Merkava.

[kevineduguay1]

Would it be possible to class the Merkava as a "Gun APC" Unit Class 127, instead of a "MBT" so it could carry some troops? I have tried this and it works fine. Capacity would be 8 men for all versions. The carry capacity in the game should be "8" not "108". We don't want folks stuffing TOW teams or other infantry heavy weapons in this tank. It was ment to carry a rifle team or even just a sniper or two.
Not all Merks carry a 50cal MG. Also this weapon is tied to the main gun and the balistics computer as is the CMG.
All Merks carry one or another version of the 60mm Soltam mtr. This weapon is also tied to the balistics computed. It is said to be very accurate. No Merks in the game have it. Will they?
When sitting "on station" some Merkavas are stuffed with as many as 80 rounds of main gun ammo (120mm)but can carry no troops. Could a version like this be placed in the "MBT" class?
:isr

[Imp]

You might want to read page 6 2nd post on from this recent thread
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?p=754245#post754245
& comment back here.

[Marcello]

Would it be possible to class the Merkava as a "Heavy APC" instead of a "MBT" so it could carry some troops? I have tried this and it works fine. Capacity would be 8 men for all versions. The carry capacity in the game should be "8" not "108". We don't want folks stuffing TOW teams or other infantry heavy weapons in this tank. It was ment to carry a rifle team or even just a sniper or two.
Not all Merks carry a 50cal MG. Also this weapon is tied to the main gun and the balistics computer as is the CMG.
All Merks carry one or another version of the 60mm Soltam mtr. This weapon is also tied to the balistics computed. It is said to be very accurate. No Merks in the game have it. Will they?
When sitting "on station" some Merkavas are stuffed with as many as 80 rounds of main gun ammo (120mm)but can carry no troops. Could a version like this be placed in the "MBT" class?
:isr

AFAIK to carry an eight men squad they would have to leave out most of the ammunition. I also suspect that classing it as an APC would lead the AI to use it as such.
I think it would be nice but only as specialized scenario design and human control units, not general issue.
As for the mortar it is an issue of lack of weapon slots and the game engine not dealing well with such a setup.

[kevineduguay1]

IMP,

Yes weapons slots are a problem but they can be overcome by combining the firepower of some of the MGs. For instance the 50cal MG and the 7.62mm CMG can be made into on weapon as could the two 7.62 mm AAMG. This leaves two slots open, one for the mortar and one for the main gun. The only versions of the Merkava that this will not work with are those armed with the LAHAT ATGM. Even if you eliminate the 50cal MG you still have to include the 7.62mm CMG and at least one 7.62mm AAMG. So with the LAHAT armed vehicles the mortar would have to be left off or all the AAMGs.
Ammo for the mortar came up as 30 rounds on most sources I found. They also said that most were HE. But like you said there are other rounds carried. So a game loadout of 15-20 rounds would be a fair solution.

Marcello,

I classed mine as a "Gun APC" Unit class 127. I will edit my original post for clarification. When the AI uses this class of APC it will move and shoot like a tank but I must admit that I have not fully tested this yet so your concerns may be valid. If a AI problem exists a custom human player unit would still be nice.
I have seen sites that also talk about reduces ammo loadouts for the main gun if infantry are carried. But other sites claim that this space is available for troop evacuation even with a normal ammo load.
If you can evacuate troops you can carry troops.
The rear compartment can be packed with more main gun ammo if nessessary. 30+ rounds of 120mm can be placed in this space. With this load no troops would be carried.
So if they can put 30 extra rounds of 120mm back there why not why not 8 men with small arms and maybe a LMG?

[Marcello]

IMP,
Yes weapons slots are a problem but they can be overcome by combining the firepower of some of the MGs. For instance the 50cal MG and the 7.62mm CMG can be made into on weapon as could the two 7.62 mm AAMG.


Perhaps you can lump together the two 7.62mm AAMG. But the 50cal MG and the 7.62mm CMG?
One has range of 40 and the other 24, accuracy is 23 and 18 respectively, ammo supply is different etc.
It would be a marriage made in hell.


I have seen sites that also talk about reduces ammo loadouts for the main gun if infantry are carried. But other sites claim that this space is available for troop evacuation even with a normal ammo load.
If you can evacuate troops you can carry troops.

The devil is in the detail. From what I read in the past the idea was to have enough space to evacuate bailed out tank crews under combat situation and similar. Needless to say 4 men with no equipment require substantially less space than a eight men squad in combat gear. Carrying a squad could be done but only leaving out most of the ammunition to free the additional space.

The rear compartment can be packed with more main gun ammo if nessessary. 30+ rounds of 120mm can be placed in this space. With this load no troops would be carried.
So if they can put 30 extra rounds of 120mm back there why not why not 8 men with small arms and maybe a LMG?

Thirty 120mm rounds do not take up as much as space as 8 soldiers which, it should be noted, is more than most modern IFVs manage. I would suspect that those thirty rounds would fill the space earmarked for the crew evacuation capability.

[Mobhack]

IMP,

Yes weapons slots are a problem but they can be overcome by combining the firepower of some of the MGs. For instance the 50cal MG and the 7.62mm CMG can be made into on weapon as could the two 7.62 mm AAMG. This leaves two slots open, one for the mortar and one for the main gun. The only versions of the Merkava that this will not work with are those armed with the LAHAT ATGM. Even if you eliminate the 50cal MG you still have to include the 7.62mm CMG and at least one 7.62mm AAMG. So with the LAHAT armed vehicles the mortar would have to be left off or all the AAMGs.
Ammo for the mortar came up as 30 rounds on most sources I found. They also said that most were HE. But like you said there are other rounds carried. So a game loadout of 15-20 rounds would be a fair solution.

Marcello,

I classed mine as a "Gun APC" Unit class 127. I will edit my original post for clarification. When the AI uses this class of APC it will move and shoot like a tank but I must admit that I have not fully tested this yet so your concerns may be valid. If a AI problem exists a custom human player unit would still be nice.
I have seen sites that also talk about reduces ammo loadouts for the main gun if infantry are carried. But other sites claim that this space is available for troop evacuation even with a normal ammo load.
If you can evacuate troops you can carry troops.
The rear compartment can be packed with more main gun ammo if nessessary. 30+ rounds of 120mm can be placed in this space. With this load no troops would be carried.
So if they can put 30 extra rounds of 120mm back there why not why not 8 men with small arms and maybe a LMG?

The rear compartment holds 30 of the 48 standard rounds (and MG ammo cans etc), not 30 'extra' rounds. Otherwise the Merkavas would be carrying 70 120mm!. The rear compartment is mainly for ease of resupplying ammo while under fire or when on a fire-step. i.e. the same philosophy as the M109 and similar SP arty, easier to bung a palette in the back passage than to break rounds down and hump them up and over the turret hatches one by one.

The merkava can carry some infantry in the ammo space, if required, but only at the cost of ammunition storage. Thus it is best to have any infantry in separate APCs, unless you like MBT with only 12 or so ready rounds.

We could allow a carry count of 4 - so they could squeeze in a ditched tank crew there, but this would be for humans only. And if we did, then the end users would immediately be using this to carry scout teams. In addition - tank carry is not protected, so any such would be shot off the rear decks because they are classed as tank riders.

The merkava carrying of infantry is a myth. The carry capacity is there, at the expense of ammo for dire emergency situations, which is out with the game's scope.

By all means feel free to make a heavy APC class Merkava with 12 or so 120mm and a carry capacity of say 8 in your own local OOB. But such a beast will not be appearing in our OOB. Only of use in perhaps a contrived Hollywood movie scene, as the Israelis have perfectly adequate heavy APC to shift grunts in - while the merkavas shift 120mm bricks, as they are designed to.

Cheers
Andy

[Marek_Tucan]

There is also a modification of Merkava for LIC with a loophole in the back door intended for sniper, but obviously this is to be employed only in static positions.

As for coop with infantry, SOP in Lebanon was, AFAIK, one tank and one APC, with a squad of infantry, on an isolated outpost - generally tank with its better optics watches the main sector, APC covers its rear, infantry does whatever is neccesary.

