Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The Merkava MK-4

1 posted on 09/28/2006 8:51:48 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: sukhoi-30mki

The Merkava is a huge source of National Pride for the Israeli's. They probably will end up buying future tanks from western powers. The only tank I think that is better is the Abrams. They may not need to keep producing individual units because they will have plenty for years to come, in order to do this they would have to keep some of the factories open to make parts and upgrades.


2 posted on 09/28/2006 9:18:01 PM PDT by lmr (The answers to life don't involve complex solutions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Bad move. What if the West refuses to manufacture Tanks for Israel?


3 posted on 09/28/2006 9:22:09 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican (Everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Merkava has important specific features for war as fought
by the IDF, including extra water storage and a access door for ground troops/egress. Possibly they could do an
offshore build or modify an existing Western tank.

UK Chieftain would be the closest equivalent. Israel
can't afford the turbine's fuel consumption.


4 posted on 09/28/2006 9:37:13 PM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

This article starts off as "The IDF has decided", but that really means "The politically appointed cronies of Kadima appointed to senior IDF posts were commanded to decide that the merkava tank production line will be shut down within four years."

If this decision was made before the Lebanon affiar, it means the Kadima partners were demanding the Merkava appropriations for domestic social spending, and Olmert and Kadima were more than willing to gut the increasingly religious military of funding to secure the Knesset votes of the minor coalition parties.

Olmert has the highest unfavorable ratings of any politician in Israel's history, including Arab MKs. He still hasn't resigned, he plans to take down Israel if that's what necessary to cling onto his personal power. Gutting th emilitary for bread and circuses didn't give him a moment of pause.


5 posted on 09/28/2006 9:49:29 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Its a badass because it can act as a troop carrier and a traditional tank.

Unfortunately, Hezbollah/Syria is being sold highly effective anti-tank missiles by the Russians and its only a matter of time before Iran gets a truck load smuggled into the gaza strip.

Israel should still keep some of these around well maintained if they ever need them, but until there is an effective way to stop the weapons sold to terrorist regimes by the russians, these tanks are sitting ducks out in the battle field.


6 posted on 09/28/2006 9:53:34 PM PDT by Proud_USA_Republican (We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki
I think I read somewhere, that Israel already has 5,000 of various Merkava variants. That's quite a number for a small country.

Can anyone confirm or update that figure?


Thanks.
7 posted on 09/28/2006 10:20:17 PM PDT by nralife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

>>>not impervious to the rockets. 500 rockets were fired at Israeli tanks, 47 Merkava tanks were hit

Somewhat misleading as this story implies a massacre of Israeli armor. I read a prior story a month or so giving a breakdown on the figures.

By memory, it said of the tanks hit, about 20 had their armor pierced. Only 5 were write offs. For the number of tracks engaged, this is a lesser % of of tanks lost or knocked out when hit as compared to previous Israeli-Lebanon combat.

Did anybody ever suggest the Merkeva WAS "impervious" ?


8 posted on 09/29/2006 12:24:09 AM PDT by tlb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sukhoi-30mki

"Several defense establishment figures believe that the tank is no longer appropriate for the modern battlefield."


This idea seems to pop up every generation or so. I remember similar criticisms during the development of the M1 Abrams back in the 1980s - no tank could survive on a modern battlefield, etc.


13 posted on 09/29/2006 9:23:18 AM PDT by DemforBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson