Project Reality Forums

I have been looking at some websites on info for Merkava and apparently they did poorly due to armour being...weak(as in it gets disabled by RPG-29 from front, and crew only has decent survivability due to engine, acting as another layer of armour, being in front of passengers). And their production was stopped too?

I have no doubt that Israel would not have as advanced armour technologies as Major world powers; but penetrated by RPG-29 from front?

Is that true and is it reflected in PR(minus the RPG-29 part)?

ComradeHX wrote:snip

It's the tandem warhead and RPG-29 that's so cool, nothing wrong with Merkavas armor. Apparently also Challenger II was penetrated through front (with ERA) with tandem RPG-29. So says the mighty wiki.
Also citation from there same paragraph: "The American Army ranks the RPG-29 threat to American armor so high that they refused to allow the newly formed Iraqi army to buy it, fearing it will fall into insurgent hands."

Btw, is wiki allowed in China?

PG-29 is modern weapon, so it can destroy modern tank.

Most modern tank has front armourment, equal to 500-700 mm of steel(without reactive armor), so RPG-29 can hit them.

Not sure if the Merkava has composite armor. If it does, and is comparable to the Abrams/Leo 2s, I'd probably guesstimate it's protection to be basically impervious on the front mantlet and turret, but the lower glacis is vulnerable and the upper glacis would be angle dependent.

Hunt3r wrote:Not sure if the Merkava has composite armor. If it does, and is comparable to the Abrams/Leo 2s, I'd probably guesstimate it's protection to be basically impervious on the front mantlet and turret, but the lower glacis is vulnerable and the upper glacis would be angle dependent.

I have seen photo of destroyed Merkava and inside of armour does not look like steel; but it looks like...wood.

So it would definitely be some sort of composite armour; but I do not think it would be as good as any of above.

I beleive Merkava has pretty good armour, plus the turret is slanted so angle bonus on that.

i dont think small bumps damage the merkava in real life

ComradeHX wrote:I have seen photo of destroyed Merkava and inside of armour does not look like steel; but it looks like...wood.

So it would definitely be some sort of composite armour; but I do not think it would be as good as any of above.

Most likely a spall liner.

Also which version of the merkava is the article about?

Arnoldio wrote:I beleive Merkava has pretty good armour, plus the turret is slanted so angle bonus on that.

I do not think sloped armour matters much against modern tank rounds.

[R-DEV]Tim270 wrote:Most likely a spall liner.

Also which version of the merkava is the article about?

I had no idea which one this is:
I also cannot find that older photo I saw because it is buried in an image board.

In reality none of the modern MBT can survive close range bullseye heavy AT strikes. All of them will sustain severe damage, so its not just Merkava.



I'm not talking about PG7s here.

From the tank books I have (that's why I can't give a link) it's said that the Merkava is one of the best protected tanks in the world, and only the Challenger is heavier.

Not only is the motor in the front and the front side of the turret is as tiny as possible, they also placed the crew as deep and as far at the back as possible. The armour of the tank is actually not known, but it is assumed it is a composite armour, similar to the modern western tanks.

So I would guess if anything, the Merkava (and the Challenger) are one of the best protected tanks at all. Doesn't mean they are impenetrable.

Edit:

German wiki also says the following things:

- Merkava IS the heaviest tank in the world
- even the bottom of the tank has a several centimeters thick armour and is slanted to the sides, to deflect the blast of mines
- the seats of the crew also have no connection to the hull bottom
- the AFEDSS is a system which detects a piercing hollow charge and immediately extinguishes it with halon.
- MK I and II had only steel armour, MK III finally composite armour
- The tank has hollows at the sides of the turret for a better protection
- Mk IV finally receives a new hull with improved armour, instead of the ordinary steel armour
- the exterior, removable armour parts are at least 0,5m thick with the first 30cm apparently being laminate armour with different metals and some white layers, probably glass reinforced plastic
- the roof is at least 15cm thick
- the Trophy HV system detects projectiles (missiles?) fired against the tank and tries to stop them with an explosively formed penetrator a few meters before they hit. Then the system reloads itself to stop the next rocket. It is recorded that the system works, and an RPG has been stopped that way. It also calculates where the shot came from, so the tank can engage immediately
- the Merkava also has a laser detection system
- due to the more evenly distributed armour the Merkava does not reach the maximum armour values of the other western tanks, although it has even more weight

Some armour values:



Wannenfront = hull front
Turmfront = turret front
KE = APFSDS

Those values are RHA equivalents, which means it shows the thickness of the needed steel armour like in WW2 to reach the same extend of protection. It's a system to compare the different modern composite armours.