[kevineduguay1]

Go to this site. It takes forever to load so if you want to go to one of the links open a new window to save time. This site covers everything Merkava.

http://www.supervideo.com/MXCD-ROMOS.htm

On site is a picture of one of the authors tank teams. In that pic there are 9 men. In the caption it says that he (the author) and another soldier taking the picture are out of the shot. Thats 11 men total. 4 crew, 7 infantry, no reduction in ammo.
Another photo from inside a Merkava plainly shows 4 full armed combat soldiers. The caption states that 4 have already been deployed not counting the photographer. Thats 9 troops.
The new Merkava "Tankbulance" carries a doctor, 2 orderlies, space for 2 stretcher cases, life support equipment, and medical supplies. This version has a slightly reduced main gun ammo load but still has all the weapons of a normal Merkava.

The site also contains info on.... well just about everything about a Merkava you can think of from springs to on board UAVs. Look at it then tell me what you think. You will be greeted by the biggest picture of a Merkava that I have ever seen on the internet!

P.S. Did you know that the Merkava and the Namer have on board toilets!

[Imp]

Lot to read there.

Toilet is for NBC operations several vehicles have them, BMP-3 & Warrior come to mind

[kevineduguay1]

On some operations the tankers have to stay "on station" for more than 24hrs. The toilet helps in these operations too.

Keep reading that site and check out some of the videos.

When finnished come back and tell me that the Merkava cannot carry 8+ fully armed combat troops and a full load of ammo.

[kevineduguay1]

Near the bottom of the site page I posted there are pics and some info on other IDF vehicles. Like the pic of a armored D9 dozer mounting a 50cal OWS. Those thing are BIG!

[kevineduguay1]

Anyone read the site I posted yet? I know its long but its full of historical and technicle information on the Merkava. Not to mention pics and videos.

MOBHACK,

Seeing as the ability of the Merkava to carry troops is "a myth" please explain the AAR about the fully armed Merkava MkIII that rescued 13 wonded Israeli troops in one trip. All carried internally.

[DRG]

Really ? " Fully armed" ? A fully armed Mk III holding the crew AND 13 wounded Israeli troops in one trip ? I'd like to see a photo of that.

We had an Isreli tanker posting her for a while. It would be interesting to hear from someone who's actually crewed one of these things.

Don

[kevineduguay1]

DRG,

It's all on the site I posted on page 1 of this thread.

Here is the pic from the site of the tank in question. The Crew are in front, the rescued men are sitting on the tank. Just count.

[kevineduguay1]

Also from the same site.


"At first during the 1990's Lebanon conflict, Merkava I & II crews would carry as much as 92 105mm rounds into combat unless they
carried troops in which case they would carry 47 rounds and up to 10 combat troops. Now with a slightly larger tank in the Mark III &
IV series they can carry 50 rounds of 120mm main gun ammo and an 8 man combat platoon into combat. This would still be 10 more
120mm rounds than a current Leopard 2, LeClerc, Chally or Abrams M1A2 SEP (improved) carries in NATO exercises. Even LESS
aboard a French LeClerc in UN Lebanon service BTW."

[Marcello]

Well, the way that website is organized is a festering sore for sure. Frankly most of pictures simply refuse to load on my browser, so I have to withold my judgement.
That said with statements worded like this...

It should be noted that it is a ballistic military fact a MBT can not be destroyed, not even by one's own Air Force and artillery and even when it is on purpose!

One can be forgiven if he starts looking for the closest pinch of salt

http://a.imageshack.us/img830/5319/tank1w.jpg
http://a.imageshack.us/img52/8194/destroyedmerkava.jpg
(OK not an IV but still...)

If you can post the pictures showing the internal arrangement of the rear compartment we can get a better idea. Preferibly one with both ammo and troops if available.

In tank design there is not such a thing such as free lunch. Increased volume must mean either inferior protection or greater weight, basic geometry at work here.
Perhaps they decided they wanted both an APC level of troop carrying capacity, good armor and 40+ rounds at the same time.
In principle you can centainly have that.
But then I would expect a very steep penalty in terms of weight for that, certainly those early rumors I heard about 90 tons Merkava IV would start to sound a lot more sensible in this case.

[kevineduguay1]

Marcello,

The site takes forever to load but is worth the wait.

The statement you refer to sounds very far feched and your photos prove the point.
I belive the author was writing about a Merkava that had to be abandon in Lebanon. The Israelis did not whan the vehicle to fall into enemy hands. Fearing that it might despite their efforts a mission was sent out to strip the vehicle of everything that could be stripped. They kept a watchful eye on the remaining hulk to make sure it was not towed away before they themselves could do the same. To secure the vehicle the Israelis not only dropped artillery on that tank they also called in air strikes to keep enemy salvagers away from the wreck.
To top it all off, the remains of the tank were finnaly recovered and seeing that there was only minor damage to the hull that tank was re-built.

[kevineduguay1]

I have two pics. One id from the inside. 4 men a visable not counting the photographer. The caption says that 4 men have already deployed from the vehicle.

Pic 2 shows part of the rear of the vehicle. But the rear door and some of the seats are shown.

4 seats per side. Another section in the same site says that the layout of the Namer APC troop compartment and that of the Merkava is almost identicle.


EDIT. The pics I have will not up-load for some reason. I'll try again.

[Imp]

The site is a total mess easy to miss all the links somewhere near the bottom there are links that show some inside views.
It does appear roomy & could probably operate as a short range battlefield taxi with a reasonable ammo load on board. However the ammo seems to be stored near the clamshell rear doors so once the magazine is empty you would not be able to reload till the passengers got out. Guessing here but not for use cross country unless you want injury more to drop off & support a patrol as a sign of strength, riding into combat I just cant see.
Wheres gingertanker when you need him.

[Imp]

4 seats per side. Another section in the same site says that the layout of the Namer APC troop compartment and that of the Merkava is almost identicle

I would say the pictures dont tie in with this, Merk very cramped though incredibly roomy for a tank due to shoehorning the engine in the front.
Namer is a limo most spacious APC ever? nice well spaced seating & decent headroom.
How is simple crew & electronics take up a lot less space & the Namer if anything offers a bigger profile as the superstructure runs the full length & is around half turret height.

[kevineduguay1]

From another site....


"Following the model of contemporary self-propelled howitzers, the turret assembly is located nearer the rear than in most main battle tanks. This gives the crew additional protection against a frontal attack by putting the engine between them and the front of the tank. This arrangement also creates an otherwise unused space in the rear of the tank that allows increased storage capacity, as well as a rear entrance to the main crew cabinet allowing easy access even under enemy fire. This allows the tank to be used as a platform for medical disembarkation, a forward command and control station, and an armored personnel carrier. The rear entrance's clamshell-style doors provide overhead protection when off- and on-loading cargo and personnel"

[Imp]

There is no disputing it can carry some passengers that much is obvious, unless you can find a better photo though Merk rear compartment is a tight space with 8 troops on board causing ammo to be stored against the rear hull.
The crew compartment is seperated from it by a wall with a doorway on the left (if facing tank front)
This arrangement looks therefore like it is not possible to use the storred ammo with passengers on board.
From a storage point of view does look more sensible than it sounds.
Rear hull has 2 large bustles attached with additional equipment in which will help defeat HEAT.
The ammo is as far away from the crew as possible & in a seperate compartment if fire fighting equipment needs to go off.
Any penetration in the dead space where the engine normaly is should be survivable by the tank with at worst some crew injury if internal wall spalls, several videos showing this.

[DRG]

Wheres gingertanker when you need him.


I've sent him a PM but I have no way of knowing if it's even going to an active account until he replys

Don

[Marcello]

From another site....
This arrangement also creates an otherwise unused space in the rear of the tank that allows increased storage capacity, as well as a rear entrance to the main crew cabinet allowing easy access even under enemy fire. This allows the tank to be used as a platform for medical disembarkation, a forward command and control station, and an armored personnel carrier.

