Posted on 11/20/2002 2:57:01 PM PST by yonif
The tank was rolled out in all it's glory at the Maintenance and Restoration Center (MRC 7100) at the Tel-Hashomer military base. The location was selected because it was where the tank had been changed from a collection of drafts and sketches into a steel "baby". It was the place where it had been molded from the thousands of steel plates into an impressive metal tank.
The following is an excerpt from an article written by Guy Zakhaim, published in the Technological and Logisitical Directorates' Magazine (2nd edition) on October 2002.
Commander of the MRC 7100 Colonel Shahar Kadashi said in his speech: "The people at MRC have been involved in the development of the tank for a very long time. They have invested in it not only their hope, but phenomenal effort as well". He added, "We definitely feel that there is an element of a birth process here."
Blue and White at Half Price
The price of the Mark 4 Merkava tank is 30%-50% cheaper than any other tank worldwide.
"The father of the Merkava tank, Major General (ret.) Yisrael Tal, was keen that the tank be manufactured by the IDF's Military Industrial corps so as not to be bogged down by unnecessary red tape", said Brigadier David Engel, head of the Merkava tank program. "Most of the parts belonging to the Merkava 3 were made in Israel as part of Israel's "Tank-Building ideology". The Brigadier added, "a large number of the workmen actually molded the cast for the tank's metal sheets with their bare hands". As a result of the fact that an "Israeli made" Merkava is cheaper, the IDF has stopped importing tanks from abroad, thereby making the IDF more independent of foreign aid.
"It is a great source of pride, national pride even. Lots of foreign representatives come to visit and are genuinely impressed by the plant. The MRC has almost become a sort of pilgrimage site and representatives from foreign armies visit us as much as twice a week."
As strong as a 'Tank'
The biggest difference between the Merkava 4 and the previous versions of the tank is that it has increased protection. Because it has increased protection, there are fewer types of ammunition that can damage it, including the newer types of weapons that have been developed over recent years.
Part of this "invincibility" is due to the fact that, like in the previous models, the tank's various systems double as defensive systems while absorbing damage that might otherwise prove fatal to the crew. The crew fights in a closed compartment that shields them from unnecessary dangers.
According to the Merkava tank program's managers, the creation of the Merkava 4 tank was the fastest ever creation/manufacture of a tank. "Generally it takes close to a decade for a tank to go from being a design on a blueprint to being on the production lines," said one of the managers. The Merkava 4 tank took only 3 years to produce, except for the engine whose production began a short time earlier.
"Telescopic Production"
The Merkava tank program managers attribute the quick development of the tank to a revolutionary new development method called "Telescopic Production". According to this new method, testing of the tank is concurrent with the production of the tank. This way, due to the changes happening all the way through the production, the first tank off the production lines will be different than the 20th tank off the production line.
Interesting innuendo, but Pollard had nothing to do with it and I suspect you know it. You know the new laser firing anti missile aircraft we are building now? The laser was acquired from Israel along with the arrow theator defense anti missile system that is being fielded in America. That system may save more American lives than were lost by the Jews in the Holocaust. I just wish Clintoon had not caused us to have to make it with Israeli help. But better late than never.
Nope. I once saw an M48A3 that had been the victim of a Viet Cong command detonated mine made from a USAF 750-pound bomb that hadn't gone off. The fella who tripped the thing waited just a fraction of a second too long to touch it off, and it went off beneath the engine compartment rather than the turret, but still got the job done. The power pack [engine/transmission assembly] was blown out of the engine compartment and was thrown alongside the vehicles rear deck; both tracks were thrown off the drive sprocket and rear support rollers and most of the rear road wheels either seperated or had their torshion bars shattered. That could have been from the initial blast or may have resulted when the 50-ton vehicle was lifted into the air, then came crashing back down.
The turret did not seperate from the chassis, but I was told that the main gun hydraulics and accumulators used for gun tube elevation were completely wrecked from the overstress and of course the sighting optics and rangefinder were ruined, with most of their glass components shattered. Perhaps most interestingly, the ammunition carried aboard, mostly *black can* and *green can* canister, but including a few High Explosive rounds and 4 rounds of High Explosive-Anti Tank ammo just on the chance of an encounter with a NVA PT76, did not detonate.
All four members of the crew survived. The driver's jaw was broken when he was thrown forward onto the *butterfly* steering wheel of the early M48s, but all four crewmen had their CVC helmets on [not always the case in 'Nam as the things were hot, uncomfortable and had no retaining headstrap; I used a headset and *porkchop* hand microphone with tank commo gear a lot myself] and aside from bruises and hearing damage, they came through it better than the guy who had killed their vehicle [written off as a complete combat loss] who was killed as a result of the explosion he had set off himself when that 10-ton, half-Volkswagen-sized power pack blown out of the rear deck landed on him. Ooops.
Kids, don't try this at home with your own tank.
