Polish armour

[perdurabo]

ok my next thread with (stolen from other sites) photos:)

PT-91

http://pancerni.to2.pl/czolgi/PT-91.jpg
http://pancerni.to2.pl/czolgi/PT-91twardy-2.jpg
http://pancerni.to2.pl/czolgi/PT-91twardy.jpg

T-72

http://pancerni.to2.pl/czolgi/t-72cnn.jpg

BWP-1

http://pancerni.to2.pl/transgasien/bmp1%20-4.jpg

SKOT

http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpkolo/skot.jpg

PZA Loara (AA Gun)

http://pancerni.to2.pl/zestplot/loara.jpg

NUR-21 (radiolocation)

http://pancerni.to2.pl/staradiolok/spg1%20nur21.jpg

SUM Kalina (minelayer)

http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpspecprz/sum-2.jpg
http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpspecprz/sum.jpg

WZT 3 (tanks support)

http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpspecprz/wzt-3-2.jpg
http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpspecprz/wzt-3-1.jpg

WZT 2

http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpspecprz/WZT2-3.jpg

WZT 1

http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpspecprz/wzt-1b.jpg

PTS-M (amphibious, on tracks carier)

http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpspecprz/pts-m.jpg


Pics stolen from sites ;-) :
http://pancerni.to2.pl

i will try to put here all armoured stuff from Polish army that i find :) maybe in future i'll post some statistics :)

[wholagun]

You got any information on the protype (well what was an protype) of the PT2001, or P2001. I know we got 128 Leo2a4's, so the prototype was canceled.

Is there talk of getting the German Leo2a6 in the future or the IFV Puma.

Is there talk of getting an new chasis and getting rid of the PT91 chasis.

[Operation Ivy]

woot woot ...some had X's though :(

PS dont get the LeoA6 its crap its all a lie about how good it is :D ;)
(waits for Leo ppl to say there tank is the best :P )

[wholagun]

woot woot ...some had X's though :(

PS dont get the LeoA6 its crap ;)
(waits for Leo ppl to say there tank is the best :P )

Yeah I saw the x's as well. Well, we do have Leo's now so it would make perfect sense to stick with the Leo's. Germans are great tank builders. But Id be just as happy with getting the newest Merkava III.

[perdurabo]

i didn't heard about any prototype but i've seen few models of it (one from bumar and one from obrum) i don't know if Poland should make new tank or just buy license for Leo2A6, prabably we don't have enough money for any of this solutions

Puma you mean german projject? or modernisation of BWP-1 by WZM? if that second if it will be enough money for that prabably we will see it but first one didn't heard anything btw there was obrum project BWP-2000 (IFV) based on SUM Kalina (look above) but it was rejected

prabably nobody is getting rid of PT91 until new better tank wil ocure (licensed or PT2001)

[Operation Ivy]

Germans are great tank builders
Very true :P

[UoUo]

woot woot ...some had X's though :(

PS dont get the LeoA6 its crap ;)
(waits for Leo ppl to say there tank is the best :P )

Yeah I saw the x's as well. Well, we do have Leo's now so it would make perfect sense to stick with the Leo's. Germans are great tank builders. But Id be just as happy with getting the newest Merkava III.

The newest Merkava type is not the Merkava mark III....
Its the Merkava 4.

[perdurabo]

woot woot ...some had X's though :(

PS dont get the LeoA6 its crap its all a lie about how good it is :D ;)
(waits for Leo ppl to say there tank is the best :P )
what X? say what pic dosn't show i will fix it or post other (i see all pics)

i would love to see Polish design but if we will have some new tanks it will be Leo2 on 90%

[Operation Ivy]

There all showing up now, dont worry bout it :D

[perdurabo]

so what x?:) TALK You Abrams lover ;-) *lights a lamp in eyes of Op Ivy*

[Marmot1]

http://www.bulba.eu.org/mil/free/gp/pt91(2).jpg

PT91 version for Malesia
http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/bwp1m.jpg

BWP-1M Puma with E8 turreat
http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/newa(4).jpg

Newa-SC AA
http://www.bulba.eu.org/mil/free/gp/patria(3).jpg

Patria APC
http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/2s1.jpg

2S1 Goździk howitzer (self propeled)
http://www.bulba.eu.org/mil/free/gp/krab(2).jpg

155 mm Krab howitzer
http://www.bulba.eu.org/mil/free/gp/loara.jpg

Loara AA
http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/honker2000.jpg

well this is not an armor but it is polish Honker family of cars :-)


All from http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/index.php

[wholagun]

Marmot1 - you beat me too it... :(
My pc crashed, I wasn't able to do it fash enough.

[Marmot1]

Marmot1 - you beat me too it... :(
My pc crashed, I wasn't able to do it fash enough.


he he sorry :-) :petting:

[REMOV]

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/rys/Rys%201.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/rys/Rys%202.jpg
Rys APC (modernized SKOT APC)

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/rys/Rys%20E8_1.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/rys/Rys%20E8_2.jpg
Rys E8 IFV

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/rys/Rys%20M98_1.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/rys/Rys%20M98_2.jpg
Rys M98 (98mm mortars carrier)

[REMOV]

he he sorry :-) :petting:Repair the links to images - some of them (i.e. Puma, Honker, Newa SC) don't work.

[Marmot1]

Some history... WWII(polish 1939 armor)
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/Pol-7TP.jpg

Some history polish 7TP tank (based on vickers) in 1939 photo
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/vickers1.jpg

Vickers E Twin Turret 1939
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/Pol-7TPjw-frontview.JPG

Another polish 7TP

source http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/pol/poland7tp.htm
http://www.msu.edu/user/storto/tk7.jpg

Polish TKS light scut tank(?)

[Marmot1]

he he sorry :-) :petting:Repair the links to images - some of them (i.e. Puma, Honker, Newa SC) don't work.
links are ok try to reload...
they work ok on my comp and my friend comp...
UPDATE:They stoped to work...maybe something with the sourcepage is not right....just click on the link below pics it should lead you to the gallery of polish armor and not only...;-) enjoy and again sorry but i have no clue why it wont work :-(

[REMOV]

links are ok try to reload...No, they are not.

Repair those links:

Wrong: http://www.army.fr.pl/link.php?k=gp&plik=bwp1m.jpg
Correct: http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/bwp1m.jpg

Wrong: http://www.army.fr.pl/link.php?k=gp&plik=newa(4).jpg
Correct: http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/newa(4).jpg

Wrong: http://www.army.fr.pl/link.php?k=gp&plik=2s1.jpg
Correct: http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/2s1.jpg

Wrong: http://www.army.fr.pl/link.php?k=gp&plik=honker2000.jpg
Correct: http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/honker2000.jpg


they work ok on my comp and my friend comp...Sure, and I'm little brown furry alien from Melmac.

They cannot work, because the BBCode don't interprete the php links. And the second thing is - use left mouse button and read properties of your images - they REALLY have 20x36 pixels?

[REMOV]

UPDATE:They stoped to work...maybe something with the sourcepage is not right....They've NEVER worked properly - you've put WRONG links. I wrote down a correct ones - change your letter, ok? Eh, kids and they computer knowledge... ("they work ok on my comp and my friend comp..." - typical excuse)

[Marmot1]

links are ok try to reload...No, they are not.

Repair those links:

Wrong: http://www.army.fr.pl/link.php?k=gp&plik=bwp1m.jpg
Correct: http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/bwp1m.jpg

Wrong: http://www.army.fr.pl/link.php?k=gp&plik=newa(4).jpg
Correct: http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/newa(4).jpg

Wrong: http://www.army.fr.pl/link.php?k=gp&plik=2s1.jpg
Correct: http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/2s1.jpg

Wrong: http://www.army.fr.pl/link.php?k=gp&plik=honker2000.jpg
Correct: http://www.army.fr.pl/foto/gp/honker2000.jpg


they work ok on my comp and my friend comp...Sure, and I'm little brown furry aliens from Melmac.

They cannot work, because the BBCode don't interprete the php links. And the second thing is - use left mouse button and read properties of your images - they REALLY have 20x36 pixels?
mea culpa

but for my excuse when i posted it i checked it on forum and it worked fine....now should be ok...
P.S I am not a kid.... :bash:

[Operation Ivy]

so what x?:) TALK You Abrams lover ;-) *lights a lamp in eyes of Op Ivy*

rofl Never!....great pics in this thread keep it going guys! :D

[Russian Texan]

Why does Poland still uses and develops upon old Soviet platforms? The reason I am asking is because of Polands integration into NATO. Russians, for multitude of reasons, take completely different approach in designing their equipment. I was also under impression that once country enters NATO it is given certain amount of money to get the equipment that complies with NATO standarts. Another question, is PT 91 based on T55 (hull and main gun similarities) or T72 (number of wheels)? Please elaborate.

[Eddie]

Why does Poland still uses and develops upon old Soviet platforms?

My guess: Money money money...


The reason I am asking is because of Polands integration into NATO. Russians, for multitude of reasons, take completely different approach in designing their equipment. I was also under impression that once country enters NATO it is given certain amount of money to get the equipment that complies with NATO standarts.

Who's giving the money? NATO? No, it's up to the particular country to get NATO-standard equipment. And I'm under the impression NATO don't go about demanding new member states to buy western equipment, NATO's main concern is that C&C is compatible. So when talking about NATO standards and upgrading existing systems to a NATO standard, it usually means communications equipment and such, not the whole platform.


Another question, is PT 91 based on T55 (hull and main gun similarities) or T72 (number of wheels)? Please elaborate.

T-72. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/pt-91.htm

[volfram]

Note that also some old NATO members still buy Russian weapons,like Grece for example.

[perdurabo]

we have a saying about russian things "gniotsa nie łamiotsa" it's something like it can bend but not crush :) why change things that are realy good and cheap too? :)

[tony6]

Texan: PT-91 is modernized T-72 (new reactive armor, engine, Drawa fire control system)

As for BWP-2000:
http://www.obrum.gliwice.pl/img/16bwp2_.jpg
http://www.obrum.gliwice.pl/img/6.jpg

[tony6]

As for PT-2001:
It is really great project. It's a pity that there's no money for it now. Our military budget is pretty tight lately (we're buying 48 F-16, 690 AMV APCs, Spike guided missiles, 8 CASA-295 transport aircrafts).
I hope that they will come back to this project later.
BUMAR group won some armor contracts lately (in Malaysia)-maybe they will finish this project with their own money (without ministry of defense support)?