Putting the engine to the front does not automatically create any new space. By itself it only makes possible rear access and the creation of a multipurpose rear compartment.
But it a design choice which comes with trade offs.
Otherwise a simple "engine to the front" configuration would result in something like this:
http://www.morozov.com.ua/images/p87-2l.jpg
http://www.morozov.com.ua/images/p86-2l.jpg
Not much in the way of storage space, even if a rear hatch was added.

The Centauro has a configuration similar to Merkava: front engine, rear turret and rear hull access. But adding troops there means reducing ammo (or creating a lenghtened version, as it was done).

[Imp]

It is quite intresting actually if you look at a Merk side profile the turret is not that far back compared to a standard layout. This begs the question where is the fuel thats a very compact engine bay if a reasonable amount is stored forward. My thinking is wherever they have put the rest of the fuel has created the rear storage space.
Very quick unsubstantiated look capacity is between Leo 2 + Chally, Abrams obviously needs to carry a lot more.

[kevineduguay1]

If you had bothered to read that very disorganised site I posted you would have known thet the fuel in a Merk is stored between the hull plates. In other words both sides of the hull are the fuel tank. This arrangement also reduces the effect of HEAT rounds. The diesel fuel helps extingish the jet produced by an exploding HEAT round. It also eliminates the need for traditional fuel tanks ans saves more space in the vehicle. It is a self sealing system.


/Steel/Fuel/Steel/ Space \Steel\Fuel\Steel\

[Marcello]

/Steel/Fuel/Steel/ Space \Steel\Fuel\Steel\

I would not be so sure of that. Granted, I can't vouch for the source but it seems consistent with what I have seen elsewhere in terms of composite armor.

http://a.imageshack.us/img413/8624/damagedmerkava.jpg

I have not done any analysis of this pic but I don't see any sign of fuel leaks there.

[Imp]

The main tanks are I think beside the engine bay & either side on rear flanks, sandwiching between inner & outer hull would be a sensible place to stick those.

[kevineduguay1]

I can't explain it but I'm sticking by what I posted as fact.

Go to the MBT thread and read what FASTBOAT TOUGH posted. And watch the videos!

[kevineduguay1]

Go back to the site I posted on page 1. Jusy under that HUGE pic of the Merkava is another pic with the author in front of his Merkava. Click on that pic and watch the video. An Israeli tanker in the video says that the tank holds 4 crew men and 8 troops.

On fuel storage....

"With the use of spaced-armor techniques and quick-
replacement modular designs, the assembly line team was able to incorporate secret compositions of a derivative of Chobham type
ceramic armor, RHA ([[rolled homogeneous armor]]) and U.S. developed carbon epoxy fiber filament. It should be pointed out that a
further enhancement to crew safety was the use of the space between inner and outer armor walls to be filled with diesel engine fuel;
an excellent storage technique and a method to defeat HESH and HEAT enemy tank rounds. "

On rear compartment....

"This compartment has now been used as: a medical operating theater (Tankbulance), a forward
command and control center, a UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) control tower, an ELINT forward operating office, an air-to-
ground FAC (Forward Air Control) station and a forward battle field command post. If this rear tank compartment contained
armed infantry, then up to 10 fully combat soldiers could be carried & the clam-shell door would allow for deploying these soldiers
while on the move under combat conditions and taking fire."

More.....

"Dateline: HaKirya, Tel Aviv (Israel's Pentagon) by Hirsh Goodman JPost Military Correspondent TUESDAY (May 17, 1977)
Defense Minister Shimon Peres (current President of Israel) officially acknowledged for the first time Saturday (14 May 1977)
that Israel is producing a main battle tank called the Merkava (Chariot). The announcement followed the unexpected public
disclosure in Washington D.C. by President Jimmy Carter of a most unusual pledge of $100 million dollars of U.S. funds to help
initial production of a new Israeli domestically built tank on Thursday (May 12, 1977). Coverage of this signing was provided by
JPost Washington Correspondent Wolf Blitzer (current CNN news anchor). This, up to now secret tank program is headed
by the Israel Armor Corps and by Aluf Israel Tal, a world authority and proponent of armor warfare since the beginning of the
decade. Peres elaborated that the Merkava has a typical crew of 4 and can carry as much as 92 rounds of 105mm ammo. He
also disclosed that this tank would be unconventional as certain lessons from recent wars of 1956, 1967 and 1973 have made
the Merkava the safest tank in the world. If only a basic load of 62 rounds were carried then up to 10 combat infantry can be
accommodated in a special rear compartment as the engine in the Merkava is in front which adds to its safety design."

The merkava was designed from the start to hold Combat Troop in the rear of the vehicle....

"President Carter focused world attention on this Israeli 'Black' secretive military enterprise with his public signing but, those needed funds did speed up tank assembly
so that by 30 April 1978 the first production examples of the Merkava Mark I tanks rolled out with one of them making the first official public appearance May 1978
during the annual Israel Independence Day celebrations at Jerusalem's main university stadium. A Merkava Mk I rolled slowly out onto the large elliptical race track to
the applause of many there that day, The four IDF tank crew members were announced & stood proudly up in their fighting compartment positions & waved to the crowd.
Then Colonel Avigdor Kahalani (tank hero of the '73 war) received the ceremonial 1st Keys from General Tal on behalf of the 1st armor group in the IDF to get the brand
new Merkava tank (7th Brigade). But, then, slowly the rear hull began to open up with these giant armored doors in a vertical clam-shell arrangement & the crowd fell
silent. No one had never seen anything like this, including the attending foreign military attachés that were in attendance. They could not believe their eyes when ten fully
armed combat soldiers began racing out on the lowered ramp of the clam shell door & then stood in formation in front of this 56 ton behemoth. All the while the complete
Merkava crew of Commander, Gunner, Loader and Driver stood in their tanks' open hatches. Fourteen fully armed troops in 1 Tank. There wasn't a dry eye in the
crowd that day. Me included! "

If this is not enough to convince you then I have no hope of doing so.

[Marek_Tucan]

The described 1973 scene is a bit of old PR trick ;) The soldiers were fully armed, not fully kitted, and the same with Merkava used.
Otherwise IDF would have to either employ exceptionally small soldiers, or warp time and space, or would not fight a long design battle around how many soldiers would fit into Namer.
Shermans were also used to transport numerous soldiers to a besieged unit on Okinawa and to evacuae he wounded, the record was IIRC something like 12 soldiers beng caried on one trip, but that does hardly make the Sherman an APC - and it certainly wasn't combat-capable in such a configuration.

[Imp]

While the Merk is being looked at & I have no idea what they represent but assume 60 vision is radar etc. Should therefore only the lead tank in the company have 60 vision as its equiped with the sensor tower.

Kevin no one is I think disputing it can carry soldiers & the fuel tank post was sort of right fuel is normaly placed so it functions as additional armour as its fairly effective esp vs HEAT.
The question is if the tank can operate effectivly with troops on board & if it is used that way or just as a convienent way to ferry troops in the rear area.

If ginger tanker does not come back might try asking on israeli defence forums & see if anybodys willing to divulge anything.

[DRG]

.......OR your all could take this to tanknet were there ARE people who know WTF they are talking about.
Let me know what the result is before the next release.

I have been quite willing to add infanrty carry capabilities to this tank since the first reports came back that it could carry combat troops and IMHO it's WAY past due this "issue" was put to rest one way or the other but it's not going to happen here otherwise we wouldn't be listening to the "yes they can"- "no they can't" cyclical arguments.

Don

[DRG]

The described 1973 scene is a bit of old PR trick ;) The soldiers were fully armed, not fully kitted, and the same with Merkava used.
Otherwise IDF would have to either employ exceptionally small soldiers, or warp time and space, or would not fight a long design battle around how many soldiers would fit into Namer.
Shermans were also used to transport numerous soldiers to a besieged unit on Okinawa and to evacuae he wounded, the record was IIRC something like 12 soldiers beng caried on one trip, but that does hardly make the Sherman an APC - and it certainly wasn't combat-capable in such a configuration.

PERSONALLY I belive they can and do carry troops. How many "typically" is the issue. I've seen photos of STUG III's with 20 + troops on top... that's doesn't mean we allow that carry capacity in the game and just becasue 12 troops are shown spilling out...... well...... I saw a guy make a train disapear on AGT.... so what? Pick the 12 smallest guys in green you can find and presto.... 12 guys appear. Four to eight I could see "typically" but it would be nice to hear what the real answer is from a source that isn't hopelessly amaturish or potentially Israeli propaganda.

Don

[kevineduguay1]

Marek_Tucan

The Sherman carried most of those troops on the OUTSIDE of the vehicle. With all those bodies strewn across the hull the tanks weapons would have been useless.
The Merk in Question went into a combat zone under fire. Provided it's own fire support while recovering 13 wounded that were placed INSIDE the tank. It then covered it's own retreat with fire from its own weapons. Tight fit? Yes! Impossible? No!

Also, every video I have seen of troops leaving the rear hatch of the Merkava in training or combat situations are in "full kit" including backpack and other gear.

Imp,

Durring Israels last incursion into Lebanon the use of ANY APC was almost impossible because of the large amount of RPG and ATGM possesed by Hesbola. These light vehicles were only used as taxi cabs to deploy infantry well away from the front lines unless the area was deemed clear of enemy anti-tank weapons. In more than one site examples can be found showing that the Merkava tank was used as a heavy APC to transport full armed and equipped soldiers to the battle areas of the combat zone. As many as 10 troops were stuffed into these vehicles and they carried 50 rounds of 120mm Ammo.
I realy don't think for one second that they would send tanks with infantry inside but carry little or no ammo to support them once deployed. that would be just stupid.

Please read my last post again.

The MkIs and IIs could carry 92 rounds of 105mm ammo, or 62 rounds of 105mm ammo and up to 10 fully equipped combat troops.

The rear compartment of all Merkavas have 8 seats in the back. The two extra soldiers are carried in the space where the stretcher cases would be carried between the two rovs of seats. Their troops are equiped with Knee pads and other protective gear just like many other Nations troops are.

Is it a comfortable ride? Not likely. But its not only possible, it was done.

There is on version of the Merk that has a lower Main Gun ammo loadout. Its the "Tankbulance". This version looks just like anyother Merkava tank in current production but the rear troop compartment has been modified to carry...
2-3 stretcher cases
a 3 man medical team ( MD and 2 assistants)
and an operating theater with a full compliment of life support equipment.
With all that and it can still fight as a MBT if it has to.

I would post the pics to prove my point but I keep gettin the Error message because the files are to big. Most are on the site I posted on Page 1. Take your time, find the pics and video links and watch them. It will open your eyes.

[kevineduguay1]

DRG,

With 10 troops even the site says they are packed in very tight. I would be more than happy with a 8 troop capacity. Like I said before, it has 8 seats in the back.

Heavy weapons would have to be restricted. No TOW teams for example.

[Marek_Tucan]

Re. Sherman, nope, in the inside, because the cut-off unit was behind a wide open valley drenched in MG and mortar fire. Entry and exit via escape hatch.
Same method used for CASEVAC and even for ammo resupply.
That's why did I mention it.
There was a pic of UAZ utility vehicle loaded with at least 13 soldiers. Same for a story about a British medical NCO being allowed by German tank commander only one trip to his positions to collect British wounded. Sure, in emergency (or just for the heck of it) you can squeeze people very tightly. But then I would doubt the MKerk carrying 13 wounded was combat-capable in such situation. Providing fire from its own weapons? Sure, why not, Comamnder and Loader have their hatches and machineguns, plus possibly (depending on access to it) the 60mm mortar.
Main gun? Sorry, but at best in dire emergency. If nothing elce, hot case or case stub is really NOT healthy and can potentially make more mess than any RPG hit.

Just a simple question: If Merkava is able to carry "10 fully armed and equipped soldiers" in the inside without any hindrance to its capability...
Why the heck took design of Namer so much time and why the heck was there a problem to fit even one fully kitted squad? In comparison to Merk, if Merk was able to fit 10 "without problems", then Namer should be able to carry how many. given the absence of turret? 15? 16? So there should be no problems in fitting 10 in there, right? But there are.

You just need to realise, that "emergency use" can be hardly made a rule. Sure, for example a Czech Liberator wa able to return home at night in storm over North sea with just two engines running doe 3 hours on emergency power (allowed for 15 minutes only). Does that mean all Liberators were able to run all time on WEP? A "record-breaking" IDF Centurion survived ca. 40 penetrating and non-penetrating hits from RPGs and ATGMs in 1973, does that mean all Centurions should be totally impervious to anything but tactical nuke? another Cent was able to rescue crew from another tank, does that mean it should be given a 4 troops internal carry capacity?

[kevineduguay1]

"A single double piece vertical
rear compartment door was incorporated to allow for easy entry, exit and reloading of ammo while under fire. At times the rear area is used for armor
personnel carrier for 8 combat troops. 10 is possible and 3 man command post, 3 station med-evac with medical team is also an option among some of
the popular configurations." Lt. Amos

1982 Lebanon,
BELOW MERKAVA COMBAT TEAM MEMBER BEING DEPLOYED

These troops were carried into battle by Merks in squads of 6, 8 and even 10 men."

" Now...
there IS most surely a rear compartment area and it Does Surely exist as can be seen here.
Special Ops will deploy 7 plus squad leader while 10 combat troops were carried in 1978
during 1st public roll out and recently the Mark 4's during 2006 conflict. A Medical team is
now fielded in ten special unmarked Tankbulances that are getting the Trophy APS installed.
They have 1 doc plus 2 orderly's with 3 casualty stations. A Forward Command Post with 5
specialist depending we're talking about a company, brigade or battalion Merkava. See below.
1000's of IDF troops have ridden inside Merkava troop compartments over the past 30 years.
It's true that all the main gun 120mm ammo makes for one very cramped riding condition but,
I never saw anyone complaining of too much ammo! "

[kevineduguay1]

Even the model makers know about the troop compartment....

"Below model is shown with rear hatch double door closed but CAN, with some
difficulty be displayed with hatch open & interior layout complete for 8 troops"

[DRG]

Look.. if you are going "quote" a source PROVIDE THE LINK TO IT

OK ?

Don

[Mobhack]

As regards any troop carrying Merkavas.

We have to take cognisance of the fact that this capability is a 'party trick' that is in reality only of use in very special circumstances in the real world.

Now - should we make a merkava as an APC class, wargamers would simply stop buying namer etc APC as there would be "no need for these". But the Israelis are still building APCs, even ones based on the merkava chassis. So there must be some "need" for such in the real world.

All videos I have seen of any such deployment of infantry from merkavas shows only troops in belt equipment order. No packs, no sign of any heavy weapons (LMG, AT weaponry etc). In other words - there is little or no room for anything else other than personal weapons in the tunnel of the thing.

No doubt the infantry cannot carry any useful load when sardine-canned in there. They probably have to be very good friends with each other too :)!. The game does not however, have any fatigue levels to apply to such a sardine pack after some rough country crossing.

We could make a "merkava dismount team" with reduced ammo, no heavy weaponry etc to reflect the light belt order - but if they were 8 or 9 men, then the wargamers would naturally ignore those units and stuff in para squads, rifle sections etc. to make up the carry capacity of 8 or 9 as the game has no way to limit the infantry carried. Wargamers will exploit any loophole they can.

I think that at the best, a carry of 4 would be the most I would ever credit them with. Maybe 6 to alow sayret scouts (sp). That would allow a scout team or a bailed tank crew. An APC class to allow the protected flag to be set, so they don't get hosed off the back deck by MG fires. And then merkavas would need to be in another unit class from the MBTs (or umpteen duplicated APC slots would be needed). The AI also handles APCs differently from MBT (it will probably scarf up any loose scouts, inf-at etc and load them into such "APC"). It will drop and retire these (maybe good, maybe expose their rear ends) and attempt to shuttle troops with them. APCs are not tanks to the AI!.

There would also be no formations of merkava (APC) with integral infantry though - any pax would be random pick-ups. The tank units don't command the dismounts.