For comparison:

Abrams:


Challenger1:


unten = bottom
oben = top

PR is not realistic enough.

ComradeHX wrote:I do not think sloped armour matters much against modern tank rounds.

Why would they do it then? Its all about force distribution and maximizing the effectivenes. Yes modern AT ammo is extremely effective but that doesnt mean they will give up on armor techinques.

Arnoldio wrote:Why would they do it then? Its all about force distribution and maximizing the effectivenes. Yes modern AT ammo is extremely effective but that doesnt mean they will give up on armor techinques.

Not sure about isreali; but sloped armour is not as effective and it decreases internal space for other stuff, so that is why you see most modern tanks are not as sloped as...let's say JS-3.

Joker86 wrote:From the tank books I have (that's why I can't give a link) it's said that the Merkava is one of the best protected tanks in the world, and only the Challenger is heavier.

When was your book written in?

Does that explain why one of world's "best" protected tanks will have production stopped very soon?

Some time ago I read about it being 2nd best protected tanks in world (possible from Jane's) but now I cannot find such article when searching for it(only 6 results from Jane's and none of them are about how great Merkava tanks are supposed to be).

Yes, the books are already a bit older, of course.

But the Wiki information I gave should be up to date. Just keep in mind it's Wiki information.

ComradeHX wrote:I do not think sloped armour matters much against modern tank rounds.

It always does, sloped armor will push KE rounds to try and align with the normal, and slope will always increase the maximum thickness of the armor.

Joker86 wrote:Challenger1:


unten = bottom
oben = top

afaik the CR2 is much, much stronger than the CR1, only ~5% of the components are the same in both and the CR1 was retired back in the 1990s so isn't really a good comparison to a modern MBT.

ComradeHX wrote:I do not think sloped armour matters much against modern tank rounds.

It works the same way as it did back in WW2, by making the round pass though a thicker wall of armour than is really there. Its a very good way of saving weight on the design, which is very important for speed and range while also keeping it heavily armoured.

Mouthpiece wrote: Btw, is wiki allowed in China?

It's allowed in mainland China, but some of contexts are blocked off for some obvious reason.



To OP, Merkava is nice cause it protects crew members from wounded or killed, any tanks on this planet can't really prevent to be destoried or disabled. Front engine help crews have more chance to survive.
Talk about RPG, dont forget a Chinese military otaku's famous saying RPG神教?. With a proper warhead, anything is possible.(Maybe a Nuclear Warhead? Just kidding.)


In PR:BF2, different tanks have different characters, from firing rate to speed...ect. But armor, I dont see any differences, 2 hits or 5 hits using AP, it's down. I had never touched PR:ARMA2, so I can never give a conclusion.

Anyone correct me if I have made mistakes.


Edit, sloped armour is Revolutionary, save material and weight. That's why T-34s are awesome.
Even today, we can see sloped armour everywhere.(Played WOT? Why soviet tanks are 'hentai' to us?)

I think in therms of armor the merkava is in a league with the leopard and M1 tank. The gun is the same Rheinmetall gun found on all modern tanks. It might not be quite as well armored as an m1 or leopard, but it can carry troops, has the engine in the front for crew protection and an escape hatch in the rear. So I would say its the best tank for the way the idf uses tanks. But in a conventional battle you want something sofisticated like an leopard, they can actually take down gunships with their targeting systems.

Acemantura wrote:

PR is not realistic enough.

The after pic they omitted

well the Merkava Mk 4 armor is a classified composite matrix of laminated ceramic-steel-nickel alloy, sloped modular design.
and as said the crew is right in the center of the tank, with all the tank materials arranged around them, the engine is installed in the front for maximum crew protection, seems a tough and well protected tank huh.....

but as anything human designs, there are drawbacks, if this tank got hit in it's rear escape hatch, by an advanced AT missile or a 125mm tank round of the t-72, or even by an RPG-7 with a special warhead, the crew inside will have a fatal explosion inside......

in 2006 during the Lebanon war, Hezbollah used AT-14 (9m133) kornet against the Merkava this way, in which they destroyed several Merkava tanks, although the kornet is capable of penetrating the frontal armor of the Merkava, the same with Hamas in the 2009 Gaza war, and during some clashes between Hamas and the IDF

right now the israeli's are developing the new trophy system, which is an countermeasure against guided AT missile, although still not widely used and tested, but did some partial success against the AT-14 in 2011 when fired by Hamas and the Merkava evaded the missile.

you should know these information when you live in the middle east.