[perdurabo]

Leo 2A4 (in river Odra)

http://www.altair.com.pl/files/r1103_leo02.jpg
http://www.altair.com.pl/files/r1103_leo01.jpg
http://www.altair.com.pl/files/r1103_leo04.jpg
(ZSU-23-4 in background)

Bergepanzer 2A2
http://www.altair.com.pl/files/r1103_leo05.jpg

Photos from http://www.altair.com.pl/files/r1103_leo.htm

About other programs:
Krab new hovitzer with AS90 turret on polish chasis. to replace 2S1 Goździk
PZA Loara new AA gun to replace ZSU-23-4
PZR Loara new AA rocket luncher tu replace OSA-AKM
ZUR-23-2TG modernisation of ZU-23-2 with new electronic firing system, and Grom AA rockets
ZSU-23-4 Biała -modernization of ZSU-23-4 Shilka also with added Grom rockets (temporal until PZA Loara will be in line)
Mi24PL (+PL-SAR) modernization of Mi24D/W, also 4 heli spetial equipment to CSAR misions
MEKO A-100PL -new corvetes to polish navy
6 ex british Hercules planes
and tones of more stuff
i would love to see PT-2001 but prabably we won't see it :(

and lots of more stuff

[kinghk]

Texan: PT-91 is modernized T-72 (new reactive armor, engine, Drawa fire control system)

As for BWP-2000:
http://www.obrum.gliwice.pl/img/16bwp2_.jpg


Looks like a CV90 ripoff

[perdurabo]

Looks like a CV90 ripoff

maybe it looks like but it's based upon:

SUM Kalina
http://pancerni.to2.pl/transpspecprz/sum.jpg
BWP-2000
http://www.obrum.gliwice.pl/img/16bwp2_.jpg

You see? :) and BWP-2000 was prabably before CV-90 :)

[tony6]

And one of the newest projects- UTL (Uniwersalny Transportowiec Logistyczny)
Universal Logistic Transport Ship
http://www.altair.com.pl/files/utl02.jpg
http://www.altair.com.pl/files/utl01.jpg

[perdurabo]

about 15 0000 tons this is newer wersion of this project older one looked better but was smaler:) i doubt if it goes in line because of lack of funds :/

[wholagun]

As for PT-2001:
It is really great project. It's a pity that there's no money for it now. Our military budget is pretty tight lately (we're buying 48 F-16, 690 AMV APCs, Spike guided missiles, 8 CASA-295 transport aircrafts).
I hope that they will come back to this project later.
BUMAR group won some armor contracts lately (in Malaysia)-maybe they will finish this project with their own money (without ministry of defense support)?

I have only heard rumars about this project, do you have concept drawings or any other info on it?

Also is the chasis of the PT 91 modernized, I noticed we use it for otherthings, the same goes for other chasis as the Polish Puma - is the Puma inside chasis modernized or is the inside the same it was 20 years ago?

[wholagun]

about 15 0000 tons this is newer wersion of this project older one looked better but was smaler:) i doubt if it goes in line because of lack of funds :/

Do you mean ever of just temporarly put aside because of lack of cash.

How much can this thing hold, it doesn't look too big to me.

[perdurabo]

I have only heard rumars about this project, do you have concept drawings or any other info on it?

Also is the chasis of the PT 91 modernized, I noticed we use it for otherthings, the same goes for other chasis as the Polish Puma - is the Puma inside chasis modernized or is the inside the same it was 20 years ago?

i had few but on paper from magazines
for Ryś only 30% of old things stays(mainly hull) rest is new
for Puma and others i don't know basicly they are all made from t72 idea(Krab, Loara etc) but hevily modernized (new build ofcourse)

as for UTL small? 15 000 BRT is small ?? hmm "Principe de Asturias" Spain aircraft carier is about 13000 standard and full is 17 000 BRT? or so:) (erlier project of UTL where up to 10 000BRT or so)

[wholagun]

as for UTL small? 15 000 BRT is small ?? hmm "Principe de Asturias" Spain aircraft carier is about 13000 standard and full is 17 000 BRT? or so:) (erlier project of UTL where up to 10 000BRT or so)


Ok so mabey it ain't so small after all, but what is the status of it, is it going to be built ever or just cast aside or is it on hold

Also, why don't we design a new chasis? Sure the PT91 may work, but Im sure we can improve upon it and make a new one.

[S'13]

T-72
http://pancerni.to2.pl/czolgi/t-72cnn.jpg

In the 1982 war in Lebanon the Merkava MK 1 fought against this tank
(used by the Syrians) and proved itself to be superior.


Merkava MK 1
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava1.gif

[Herrmannek]

In the 1982 war in Lebanon the Merkava MK 1 fought against this tank
(used by the Syrians) and proved itself to be superior.
Don't blame tank blame soldiers :)

[perdurabo]

as for UTL small? 15 000 BRT is small ?? hmm "Principe de Asturias" Spain aircraft carier is about 13000 standard and full is 17 000 BRT? or so:) (erlier project of UTL where up to 10 000BRT or so)


Ok so mabey it ain't so small after all, but what is the status of it, is it going to be built ever or just cast aside or is it on hold

Also, why don't we design a new chasis? Sure the PT91 may work, but Im sure we can improve upon it and make a new one.

they are saying about building up to 4-6 :D and giving them to private owners to work as normal RO-RO (Ro-PAX?) transport ships :D

PT91 is only upgrade and new tank would prabably be new design
and S13 fight Merkava 1 aginst PT91 hmm with polish crew hmmm we prabably :-*$ your merkava with your Spike rocket :P merkava 1/2 has only 105mm gun so prabably PT91 would win but Merkava3/4 would sloughter Twardy :(

[PAK]

About Leopards in polish army - when they were introduced, during the official ceremony, there were present some polish veterans of second world war - especially from polish 1st Armoured Div (was fighting in Normandy, during the battle of Falaise, later liberated belgium city of Breda, and finally seized and was occupying Kriegsmarine base in Wilhemshaven - unit was commanded by general Stanislaw Maczek).
One of them gave a short interview to Gazeta Wyborcza (one of biggest and most influencial polish newspaper). He said, that he had some mixed feelings about german tanks serving in polish army. But he concluded, that after all, Germans were experts in tank constructions.
Well, he knew what he said - especially if he had to deal with Panthers, Tigers or KingTigers....
;)

[wholagun]

Personally I say screw new tank, get Eurofigher Typhoon/JSF, new guns (bye bye Beryl), and improve the capability of every soldier (training and equipment). Screw heavy tanks, we need logistics and better equiped soldiers so that we can send them all over the world ie Iraq and other places.

[REMOV]

In the 1982 war in Lebanon the Merkava MK 1 fought against this tank (used by the Syrians) and proved itself to be superior.Ekhm... that was mostly a propaganda superiority, because the truth looks a little bit different. I was made a little research about a year ago and...

Official Israeli source:

Source: http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0ibj0
Interview with Prime Minister Begin on Israel television, 15 June 1982.

We destroyed 300 Syrian Soviet tanks. You know, they included the T-72. We destroyed nine such tanks with our "Merkava." While NATO claimed that the T-72 is undefeated in one respect - it cannot be hit from the front - NATO now knows this is not so. This is also a myth. It can be hit from any side. And we destroyed nine T-72 tanks. I wish we could take one out and examine what goes on there in its belly, but we have not succeeded till now due to battlefield reasons. But the fact is that our "Merkava" destroyed nine such tanks. So, only 9 (nine) T-72s were destroyed by Merkava Mk.1s during this war, according to Prime Minister Begin.

The next source:

Source: http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/MerkavaMk1.html

The first Mark-1 Merkava tanks were supplied to the IDF in April 1979, nearly nine years after the decision to produce the Merkava tank was taken. (...) The Merkava Mk-I tank participated with a high degree of success in the 1982 war in Lebanon when the war started Israel had 200-300 Merkava Mk 1 tanks. (...) Production of Merkava Mk 1 continued up to 1983(...) Lessons learned from the operation of the Mk-1 tanks were applied to the Mk-2 tanks, mainly in the following:
- Improved mobility
- Improved fire control system
- Improved special armor (...)So, the question is - why the production of the first Merkava model Mk.1 was stopped just after the 1982 war? Why the most important thing was armor improved? The newest Israeli tank was upgrated only 4 years after the production starts? And about the superiority... ekhm... only 9 T-72s destroyed (from 30 T-72s destroyed during the war)?

[PAK]

Screw heavy tanks, we need logistics and better equiped soldiers so that we can send them all over the world ie Iraq and other places.

I woudn't like to send professional troops "all over the world" without the possibility of giving them heavy armour support. You think, that tanks are useless? Well, I think that Iraqi Freedom has just proven otherwise.
Moreover, tanks are usefull even in stabilisation/peace mission. You won't get a better protected checkpoint, when you can position a tank with that checkpoint. And it is not only a psychological factor. Against trucks, multipurpose vehicles, light APC's you can use relatively light weapons - even machinguns would be usefull. Against tanks - you need something with much bigger "punch".

[wholagun]

Against a 3rd rate army tanks can be useful, although against a first rate army, Im not so sure they are good.

I didn't mean to say that we should get rid of all our tanks. What I meant was that we don't have to build our own tank and spend millions of dollors. We can buy foreign tanks and put money to good use buying other equipment. But what is the point of having tanks if you can't get them from point A to point B. We depend on the US to move our troops and equipment, we need to be able to do that our selves for the most part. We can still use US but only if we have a huge mission we can't handle ourselves. We need big transport planes, and logistical boats like the other posted.

I would like to see less reliance on heavy equipment and more on speed and rapid deployment more special forces like in the US. Nature of combat is changing we need to adapt. Russia or Germany ain't gonna attack us any time soon.

[REMOV]

the same goes for other chasis as the Polish Puma - is the Puma inside chasis modernized or is the inside the same it was 20 years ago?The Puma it is a basically a modernized BWP-1 (BWP-1M) with less changes (an engine etc.), the Puma E8 is an option with a new turret (probably Rheinmetall E8) and more changes.

Puma (BWP-1M)
http://www.wzm.pl/img/puma.jpg
http://www.wzm.pl/img/puma2.jpg
http://www.wzm.pl/img/puma3.jpg
http://www.wzm.pl/img/puma4.jpg

Puma E8
http://www.wzm.pl/img/Puma_E8_1.jpg
http://www.wzm.pl/img/Puma_E8_2.jpg
http://www.wzm.pl/img/Puma_E8_3.jpg
http://www.wzm.pl/img/Puma_E8_4.jpg

[wholagun]

Remov why didn't we send any of these to Iraq, why did we send that little winer armour thing over (that thing is ancient) Im not sure what its called (SKOT i think)

[perdurabo]

all is basicly about money if with the same money or little bigger we can make our own tank equal or superior we should o that but if costs are too high and value of new project is low we shouldn't build own tank :) but look we build Loara it was cheaper than buying licence for i.e german Geprad, we build Krab with AS90 tower system but on polish chasis, we build Grom AA rocket witch is better than stinger or striela, igla. So Poland have big potential but shortage of money :) We can't spend money only on one thing so what if we have 100JSF ( ;-) ) but our airfields are taken by enemy? you say war can't happen in next 20years hahaha how much time Hitler needed to start war? before 39 our politics thogut "oh hitler can't attack us" or " if he attacks us we will kick his ass and french and brits backstab him" learn from history mate, "if you want peace prepare for war!" (Si vis pacem para bellum -or somthing like that)

Adn we are going to build transportation look at UTL, we also are buying Hercules, CASA transport crafts and we are thinking about C-17 or A-400 or something like that, look we are going big changes we can't do all in one jump and we cant afford to leave some aspects behind because it will go back with ten times more costs so we try to do all in proper time! it's time for new fightera and transport its ime for new C&C and it will be time for new tank

[REMOV]

Remov why didn't we send any of these to Iraq, why did we send that little winer armour thing over (that thing is ancient) Im not sure what its called (SKOT i think)The only SKOTs that survived in Polish army (ca. 300) are specialized version (Command nad Control and other) not normal APC (i.e. SKOT-2AP).

[Herrmannek]

I think that wholagun was talking about BRDMs
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:YBM-xKGHB9sC:www.army.fr.pl/foto/brdm.jpg

[Operation Ivy]

Screw heavy tanks

Ahhh must never read that again :( :D

[UoUo]

Take this !!!

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava4_9.jpg


http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava4_10.jpg


http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava4_gg.jpg woot

[UoUo]

[/quote]So, the question is - why the production of the first Merkava model Mk.1 was stopped just after the 1982 war? Why the most important thing was armor improved? The newest Israeli tank was upgrated only 4 years after the production starts? And about the superiority... ekhm... only 9 T-72s destroyed (from 30 T-72s destroyed during the war)?



You don't have point here....
The merkava mk1 enterd the IDF in April 1979...and last until 1983...
From 1983 until 1989 the Merkav mk2 enterd the IDF. few years more...and a good army must learn from is history...this is not mean that the Merkava 1 did't foght well against the T-72
and BTW : hmmm..israel a country with about 4 million people in that day...prodacut a tank that can win a T-72 that the country that product it was a world super power with about 300 million people.

And still The Merkava Kick's all the T-72 ass.....


hmmm..then we had the Merkava 1 against the syrian T-72...now we have the Merkava 3 and 4 against the the T-72.

:bash: woot

[Javehn]

I am very sad to tell you , UoUo , that the Merkava 4 project is , how to say it gently ... let's say in danger . :(
Second , i can't and i want bring you number how muched destroyed . That's just useless. I do appreciate russian technology , but i mean , you can't study nothing about the technology that way. Good tank crue in Mark 4 from WW1 will beat T-90 , if the last are **** (well , maybe little exaduration , but you get the point ) . Surian tankers lack in personal , and command training . It's shame to give them such good peace of technology .
About to replace heavy tanks , the one who said that just delirios . Not yet found a better way to "wash" objectives on open ground . Tanks proofed themselfes , and still will proof themselfes . Maybe only in small intencity conflict , were is neaded limited use of fire power , tanks are uselless .

[UoUo]

I am very sad to tell you , UoUo , that the Merkava 4 project is , how to say it gently ... let's say in danger . :(
Second , i can't and i want bring you number how muched destroyed . That's just useless. I do appreciate russian technology , but i mean , you can't study nothing about the technology that way. Good tank crue in Mark 4 from WW1 will beat T-90 , if the last are **** (well , maybe little exaduration , but you get the point ) . Surian tankers lack in personal , and command training . It's shame to give them such good peace of technology .
About to replace heavy tanks , the one who said that just delirios . Not yet found a better way to "wash" objectives on open ground . Tanks proofed themselfes , and still will proof themselfes . Maybe only in small intencity conflict , were is neaded limited use of fire power , tanks are uselless .

This is just talkin...how to get more money from the goverment...i can't belive that the Merkava 4 will stop.

וחוץ מזה אתה הח'ברה שבפורום לא צריכים לדעת מזה....ששש..כביסה מלוכלכת מכבסים בבית..לא בחוץ

[REMOV]

this is not mean that the Merkava 1 did't foght well against the T-72The changes means that the mobility, armor and FCS didn't work well - and the production of Mk.1 model were stopped just afer the war. Is it a little bit strange?

and BTW : hmmm..israel a country with about 4 million people in that day...prodacut a tank that can win a T-72 that the country that product it was a world super power with about 300 million people.The Merkava project was financed MAINLY by Americans (lots of Merkava's parts were made in the USA). Israel cannot effort such MBT alone.

[Mo]

The T-90 is a superior tank to even the Abrams, let alone the Merkava.

[wholagun]

I think that wholagun was talking about BRDMs
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:YBM-xKGHB9sC:www.army.fr.pl/foto/brdm.jpg

yeah those, thats what i meant, not skot thats why I said I didn't know the name. Why are those terds there and not something better.

[UoUo]

[/quote]The Merkava project was financed MAINLY by Americans (lots of Merkava's parts were made in the USA). Israel cannot effort such MBT alone.[/quote]

Didn't matter....the the tecnology is israeli made.


The T-90 is a superior tank to even the Abrams, let alone the Merkava.

no.

[Javehn]

The T-90 is a superior tank to even the Abrams, let alone the Merkava.

What a nice answer. I just love those answers ! Very based one indeed .
About , why the Israel stoped produsing Merkava 1? Simple . That is the Israeli system of upgrade . Not unlike other countries with money , that can afford to build new system from scratch , Israeli system is simple trying to upgrade constantly old systems . And only after the old system have passed it's use , the beggining of new model begins . Merkava 1 was tested in war , showed it's flaws and good sides , so ...
לגבי כביסה מלוכלכת , אנחנו תולים אותה בחצר , לפני כל העולם .כל העולם ואחותו יודע על הכביסה שלנו. אני לפחות מנסה לפחות שתיראה יותר נקיה .הרבה יותר עדיף מלנסות להסתיר משהוא שכולם כבר יודעים , ואז יוצאים סתם שקרניים אידיאליסטים . וחוץ מזה , אני חושב שזה אפילו פורסם פה בפורום הזה .

[REMOV]

The T-90 is a superior tank to even the Abrams, let alone the Merkava.Again... a guy with the commercial brochure ;) The T-90 is just modernized a T-72B, and it is not superior to Merkava Mk. IV or M1A2 SEP. Sorry... not this armor, this engine and transmissions, the FCS and - important - gun stablization system. It's a quite good tank, but not the best.

[UoUo]

The M1A1 is great tank...but i am sad that the USA sold those tanks to Egept. :(

hmmm....hope that the Merkava 4 and 3 with and israeli crew can screw an M1A1 with an egeptain crew. woot

[Mo]

What about the 3 phase protection system on the T-90. 1)thermal imaging interferring smoke generators 2)IR and laser guided weapons distractors, and 3)reactive and it's "secrete" armor. I know the Abrams doesn't come close to this level of protection, dont knwo about the Merk.

[Javehn]

What about the 3 phase protection system on the T-90. 1)thermal imaging interferring smoke generators 2)IR and laser guided weapons distractors, and 3)reactive and it's "secrete" armor. I know the Abrams doesn't come close to this level of protection, dont knwo about the Merk.

Interesting indeed ! Thermal imaging interferring smoke generators ? That's new development !! Someone in here knew about that ?? REMOV ? Someone ? I think that's secret .

Same cat , different hat - look for T-72 .
I am not saying that this is a bad tank , not at all. I love Russian tanks. But they have they flaws. Those so called by you "3 phase protection system" excists on all new 4-th generation tanks , on different shapes .

[REMOV]

About , why the Israel stoped produsing Merkava 1? Simple . That is the Israeli system of upgrade . Not unlike other countries with money , that can afford to build new system from scratch , Israeli system is simple trying to upgrade constantly old systems . I've never called into question an Israeli upgrate system, but only exaggerated datas about Merkava Mk.1's victories. I don't know how Israeli military censorship works, but do you know how many Mk.1 was damaged, badly damaged or damaged beyond repaired in 1982? ;)

Merkava 1 was tested in war , showed it's flaws and good sides , so ...Yes, I understand. You know, I'm interested in military technology not a victorious propaganda, so...

לגבי כביסה מלוכלכת , אנחנו תולים אותה בחצר , לפני כל העולם .כל העולם ואחותו יודע על הכביסה שלנו. אני לפחות מנסה לפחות שתיראה יותר נקיה .הרבה יותר עדיף מלנסות להסתיר משהוא שכולם כבר יודעים , ואז יוצאים סתם שקרניים אידיאליסטים . וחוץ מזה , אני חושב שזה אפילו פורסם פה בפורום הזה .Ekhm... I knew futhark (i.e. Norse Runes) well. Should I use them answering you? :|

[Mo]

Following is what i had found on the web about the T-90's defensive capabilities........

