Now you've got three tanks along with one APC. The IDF APC and Merkava tank both feature an engine mounted in the front space within the hull. I suppose that might be the feature common to all four vehicles.
The treads of the Merkava and Naver are derived from those of the Centurion. I suppose the Challenger and some other AFVs might share that same ancestral origins for their own tread designs.
that is it. Chieftain,Challenger I and II and all 4 Merkavas all have a shallow V hull(I think that is called "double v" sometimes) and externally mounted suspension. For a number of reasons this is a very good thing if you run over a mine.
Most other tanks have hull penetrating torsion bar suspension,usually with a flat bottom like the Abrams (sometimes the bottom is shaped around the bars like the Leopard II).
This causes a number of problems. The tin opener effect of a whipping torsion bar. Ingress of high energy gasses through lower hull penetrations. Transmission of shock to the vehicle interior via the torsion bars which can destroy the occupant's legs. Structurally weaker lower hull more prone to being stoved in by mines. Increased blunt trauma due to vehicles being thrown around more because the lower hull shape traps rather than deflects blast.
This is just one reason why I hope the British Army does not end up driving around in A.S.C.O.D. for the next 50 years.
Incidentally,Merkava is related to Challenger via the Chieftain. Israel was going to buy Chieftains at one point. They were tested there in 1967 and Israel Tal visited the Chieftain production line before developing the Merkava. The two tanks have a number of similarities.
35 comments:
A Kettle?
Not my area, but is it that they can carry infantry?
Hello,
hmmm,now I know British tanks can heat water and I know American tanks are getting that capability but I have no idea if Israeli tanks can heat water.
Challenger can not carry dismounts unfortunately,it's one major downside.
The feature I am thinking of is shown in each of those pictures.
GrandLogistics.
Does it have to do with the skirts at the treads?
Hello Chuck Hill,
it is not the skirts or tracks but you are closish.
I added another picture.
GrandLogistics.
Well,
Now you've got three tanks along with one APC. The IDF APC and Merkava tank both feature an engine mounted in the front space within the hull. I suppose that might be the feature common to all four vehicles.
Hello D.E.Reddick,
the Challenger has a rear engine.
Have a look at those pictures you can see this feature in each one.
GrandLogistics.
OK,
They all have black or rubberized skirts or bumpers over the treads at the edges of the hull.
Hello,
it is something more useful in combat than that.
A fundamental part of the tank's design.
GrandLogistics.
Well,
The IDF Namer APC carries reactive armor panels, so perhaps that's the shared feature you're looking for us to identify.
Then, to it might be aspects of the composite armor, the suspension system, or the power-drive mechanisms.
Hello D.E.Reddick,
you are getting a lot warmer.
You just mentioned one part of it but not the second related and more visible part.
GrandLogistics.
Laminated composite armor.
Hello,
no,but closely related.
Have a look at the pictures again,you might notice they are all taken from front or back.
GrandLogistics.
Treads / tracks.
The treads of the Merkava and Naver are derived from those of the Centurion. I suppose the Challenger and some other AFVs might share that same ancestral origins for their own tread designs.
They all have sloped armor, but almost goes without saying.
Hello Chuck Hill,
you are very warm.
This has something to do with sloped armour and something else D.E.Reddick mentioned earlier.
GrandLogistics.
Hello D.E.Reddick,
Challenger,Namer and Merkava do share some ancestry (though they are not exactly blood relatives) and this has got something to do with that.
But it has nothing to do with tracks.
GrandLogistics.
OK,
Sloped, reactive (explosive) layer of armor laid atop sloped, laminated composite armor.
Crew protection provided by a rear hull hatch.
Hello D.E.Reddick,
it is something more visible than armour composition.
GrandLogistics.
They all have Chobham armour.
IR paint?
Hello steve,
it's not the paint.
There is another picture up of a tank with the same feature.
GrandLogistics.
Smoke grenade launchers.
Turret-top machine-gun mounts.
RWS machine-gun mounts.
Hello D.E.Reddick,
no.
This is a fundamental aspect of the tank's construction and is visible in each photograph.
GrandLogistics.
The only thing I can see common to all is NATO hooks........
well apart from tracks etc.
Hello,
have a look at this picture of an Abrams:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/
US_Army_M1A1_Abrams_main_battle_tank.jpg
The Abrams does not share this feature with the tanks shown.
GrandLogistics.
Hello steve,
it is something a lot bigger than a hook or a track.
GrandLogistics.
Well I am stumped. The only thing I can see is the bottom of the hull seems to slope back more on the vehicles you have posted.
The angle / slope of the glacis plate!?!
Hello D.E.Reddick,
close but no.
Have a look at the pictures then compare to the Abrams.
Think of something which might be important in Afghanistan.
GrandLogistics.
V-shaped anti-IED under-hull.
It's the reinforced v-shaped belly armor pack.
Hello D.E.Reddick,
that is it.
Chieftain,Challenger I and II and all 4 Merkavas all have a shallow V hull(I think that is called "double v" sometimes) and externally mounted suspension.
For a number of reasons this is a very good thing if you run over a mine.
Most other tanks have hull penetrating torsion bar suspension,usually with a flat bottom like the Abrams (sometimes the bottom is shaped around the bars like the Leopard II).
This causes a number of problems.
The tin opener effect of a whipping torsion bar.
Ingress of high energy gasses through lower hull penetrations.
Transmission of shock to the vehicle interior via the torsion bars which can destroy the occupant's legs.
Structurally weaker lower hull more prone to being stoved in by mines.
Increased blunt trauma due to vehicles being thrown around more because the lower hull shape traps rather than deflects blast.
This is just one reason why I hope the British Army does not end up driving around in A.S.C.O.D. for the next 50 years.
Incidentally,Merkava is related to Challenger via the Chieftain.
Israel was going to buy Chieftains at one point.
They were tested there in 1967 and Israel Tal visited the Chieftain production line before developing the Merkava.
The two tanks have a number of similarities.
GrandLogistics.
Whoops! Yes of course.....
I was too fixated on what I could see clearly. Further I was too idle to go and get my copy of Jane's.
@ TheRagingTory
You mean a BV or boiling vessel.
"If in danger or if in doubt get the brew can out."
Post a Comment