But firstly kevineduguay1 - go to tanknet (http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?act=idx) and set up an account there and post a question on the practicalities of the merkava's alleged dismount capability in the AFV forum there. I'll monitor the response from the experts. I'm more interested in what they have to say than some amateur enthusiast's website.

Should they think it is in some way practical, then we can think about it for the next patch.

Cheers
Andy

[kevineduguay1]

DRG,

Sorry about that. Almost if not all quotes are from the site I posted on page 1 of this thread. Most are on the opening page and some are contained in the links on that page.

Mobhack,

On real World need,

Durring the Lebanon conflicts the Israelis had no real heavy APCs that could stand up to the huge amount of RPGs and ATGMs operated by the enemy. The 113s, Pumas, and Achzarit could have hardly been expected to stand up to such weapons without loosing many men and vehicles. At this time the Namer was only a dream. You still need infantry to cover your tanks, even the mighty Merkava has its limits. The solution was loading the infantry into the Merkava. They could ride to where they were needed under the heavy armor of these tanks, deploy where needed, and have the advantage of having a MBT for supporting fire.

If you look at the pic on the site I posted most if not all the troops have some sort of backpack. It's not the size of the one carried by U.S. troops but is there none the less. One pic is a view from inside showing 4 soldiers on the way out and they all have packs on.
Maybe no LMG but a SAW for sure. I have already made clear that no TOW teans, Dragons, Spikes, Or Javalins should be carried inside the Merkava. A LAW size weapon would be no problem. Besides with a MBT for fire support what do you need anti-tank weapons for?
Yes they are packed in tight. As much was said on the site I mentioned above.

Merkava dismount teams,

No real need for these. In my experiments I use a Sayeret section and add a sniper or two. This will have to be up to the individual player as it is in real life. But only 8 men and no heavy weapons. Carry capacity 8.

Class,

I classed mine as Unit Class 127 Gun APC but have not experimented with the AI useing the Merkava with this classification. And like you mentioned this could be a problem for the AI.

Formations,

I did not put any infantry in my formations either. Again this should be up to the player. Some sort of Merk Infantry formation may be nessessary for the AI to use. This would be quite the experiment.

I have registered at Tanknet and will ask the question to see what comes up.

The author of the Amateur site I posted is an Israeli tanker. His tank is the "Black Mamba" a MkIV. Pictures of his tank and crew are also on the site.

Hope I covered everything. I'll get the question posted on Tanknet.

[kevineduguay1]

Did'nt get clearence to post on tanknet yet but found this video link to Youtube. enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXvj_A6BgeU

[kevineduguay1]

This and the above videos show troops leaving the rear compartment from a view inside the tank. First man out has a LMG, last man out has a radio set. Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI-d8RuPnDo


Still no word from Tanknet. Im registered but can't post.

[Marcello]

This and the above videos show troops leaving the rear compartment from a view inside the tank. First man out has a LMG, last man out has a radio set. Enjoy!


No seat and you can't stand either, being confined for prolonged lenght of time in such a fashion has been used as a form of light torture in the past. Any cross country movement along broken terrain will be a preview of hell.
I can see the value of that for driving 300 meters up to the next building while every Ahmed in town is taking pot shots with a RPG-7.
Using it as a regular APC? Forget about it.:down:

[Marek_Tucan]

A sad Merkava-related not:
Maj. General Israel Tal died today, a week before his 86th birthday.
May he rest in peace.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3951557,00.html

[Marek_Tucan]

Kevin, you yourself write, that the reason Merks were used as ad hoc APCs in 82 was that Israel had no heavy APCs back them. IOW emergency use and in pretty limited conditions - for example less need to fire main gun, during city fighting usually commander's and loader's MG were enopugh etc, even if main gun is used ammo consupmption is pretty low so you do not need the hull ammo storage etc.
Design of proper HAPCs (and even Achzarit does not AFAIK carry a full squad's worth of dismounts) of course seriously lessened the need.

[Richie61]

A sad Merkava-related not:
Maj. General Israel Tal died today, a week before his 86th birthday.
May he rest in peace.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3951557,00.html

:(

RIP is a truely great armor leader and creator of the Israeli armour doctrine which led to the Israeli successes in the Sinai in the Six Day War.

[kevineduguay1]

Maj. General Israel Tal had a hand in the development of two other tanks, the XMBT-70 and the M1 Abrams. A true visionary.

[kevineduguay1]

Marek-Tucan,

While the Israelis use this tactic in the 1982 conflict it was not as wide spread as in the 2006 conflict.

As far as the game is concerned the longest scenario is 90 turns long. If the time elapsed per turn is 2 to 5 minutes then we are only talking about 3 to a max of a little over 7 hrs of real time. Putting troops in the back of a Merkava for this amount of time is not outside the scope of human endurance.

The videos show them practicing the deployment of infantry from the rear of this tank. Why practice something if its not intended to be used in battle?

EDIT: Achzarit has a 3 man crew and carries 7 infantry.

[Marek_Tucan]

Pilots also train for ejecting the craft and evading enemy pursuit on the ground, though I guess they hope they will not have to do so IRL, same for lots of other drills and lots of other battlefield expedient solutions (like using tank destroyers and SP howitzers as assault guns etc.).

[kevineduguay1]

Please go back and CAREFULLY READ the information on the site posted on page 1. Find the links in the articles and read those and watch the videos. It will take the good part of a day to take it all in.
If you still don't belive any of it then you must belive that the author, an Israeli tank Commander, is just telling stories and the picture of his 11 man tank crew is just a picture of a group of his friends. After all, it's all just a "parlor trick".

[DRG]

Kevin. I have dial up and because of that anything on YouTube I avoid at all costs. The last Video I attempted to watch, which was, incidentally, one you posted a link to, took 50 minutes to get me 60 seconds of video and I have better things to do that wait 3 hours for a video to load

As much as I sympathize with the Israelis I am also aware they are quite adept at propaganda. They have to be because their "opponents" are adept at it as well. What I want to know is this..... is there a video, shot in one continuous shot, ( NOT edited for camera angles NOT photos of four guys ready to emerge and the other four out of camera range ) of 8 troops emerging from the back of a Merkava ?

My rough calculations indicate you would need a space roughly 7 .5 feet long and 5.5 feet wide to put 8 troops. ( they would really have to like each other.....) Given the hull is nearly 25 feet long and just over 12 feet wide that would be around 14 % of the available interior hull volumn so it's not a stretch to believe this is possible even though no other tank in the world has that capability.

BTW, we have tested the things as Gun APC's and they don't do anything radically weird in an AI advance

Don

[RERomine]

I've read through this thread several times. It is good reading with beer and pretzels. Anyhow, while they could squeeze 8 troops in there, it was as pointed out before ad-hoc and not doctrine.

All varieties of Merks were designed as MBT. The rear exit was designed to allow the crew to exit relatively safely if needed. Somewhere along the line, someone noticed it could be used for troops as well. That doesn't make it doctrine.

I've watched the various videos. The YouTube videos are clearly of a promotional variety, showing much of the same footage. The four men shown exiting the vehicle are lightly equipped and oddly armed. They could be an LMG, a sniper rifle, some variety of M16 with the M203 attached and some sort of SMG w/folding stock. And heaven forbid they have to get out in a hurry, because that didn't seem to be happening. In those videos, the 12 main round storage canisters have been removed. If you want to hear the loudest cry of anguish in the world, tell a tanker you are going to take away over 80% of his main gun ammo on a regular basis.

Another thing that has been pointed out is the Namer has been created as a heavy APC for the IDF. Depending on the source, it puts them as having capability to care 2-3 crew members and 9 fully equipped troops. They have removed all the ammo and the turret basket and for all that, all they could accomplish was make space for heavier equipment for the troops? If that is the best they could do, it sounds like it is highly unlikely to try to squeeze 8 men into a Merk on a regular basis.

That is the point of the topic at hand: Doctrine. There are many things that have been done on an ad-hoc basic. It doesn't make it doctrine. Comments and videos in one website, albeit a very large one, doesn't make it doctrine. Used in as a heavy APC in one relatively small campaign doesn't make it doctrine either. Prove this to be doctrine and people will listen. Don and Andy have gone through efforts to accommodate special requests where practical, without compromising commonly excepted ideas of realism.

