Im not?
I just said all tanks that get shot in the same area will lose its armor
Even leo turret armor
But unlike other mbts israel made merkava armor to be easily replaced so it can go back to the fight soon as possible cuz israel doesnt have alot of tanks so every unit counts
1 Like
In and out armor replacement is useful, and easily proven to be strong when done correctly.
Also you’re not for making sure Merkava is accurate? I was under the impression you were.
I do want merkava to be accurate but since we doesnt have documents gaijin needs to estimate things according to the tanks feats and read between the lines of articles and such
And ppl estimate things wrong cuz they saw some political tiktoker says merkava has been destroyed by yassin105
1 Like
[/quote]
You’re confusing exports with deployment. Sure, the T-72 and Leopard have seen combat out of their own countries, but that’s not easy for them. The only country other than the US that can reliably ship its forces across the world within days is France.
[/quote]
These machines, are designed to be exported and excel in all terrains… and once a country buys a tank it’s more or less a done deal, sure you need NATO or russian type of ammo, but you can buy these everywhere. And some spare parts… But if you buy the merkava you tie yourself to israel as the material consumption of spare parts and armor modules will be greater, as it is the philosophy of the tank.
[/quote]
Do you seriously think that those countries can still do that? European Tank readiness rates are extremely low.
Did you see how long it took to get a handful of them combat-ready and sent to Ukraine? Britain can barely field their tanks to begin with these days.
[/quote]
Well if they are ready or not right now is a different subject… armies decay in peace time if not maintaind properly
[/quote]
The K2 is in service with Poland.
[/quote]
Didn’t know that
[/quote]
That comparison doesn’t make any sense. The Merkava isn’t designed remotely close to the K2?
[/quote]
It wasn’t a comparison, was just thinking out loud if korea is in a similar situation
[/quote]
It would not change if that was a Russian crew or not.
[/quote]
Probably not…
- Not sure about this comment of me siding with Alvis ? My ideas are my own
- How da hell this quotes supposed to work ?
The sad truth is that I think Gaijin is right… If you’ll implement true performance of merkava and NATO tank and also soviet tanks, modern tank game will die… Russian stuff/style is half of the vehicles…
So sadly we need some russian bias to keep the game moving
Yea… but right now it’s not fighting at the intensity it could if against another country with thousands of tanks… in this case the logistics load will skyrocket, as tanks gets damaged
What you said about how easy it is to be replace:
The difference is that you NEED to replace merkava’s module after a hit or 2 as the armor is designed to destroy it self to stop penetrators… ( it will probably work, but will start losing effectiveness)
Other mbt armor don’t need to be replaced after 2 hits they can withstand many more hits…
No tank can be good at everything…every one make compromises
I dont think so
In fact as i said merkava designed to be easily repaired
Which can be very good to a long therm war
U dont know its durability and there is diffrence between ce and ke
Until we have clear evidance we shouldnt assume anything
Sure it’s easy… but how many armor modules can you produce ? Ablnd how many can you deliver to the front line ?
It’s true I don’t know how the structure will hold against kinetics… But i believe it is designed to be sacrificed… it is less dense bulky and has explosives
Delivering isnt a problem israel is a tiny country
Producing isnt such a problem also
Israel buy metrials and bulid it in factories which are probably isnt very far from the front line anyway
Belive isnt a proof
And in photos it looks pretty danse so idk
Its 70-80t tank for a reason
Yea ! Now you see my point, Israel doesn’t have these constraints so it can make its dream tank, unlike other countries
Unfortunately believes aren’t proof no… :(
Although there are many people that don’t get this concept
It’s heavy, not dense. Abrams is dense. All the armor is in the front, the Merkava is heavy, the armor is all around the vehicle. So it can never be dense, as it will start reach Maus level of stupidness
1 Like
It can, with a lot of love and car it can grow into a beautiful Merkava one day ❤️
Just make sure to water it daily
Its heavy and dense
Being a maus is an exaggeration and all tho its protected from the side its not insted of the front or smt
It should be high tier heavy tank!
One of the successes of the m4 is that it has alot of protection without being too heavy for its protection weight ratio
The first m4 were the same weight as the m3 with much better protection.
Military ppl said it has no less then leo 2 level of protection
Also i think gaijin rly underastimate the engine armor value which is a big factor but i cant proof it
It’s heavy yes, but relative to other tanks armor it is less dense.
Not saying it is cardboard, but it can’t have large slabs of heavy metal. That is actually not an opinion, but a fact.
-
It will certainly have dense materials inside !! That are working with other composite to make the necessary effects. But it won’t be large slabs of it. As the vehicle weight will skyrocket.
-
An exception will be the front hull armor, it will be probably made out of denser array of metals and ceramics
They’re not. The Leopard 2A4 and T-72 have a poor track record in some countries. Turkey and the middle east especially did not utilize those vehicles well.
The Abrams, Leopard, and similar vehicles would also be of limited use in India and much of the Pacific. If you want evidence for this, look no further than the Philippines adopting the Israeli Sabrah and China fielding the Type 15.
It’s not. The Merkava Mk.4 did not exist during the Cold War. Comparing the vehicle’s ability to stand up to those budgets is foolish at best.
This should show to you that despite the K2 being specialized for South Korea, other countries have seen its potential in different combat.
Both South Korea and Israel have exported equipment to countries not in the same situation as themselves.
For South Korea, that would be Poland, Norway, and such. For Israel, that would be nearly every single European nation, India, China, the US, Philippines, and more.
Israel has exported more.
1 Like
@Alan_Tovarishch can you give me a little insider as to when you will possibly be dropping your report/ pt2 ( and if you need more information if you haven’t already you can go to shiryon archives discord server, lots of open info always going through there if you haven’t checked it out already )
Sadly, no. Got too much on my hands as it is. I´m working on an addendum to Part 1, with more sources that strengthen the arguments I presented there. Together, part 1 and addendum have the necessary material to make a bug report regarding the tanks frontal armor and KE protection effectivenes. Parts 2 and 3 will be nowhere that long and will deal with side armor and roof armor respectively.