The T-90 is equiped with the TShU-1-7 Shtora-1 optronic counter measures system which is designed to disrupt the laser target designation and rangefinders of incoming ATGM. The T-90 is also equipped with a laser warning package that warns the tank crew when it is being lased. Shtora-1 is an electro-optical jammer that jams the enemy’s semiautomatic command to line of sight (SACLOS) antitank guided missiles, laser rangefinders and target designators. Shtora-1 is actually a soft kill, or countermeasures system. It is most effective when used in tandem with a hard kill system such as the Arena. During the International Defense Exposition (IDEX) held in Abu Dhabi in 1995, the system was shown fitted to a Russian MBT. The first known application of the system is the Russian T-90 MBT that entered service in the Russian Army in 1993. Shtora-1 is currently installed on the T-80UK, T-80U, T-84 and T-90 MBTs.

The Shtora-1 system comprises four key components, the electro-optical interface station, which includes a jammer, modulator, and control panel; a bank of forward-firing grenade dischargers mounted on either side of the turret that are capable of firing grenades dispensing an aerosol screen; a laser warning system with precision and coarse heads; and a control system comprising control panel, microprocessor, and manual screen-laying panel. This processes the information from the sensors and activates the aerosol screen-laying system. Two infrared lights, one on each side of the main gun, continuously emit coded pulsed infrared jamming when an incoming ATGM has been detected. Shtora-1 has a field of view of 360-degrees horizontally and -5 to +25-degrees in elevation. It contains 12 aerosol screen launchers and weighs 400kg. The screening aerosol takes less than 3 seconds to form and lasts about 20 seconds. The screen laying range is between 50-70 meters.

[Javehn]

To answer you on the first question , i would have to look deep inside my books , and that to late at my place to do it . Just one thing - Israel have developed system of field repairment and field ingeneer , that used to repair tanks even under fire .Those one allowed much of damaged tanks to get back on the field . And i think there was merkava tank that took 20 hits and kept on moving (i am not shure if it's ATGM's or shells. I will go on the first ). About the last question , no need , thanks :D
to Mo , that's nice you can find things on the web :) . First - Shtora is attached on the T90 tanks as a choice , not part of a system , and ussualy because of money , or lack of it , not every tanks get's equipt . Second , simular system been developted and even used 20 years ago . Nothing new about it . T90 is not unic !!

[UoUo]

About , why the Israel stoped produsing Merkava 1? Simple . That is the Israeli system of upgrade . Not unlike other countries with money , that can afford to build new system from scratch , Israeli system is simple trying to upgrade constantly old systems . I've never called into question an Israeli upgrate system, but only exaggerated datas about Merkava Mk.1's victories. I don't know how Israeli military censorship works, but do you know how many Mk.1 was damaged, badly damaged or damaged beyond repaired in 1982? ;)

Merkava 1 was tested in war , showed it's flaws and good sides , so ...Yes, I understand. You know, I'm interested in military technology not a victorious propaganda, so...

לגבי כביסה מלוכלכת , אנחנו תולים אותה בחצר , לפני כל העולם .כל העולם ואחותו יודע על הכביסה שלנו. אני לפחות מנסה לפחות שתיראה יותר נקיה .הרבה יותר עדיף מלנסות להסתיר משהוא שכולם כבר יודעים , ואז יוצאים סתם שקרניים אידיאליסטים . וחוץ מזה , אני חושב שזה אפילו פורסם פה בפורום הזה .Ekhm... I knew futhark (i.e. Norse Runes) well. Should I use them answering you? :|

About the Hebrew part...soory..he directed this part to me.

[REMOV]

What about the 3 phase protection system on the T-90. This is a system not a tank, right? Shtora-1 (TShU-1) is a system developed in early 80s. It works well agaist 2nd generation ATGMs i.e. HOTs, TOWs, Milans, Fagots, Konkurs, Mavericks and Hellfires. But the modern 3rd generation ATGM guided by thermooptic systems or coded laser transmissions are grave danger for T-90s. The new system called Arena (again - system not a tank, Arena can be also mounted on the M1A2) is very expensive (ca. 30% price of the MBT T-90) and more efficient.

1)thermal imaging interferring smoke generatorsSmoke (or aerosol) GRENADES not generators ;)

3)reactive and it's "secrete" armor.Tandem or triple shape charged warheads. Nasty stuff...

[REMOV]

To answer you on the first question , i would have to look deep inside my books , and that to late at my place to do it .In my British and Russian sources its about 60-100 more or less damaged Mk.1s, 15-30 of them beyond repair, BUT - only 12 Israeli crewmen dies in fight. The level of crew protection in Mk.1 was very high.

Just one thing - Israel have developed system of field repairment and field ingeneer , that used to repair tanks even under fire .Those one allowed much of damaged tanks to get back on the field . Right, it works well during the Yom Kippur war, and also in 1982.

And i think there was merkava tank that took 20 hits and kept on moving (i am not shure if it's ATGM's or shells. I will go on the first ). If I were you I wouldn't be so sure. Syrians had lots of ATGMs and RPGs. The new M1A2 are still vunerable to such rounds so Mk.1s build the 20 years earlier also. AFAIK the additional Mk.2 armor was mostly upgrated against HEAT rounds not APFSDS.

[Marmot1]

I heard that couple of newest Merkavas were blown by the palestinians with charges made of 50-70kg of explosives buried under the roads used by tanks.... so there is a way to deal with it.

About the merkava that tok 20 hits,during the WW2 in 1941 near kiev soviet KV-1 tank was hit 178 times with AT weapos and menaged to smash german AT guns with track(main gun was damaged) and then return to own lines,only one crewmember was light wounded.....so can u beat that :-)... another KV-1 on lithuania stoped whole panzer regiment for 11 hour on a bridge and was destroyed only by the german sapers who menaged to put demolition charges under it after swiming the river... rusian tanks rule :-)

T-90,(and as far as i konw also t-72 but with some limitations) can be fueled with regular gas,diesel,aircraft fuel,pure alcohol(what a waste!!!),and petroleum that means u can put almost everything that is liquid and you can ignite, can u do this with Merkava or Abrams? So as you see it is easy to maintain this tank runing even behind enemy lines...:-)

It is easy to build merkava 1,2,3,4 if sombody gives you bilions of dollars in military aid , we don`t have such amout of money so it takes a long time to modernize our army....

[Operation Ivy]

The T-90 is a superior tank to even the Abrams, let alone the Merkava.

Haha Never! :D

[Dmitri]

Smoke (or aerosol) GRENADES not generators Well, smoke generators do exist and are pretty common, not sure about russian tanks though.


It works well agaist 2nd generation ATGMs i.e. HOTs, TOWs, Milans, Fagots, Konkurs, Mavericks and Hellfires.Well, a lot, if not most, of these are used today, and if something works against them, it wins my respect! I don't know about most of these weapons, but TOW for sure can destroy any piece of equipment on the battlefield and is very easy to use. On Bradleys, when you shoot TOW, it is flight by wire system, as long as you have crossights on the tank it WILL be hit and destroyed, if something can stand against that, it is more than good.

[Russian Texan]

No one can tell which tank is better untill they face each other on the real battlefield. That is when reliability of both mechanics and electronics, ease of maintance, survivability of the crew and everything else gets tested. Russian tanks are more reliable, faster, easier to maintain, have better armament (especially I love the cabability of launching missile through the main gun) and features like reactive armor, shtora or newer arena, etc.
So IMHO T80/90 overall are a better tanks than Abrams.
But like I have said before: only the battlefield can tell and as far as I know Soviet/Russian spec. T80/90 have never engaged M1A1/A2. Although situation somewhat reminds me of WW2: German designs were superior in many aspects but nevertheless T34 is considered to be the best tank of the war.

Everything above said I have to admit of being bias because of the the music :)

http://www.aviation.ru/www.rusarm.ru/video/T-90S_1.wmv

http://www.aviation.ru/www.rusarm.ru/video/T-90S_2.wmv

http://www.aviation.ru/www.rusarm.ru/video/T-90S_3.wmv

[Operation Ivy]

A series of live firing tests of the LAHAT - Laser Guided anti-tank missile developed by IAI/MBT (Israel Aircraft Industries-MBT Division) included the firing of 120mm missiles, adapted for smooth-bore guns used on Merkava Mk3, Merkava Mk4, Leopard 2A5/6 and M1A1/A2 Abrams tanks. The missile is also designed for employment from launch tubes, where it could be deployed from fixed positions, light vehicles or APC's. The missile’s trajectory can be set to match either tank (top attack) or helicopter (direct attack) engagement. Finally, the missile uses a tandem warhead which can defeat modern armour and reactive panels. The main warhead has a high penetration capability, defeating all known armored vehicles at high impact angles typical of top attack trajectories.



Seems like Isreal is making missiles for its tanks, and sense it can be used on the M1A1/2 i bet they will gladly share it with the US :hug:
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Mekava.htm

[tony6]

"T34 - the best tank of the war" - it's only a myth.
I'm surprised that You still believe it.

[UoUo]

It is easy to build merkava 1,2,3,4 if sombody gives you bilions of dollars in military aid , we don`t have such amout of money so it takes a long time to modernize our army....

I am sick of that bull****....the american aid to israel can only use for buying weopns in USA !!! all the merkava thank are fund with the money of israel !!

Unlike Egept that buying the M1A1 from USA with USA money.

[Javehn]

Ok , first of all to Remov .
You can start throwing Russian numbers - they wortheless . They tend to very over react , to proove that T-72 was supperior ( oh , heart russian pride can be dangerous ) . I have found Russian ( Or soviet at that point of time ) books with redicilous numbers . The number i found of total merkava tanks destroyed was closed to 40 . Take from this number the tanks that destroyed bu mines , and tanks destroyed by ATGM , and i think you have very small number of tanks destroyed by direct enemy tank fire . I cannot disclouse what can penetrate Merkava or not , and not about that we talking here .

To marmot , i am shocked and outraged by your sayings !!! . First of all , not 50 - 70 , 100 kg charge . You just don't realise what the hell are 100 kg of explosive matterial !!!! 100 kg of explosive can level down , let's say 5 stores building ! Not a tank in the world that can stand half of this . Ofcorse there are no such a thing as super-tank . By the way , 2 of 3 blown tanks are allready restored and back on service . Russian tank are fueled with almost everything , because of next reason : they were assigned to move throw europe , and to get it's fuel from local refueling car stations (i am not kidding :) ) . No need to Merkava to do that . Why ??
Smoke generators excist on almost all MBT . It's just Diesel fuel turned into smoke when it's spilled on hot engine , that's all , not nothing special about it . Russian tanks do have it .
Even Sagger (or malyutka , how you like to call it ) can penetrate M1 , on this you can count on my word , depend where he hits the tank .