If there is a niche that any one of us wants to fill by modding our units, we have been given the ability to do so. Make your change, play the game and be happy. If it is changed in the game for all, the AI will make it game doctrine, even if it real doctrine. We will see those Merks as HAPCs all over the place, even if it isn't really used that way.

[kevineduguay1]

DRG,

In the site posted on page one there is a section on the history of the Merkava. The propaganda issue is valid to an extent. When the MkI was first shown to the public 10 troops came out the back and the Israelis bragged about their tanks versitility. A short while later they said it could not carry troops. After 2006 and the conflict in Lebanon they again admitted thet troops could be caried. This back and forth and the Israelis being in an almost constant state of war makes research on the Merkava difficult at best. Much of the interior of the Merkava is still classified.

On the Tanknet website under Tank videos there is a 38 to 40 second video taken by a member of the inside of a old Merkava tank. It's not of great quality. When he gets to the rear of the vehicle you can plainly see 12 empty main gun ammo containers lining the rear compartment. They are stacked 2 deep and 3 high on each side of the hull. The man with the camers has no trouble moving between the stacked ammo boxes to exit the rear door of the vehicle.

This video can be found on Tanknet in the AFV forums under tank videos. It's in the first post on page 2. posted by Zakk.

Dial up stinks. I had it for the longest time and it realy limits your options.

I'm glad to hear that the AI works ok with this option in play. I only tried it in human played mode.

[kevineduguay1]

RERomine,

Thanks for at least reading the website.

Firstly doctrine changes by nessesity or a shift in tactical thought. If it did not the US would never have made the Stryker.

If not ment to carry troops or if not doctrine why the sniper port in the read door of some Merkavas? This feature will be on all Namer HAPCs.

The ammo is no longer packed in crates as shown in the above thumb-nail. They all come in their own container. Could this allow the ammo load to be shifted from the rear compartment to areas around or under the turret basket? Just enough to carry 50 rounds and 8 troops? Remember 10 rounds are already in the turret in the automatic magazine on MkIV. What about the article that mentions a possible 105mm ammo load of 92 rounds if no troops are carried or about 80 rounds of 120mm? Look up and then explain the Merkava "Tankbulance". 3 stretcher cases, 3 man medical team, life support and enough gear to perform emergency operations. Yet it can still with all this aboard fight like a tank. This version is said to have a reduced ammo load for the main gun but it still looks like anyother Merkava and hits just as hard.

The Namer is a very roomy vehicle but as you said only has 8 passenger/troop seats. The Namer is set to replace most if not all other APCs now in inventory with the IDF. It now carries 3 weapons if you count the Soltam 60mm mortar. The 50cal mounted on the R-OWS can be swaped out for a Mk19 AGL. In the near future the IFV varriant may mount a 30mm Bushmaster, coax 7.62 MG and a twin Spike ATGM launch tube mounted on a R-OWS. While the weapon will not protrude in any way into the troop compartment much of that extra space seen now will be used up to store the larger 30mm rounds and extra Spike missiles.

Mobhack,

I posted the question on Tanknet in the AFV forums. Never recived a notification from them. I just checked and was able to post today. Lets see what happens.

[RERomine]

Firstly doctrine changes by nessesity or a shift in tactical thought. If it did not the US would never have made the Stryker.


Agreed, but has it happened with the Merkava beyond ad-hoc. Versions of the Merkava have been around for roughly 36 years. Has carrying troops in the Merkava developed into an standard practice documented in IDF training manuals? I will admit that if it has, such manuals aren't readily available in the local book store. Also, I find very few references to the capability on the internet as well. There are some, but the number of sites that omit any references at all seems to vastly out number those that do mention it.


If not ment to carry troops or if not doctrine why the sniper port in the read door of some Merkavas? This feature will be on all Namer HAPCs.


This one you would have to ask the designers or tankers who had input into the design. I would take a guess that it would be nice to know the rear of the tank is clear before the crew bails out if they need to. Keep in mind, a sniper is one person with light gear. The Merkava could carry one person extra person without off loading any ammo and the one person should not hinder operations of the tank.


The ammo is no longer packed in crates as shown in the above thumb-nail. They all come in their own container. Could this allow the ammo load to be shifted from the rear compartment to areas around or under the turret basket? Just enough to carry 50 rounds and 8 troops? Remember 10 rounds are already in the turret in the automatic magazine on MkIV. What about the article that mentions a possible 105mm ammo load of 92 rounds if no troops are carried or about 80 rounds of 120mm? Look up and then explain the Merkava "Tankbulance". 3 stretcher cases, 3 man medical team, life support and enough gear to perform emergency operations. Yet it can still with all this aboard fight like a tank. This version is said to have a reduced ammo load for the main gun but it still looks like anyother Merkava and hits just as hard.


I'm not sure what you mean by they all come in their own container. In one photo, I saw rounds in their own shipping tubes, but you wouldn't put the tubes in the tank. Just the rounds would be loaded. No matter anyhow. I also can see an extra 24 rounds being loaded at the expense of being able to use the rear exit. That gives it 82 rounds with that load.

As far as the Tankbulance, I have read two stretchers from other sources, not three. Despite the fact the website you provided says three, a picture in the same website shows only two and basic life saving equipment. I seriously doubt they are going to have a doctor on board. Even removing a splinter, he is likely to do more harm than good unless the vehicle is standing still, not shooting and not getting hit. Medics are enough. Stabilize and evacuate. That is their role.


The Namer is a very roomy vehicle but as you said only has 8 passenger/troop seats. The Namer is set to replace most if not all other APCs now in inventory with the IDF. It now carries 3 weapons if you count the Soltam 60mm mortar. The 50cal mounted on the R-OWS can be swaped out for a Mk19 AGL. In the near future the IFV varriant may mount a 30mm Bushmaster, coax 7.62 MG and a twin Spike ATGM launch tube mounted on a R-OWS. While the weapon will not protrude in any way into the troop compartment much of that extra space seen now will be used up to store the larger 30mm rounds and extra Spike missiles.

How it impacts the passenger compartment remains to be seen. ATGMs aren't all that small and have to be stored properly, which takes up space. Don't be surprised if it reduces the number of passengers that can be carried. That is if we even find out anytime in the near future. It is unlikely the IDF will publish details in the newspaper.

Do you understand where you are getting resistance from with respect to the change you have requested? I don't think anyone has really questioned that the Merkava can carry troops or that you can fit eight in there, albeit lightly equipped and tight. It still boils down to whether the tactic has made it to mainstream doctrine. Maybe somewhere it is in doctrine on dealing with terrorists and guerrillas who don't have tanks. I highly doubt they would use such a tactic against an enemy who can field hundreds or thousands of tanks. That is the type of war that threatens their very livelihood and that is the type of war their doctrine is going to be built around. If you can show that carrying troops is part of the IDF principle doctrine, I would be surprised if your requested change didn't occur.

[Imp]

Your tanknet post produced virtualy the result expected, can use in an emergency to evacuate but are used with a couple of men on board which is pretty much if you remember how said played when I modified let it carry a scout unit.
Makes sense Israel likes to protect there men so best protected & crucialy fastest vehicle forward, tank commander can stay in the tank & let his passengers go for a look maybe even launch a little hand held UAV.
Or they can check a firing location for suitability & then take up position to defend it from RPGs given opponent.
They also have the ability to field command tanks easily, 2 guys & some electronics could probably fit & still carry a decent ammo load.

[kevineduguay1]

You better go back. Its getting interesting. A member posted as 5-alef is elusive at best. When another member said that the "few" infantry sat between the ammo boxes in the back 5-alef said,

"at the exit and to the sides - where ever there is space"

In the you-tube videos posted here there are 5 men in the back, 4 combat troops and the photographer. Freeze the frame just as the rear doors let in the light. Notice where the men are sitting and the possition of the overhead hand rails. Now go to Tanknet and look at the nice photos posted of the rear compartment of a Mk on my thread.
Also remember that the man commenting on how little space is in the tank is a little over 6 feet tall. (1.95 m)

[Imp]

Kevin go back & reread all the posts it was Alef who said 1 or 2 men & has now elaborated THEY sit to the sides. He is not going to give much more away do not pi&@ them off its classified. Thats all I have to say on the subject Don & Andy can read it & decide the outcome.

