NationStates Jolt Archive


Merkava Mk B1

Johnistan
10-10-2003, 03:54
The Merkava Mk B1

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/merkava/images/merkava5.jpg

The Merkava Mk 3 shown here. The Merkava Mk B1 has a smaller turret and a longer gun

Weight: 63 tons
Max Road Speed: 55 mph
Max Ground Speed: 40 mph

Description
The Merkava B1 is a departure from pervious Merkava designs in many ways. The first of being the placement of the crew in what was previously the infantry bay. Now all that resides in the turret is the auto-loader and the tank’s ammunition supply. This greatly increases crew survivability and reduces the tank’s profile. Most of the armor that was previous on the turret is now added to the front, sides, and back of the tank. This configuration makes the Merkava Mk B1 much more survivable and lethal on the battlefield. The tank is also equipped with a deep fording snorkel.

Self-Protection
The Merkava is protected by spaced layers of ceramic, Depleted Uranium, and other high strength, low weight materials. This armor configuration is very resistant against both HEAT and KE projectiles. The Merkava is also protected by MEXAS semi reactive armor. This armor is a combination of chemicals and ceramics at the center of the main armor package that gives the same protection from HEAT rounds as 4th Generation Chobham but is much less bulky and heavy.
The armor is modular and very easy to replace and repair. Changing of a specific module can be done by the crew in less then 10 minutes.
Also protection the Merkava is Kaktus-20 ERA. This ERA is specifically designed to defeat longs using heavy tungsten plates instead of steel. This ERA has shown to reduce the effectiveness of 135mm electro-thermal APFSDS rounds by 30%.
The APS on the Merkava is Arena-5. Arena-5 uses an instant scan radar to detect incoming ATGMs and destroy them by launching a grenade at them
RHA equivalents against long rods
Front: 2,100mm
Sides: 1,500mm
Back: 500mm
Top: 300mm

Weapons Systems
The Merkava Mk B1 is equipped with a 140mm JH-140 electro-thermal cannon. This cannon can fire APFSDS, HEAT, and HE-FRAG. The cannon has a fume extractor and thermal sleeve to reduce barrel wear and increase accuracy. Placed behind the engine is a tank of liquid nitrogen, when the barrel heats up it can be doused to cool it off. This helps reduce barrel wear and thermal signature. The barrel is fed by an auto-loader that hold 50 rounds or 25 missiles with a feed rate of 1 round per 5 seconds. The APFSDS rounds fired by the Merkava are longer then normal ones, increasing their penetrating power.
The Merkava Mk B1 is also capable of firing the Common Modular missile system. The CMM is a family of warheads, guidance packages, and booster engines that can be changed in the field in less then 10 minutes by the crew. There are double, triple, WP, smoke, and HE warheads. There are optical, laser, radar, and thermal guidance packages. There are booster engines that can give this missile an artillery profile, giving it a range of 12 miles.
Also mounted next to the main gun is a 25mm OCSW weapon and a 7.62mm machine gun. The turret holds 300 25mm rounds

Fire Control
The new fire control system, developed by Johnistani El Op includes very advanced features including the capability to acquire and lock onto moving targets, even airborne helicopters, while the tank itself is on the move.
Observation is provided by the EYES observation system. Mounted around the tank are 5 cameras with both thermal and night vision This provides a complete 360 degree view of the surrounding terrain. This greatly increases reaction time and crew situational awarenes.
JDI developed the Merkava's communications system, theJ-RAY battle system has the location of every other system using it and gives their location on a digital map. It allows instant radio or written comm. with them.
Propulsion
The Merkava Mk 10 is powered by a 1800 horsepower hydrogen turbine. The fuel cells operate by pulling the electrons off of an H2 molecule, splitting it into 2H+ molecules and 2 electrons. The electrons pass through the "load" (engines, weapons, avionics, etc.) creating current and powering the systems. Meanwhile, the 2H+ molecules pass from the anode to the cathode through the electrolyte. At the other "end", the electrons then recombine with the 2H+ molecules and Oxygen (from the air) and are release as water from the rear of the vehicle. The water can be stored in tanks for comsumption. The fuel cells also give off much less heat then normal combustion engines, making it less observable on the battlefield.