-archy-/-
With ammunition and projectile development a project of the late Gerald Bull's Space Research Corporation in Canada, also developing the 105mm tank *STUP* projectiles at the same time. They're now a common training ammunition for use on Canada's restricted-firing tank ranges, but have been considered by the Israelis and others as an APC and light vehicle-killing round as well. And of course the Germans and Canadians have contributed greatly to the development of the late-generation German Leopard I design, as per the current Canadian Army C2 versions. The 105mm L/68 guns, as fitted on the Leo Is, German C1s and C2s and the Israeli Magach 6 through 7C series, aren't quite silent yet.
The BOLO electrical quadruple traction motor final drive [front and rear drive sprockets on both sides] offered both redundancy and sufficient power to pull the 85-ton prototype, expected to hit a possible 100 tons in a final version. Even the test bed vehicle [203mm/ 8-inch gun mount fitted in the engine compartment of a VERY modified M60 chassis, as per some WWII SP artillery] was probably beyond the realm of air transportability.
I believe some of the BOLO project design team also had a hand in a possible alternate to the miserable M247 DIVADS *Sergeant York* [later renamed Davy Crockett after the York family went public with their complaint that the less-than-accurate AA weapon was an insult to their family name] twin 40-mm AA weapon flopped miserably, the alternate design being nicknamed [not official so far as I know] *Skunk*. It mounted the GAU-8/A 30mm cannon of the A10 Warthog in a custom turret mounted on an M48 chassis. But those systems were only as good as their radars and fire control, and the M247's failure gave us a good idea what that was all about. Which came first, deponent knoweth not.
One of the M247 prototypes is tucked away at the Aberdeen Proving Ground museum, hidden behind some buildings and draped with tarp. Wouldn't want anyone to see it, and remember...
It may have been privatley funded by the companies involved, I don't know.
I saw the pics when I was working as a subcontractor to a subcontractor on Crusader, It looked to be about the size of a CAT D11 Bulldozer (That's really big)
The powered chassis I saw had a Diesel powerpack turning a generator where the turret would have gone [mid-chassis mounting] with the electrical output from the generators going to four traction motors turning a drive sprocket at each corner. I believe some of the later Porsche heavy tank designs of WWII were also Diesel Electric drive [Maus?]
I have no idea how braking or steering was accomplished, and it may not have been that much of a consideration on a developmental prototype. The gun package was a 8-inch artillery unit mounted at the rear, where the engine/transmission powerpack normally would have gone, as on the the M110 8-inch self-propelled gun.
It wasn't QUITE the size of the BOLO's the late Keith Laumer had envisioned:
Have been reading a very good book.."Into Laos"..the Dewey Canyon II ops.
really detailed book Archy...several accounts from witnesses around and inside stuff...when they come apart.
The M 155 Sheridan.....RPG screen fitted in this pic
Have read reports and personal accounts on the M-155 in Vietnam..was interested in your take on the unit.
Later, when I got to Vietnam, I bounced from unit to unit and job to job for a while, as I'd arrived in-country during the Tet 1968 festivities. It was quite a welcome for a young troop, and they really didn't have to go to all that fuss just for me, but I tried to show my appreciation. Eventually, though, my paperwork caught up to me and I was to be sent off to a swell cav outfit called the *Blackhorse* that operated- surprise, surprise!- the M551 Sheridan. There were three ways out of that assignment: I could volunteer for duties as a tunnel rat, as they liked to get tank crewmen, who they figured were at least not claustrophobic and could handle working in the dark [as a tank is inside while buttoned up a lot of the time.] I could sign on as a door gunner on a Huey, as they liked getting tankers who knew how to keep the machineguns running and weren't inclined to fire short choppy little bursts. Or I could volunteer as a LRRP in one of the divisions, since I'd been through jump school, and I'd likely end up as far away from Sheridans as I wanted, and that was the route I took, though I did eventually hook back up with an M48 outfit later.
So most of my time with the Sheridan was spent with 'em in Germany instead of Vietnam, and I count that as one reason I came back home more or less in one piece. My opinion of the Sheridan is not a terribly fond one, and the aluminum *armor* on those things wouldn't stop a .50 round, let alone a B-40 or RPG-7 antitank rocket.
Most of the things are now either out of service or used as substitutes for enemy vehicles at the National Training Center [*sandbox*] at Ft Irwin, CA, though the 82nd Airborne still has 57, since nothing similar can be air-transported and air-dropped; the introduction of the C-17 aircraft, which can haul M1A1 tanks may change that [the M2/M3 Bradley can't be air-dropped; the integrated gunsight/computer mechanism won't take it] but there'll be few tears shed by me for final passing of the things. But some of those who've crewed in them have genuinely liked 'em.
Sheridan from H troop, 17th cav provides security for 59th Engineers land-clearing detail, near Hill 43/ Binh Son, in the 198th Infantry Brigade's operational area, circa 1970.
My first boss was Jewish, he always told me "Never pay retail!"
Thanks for this post.
US tank under XXXlinton/Daschle Administration.
.
(not)
They tried to build it light, but then they tried to put the 120mm gun on some of the prototypes - kept warping the turret bearing during test firing.
I think thee are still several of them sitting up in Minneapolis.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.