would be Syria, who even got their hands on T-72AV before anyone else could.

Even if the BK-15M were in that war (in 1982), the Syrians already had the AT-3 missiles in large numbers, and the Merkava 1 was more or less invulnerable to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I got a little request here:


1) @LoooSeR , some of these videos are reposted in Otvaga. I usually post them here first, so they also get reposted here numerous times. 


2) @asaf , the THOR system is an old one that was likely only activated because it was nearby. It did not enter service in large numbers, and it's unknown whether it will continue operating for long.


3) Please don't link news articles in Hebrew. Try finding its equivalent in English, but if you don't find one then at least translate it for the others.


Since it was already posted, I will do the translation if anyone is interested:


Crusher of the Dahieh

Saturday eve, July 2014. The ground maneuver phase of Operation Protective Edge commences, and with it one of the most complex battles the Golani had seen in the last 20 years. 

Notes: Dahieh is a quarter in Beirut, likely mentioned because the new howitzer has sufficient range to hit it from Israeli territory. Golani is a frontline mechanized infantry brigade.

After days of warnings, where leaflets written in Arabic were dispersed, radio and TV messages on Palestinian channels, and phone calls to civilians, and smoke shells were fired into village surroundings, began the "softening" phase for the artillery, who fired up to the first line of houses. At its end, Isaac Turgeman, commander of the 36th division gave the green light for the 4 brigades under his command to move deep into Palestinian territory.


Golani fighters made their way into the heart of the Shujaiya neighborhood in the Gaza strip to locate attack tunnels that were dug under the cover of Palestinian houses. The tunnel array was defended by the elite Shujaiya battalion of Hamas, which included 860 veteran warriors that prepared for years for an IDF ground maneuver. The "reception", some would call it a well planned ambush, included advanced AT, mortars, snipers, IEDs, and defensive tunnels dug under the houses to help the terrorists fire and vanish under the ground.


The night began with the injury of an armor officer, and the friction further increased. A Golani APC was hit and caught fire without being able to extinguish it, and 7 warriors died. 

Note: It was an M113 APC that wasn't even supposed to be used there.

Later it was discovered by the high echelon that Oron Shaul's body was kidnapped using a nearby tunnel. 

The Shujaiya battalion's fire intensified, and the brown brigade (Golani) paid their price.

The then-Golani-commander Rasan Elian was injured and had to evacuate, and later 3 battalion commanders, including one of the recon battalion, were injured and also had to evacuate. The command chain was shaken and disturbed, and the 36th division commander received an ever elongating list of killed and injured men. The ground forces tried to suppress the fire sources and direct aerial firepower, but stumbled upon effective "firewalls" every time they tried to get out of the line of houses to evacuate injured or to move to safer areas. The effort of the Golanis had shown acts of heroism, but was insufficient.


It was dawn. The top artillery officer commanded in those frustrating hours on the fire center in the division command center, and received from the Golani support unit commander, info on what's happening on the field and the situation of the enemy. He devised a plan that was not implemented since the 1982 Lebanon war - firing masses of artillery shells on Hamas fighters operating just 100-150 meters from the Golani troops, while heavily risking IDF soldiers as well.


The firing plan had to be based on quality and effective intel, and the division intel officer helped create a very clear picture of the enemy location. At 09:00 the artillery officer realized the brigade firing plan had to be converted to divisional firepower - and he relayed to the 3 artillery battalions of the division that they're under his command.


In parallel, a building collapses on a Golani force, and the intel officer draws on a digital map the layer of information that is required to hit concentrations of the enemy. He also assembled a rescue plan for the injured.

The artillery officer then explains to the division commander why this extraordinary action is required, and stresses "If we don't do this we won't evacuate the injured. There will be none else to help the Golani". Turgeman approves the plan but under one condition: The Golani troops will withdraw to a pre-determined line and enter the Namer APCs, a condition that was based on the assumption that these vehicles will withstand the attack despite the great security risk.


After thorough analysis and corrections, the firing plan was approved. Every battalion was asked to prepare 200 artillery shells, and fire them to the pre-determined areas. The fire rate and accuracy were critical. It was clear to everyone that some of the fire would go right above the heads of the soldiers on the ground, and some of it would be fired to just 100-150m from them - far below the pre-set safety bar.

In parallel, the artillery officer gave the air force officer an urgent firing procedure that focused on several high rise buildings.


The action was set for 10:00, amid heroic efforts by the Golani fighters to evacuate the injured under fire, but not everything went smoothly. An operational dialogue between the battalion commanders to the fire center commander, centered around the plan and focused on the fact that it has crossed the safety lines on which they trained from the very beginning. The fear that the shells - weighing 43kg - would hit the ground troops was very much real.

The dialogue was professional and to the point, and ended with the support of all commanders for this plan. "I trust you", he stressed.


Later, the artillery officer explained to the cadets of the IDF national security academy, that what gave him the great confidence to pull off this plan was understanding of the artillery profession, understanding the doctrine, his personal acquaintance with the battalion commanders' and understanding their quality, understanding their high level of professionalism, and understanding the tools (howitzers) in the batteries.


At 10:10 the command was given, and for 45 minutes 600 shells were rained on the battle zones of the Shujaiya neighborhood. The Golani fighters told "The ground shook like jelly, we've never experienced such thing". Some of the commanders yelled on the comms: "Stop the fire, it's hitting us", and the firing center had to cope with the urgent calls. Aircraft flying over the area provided a live feed of the situation to the computer screens in the Golani brigade command room, headed by Yoeli Or, and in the division fire center headed by the officer.


At 11:00 the last howitzer went quiet. The Palestinian territory was silent. Shortly afterwards, an urgent request came from Hamas, through international aid organizations, to declare a humanitarian ceasefire. The Hamas forces did not regain operational capability for the next 24 hours. Golani troops evacuated the injured and prepared anew for an attack.


The fire support of the artillerymen lasted throughout the whole 51 days of the operation, and only by the end of it, the scope of the achievement of the artillery and intel in the division was realized: 81 terrorists were killed in the attack, among them more than 10 chief Hamas commanders. 


The said combat legacy - that underlines the importance of heavy statistical fire, alongside the precise guided rockets and missiles - explains clearly why the security cabinet approved last week the new howitzer for the corp. It is one of the most central projects for the ground arm for the next couple of years, and the delay in its implementation was the result of budgetary difficulties. Some of the cannons that rained fire on Shujaiya were over 40 years - an outdated system with a limited range, whose operation requires a crew of at least 10 men. The new cannon, made by Elbit, will save more than 50% of the manpower as it is semi-automatic, will greatly increase the operational range and rate of fire, and will dramatically improve the accuracy and lethality.


Every new cannon will replace an old battery, and will provide the corp with better flexibility for relocation, while its command and control systems will allow connectivity with the other corps.

In parallel, the ground arm will finalize by the end of this year a purchase of smart rounds, that will increase the quality of the existing howitzers.


Pics from article:
















The artillery corps is going through, in the last years, more than just a face-lift. He's simply transforming. Aside from the howitzers, the rocket array (MLRS) that includes also a Romach battery that possesses the fire rate and capabilities to work against multiple targets simultaneously, the geolocation array, that said goodbye to the Nurit radar and accepted the Raz radar (Raz - Rav Zroyi - Multi-arm/branch, EL/M-2084). The IDF website also chose to highlight the Kelah David brigade, whose outstanding unit is the Rochev Shamaim, the one that uses small UAVs for the artillery corps.


One of the more classified units is Moran, that was established in 1982 and participated since - through using the Spike-NLOS missile - in many operational activities, including precision attacks and hunting rocket launching units.

The UAV unit of the ground arm in the artillery corp is a parallel unit to the air force's UAVs, but different in its missions, operational culture, and type of aircraft. Its primary destination is to support the ground maneuvering forces - something the chief of staff Major General Gadi Eizenkot constantly speaks of. These units, and the overall activity of the corp, leads to to one main question: Are the artillery commanders capable of turning it into the ground arm's air force?


Unlike in Operation Protective Edge, the next war will require the IDF to maneuver deeper and quicker. The threat on the forces will also be more complex, and will require complex artillery firepower: Warning fire to distance the population, deterring firepower, screening, evacuation, and hitting the centers of gravity of the enemy - command and control centers or concentrations of fighters.


Another change on which the corp's revolution is based on is the Hupat Atar system. Uploading the target to a force-wide net allows a wide range of attacking solutions - an especially critical advantage when the enemy against which the IDF deals with, hides most of the time, shows up for short periods of time, and avoids face to face combat, except for unusual raids. Hence, every second in the IDF's reaction time is critical.


The massive cuts in the reserve forces and shutting down of units did not go over this corp, and in the frame of re-organization it was decided that whoever stays in the corp will be better trained and better prepared than before. Additionally, the artillery school in Shivta was united with the reserve division - the 252nd division. 






Link to comment
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.

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 Sturgeon
      @Dominus Dolorem
      @A. T. Mahan
      detailed below is the expected format of the final submission.
      The date is set as Saturday the 24th of July at 23:59 CST.
      Again, incomplete designs may be submitted as they are and will be judged as seen fit.

      Vehicle Designation and name
      [insert 3-projection (front, top, side) and isometric render of vehicle here]
      Table of basic statistics:
      Mass, combat (armor)
      Length, combat (transport)
      Width, combat (transport)
      Height, combat (transport)
      Ground Pressure, zero penetration
      Estimated Speed
      Estimated range
      Crew, number (roles)
      Main armament, caliber (ammo count ready/stowed)
      Secondary armament, caliber (ammo count ready/stowed)
      Vehicle designer’s notes: explain the thought process behind the design of the vehicle, ideas, and the development process from the designer’s point of view.
      Vehicle feature list:
      1.     Link to Appendix 1 - RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.
      2.     Engine- type, displacement, rated power, cooling, neat features.
      3.     Transmission - type, arrangement, neat features.
      4.     Fuel - Type, volume available, stowage location, estimated range, neat features.
      5.     Other neat features in the engine bay.
      6.     Suspension - Type, Travel, ground clearance, neat features.
      1.     Link to Appendix 1 - RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.
      2.     Link to Appendix 2 - armor array details.
      3.     Non-specified survivability features and other neat tricks - low profile, gun depression, instant smoke, cunning internal arrangement, and the like.
      A.    Weapons:
      1.     Link to Appendix 1 - RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.
      2.     Main Weapon-
      a.      Type
      b.      Caliber
      c.      ammunition types and performance (short)
      d.     Ammo stowage arrangement- numbers ready and total, features.
      e.      FCS - relevant systems, relevant sights for operating the weapon and so on.
      f.      Neat features.
      3.     Secondary weapon - Similar format to primary. Tertiary and further weapons- likewise.
      4.     Link to Appendix 3 - Weapon system magic. This is where you explain how all the special tricks related to the armament that aren’t obviously available using 1960s tech work, and expand to your heart’s content on estimated performance and how these estimates were reached.
      B.    Optics:
      1.     Primary gunsight - type, associated trickery.
      2.     Likewise for any and all other optics systems installed, in no particular order.
      C.    FCS:
      1.     List of component systems, their purpose and the basic system architecture.
      2.     Link to Appendix 3 - weapon system magic, if you have long explanations about the workings of the system.
      1.     List vehicle features which improve its fightability and useability.
      Additonal Features:
      Feel free to list more features as you see fit, in more categories.
      Free expression zone: Let out a big yeehaw to impress the world with your design swagger! Kindly spoiler this section if it’s very long.
       Example for filling in Appendix 1
       Example for filling in Appendix 2
       Example for filling in Appendix 3

      GOOD LUCK!
    • 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
      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).
  • Create New...