There has been an acknowledged armor complaint for the Merkava IV series for almost 3 years now I think.
Also, the armor in game is considered NERA, when it should actually be SLERA.
It doesn’t. The Russian ERA stops more.
Unfortunately, the Merkava 4M’s trophy struggles to stop the 9.7 Krizantema.
1 Like
First of all Era should be better on it’s own its active protection not 0assive NeRA.
Then, merkaba4 front hull + transmission + engine outdoes things like t90m hull it stops more
Even merk1,2 stop like 400-450mm heat. Merk 4 stops like 1300+
Those armor blocks on the Merkava are a type of armor called SLERA. It’s basically a super ERA that deletes chemical projectiles. It also has the ability to stop a large amount of KE, but Gaijin doesn’t think so for some reason despite it being a huge mix of NERA and ERA.
1 Like
It’s not NERA. It’s SLERA, but Gaijin has failed to model it properly.
Yeah, but despite the front plate being full to the brim with SLERA and other things HEAT doesn’t like, HEAT still goes through easily.
Also, the Russian UFP on T tanks aren’t much thicker, if at all. The Merkava has a better slope and should have better KE protection since the SLERA is a better form of protection than an ERA block.
57mm* from a 2A90 autocannon
Also merk was designed to fight against old t54, 55, 62, 64 series tanks of the neighbouring nations so It was never designed to ‘parry’ hits from actual modern ammunition.
The APS was the main feature of protection IMO.
As can be seen from the armour image shared above, the armour is too thin to stop anything with more than 400mm of penetration.
And no the modern Russian t-80 and t-90 have waaaay thicker armour plates with composite and reactive plates that’s why they are better armoured
1 Like
Merkava 3 and 4 were designed when Egipt already was producing Abrams on their own turf and military conflict with them never went off the table to begin with.
1 Like
they know egypt never gonna attack… they got the gov in their hands
This is false. Even the Achzarit heavy IFV are known to have armor capable of stopping 3BM42.
Even the Merkava 1 and 2 fought T-72 tanks successfully with low casualty rates. Also, their neighboring nations and enemies have equipment just as good as Russia does. As an example, Iran has capabilities on par to Russia.
And also, even if we assume the Merkava is specifically geared to CE protection and forgoes KE protection, it doesn’t do a good job. Even the UFP can’t stop Russia’s missile at 9.7 reliably despite that being blatantly incorrect and Gaijin has acknowledged this for over a year now.
Not to mention that many Missiles overwhelm Trophy in game, which is strange. Trophy should be able to consistently stop almost ever missile in game, if not EVERY missile.
It’s not. The SLERA on the Merkava is superior to Russian Kontakt-5 due to construction.
The Armor in-game is modeled poorly. Not only is it the wrong type of armor (NERA when it should be SLERA), it also just isn’t shaped properly in some areas. For example, the side skirts are vastly thinner than they should be.
In the second image provided, you can clearly see that the in-game Side skirts are modeled wrong. They’re far too thin. And you can’t deny this since Gaijin has accepted this as incorrect on the Issues page.
And also, even if we assume Russian ERA is better that SLERA, which it isn’t based on deductive reasoning, the Front Plate should still be more effective than any Russian UFP. Their thickness is nearly identical and the Merkava’s angle is far superior to the Russian equivalent. Using more deductive reasoning, we can also come to the conclusion that a tank designed in the 80s should have inferior armor technology to one built 20 years later (not referring to the T-90. It’s just the only one I own). If that amount of time doesn’t seem like a lot to you, you should realize that 20 years ago from today, Gaming PCs barely ever had even a single gigabyte of RAM. It should also be noted that the Merkava has been consistently improved since its Debut.
While it is true that the T series have an overall thicker plate by a small margin, the Merkava has a vastly superior UFP angle. The Armor is also SLERA on the Merkava, which should act like a mix of both ERA and NERA, but it doesn’t do that in-game.
The base armor of a T-72 and a T-80 hasn’t changed that much. Without the ERA, Russian Armor in-game would be vastly weaker. However, the Merkava’s SLERA is being concidered “Composite Screens” and “NERA”, which is incorrect. If Gaijin fixed this, the Merkava might actually have a decent chance at surviving a hit. As it stands in-game, the Merkava can’t even stop HEAT-FS reliably.
5 Likes
1,200mm*.
Bruh that’s a complaint? That the merk cant stop a missile with more than a whole damn METER of penetrative power?
Like bro that’s the capability of the tank vs the missile its simple math.
Missile pen > tank armour = penetration + damage.