And it's all comes down to : you can't compare different tanks without define which criterrion you want to compare . Otherwise , this discussion is usseless and non-professional (childish also ) . Define criterion , please - crue survivobillity ? Human ingeneering ? FCS ? Transmittion and mottor system ? Turret and gun systems ?
And ofcorse the most important, the purposes of tank as ingeeners who made it thought . (Merkava tank have the crue protection , russian tanks don't even care a bit on the crue protection or comfort , but they are fast and good manouvring , low on profile - good attack tanks , and so on ) .

[REMOV]

I heard that couple of newest Merkavas were blown by the palestinians with charges made of 50-70kg of explosives buried under the roads used by tanks.... so there is a way to deal with it.The MBT which survives such explosion doesn't exist in the real world, regardless of who made it - M1A2 SAP, Merkava Mk.IV, Challenger 2, T-80, T-90 are vunerable to such IEDs.

T-90,(and as far as i konw also t-72 but with some limitations) can be fueled with regular gas,diesel,aircraft fuel,pure alcohol (...) and petroleum that means u can put almost everything that is liquid and you can igniteYou've just discovered multifuel diesel engines (it is basically a four-stroke cycle diesel engine with the capability of operating on a wide variety of fuel oils without adjustment or modification. The fuel injection system is equipped with a device called a fuel density compensator that varies the amount of fuel to keep the power output constant regardless of the type fuel being used)? All modern tanks have such engines but only Russians boast this feature so much ;)

[Javehn]

You tanker , REMOV ?

[REMOV]

Well, smoke generators do exist and are pretty common, not sure about russian tanks though.Right, but this is not a part of Shtora-1 system and such feature isn't used to make very fast self-defence cover but to a "normal" smokescreen.

Well, a lot, if not most, of these are used today, and if something works against them, it wins my respect! Well, Shtora-1 isn't battle proved system, you can only believes in some expert information, books and brochures. The real battle capability is still unknown. BTW - Shtora-1 is also not working to top attack missiles.

I don't know about most of these weapons, but TOW for sure can destroy any piece of equipment on the battlefield and is very easy to use. Don't be so sure. The TOW is an relatively old ATGM. And reactive armor is still under development.

On Bradleys, when you shoot TOW, it is flight by wire system, as long as you have crossights on the tank it WILL be hit and destroyed, if something can stand against that, it is more than good.It has a chance to be destroyed, thats true. You don't know it for sure. None of ATGMs has a 100% hit and 100% chance of destroying the target capability, despite the fact you found in brochures ;)

BTW - I read a "Armored Cav: A Guided Tour of an Armored Cavalry Regiment" by Clancy ones, and he invented... the 200% effective Hellfire missile! It was very funny indeed ;)

[lekomin]

This is a system not a tank, right? Shtora-1 (TShU-1) is a system developed in early 80s. It works well agaist 2nd generation ATGMs i.e. HOTs, TOWs, Milans, Fagots, Konkurs, Mavericks and Hellfires.
Hellfires? AFAIK Sztora is simply an IR beacon, something like Ispanka on Mi24. It confuses the IR tracker on launch units of, for example, HOT, that uses an IR beacon on the back of the flying missile to compute the relative position of the missile and the target. If the beacon is above the line of sight to the target, then the missile sends a signal via the wire (connecting the launch unit and the missile in flight) to descent. Shtora simply produces a very strong fake "IR beacon" or rather a huge "IR flashlight" :) I have not heard that it is possible for Shtora to produce a "fake" laser return to confuse Hellfires, that home on the reflected laser signal. AFAIK the laser signal used in Hellfire guidance is coded. Except of producing a fake laser return or directing a laser directly at the missile seeker (it can be done; some of the modern anti-anti-aircraft selfdefense systems mounted on planes and helos direct laser at the incoming IR guided antiaircraft missile' seeker and blind them) it is immpossible to jam Hellfire (I don't know about the K - version, that is radar guided and works with the Longbow radar)
To sum up, in case of 2nd GEN missiles (HOT, MILAN, MALUTKA) Shtora simply confuses the missile and forces it to miss its intended target.



But the modern 3rd generation ATGM guided by thermooptic systems or coded laser transmissions are grave danger for T-90s. The new system called Arena (again - system not a tank, Arena can be also mounted on the M1A2) is very expensive (ca. 30% price of the MBT T-90) and more efficient.


Arena is a different animal. It physicaly shoots down the incoming missile instead of confusing it. Arena consists of a milimetre wave radar that detect the missile and a system of podded "claymore mine type" counter-projectiles. Radar detects the missile, a pod in a given sector (i.e. for instance 45 to 90 deg from the gun barrel to the right) detonates sending fragments, that in turn destroy the incoming warhead. The system has many drawbacks: the radar is easy to detect, and once detected pinpoints the tank's position; system can only react at a given speed and therefore a very fast missile (like the new antitank weapons underdevelopment in the US) can hit the tank before Arena is able to function; fragments will for sure disable the missile but the debris would be still flying due to kinetic energy. It can still hit the tank and for instance, destroy the Arena radar, as it cannot be protected by any armour (anybody thought of microwave transparent armour?)
take care
lekomin inc

[lekomin]

I am sick of that bull****....the american aid to israel can only use for buying weopns in USA !!! all the merkava thank are fund with the money of israel !!

Unlike Egept that buying the M1A1 from USA with USA money.
Don't get so exited :) Nobody discounts Israel for producing Merkavas. Those are very capable tanks. Merkava IV can be only compared to M1a2 SEP or Leo II A6. It is a damn good tank, that would beat a hell out of T72 or PT-91.
BUT... what Remov wanted to say is that, if you had to buy military systems (F16s, F15s, radars, helos, weapons, guns, howitzers) on your own instead of receiving it from the US you might not be able to finance the Merkava development. AFAIK Israel decided not to develop the next generation of Merkava. Up to now introduction of a new Merkava into service meant the the work on a new one starts. This time due to lack of funds it won't be so smooth.
I think you don't really comprehend the level of self sufficence Israel really has. In my opinion some of its produce are top notch (UAVs especially) but ISRAEL IS NOT CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A MTB ON ITS OWN. Look at Merkava.. could you tell me what engine it has? What main gun? Those are crucial parts, arent't they?
take care
lekomin inc

[REMOV]

No one can tell which tank is better untill they face each other on the real battlefield. Well it depends on a chosen criterion. I choise a technical one - i.e. compare the whole MBT and the key elements features. That's the tank rivalry works, especially during some tests the state-buyer make before it choice a tank. The only one trial the T-90 participate in was in Malaysia was lost (India bought 310 T-90S because of T-72 similarities and easy to convert their factory from T-72 to T-90, but uses Israeli 125mm rounds, because the Russians don't works well). So...?

Russian tanks are more reliable, faster, easier to maintain, have better armament (especially I love the cabability of launching missile through the main gun) and features like reactive armor, shtora or newer arena, etc. (Bla, bla, bla, from ad brochures) Tell me, there are more reliable than what...? Better armament than what? The M1A2? Challenger 2 maybe? Leopard 2? ;)

And the whole thing with ATGM fired form main gun is the fact that Russian has still problem with a rounds and FCS to fight at over than 2100m distance (The normal T-90s 1st generation Buran-PA thermal sights works only to 1200m, the next one 2nd generation Agava-2 ca. 3000m, but it's only an option not a standard). So, such ATGMs is their answer for the problem. In my opinion it is a wrong solution.

The FCS 1A45T Irtysh was developed in middle 80s, was also mounted on T-80U, but even after the little upgrades it's still beyond the modern ones (compare it to French Savane-!s, for example). There is still not full hunter-killer feature in this tank.

T-90 is only a very good T-72B modernization, nothing else. Right, if you narrowed down a selection only to a subclass - only MBT to 50 tonnes than T-90 it's one of the best. But only with such assuptions I'll agree with you ;)

So IMHO T80/90 overall are a better tanks than Abrams. I don't agree with your opinion, ok?

Although situation somewhat reminds me of WW2: German designs were superior in many aspects but nevertheless T34 is considered to be the best tank of the war.There are three tanks considered to be the best of war - the Panther, the Sherman and the T-34. The best technical parametres had got a Pzkfw V, but the Shermans and T-34 were mass produced. OTOH the T-34-85 were still in service in 90s (in Yugoslavia) so... the record of longevity belongs to them.

[UoUo]

I am sick of that bull****....the american aid to israel can only use for buying weopns in USA !!! all the merkava thank are fund with the money of israel !!

Unlike Egept that buying the M1A1 from USA with USA money.
Don't get so exited :) Nobody discounts Israel for producing Merkavas. Those are very capable tanks. Merkava IV can be only compared to M1a2 SEP or Leo II A6. It is a damn good tank, that would beat a hell out of T72 or PT-91.
BUT... what Remov wanted to say is that, if you had to buy military systems (F16s, F15s, radars, helos, weapons, guns, howitzers) on your own instead of receiving it from the US you might not be able to finance the Merkava development. AFAIK Israel decided not to develop the next generation of Merkava. Up to now introduction of a new Merkava into service meant the the work on a new one starts. This time due to lack of funds it won't be so smooth.
I think you don't really comprehend the level of self sufficence Israel really has. In my opinion some of its produce are top notch (UAVs especially) but ISRAEL IS NOT CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A MTB ON ITS OWN. Look at Merkava.. could you tell me what engine it has? What main gun? Those are crucial parts, arent't they?
take care
lekomin inc

The main gun of the merkava is israeli made.

And about the next Merkava....nothing is sure....i hope when the economy will be better in israel...israel will start the merkava 5...i hope.

[REMOV]

The main gun of the merkava is israeli made.Which one? The Mk.1 and Mk.2 model have got the 105mm American M68 gun (well, a clone of the British L7). The Mk.3 and Mk.4 120mm gun which is an Israeli made.

[UoUo]

The main gun of the merkava is israeli made.Which one? The Mk.1 and Mk.2 model have got the 105mm American M68 gun (well, a clone of the British L7). The Mk.3 and Mk.4 120mm gun which is an Israeli made.