Cost: 7.5 million USD.
Bereza
10-10-2003, 03:59
mmm....better-designed than ours, but not as well-armored or with as much firepower. same engine. less features. same fire control comp. more expensive. you have a picture, though, so that kinda more than makes up for everything else...hmm...
Johnistan
10-10-2003, 04:00
How can it not be as well armored?
Bereza
10-10-2003, 04:02
our armor is more high-tech and if not the pride of our military technology industries, is still highly praised by crews and allies. in actual combat, yours (being much more highly sloped) probably isn't much less effective, though. against choppers or side shots, though...different story.

i've a mini-spiel on ranking tanks and their features. if you like, i can post it.
Johnistan
10-10-2003, 04:05
Does it use future or yet to be discovered materials?
Johnistan
10-10-2003, 04:05
Go for it
Bereza
10-10-2003, 04:19
it's not future-tech. it's basically just as effective against KEs as yours (maybe somewhat more, especially since our T-64 is a heavy tank by weight, and has very thick frontal armor), but is especially effective against large HEATs, such as hellfires (which a T-64 can stop from just about any angle).

spiel: generations, what do they mean?
a 1st generation tank (like the british Mk 4 or char-bis-something) has early-type engines, pathetic armor, and mostly a bunch of machine guns. they are infantry tanks, designed to move at the speed of infantry.
a 2nd generation tank (like the panzer 2 or other early WWII) is faster and better armored than 1st generation. they are designed to accompany mechanized infantry. their firepower has at least a 20mm autocannon, or a light AT gun.
a 3rd generation tank (like the king tiger or T-34) are designed more to fight alone than with infantry. their emphasis is on firepower, and then a compromise between armor and speed. they usually have powerful, general-purpose guns, and machine guns are secondary armament.
a 4th generation tank (like early T72's) are the first with fire control computers, advanced sights (like night vision or FLIR), autoloaders, and smoothbore guns, and either laminated or "extra" armor (schurzen doesn't count). they are designed to fight with a more general force of mechanized infantry and air support.
a 5th generation tank (like the abrams) has a reliable fire computer, advanced sights, sophisticated electronics (like GPS), special firepower (like guided missiles), and effective laminated armor.
a 6th generation tank has some significant new feature in armor, firepower, and maybe mobility. this includes things like special armor (not simply uranium and ceramic encased in steel) that is much better than even abrams or chobham stuff, guns that use some significant new technological improvement, hydrogen engines, etc.

the big deal with 6th generation is that they are a revival of a tank's ability to fight on a modern battlefield. 5th generations are failing because of infantry (and to a lesser extent, aircraft) anti-tank weapons.

yours is probably a late-5th generation tank. ours is more like early 6th.
10-10-2003, 04:25
ANd bereza, what exactly make your tank sooo 6th generation?
Clan Smoke Jaguar
10-10-2003, 06:31
a 1st generation tank (like the british Mk 4 or char-bis-something) has early-type engines, pathetic armor, and mostly a bunch of machine guns. they are infantry tanks, designed to move at the speed of infantry.
a 2nd generation tank (like the panzer 2 or other early WWII) is faster and better armored than 1st generation. they are designed to accompany mechanized infantry. their firepower has at least a 20mm autocannon, or a light AT gun.
a 3rd generation tank (like the king tiger or T-34) are designed more to fight alone than with infantry. their emphasis is on firepower, and then a compromise between armor and speed. they usually have powerful, general-purpose guns, and machine guns are secondary armament.
Char B1-bis is easily a 2nd generation, if not 3rd. It was one of the best tanks in the world in 1940, and had a 75mm gun (only other tanks with this at the time were Pz.IV, T-34, and some Soviet heavy tanks). It was used as an infantry support tank, but that was due to the French reliance of WWI tactics rather than performance limitations.
A generally neglected fact is that in the early days of WWII, the allies had superior tanks to the Germans. Matildas, S35s, Char B1s, T-34s, and KV-1s were all better than most early german tanks. The Germans just made better use of what they had.
Bereza
10-10-2003, 20:43
somehow, the name "char-bis-something" came to mind when i thought of wwi tanks. i know some were used in WWII, but i was thinking maybe some earlier models? i don't know. anyway, i stand corrected. and you're right - allied (at least russian) tanks were superior to early-war german ones (which i'd call 2nd gen). then came the tiger, panther, elefant, ferdinand, jagdtiger, jagdpanther, and king tiger (all of which are right in the middle of 3rd generation). it wasn't until the IS-3 (late 3rd) that the allies got the advantage back, and whether or not the '3 ever saw any action against the germans is still debated.