The missile can pen 1200mm of RHA (AND is a tandem warhead so it seen zones SLERA) and gaijin calculates that the merk’s frontal armour is rated at around 927mm of CE protection at that angle (not an unrealistic estimate). So what happens when you do the following equation:
1200 - 927 = ____
The answer is 273mm.
Oh my…
Look at that!
The missile has and extra 273mm of penetrative potential AFTER it has gone through the UFP of the merk. It will have a similar amour after it goes thru the UFP of other tanks of the BR. (If not more) (including Russian tanks).
I cannot understand what the complaint here is.
The merk isnt the best tank nor is it indestructible. And I’ve seen ATGMs from my grandpas era penetrate the UFP of the poor merk. So sorry but I don’t rate the armour very capable of stopping modern ammunition.
Modelling inaccuracies aside, nothing is 100% when it comes to such game models as info is classified. And we cant use classified info even if we have it.
Trust me people have tried. It only gets Gaijin into trouble.
I’d personally state against this. Even if an ATGM blasts through the UFP, it still has to go through the ~2000mm of engine and transmission, which if you think about it, they are just two massive blocks of spaced armour.
merk was designed starting 1970 and in service 9 years later in 79.
At the time, the neighbouring nations barely had anything more the early model T-72As and T-72M1s etc.
The merk designers were expecting current ammunition and future ammunition but no one can afford to go overboard with armour (on a 65ton obesity). So they expected 3BM15 (400mm at 0*), 3BM17 (similar to 15), 3BM22 (420mm at 0*) and eventually as they came around to it, 3BM26, 3BM32 and 3BM42 ‘mango’ (kek) (457mm at 0*).
So I imagine they would be caught off guard when they found their brain child facing modern 3BM60 in a video game with 580mm of pen at 0*. No wonder it struggles with protection. It was never meant to face such ammunition.
Spoiler
Not from egypt (neutered), not from syria (too busy), not from jordan or lebanon (busy too), and iran is not gonna do a tank invasion because its pretty much unfeasible.
Cannot be taken as fact as that is a claim. And also, given the correct angle, even a BT-5 can ricochet or stop a modern APFSDS shell.
Ive heard the opposite.
Infact, I’ve heard the T-72 has never faced the merkavas and the merkavas have never faced the T-72.
And even against syrian T-62s it suffered losses.
Historical reports from 2010 state that even kornet ATGMs could penetrate the UFP of the merk.
Heck, even the RPG-29 can defeat the SLERA of the merk.
this is a relative method of calculation you are taking. br spread doesnt matter. Stats do. And the penetration statistics show that the supposed 9.7 russian missile has 1,200mm of penetration. So yeah. please recheck your claims with respect to penetration vs armour values instead of br.
This is accurate to real life. And since personal experience is valid evidence here… I have seen it. so its true.
thats just purely wrong. SLERA is basically ERA with less explosive filler so it can be stacked. but we know that the main thickness of the UFP of the merk is no where more than 400mm and not all of that is SLERA ‘active’. hence tandem warheads and modern ammunition that the merk faces in game go thru like butter.
Kotakt-5 is way better purely because it has more filler and has been designed to face modern ammunition ever sine Kontakt-1 dropped.
again, this is not part of the discussion which was abt the UFP. no side armour on any tank i know can stop an APFSDS shell.
but yes i agree to this.
in your opinion it isnt. we can disagree.
thats… a biased statement if i ever heard one. Ive seen knocked out T-80BVMs and T-90s and they have a BRUTAL amount of pure muscle in their UFP. The merk cannot match that while maintaining 65 tons.
not always true and i dont know which tanks you are talking about, the merk is a 1979 starting service tank while the t-72 is a 1969 starting service tank. im not saying the base model T-72 has better UFP than the merk but were comparing in game so its not a T-72 itll be a T-80 (1976)(base model) or T-90 (1992).
This is not a Merk special feature, every tank has gone thru this. Even ammunition does.
nearly 100mm more isnt a small margin…
it has.
without SLERA, merk armour in real life would be vastly weaker.
IMO it will still get penetrated easily by the ammunition variety that it faces in game.
the engagement scenarios in game can prove unrealistic, but thats what makes WT a game. its not always realistic. we have to bear that in mind.
in my experience it can and the armour is considerably tough to beat with older APFSDS.
1 Like
The transmission is lower so it doesnt affect much, but i think the engine was counted in the 927mm figure calculated by the armour penetration calculator in WT. And of that nearly 20000mm of spaced armour (engine), it is not comparable to RHA nor is it consistent. And air doesnt really stop a molten piece of metal flyin at you at mach 1
It’s incorrect.
huh?
It’s incorrect. SLERA should stop vastly more than it does in-game. Gaijin has acknowleged.
i dont deny that.
but please, share that report as well so i can see EXACTLY how much.