That what i am talked about.

The merkava 3 and 4.

[REMOV]

The merkava 3 and 4.But the engines are still American, right? AVDS-1790-9AR diesel supplied by Teledyne Continental Motors or German GD 883 engine manufactured under license in the USA.

[UoUo]

Yes...you right...but still most of the tank is israeli made...just look on the country that made tanks...

Great britian - huge country with 60 million people....a country that exist from the 19th century....a country with $565 billion Budget


Germmany - a country with 82 million people....a budget of $802 billion dollar....with labour force of 42 million people.


Usa - the world super power...with the best Economy in the world....300 million people...and Labor force of 141.8 million people...with Budget: $1.946 trillion


Russia - a former world super power...with 144 million people....and Labor force of 80 million people....


And israel...a country that exist only about 50 years...with just 6 million people...a country in the size of new jerzy (even smaller) with a Budget: $38.5 billion and with limited natural resources unlike all of those great countrys....

[REMOV]

Yes...you right...but still most of the tank is israeli made...just look on the country that made tanks...Ekhm... forget about China, Brasil, France (Leclerc, AMX), Japan (Type 90), South Korea (Type 88), Sweden, Italy, Pakistan, India...? Poland also has its own homemade verision of T-72M i.e. PT-91 ;)

[Dmitri]

Right, but this is not a part of Shtora-1 system and such feature isn't used to make very fast self-defence cover but to a "normal" smokescreen.
Doesn't matter if it is part of Shtora or not, like you see it is pretty simple, so no need for it to be part of some complex system

Don't be so sure. The TOW is an relatively old ATGM. And reactive armor is still under development
Well, the reason I am sure is because I am the gunner for Bradley, which has TOWs as part of their arnament. Second, there are many mods of TOW, and trust me, most of them in no way possible can be stopped by any reactive armor. There is a mod where you aim at the tank, but the missle actually flies over it, exploding and sending explosive parts on top of the tank, completely destroying the turret.

[UoUo]

Yes...you right...but still most of the tank is israeli made...just look on the country that made tanks...Ekhm... forget about China, Brasil, France (Leclerc, AMX), Japan (Type 90), South Korea (Type 88), Sweden, Italy, Pakistan, India...? Poland also has its own homemade verision of T-72M i.e. PT-91 ;)

I am talking about the best tanks in the world...

Yes i forgot france and Japan...

Japan 1 of the best econnomy in the world...france...and itasy have good Economy as well....and more then 6 million people right ? ;)

The best tanks in the world wholud be the : (nothing about the order i put them)


Merkava 4
M1A2
leoprad 2
Leclerc
and the tank that Britian made...i forgot the name.

and Still for

israel the best tank is Merkava....for USA the best tank is M1
and act....
don't you people agree ?

[REMOV]

I am talking about the best tanks in the world..."...just look on the country that made tanks... " Do you?

The best tanks in the world wholud be the : (nothing about the order i put them)
Merkava 4, M1A2, leoprad 2, Leclerc, and the tank that Britian made...i forgot the name.You know we can distingush some tanks "generations". So, 3rd generation MBTs are: Leopard 2 (Germany), Merkava Mk.3 and Mk.4 (Israel), Type-90 (Japan), M1Ax Abrams (USA), Leclerc (France), T-80 (Russia), Challenger 1 and 2 (UK), Type-88 (South Korea) and Type 98 (China) plus some prototype vehicles (Arjun, Vickers Mk.7, Osorio etc.).

I really don't know which one are "the best". I don't think in such... let's say... simple way ;)

[unwanted]

Yes...you right...but still most of the tank is israeli made...just look on the country that made tanks...Ekhm... forget about China, Brasil, France (Leclerc, AMX), Japan (Type 90), South Korea (Type 88), Sweden, Italy, Pakistan, India...? Poland also has its own homemade verision of T-72M i.e. PT-91 ;)

I am talking about the best tanks in the world...

Yes i forgot france and Japan...

Japan 1 of the best econnomy in the world...france...and itasy have good Economy as well....and more then 6 million people right ? ;)

The best tanks in the world wholud be the : (nothing about the order i put them)


Merkava 4
M1A2
leoprad 2
Leclerc
and the tank that Britian made...i forgot the name.

and Still for

israel the best tank is Merkava....for USA the best tank is M1
and act....
don't you people agree ?

Hm..Youre talking about the best tanks in the world and you still forgot about the Swedish STRV122 a modernised Leo2a5 , that is full comparable to youre merkava Mk 4 , leo2a6 and the M1A2 ....

[REMOV]

Youre talking about the best tanks in the world and you still forgot about the Swedish STRV122 a modernised Leo2a5 , that is full comparable to youre merkava Mk 4 , leo2a6 and the M1A2 ....Ekhm... you want to start a discussion (=flame war) which Leopard 2A4 modernization (German, Swedish, Spanish, Greek etc.) is better? ;)

[UoUo]

Hey Hey...don't you agree that every country had its need for a it's own tank ?

I mean USA need the abrams for the desert...
Germmany need the Leo for europe....
Isreal needs the Merkava for the golan hights....

don't you agree ?

[REMOV]

Hey Hey...don't you agree that every country had its need for a it's own tank?And when the soldiers would go in some other place they... change the MBTs? ;)

don't you agree ?Some countries bought or produced a dedicated tanks to their grounds (or natural and political conditions) like Argentina - TAMs, Thailand - Stingrays, Japan - Type-90 or Israel - Merkavas. Some uses universal MBT for all possible battlefields (T-series, Leopard 1 and 2, M1, Challenger 1 and 2 etc.).

[S'13]

In the 1982 war in Lebanon the Merkava MK 1 fought against this tank (used by the Syrians) and proved itself to be superior.Ekhm... that was mostly a propaganda superiority, because the truth looks a little bit different. I was made a little research about a year ago and...

Official Israeli source:

Source: http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0ibj0
Interview with Prime Minister Begin on Israel television, 15 June 1982.

We destroyed 300 Syrian Soviet tanks. You know, they included the T-72. We destroyed nine such tanks with our "Merkava." While NATO claimed that the T-72 is undefeated in one respect - it cannot be hit from the front - NATO now knows this is not so. This is also a myth. It can be hit from any side. And we destroyed nine T-72 tanks. I wish we could take one out and examine what goes on there in its belly, but we have not succeeded till now due to battlefield reasons. But the fact is that our "Merkava" destroyed nine such tanks. So, only 9 (nine) T-72s were destroyed by Merkava Mk.1s during this war, according to Prime Minister Begin.

A tanks ability and superiority isn't just measured by how many enemy tanks it destroyed but also by how it can cope with terrain and so on. By the way, how many Merkava MK 1 tanks were destroyed by the T-72 (if at all)?
The next source:

Source: http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/MerkavaMk1.html

The first Mark-1 Merkava tanks were supplied to the IDF in April 1979, nearly nine years after the decision to produce the Merkava tank was taken. (...) The Merkava Mk-I tank participated with a high degree of success in the 1982 war in Lebanon when the war started Israel had 200-300 Merkava Mk 1 tanks. (...) Production of Merkava Mk 1 continued up to 1983(...) Lessons learned from the operation of the Mk-1 tanks were applied to the Mk-2 tanks, mainly in the following:
- Improved mobility
- Improved fire control system
- Improved special armor (...)So, the question is - why the production of the first Merkava model Mk.1 was stopped just after the 1982 war? Why the most important thing was armor improved? The newest Israeli tank was upgrated only 4 years after the production starts? And about the superiority... ekhm... only 9 T-72s destroyed (from 30 T-72s destroyed during the war)?
I don't see the problem in improving a weapon, and again I ask, how many Merkava MK 1 tanks did the T-72 destroy if at all???

[UoUo]

[quote=UoUo]Hey Hey...don't you agree that every country had its need for a it's own tank?And when the soldiers would go in some other place they... change the MBTs? ;)

don't you agree ?


Look...Usa may need a Multy MBT cuz they can opreate all over the world..israel don't need to fight lets say..in the jongel...or in the snow..so the merkava is the best for israel...and not the M1a1 that will not be so good in the golan hights....you see what i mean ?

[REMOV]

A tanks ability and superiority isn't just measured by how many enemy tanks it destroyed but also by how it can cope with terrain and so on. So the T-72 were in such terrain also proved itselfs to be superior? ;)

By the way, how many Merkava MK 1 tanks were destroyed by the T-72 (if at all)?A few (ca. 4-20).

and again I askOnce in a letter is not enough for you? ;)

[REMOV]

so the merkava is the best for israel...It's just designed by Israelis to meet their requiremnents. But they modernized this tank so many times that I don't really know that it suits or not to demans. So, I really don't know if the Merkava "is the best for Israel" ;)

and not the M1a1How do you know?

that will not be so good in the golan hights....you see what i mean ?No. Why M1A2 wouldn't prove itself into Golan Heights? Any particular reasons?

[S'13]

A tanks ability and superiority isn't just measured by how many enemy tanks it destroyed but also by how it can cope with terrain and so on. So the T-72 were in such terrain also proved itselfs to be superior? ;)

I doubt this...


By the way, how many Merkava MK 1 tanks were destroyed by the T-72 (if at all)?A few (ca. 4-20).
Where did you get these numbers, the Syrian General Staff? rofl ;)

[REMOV]

I doubt this... As you said so...

Where did you get these numbers, the Syrian General Staff?If I got such connections the source would be nice, but those datas are collected from some books and other hmm... sources.

That's why the numbers are so different. Israel lost 40-250 tanks, Syria 230-420 (Prime Minister Begin said 250-300, even less then the other sources). The 40 MBTs are official Israeli losses (tanks beyond repaired only!), Syrians are estimated (some said that are together damaged, badly damaged and damaged beyond repair tanks) - mainly by Russians (ca. 280-300).

Any other "rofl"'s? ;)

[S'13]

If I got such connections the source would be nice, but those datas are collected from some books and other hmm... sources.

That's why the numbers are so different. Israel lost 40-250 tanks, Syria 230-420 (Prime Minister Begin said 250-300, even less then the other sources). The 40 MBTs are official Israeli losses (tanks beyond repaired only!), Syrians are estimated (some said that are together damaged, badly damaged and damaged beyond repair tanks) - mainly by Russians (ca. 280-300).