[RERomine]

Don't read too much into what wasn't said. This is what he said...


not very accurate - yes, it's not comfortable, but a merk can carry 2-3 fully loaded combat soldiers in the back without giving up ammo. Merks in combat DID carry 1-2 soldiers in the back specifically for combat purposes (i'm not going to go further) and very successfully.

that doesn't say that the tank is a troop carrier - on the contrary, but it HAS the ability to carry troops even without giving up ammo.


Everything I'm reading is saying they aren't going to off load their ammo to carry 8 men or for that matter a 4-man scout team. From one of the photos out there, it looks like if they had 3 men, the third would be standing on the floor of the turret basket. There could be health risks if the turret is rotated to any degree, but that is only my impression based on the photo so take that worth a grain of salt. Kevin, you raise a similar question that hasn't been answered yet.

5-alef didn't go into any details as to how this tactic is used, which is appropriate and expected, however. Also, emphasized was DID. That honestly can be taken any number of ways, but his intentional vagueness leaves us to draw our own conclusions (in the past; during his experience; obsolete tactic). You might get a vote for 2-3 men, provided isn't a crew served weapons team.

Looking at some of the other photos, I wouldn't take those containers as seats, even though you can certainly sit on them. I wouldn't want to be on one of the handles on top, as they don't look very comfy. I'm not sure what those containers would be.

While there could be more answers, have we really gotten anything we didn't already figure out ourselves?

[kevineduguay1]

I already agreed with all those concerned, whatever amount of infantry carried NO HEAVY OR CREW SERVED WEAPONS.

5-alef says that armored infantry was carried in some tank durring the 2006 Lebanon conflict. But no numbers. I have a funny feeling that any other numbers than the ones I found on a few sites and that are mentioned in a few videos is all that we will be able to find.

The only for sure is that ten soldiers came out of a Merkava MkI the day is was first shown to the public.

The Merkava can carry two stretcher cases inside the tank.

How many men can sit in the space of a standard military stretcher?

[Marek_Tucan]

How many rounds are given up to give space for the stretchers?
And how gutted was that "showtime" Merkava?
And you have numbers. 2-3 fully loaded max., 1-2 usually.

[Marcello]

The only for sure is that ten soldiers came out of a Merkava MkI the day is was first shown to the public.

The Merkava can carry two stretcher cases inside the tank.

How many men can sit in the space of a standard military stretcher?

It is pretty safe that they can indeed squeeze in a full infantry squad or a couple of strecher and assorted medical equipment, a command post or whatever.
The thing is, it appears that these are niche uses which require significant ammo trade offs. Said tanks will be be supported by others and will retain some rounds for self defense or short actions, so for the intended purpose it is not a problem.
You have already been told that with full ammo it is 2-3 combat troops, usually less, which seems reasonable for a tank of that size.
There will inevitably be a gray area between what is expedient and what is doctrine, what is feasible only for special circumstances and what can be used as standard and obviously between the various different models of the tank.
But what everyone here and on tanknet is telling you is that no, you can't have your cake (a full ammo load) and then eat it (carry around a full infantry squad). Given we are talking about a tank apparently not much bigger than others western types and the trade offs inherent in increasing armored volume in an AFV it is hardly surprising.
For it to be different it would raise the question of how it was accomplished, it is not like that every other tank designer is a moron. Even if nobody else was interested in carrying around troops extra ammo or fuel would be always useful, at least as potential. But that cannot be had without paying a price.

They all come in their own container. Could this allow the ammo load to be shifted from the rear compartment to areas around or under the turret basket?

Just because you can squeeze extra ammo in some apparently empty space it does not mean that
1) It won't get in the way of something or someone during actual operations.
2) It will actually remain out of the way once the tank hits the first big pothole or whatever.

[RERomine]

The Merkava can carry two stretcher cases inside the tank.

How many men can sit in the space of a standard military stretcher?

Given the configuration of the stretchers, I would say you could get four, as long as they are friendly. The photo is obviously of a display model and not in a real vehicle, but the ammo has been remove (aside from the 10 rounds that would be carried elsewhere) which seems to be something no one has said would be done. This is a special configuration and 10 are proposed and supposed to be the the field sometime this year.

[kevineduguay1]

RERomine,

Thanks for posting that picture!

The Merkava "Tankbulance" has a reduced ammo load. No one is saying how reduced but with the whole rear compartmen reconfigurd and the extra equipment etc. it for sure is carrying NO ammo in that area.

[RERomine]

They all come in their own container. Could this allow the ammo load to be shifted from the rear compartment to areas around or under the turret basket?

Just because you can squeeze extra ammo in some apparently empty space it does not mean that
1) It won't get in the way of something or someone during actual operations.
2) It will actually remain out of the way once the tank hits the first big pothole or whatever.

I'm still not sure where this "own container" thing is coming from. Photos from that website show shipping tubes where the rounds are being removed and ammo resupply taking place, without tubes.

Marcello, I completely agree. Even lap readying a round is frowned up, so having lots of ammo placed randomly within the tank would be ill advised.

[RERomine]

RERomine,

Thanks for posting that picture!

The Merkava "Tankbulance" has a reduced ammo load. No one is saying how reduced but with the whole rear compartmen reconfigurd and the extra equipment etc. it for sure is carrying NO ammo in that area.

Not a problem on the picture. A lot of folks have said they have trouble getting to the site but I don't. While it seems to stretch the facts some, there are a lot of good pictures out there. I figured I would put some of the relevant pictures out here so everyone could see them.

[kevineduguay1]

I had a few that I wanted to post but I kept getting the error message. The Tankbulance was one of them.

I belive thet on that site or one of the links you will find pics of those shell sleaves/protectors stuffed into the baskets at the rear of the tank. I to saw the pic of the crew loading unprotected rounds. It just makes no sence unless its an older Mk and the rounds are going to be repacked into the larger ammo crates.

Those sleaves are supposed to help prevent cook offs. The older bins held 2 or 4 rounds.

[RERomine]

I found the reference to the individual fire-proof canisters, but I don't think we've seen any pictures of them. The photo with the containers on the road, I'm sure those are just shipping tubes. Somewhere in the tank are the fire-proof canisters, so the rounds are removed from the shipping tube and loaded into the canisters. The upright ammo in the road is probably just some intermediate step, where the rounds have been removed from the shipping tubes, but not been stowed in the fire-proof canisters within the tank yet.

As to the caliber of the ammo, they look like 120mm rounds, but don't have combustible casings. The tank doesn't appear to be a Merk IV, because I don't see the rearward facing camera. I'm pretty sure it isn't a Merk I, also. That leaves Merk II or Merk III. If they are 105mm rounds, it is a II, if 120mm a III. Overall, I don't think it matters.

[kevineduguay1]

RERomine,

Yes I see what you mean. It looks like the rounds are removed from the shipping tubes and then placed inside the tank.

Also the rounds in the "ready" magazine area are protected by the magazine. 5-10 rounds depending on Mk.

Now as to the stowage question I have some observations from the short video and the pictures on Tanknet.
Both show an early Mk of Merkava. The short video shows the 4 round containers stacked 6 to each side of the rear compartment much like the picture on the site poster here. Those containers do not belong in that tank. Its a MkI. The picture on my thread on Tanknet show 2 metal bins that look like they could hold about 6 rounds of 105mm ammo. This would match up with the description of secured storage of ammunition on a MkI. If I am correct about those metal bins there are only 12 rounds stored in the back of a MkI. With 5 or 6 at the ready station where are the other 42 rounds stored?
In the game the MkI holds 60 rounds of ammo for its 105mm gun. I have seen other numbers that seem correct up to 62 rounds. Now if you read the part about carrying troops and ammo storage one the site we have both been looking at here the author gives a main gun ammo load of only 47 rounds if carrying troops.
The hull of the MkIII is larger that the MkI and MkII. The MkIVs hull is slightly large than the MkIII. On the site posted here the author only gives the load out of 120mm ammo for the MkIV carrying troops. The Magazine in the MkIII I think only carries 5 rounds. With the smaller magazine the number of rounds stowed while carrying troops in a MkIII would be 5 to 7 rounds less than a MkIV.

