Well i dont know about this stuff enough so i wish u good luck
Looks very detailed but then again, I won’t be surprised anymore. Even if this gets through, we might see a rework in about a year or never lol. Pretty awesome stuff though, waiting for the report <3
4 Likes
Real-life values go even beyond, with an IDF officer once admitted that they took a ‘safety range’ above what was necessary to protect the tank from local tank gun threats - so well beyond the KE-W level, since that is Egypt’s top shell. The hull supposedly resists all modern tank guns up to DM53, if Israel admits one thing double it and you got the real data. The turret of even Mk.4A/B was nearly invulnerable to Kornets (ask Eli Daparin).
1 Like
Well here I´m trying to get to an estimation as supported as possible by sources. Its very possible that through the years the armor has been improved in different aspects through continuous iterations. But here I´m refering to what may be the first generation of Merkava 4 armor, as described in the source cited. Given the described theoretical limits of this armor technology, I see it unlikely that the hull can stop DM53 without sacrificing the power pack (and if so, not at close range).
For the turret on the other hand, the article supports the idea that both the front and side can resist succesfully Kornet shots pretty much at any angle.
2 Likes
My man, those continuous improvements are a big part of what makes the IDF special. Any battle - and Israel had many since the Mk.4 was made - became a lesson, and eventually an upgrade, usually to the armor, as crew safety is No.1 in Israel.
Beyond any tank at it’s time.
Don’t be so sure. But I would gladly sacrifice my powerpack in-game though. And most importantly, it’s more likely to damage to powerpack but not completley destroy it.
But long range is a whole different story.
Reality at it’s finest.
3 Likes
I don´t know what makes X tank armor “the best” of its time. There are many parameters. Merkava 4 for sure has the best armor coverage even today. However, it doesn´t come free especially in terms of weight. On the other hand we know for sure that other contemporary tanks fetured better KE protection (T-90A, for example, also entering service in 2004 had about 720mm KE). In terms of multi hit capability of its armor modules, Merkava 4 also is behind most of the tanks. It works for IDF but its unlikely to work for anyone else.
Regarding DM53, it wasn´t a reference threat for Merk 4 especially in its earlier years. There was no prospect for the round to be exported to Egypt then.
About the armor itself, the source is very clear regarding the limits of its effectiveness vs LRPs: to be effective, the armor needs to have as much PMMA-like material at LOS as the length of the LRP. In the article I also go over some extra things that can be done to enhance the volume efficiency somewhat. Nevertheless, DM53 penetrator is at least 640mm long (depending on what is considered part of the penetrator, it could be even 685mm long). On the Merk 4 UFP there is no way to fit more than 435mm of PMMA-like material at LOS. So we are talking about a 640mm LRP vs 435mm of PMMA, hence its very unlikely that the front hull can stop such a projectile, perhaps at 1.5-2km but also sacrificing the powerpack (mobility kill). I would bet that if the distance is any closer the DM53 would make it right into the crew compartment producing casualties.
1 Like
The IDF had already stated that The first genration of Mk.4s was frontally invulnerable to any regional threat, which includes KE-W armed M1 tanks from Egypt. That means it has enough armor to completley stop a 583 mm penatrating round at point blank. The engine block was designed in such way and built of such materials that it would stop and absorb spall and rounds which penatrated the armor. But if a KE-W would fail to go through at point blank, then only DM53 level of shells might penatrate. And even then, the shell will most likely deal no damage to the crew.
If you have a source for the IDF saying it exactly in such a way, it would be very helpful for my article. But what my estimation essentially yields is that yes, KE-W will be defeated by the turret frontally while a hit on the hull it most likely will result in a mobility kill.
1 Like
there still might be hope for the merkavas
Meh, its a mixed bag to be honest. Because while protection levels wouldn´t be stellar, mobility should be nerfed greatly.
I would take it
Being able to eat rounds in the turret and ufp(mahbe expet dm53) is a massive advantge for this tank
1 Like
Though beware. If I get to make a bug report based on my investigation and its passed and all, its unlikely Merk 4 front armor is going to be buffed beyond 580mm KE on the vertical. Thats enough for protecting vs KE-W, DM43, BM60 (although theres a case to argue for BM60 beating this protection level, won´t go into it for the moment as I´m still looking into patents) and M829A1. But won´t protect even at 2km vs DM53 or M829A2 and others. And this is talking just front turret, front hull will be penetrated by all these rounds (perhaps you will just loose the engine).
1 Like
genuinely would be better then what we have atm, hell might even make the namer better
1 Like
Its a start and if the merk4 will have a good turret armor with the fire power it has it will be amazing tank just behind the leos and the t series
Well the problem with that is the merkava has terrible mobility as is. It technically has better mobility irl than in game
IRL we are talking a max speed of 60 km/h, with power to weight ratio of 18,75. Currently, ingame Merkavas weight is 65t (should be 80) and their p/w is mostly on par with other tanks.
Idf stated its 64kmh so gaijin right on this one
Gotta love how gaijin won’t fix its weight and armor, but at least they got the top speed right… lmao
1 Like
Idk if it’s just me, but that thing doesn’t scream 170mm to me…
1 Like
170mm on the lower part of the UFP, maybe?