You mean to tell me that the majority of the sources from which you got these numbers are Russian?

[REMOV]

You mean to tell me that the majority of the sources from which you got these numbers are Russian?No, British (or Polish) as well. The funny thing - the most higher losses for both sites were in some British book. BTW - what are yours, besides of triumphant phrases such like: "We lost only one tank, and they lost zillions!", hmm? ;)

[S'13]

You mean to tell me that the majority of the sources from which you got these numbers are Russian?No, British (or Polish) as well. The funny thing - the most higher losses for both sites were in some British book. BTW - what are yours, besides of triumphant phrases such like: "We lost only one tank, and they lost zillions!", hmm? ;)

I never wrote no Israeli tanks were lost in the Lebanon War. I do belive the T-72 proved much less efficient in this war in comparison to the Merkava tank. The evaluations you brought are very generalized, I'm talking about how many Merkava tanks were lost as a result of T-72 hits. Your talking about total tank loses in this war, something I never brought up. Where did you get the estimate that between 4-20 Merkava tanks were lost as a result of T-72 hits? and are you sure this estimate is not the total number of Merkava tanks lost in this war?
BTW, Where exactly did I write "We lost only one tank, and they lost zillions!"? I think your starting to take things out of proportions... ;)

[REMOV]

You can start throwing Russian numbers - they wortheless . They tend to very over react , to proove that T-72 was supperiorReally? ;)

( oh , heart russian pride can be dangerous )Sure, but not so much as Israelis.

You know, I'm a little bit surprised - I've talked with some older veterans (here in Poland) and they are much closer to reality than most of Israelis youngers (?) in this thread. Hey, one of those guys was prof. Adam Zertal (badly injured during Yom Kippur war), a man who find a Joshua's Altair on the Mount Ebal/Shechem (http://www.shechem.org/machon/engevala.html). You're... a little bit nervous, I must admit.


The number i found of total merkava tanks destroyed was closed to 40Those are official Israel losses.

Take from this number the tanks that destroyed bu mines , and tanks destroyed by ATGM , and i think you have very small number of tanks destroyed by direct enemy tank fire . Sure, that works both sides, right?

I cannot disclouse what can penetrate Merkava or not , and not about that we talking hereIt's a normal tank - it can be penetrated by 40mm APFS or RPG round from top, back, and both sites (from ca. 1/3 of hull lenght).

Even Sagger (or malyutka , how you like to call it ) can penetrate M1 , on this you can count on my word , depend where he hits the tank . Yes, its true.

Define criterion , please - crue survivobillity ?Mhm - thats the field where Israeli tank beat others, right? ;)

[REMOV]

I do belive the T-72 proved much less efficient in this war in comparison to the Merkava tank. I don't talk about things you are belief but about facts and military technology ;)

The evaluations you brought are very generalized, I'm talking about how many Merkava tanks were lost as a result of T-72 hits. I don't know. There are estimated datas - I have any, and you?

Your talking about total tank loses in this war, something I never brought up. Where did you get the estimate that between 4-20 Merkava tanks were lost as a result of T-72 hits?No, just eliminated by enemy tanks. But - if there was a fight(s) where a Mk. 1 destroyed nine T-72 the probability that in the same time the T-72 also got a chance, right? Syria has got many T-72s, but lost only 9. The losses in T-72 and Mk.1 are similar. The other hint is the changes were made in Mk.1 - were serious. I really cannot understand, why made an major upgrades to a tank which was superior to the newest enemies vehicles and "prove its superiority". It's senseless, don't you think? And Israelis modificated key features!

and are you sure this estimate is not the total number of Merkava tanks lost in this war? As I said before, I'm not sure.

[UoUo]

hmmm..the merkava MK3 is much more superior then the MBT of syria (T-72)...so why israel come up with the Merkava 4 ?

[S'13]

I don't talk about things you are belief but about facts and military technology

So you decide what is fact and what is not? ;)





The other hint is the changes were made in Mk.1 - were serious. I really cannot understand, why made an major upgrades to a tank which was superior to the newest enemies vehicles and "prove its superiority". It's senseless, don't you think?

Not if you want to be a step ahead of your enemies...


As I said before, I'm not sure.

Next time be sure.

[UoUo]

Soory about this but :

S13 תזכיר לו את הקרב בכפר סיל...שם הושמדו מעל 17 טנקים סורים על ידי גדודי שריון ישראלים

[S'13]

About Israeli tank battles in the Lebanon war:


The Peace for Galilee War

The Barak brigade was among the first troops in the Peace for Galilee war. Initially, the brigade broke through the border into Lebanon into the central sector, an area similar in structure and terrain to the upper Galilee in Israel and inhabited by a number of different communities, primarily Shiite Muslims and Christians. From there, the main effort of the war moved to the western sector along the very narrow coastal plain from Sidon to Beirut, an area densely populated by Sunite Muslims.

The geographic and demographic characteristics of the sectors in which the brigade fought - densely populated on the one hand and large areas of intensely - cultivated agricultural land on the other - made regular military combat difficult and facilitated guerrilla warfare. Under these conditions, it was particularly difficult to wage conventional tank warfare. The combat in Lebanon was based on fighting in built-up areas, with close cooperation between tank, infantry, engineering and artillery gun forces.

The mission of the brigade was to destroy the terrorists bases in Lebanon, thereby removing the constant threat on the Israel's northern villages.



On Sunday, 6 June, the brigade crossed the international border in the Metulla area and started its advance north into the central sector, along the road leading to the Akia bridge on the Litani river via Taiba and Dir Sirian. The force advanced in a brigade column led by a company of the 53rd battalion, followed by the 71st battalion and the brigade advance command group led by the brigade commander. The rear elements of this force were the 12th Golani infantry battalion and the rest of the 53rd battalion companies. Engineering and anti-aircraft troops were alternated along the brigade column. The brigade's 74th battalion moved along a parallel route, under the command of a Golani brigade. The forces crossed the bridge almost without difficulty, led by the 71st battalion, passing through a number of friendly villages and continuing north.

The first encounter was at Kfar Haruf, where machine guns and RPG's were fired at the forces. The high level of ethics of our soldiers was first exhibited at this village, where they endangered their lives and prevented firing on innocent civilians. The first injuries suffered by the brigade were in this village.

While the doctor was still busy rescuing the injured and after release from the jam created in the village, the forces continued to bypass the village of A-Kafpur and secured themselves on the ridges above the village. The terrain was difficult for movement, but the problems were overcome with the help of the engineering corps.



The forces continued past the village of Ha bosh, climbing in the direction of the village of Homein-el-Fawka. Heavy firing was experienced when passing this village. However, the brigade commander decided against going into the villages along the line, in order to prevent unnecessary complications. He assumed that the pockets of resistance would fall at a later date. Accordingly, the brigade moved along a narrow path at the bottom of the channel, along the foot of the ridges scattered with villages, an easy target for the terrorist's fir. It was here that the first of the brigade's soldiers fell. In the meantime, a force was sent to Ein Zehalta. This was the first encounter of the IDF with the Syrian army. After a short battle, the brigade left its positions to other forces and started its advance in the direction of Sidon.

Most of the way was quiet, with the villages passed receiving the brigade in friendship and happiness. The resistance experienced at Kfar Teisun was easily overcome by the forces.

After two days of exhausting battle, the brigade stopped for a night rest at the entrance to Sidon. Once the reconnaissance company of the brigade found a bypass channel to reach the brigade, this respite was used by the ordnance and logistics personnel to repair and rearm and fuel the equipment.

The following day, the third day of the war, the Barak brigade started its battle for Sidon. Its aim was to put pressure on the enemy's hold on the north and east of the city, while other IDF forces, including the "loaned" 74th battalion, pressured from the south. The area was full of dense growth and cultivated land. A decision was made to conquer to periphery of the town, hoping that the town to fall easily at a later stage.

Before this, 74th battalion together with the Golani brigade broke through in the south, in the area where the Sidon oil port and refineries are located. Confrontations with terrorists had already started in this area. They were a sign of what was to come. The battalion reached the densely populated Ein Hilwe refugee camp typified by narrow and winding alleyways. The camp contained about 5,000 terrorists who were determined to fight to the end. The battalion tried to conquer the camp three times, without success. The terrorists fought stubbornly, without compromise, causing many losses to the Israeli forces. In its actions, 74th battalion weakened the stand of the fighters in the camp. However, in the afternoon of the following day, it bypassed the camp and turned north along the coastal plain towards Damour. The refugee camp was conquered later in the war, after all negotiations with the inhabitants to surrender failed.

In the evening of Tuesday, 8 June, the Barak brigade went out on the coastal plain line in the direction of Damour, joining up with additional forces along the way. The brigade served as a reserve force in the comparatively simple capture of the city.

When the brigade penetrated north to the periphery of the Kfar Sil, it met up with a fortified formation of the Syrian 85th armored brigade. Kfar Sil is located in a strategically important area, and it was essential to capture the village. At the same time, the cease fire was imminent, and it was clear that the time remaining to defeat the enemy could be measured in hours.

On the morning of Thursday, 10 June, the forces divided into a pincer movement, as planned. The soldiers of the 53rd battalion who were students in the Army affiliated religious academy infiltrated together with Golani into the fortified position while tanks of the 71st battalion covered from on high. A bloody battle was waged in the fortified position, the commander of the company was injured and 8 soldiers were killed. The fighting in a built-up area, the tanks moving in a line through the village and the sources of fire hidden from the eye together accounted for the many losses. The company escaped by retreat and the brigade effort to eliminate the Syrian hold of the Kfar Sil area failed.

However, the fortified position was far too important strategically to be left. On the same day, the 74th battalion was ordered to take part in a battle plan which included making a bypass, and attacking the village from the rear, from above to below. Once a path of about 2 km suitable for the passage of tanks had been prepared, the battalion attacked the village from behind. The tanks fired from a range of about 50 meters, surprising the enemy and destroying the Syrian tanks, one at a time. The battalion gained control of the ridge above the village and towards evening, attacked the village itself. By the morning, the battalion had destroyed 27 Syrian tanks and Kfar Sil was conquered. In the morning, the battalion took positions above the village. A difficult battle of attrition ensued, until the Syrian and terrorist fire was eliminated.