With all the videos I have looked at the only rounds that are ever shown being used are those from a magazine of one kind or another. But if we look at the layouts of other tanks we see that ammo can and is stored almost anywhere it will fit.

Just some thoughts.

Edit: Its not a MKIV in the pic but it could be an early MkIII or an updated MkII. The MkIIs have been upgraded almost as much as they can be. MkIIIs going back for re-fit are comming out looking much like MkIVs. Good eye about the camera!

[kevineduguay1]

See post # 26 on the thread I started on Tanknet. Good info on MkI and MkII ammo load out.

[RERomine]

The photo seems to show twelve 4-round containers and seem to be for 105mm rounds, so the numbers quoted from Jane's don't add up:


- 44 in 4-round containers


My math tells me that is eleven 4-round containers, but my eyes tell me twelve. The containers are obviously removable, so maybe they typically pull one of the 4-round containers and use the space for MG ammo storage. That is just a guess, however. I don't believe I've seen any pictures with 2-round containers, but I haven't really looked for them either.

As far as the two containers you are referring to possibly holding 105mm rounds, it is possible. My gut tells me it is something else. We know the 4-round containers were removable, so maybe they were taken out and these put in. Possible for one of those ad-hoc infantry missions. They could be used for equipment storage and make convenient, if uncomfortable seats. If you recall, commented before that the handles wouldn't be pleasant to be sitting on.

For the benefit of everyone else, I'll put those pictures out here as well.

[kevineduguay1]

Thanks again.

And for those who have not seen this yet....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOZvoBL8d-k

[kevineduguay1]

I think we have the reply we were waiting for on Tanknet. Its post #36 by DADI.

He knew about the metal bins in the pic posted here above.(Its not Merkava gear) He also gives a load out for the MkI and MkII of 14 rounds while carrying 8 men in full gear. carrying this many men does not restrict in any way the rotation of the turret. With a 1 or 2 man team it is possible to carry a full load of ammo. Now we just have to do a little math to figure out the rest.

Getting this kind of info on the MkIII and MkIV will probably not be possible at this time but it may be possible to come up with some kind of solution that will satisfy most players.

I have seen some of DADIs other posts and I trust his figures.

[gila]

What can you trust Israeli propaganda or the real truth?




Unique among the main battle tanks of the world, the Merkava design features a front-mounted power pack, which presents a heavy mass in the forward area, which protects the crew from enemy attack. This configuration also cleared room at the rear section for a safe exit and enough space to carry a few fully armed infantrymen, in addition to the crew. The rear access hatch allows for the quick and safe exit of injured crewmen or pickup of wounded soldiers for evacuation.



Source here:

http://www.defense-update.com/directory/merkava4.htm

[gila]

note can carry a "few" fully equiped infrantry..which means 3 at best.

The way Isreal trys to describe it as some kind of Hybride tank,that can do backflips and juggle all at the same time,is just plain PG BS.;)

[Imp]

Kevin why not go read about 2006 as this was the documented period where squads were loaded. From memory not rereading so appologies if wrong.
First tank goes bang doing regular patrol work, parks up & deploys troops in the same few spots most days:doh:
The charge through the valley into the ATGM ambush also had troops on board.
These mistakes will not be repeated in a hurry & yes the tactic of troops on board was only a small part of the problem. Poor use of intel & shall we say overconfidence played a bigger factor while the Hez had been planing for months.
Will they ever use them as IFVs again or perhaps is this what is making them think sticking a GL or gun on the Namer is a good idea.
Perhaps Israels problem was they could not use the tanks as they wish because the APCs cant keep up so carrying some infantry seemed a good idea.

[kevineduguay1]

gila,

With a full ammo load 2-3 troops. Thanks for the confirmation.

The Russians call the Merkava a hybrid.

Imp,

Carrying a few troops in the back (1-3) seems to have been common practice durring LIC operations. In a tank vs tank situation the Merks would probably not carry any infantry

In both Lebanon conflicts the Merks were pressed into service to transport infantry into areas where a normal APC would be a sitting duck to anyone with a RPG.

2006 was when these tactics were used the most and with the most men aboard. One tactic was to back the tank up to a breach or doorway of a building and let the squad or section out under full cover from small arms fire.

[gila]

Good thread,

Learned alot about the Merkava,although i've never used them in game,they have some interesting potential.

One thing that could happen from what has been uncovered, is maybe the dev's could create a a separate hybrid (apc class) with much lower main gun rounds to have a few infrantry inboard.

[kevineduguay1]

gila,

It can be classed as a Gun APC (Tracked) Class # 127. I think DRG tested this with the AI and had no real problems.

[DRG]

The AI will use a gun APC much like it does a tank.

Don

[kevineduguay1]

The extra 8 rounds on the MkI and MkII are stowed in front of the engine fire wall between it and the turret basket. They are in 4, 2 round containers. This is why the tank can carry 14 rounds with only 6 in the ready possition on the floor of the basket.Info from DADI on Tanknet. Also gave some other load info for other weapons. Please look at the relevant posts on that site.

I may get access to a book written by a Tanknet member (Marsh) on the Merkava. Maybe this will clear away more of the fog.;)

[Mobhack]

The extra 8 rounds on the MkI and MkII are stowed in front of the engine fire wall between it and the turret basket. They are in 4, 2 round containers. This is why the tank can carry 14 rounds with only 6 in the ready possition on the floor of the basket.Info from DADI on Tanknet. Also gave some other load info for other weapons. Please look at the relevant posts on that site.

I may get access to a book written by a Tanknet member (Marsh) on the Merkava. Maybe this will clear away more of the fog.;)

I am quite capable of reading tanknet, since I pointed you that way in the first place.

The thing will be modelled in the way we decide. No further discussion required.

Andy

[kevineduguay1]

Andy,

I never should have brought it up and I won't again HERE. F-OFF you close minded puke!

So long guys. Just trying to help.

[RERomine]

Andy,

I never should have brought it up and I won't again HERE. F-OFF you close minded puke!

So long guys. Just trying to help.

Kevin, that isn't called for. What you did was brought up a suggestion and it was politely turned down. You kept pushing for what you wanted and seem surprised people are getting irritated you won't let it go. I mentioned what you needed to do to get your argument heard, prove it to be doctrine. Instead, you kept on focusing on what can be instead of what it really is and how it is used. You got your answer long before today. Time to move on and accept if for what it is.

[Imp]

Andy,

I never should have brought it up and I won't again HERE. F-OFF you close minded puke!

So long guys. Just trying to help.

We got there weeks ago thanks.

[Spinflight]

Whilst it is true that the Merkava has an interesting niche capability it probably isn't as unique as you'd think.

It is one thing to cram troops in the back but I can assure you that without restraints and well designed seating going cross country at speed in a heavy armoured vehicle is simply downright dangerous. It certainly feels rather dangerous even with the above!

As for the numbers I've heard stories of 27 troops with bergans in the back of a Warrior, its strange what the prospect of a 20 mile tab makes possible. It isn't just a question of the number of seats either. Storage space on AFVs is very tight and unless even moderately heavy equipment is restrained you are asking for someone to get brained. Often the restraints and seating are needed for extra bits of kit and there is a huge difference between the kit needed for a quick jolly and a deployment where you are effectively living out of the vehicle. Rifle racks and the suchlike are not just to keep things tidy.

You could probably make a case for almost any modern MBT carrying a couple of dudes, possibly not even at the expense of some ammo. If you were going to model it however you'd probably have to think about them being unconscious or having broken limbs if the vehicle went above 30 mph for any period of time.

[Imp]

its strange what the prospect of a 20 mile tab makes possibleLol

Reminds me years back on a practice exercise a mate of mine managed to organise a sneak in & disableing a load of their transport. They were not happy about it gave him a good beating after but serious respect for pulling it off.