i consider my T-64 6th-generation mostly because of its armor, and maybe because of the hydrogen engine. it also has two main guns, but i wouldn't count that as a feature of 6th. other than that, it's just about identical with the best operational real-world tanks out there - near-perfect fire control, advanced sights, etc.

anyway, any comments on my generational ranking system?
Seversky
10-10-2003, 20:50
140mm? is that all?

Its good to know that my tank still has the largest cannon yet.
Bereza
10-10-2003, 20:52
"mine's bigger than yours!" :D

...how juvenile...probably not, anyway. we've 230mm siege guns on our T-73's. they'ren't standard battle tanks, though. they can barely move. and T-61's (which aren't MBT's either) have 125mm, but it's L/85 (meaning the barrel is something like 10 meters - 30+ feet - long).
Seversky
10-10-2003, 20:57
"mine's bigger than yours!" :D

...how juvenile...probably not

155mm HV, and fires green rounds. And the driveing force behind tank development is to build the biggest and best yet.
Clan Smoke Jaguar
10-10-2003, 23:17
somehow, the name "char-bis-something" came to mind when i thought of wwi tanks. i know some were used in WWII, but i was thinking maybe some earlier models? i don't know. anyway, i stand corrected. and you're right - allied (at least russian) tanks were superior to early-war german ones (which i'd call 2nd gen). then came the tiger, panther, elefant, ferdinand, jagdtiger, jagdpanther, and king tiger (all of which are right in the middle of 3rd generation). it wasn't until the IS-3 (late 3rd) that the allies got the advantage back, and whether or not the '3 ever saw any action against the germans is still debated.

i consider my T-64 6th-generation mostly because of its armor, and maybe because of the hydrogen engine. it also has two main guns, but i wouldn't count that as a feature of 6th. other than that, it's just about identical with the best operational real-world tanks out there - near-perfect fire control, advanced sights, etc.

anyway, any comments on my generational ranking system?
The ranking system is good, though there's naturally going to be some blurring (Matilda for one could be argued either 1st or 2nd gen).
It's not entirely surprising that the word Char came to mind for WWI French tanks. "Char" is French for tank, and many earlier vehicles were given that designation. Looking into it further, I did find a Char 2C bis from 1926, which was easily 1st generation. However, one must be careful as the B1 is by far the best known.
Bereza
12-10-2003, 08:34
a green round? what's a green round? and the "probably not" was in reference to your claim of biggest gun. we've 230mm if you're looking just at caliber, and 125 L/85 if you're counting actual firepower. on an mbt, though, you're either ahead, even, or not far behind (for actual firepower), or ahead (with caliber).

yes, there will always be blurring. as for the matilda, it's late 1st generation, because it's incapable of doing the job of a 2nd (due to its slow speed), and obviously anything later (due to everything else). it's a foot infantry tank by design. it's just not easy to say 1st generation because its armor doesn't suck (all that means, however, is that it does well what the mk.4 was supposed to - accompany foot infantry and not get ventilated by machine gun fire in the process).

the 6th thing is only theoretical in nature, keep in mind - 6th generation tanks don't actually exist in real life (at least in service).
12-10-2003, 16:27
[order cancelled]