On 11 June, at the end of the first week of fighting, the brigade was at the suburbs of Beirut. Battalions 71 and 53 were at Duha, and battalion 74 at Kfar Sil. In the following days, the brigade fortified and organized itself to stay. At the same time, the terrorists returned fire on the Israeli forces. The units of the brigade advanced during this fighting and gained control of parts of the Beirut international airport in Hulda and the Science faculty building of the University of Beirut in Reihan. The brigade remained in Beirut for a month, during which the tasks to advance, fortify and organize were divided between the brigade and the Golani brigade.

On Monday, July 12th, the Barak units were transferred from the Beirut sector to the eastern sector. Battalion 74 remained in the coastal area, locating itself in the Damor area. The brigade was located opposite the Syrians in the Jib-Jenin-Sultan Ya'akub area. Ten days after arriving, the brigade participated in a battle in the area. This battle occurred after many Syrian violations of the cease fire, and after the Syrians permitted the terrorists to operate from their sector. The method selected was opening coordinated fire by all forces spread out along the length of the front line. The 53rd Battalion destroyed five Syrian tanks, and the 71st battalion destroyed about 30 tanks and armored combat vehicles.

A few days after this day of battle, during the night of August 3-4, the Barak units returned from Beka to the Beirut area. The IDF, including the Barak units, tightened the siege on western Beirut. IDF operations were simultaneous in two sectors - the north east sector of the city (the museum and the hippodrome) and the south west sector (the airport and surrounding suburbs of Jurj Barjina, Burj el Barajna, El-Uzai, Leilka and others). The Barak brigade participated in the military efforts on the second front. In the first stage, the brigade was active in capturing the airport runways, following earlier operations in this area during June-July during which very small advances on tens of meters each time were achieved. This advance was primarily carried out by the 74th battalion. In one of the battles in this area, the battalion commander was wounded, which resulted in the changing of the battalion with the 71st battalion. As the new battalion was taking its positions, it was attacked. Three of its soldiers were killed, including the commander of one of the companies, and many were injured. The Barak brigade continued its fighting in the area of the airport and the southern suburbs of west Beirut, until the terrorists left Beirut on August 31st.

The brigade remained in Lebanon, both in Beirut and in the eastern sector, for many months after the end of the Peace for Galilee war. After the return of the units to their permanent bases on the Golan Heights, they continued to alternately man the Lebanese border line for many more months.


תודה שהזכרת לי אחי ;)

[tony6]

Jesus Christ, guys!
Don't You have nicer things to do than arguing about some tank-stuff?
Go pick up some girls, drink beer, have some fun!
Life is short!
:)

[wholagun]

Jesus Christ, guys!
Don't You have nicer things to do than arguing about some tank-stuff?
Go pick up some girls, drink beer, have some fun!
Life is short!
:)

I kinda like it, I have no clue WTF is goen on but I like it.
Nice change fromt he mud slinging back and forth in other posts laced with flame.

[unwanted]

Youre talking about the best tanks in the world and you still forgot about the Swedish STRV122 a modernised Leo2a5 , that is full comparable to youre merkava Mk 4 , leo2a6 and the M1A2 ....Ekhm... you want to start a discussion (=flame war) which Leopard 2A4 modernization (German, Swedish, Spanish, Greek etc.) is better? ;)

Nope .. I dont want or need another flamewar .. Im just making out a point , that there are other small countries than Israel that is buildning and mainting state of the art military equipment .. thats all ....

[UoUo]

Youre talking about the best tanks in the world and you still forgot about the Swedish STRV122 a modernised Leo2a5 , that is full comparable to youre merkava Mk 4 , leo2a6 and the M1A2 ....Ekhm... you want to start a discussion (=flame war) which Leopard 2A4 modernization (German, Swedish, Spanish, Greek etc.) is better? ;)

Nope .. I dont want or need another flamewar .. Im just making out a point , that there are other small countries than Israel that is buildning and mainting state of the art military equipment .. thats all ....

What country in the size of israel makes tanks ?

[REMOV]

So you decide what is fact and what is not?Pardon? I don't understand your point.

Not if you want to be a step ahead of your enemies...So, Merkava Mk.1 wasn't such step forward? So, what about superiority?

Next time be sure.Don't be silly, ok? You do not given ANY datas during the discussion, only the things you "believes" or not. The real numbers are still unknown, but as I see the Israeli propaganda works well.

[unwanted]

Hmm..lets se Sweden has produced their own battletank before the S103 and now we are using a heavily modified Leo2a5 , we have "our" own weapon industry producing all kinds of weapon from Carl Gustan M48 to the JAS Gripen airplane and the Stealth Korvett Visby for ex ... Im not bashin Israel if you think so , its just that youre not alone being a small country producing state of the art military equipment. :hug:

/cheers

[UoUo]

I don't see yor point...the Merkava Mk.3 much more superiority and much more step ahead then the T-72....so why israel come out with the Merkava 4 ?

[Javehn]

God damnit !! What is going on here ??
The battle of Sultan Yakub was fought with Centurions , not Merkava . Prooved again that the Israeli armored corps can use even old tanks effectively . I am not shure , but i think ther were only 1 major battle against T72 and Merkava 1 , in battalion sizes .
I am still not shure what you are trying to discuss here .

[UoUo]

Hmm..lets se Sweden has produced their own battletank before the S103 and now we are using a heavily modified Leo2a5 , we have "our" own weapon industry producing all kinds of weapon from Carl Gustan M48 to the JAS Gripen airplane and the Stealth Korvett Visby for ex ... Im not bashin Israel if you think so , its just that youre not alone being a small country producing state of the art military equipment. :hug:

/cheers

With all do respect...israel have the 5 largest milltery industry in the world...what about sweeden ?

BTW : i am not bashin you as well :)

[REMOV]

About Israeli tank battles in the Lebanon war:But without any datas about T-72 or Merkavas. You should quoted every piece of on-line information about this war?

I not questioned at any time that Syrian losses were lower than Israeli, mayby you don't understan the text, BUT the fact of Mk.1 "superiority". And you cannot find a real and resonable argument against, beside your "believes".

When you started to talk about facts, give an information of Barak brigade equipment as well as enemies, ok? This text without such information is completely useless.

[REMOV]

Go pick up some girls, drink beer, have some fun! Normally I would, but this week I catch an influenza, so... ;)

[Javehn]

Ok , Remov , if you are patient , wait please , and i will find you about merkava 1 .
About the Barak brigade ( it happends to be the brigade i serve in ... :) ) was equipted at the time with modified Centurion mk 13 tanks .

[REMOV]

God damnit !! What is going on here ??Heheh, I've got a three days sick leave, damned flu!

The battle of Sultan Yakub was fought with Centurions , not Merkava. Yes, I know, but S13, enjoys talking for talking sake, so I have a little bit fun ;)

Prooved again that the Israeli armored corps can use even old tanks effectively . Yes, you're right. The Israeli are trained very well and got superb battle experience. That's why you gave Arabs hard time so many times ;)

I am not shure , but i think ther were only 1 major battle against T72 and Merkava 1 , in battalion sizes .Mhm... 7th Armored Brigade (252nd Division, previously in 36th) led by Colonel Avigdor Kahalani was the one equipped with new tanks. And the battle hmm... 10th July 1982, right? ;)

I am still not shure what you are trying to discuss here .The alleged Mk.1 "superiority" ;)

http://lebanon82.tripod.com/israelitanks.jpg
Merkava Mk.1 in Lebannon

[perdurabo]

Remov: szybkiego mpowrotu do zdrowia, w tym tyg. też leże chory :|

Ok but guys let's back to topic? We post here stuff about polish armored vechicles :)

BTW Czech Rep. is small and their are building T72M4CZ :) and i'm sure they have lower military budget. We are maybe bigger but we have smaller than israel budget too :) and we still can make few realy good stuff :)

[REMOV]

Ok , Remov , if you are patient , wait please , and i will find you about merkava 1 . With pleasure, thanks. But I hope without too many exaggerated stories, ok?

About the Barak brigade ( it happends to be the brigade i serve in ... :) ) was equipted at the time with modified Centurion mk 13 tanks .Sho't Blaser's, right? AFAIK the Israeli has in 1982 three types of tanks: Sho't Blaser, Mag'ach 7B and Merkava Mk.1.

[Javehn]

To copy T72 ? you call this "to build from scratch" ? Twardy is good tank , but he is mostly riped off from T72 .

To Remov : Did i exadurated so far ?? I like to keep it real :)

And yes , Centurion is Sho't (Blaser- you must be talking about magah , it's magah reactive armor ) .

[REMOV]

BTW Czech Rep. is small and their are building T72M4CZ :) But they want to build only ca. 30 (thirty) tanks! And the M72M4Cz isn't in fact a new tank but modernization of T-72M like Polish PT-91.

[S'13]

Here are some numbers for you:


The Merkava first saw action in the June 1982 invasion of southern Lebanon, codenamed Operation Peace for Galilee and afforded its crews significant advantages in protection over the Centurions and M60s. Only seven Merkavas were destroyed and a number damaged and the percentage of tank crews killed was far lower in Merkava equipped units. Tal's vision had paid dividends.




About the ability to cope with terrain:


Tal visited friendly Western nations viewing tanks such as the British Chieftain, French AMX-30, German Leopard and American XM-1. He even managed to have a glimpse of the latest Soviet tank (at that time) the T-72. All were impressive, but designed with regard to the relatively flat and open country (compared to Israel's north and east border areas that varied from mountainous at worse to hilly at best) of the North German Plain where NATO and the Warsaw Pact were expected to slug it out. The Israeli tank had to be a desert warrior too (to the west was the desert of the Sinai).

So the T-72 isn't superior in that manner after all... ;)

source: http://www.rickard.karoo.net/weaponsmain5.html

REMOV, your taking this debate too seriously. I'm not trying to have a fight with you.

[S'13]

About Israeli tank battles in the Lebanon war:But without any datas about T-72 or Merkavas. You should quoted every piece of on-line information about this war?

I not questioned at any time that Syrian losses were lower than Israeli, mayby you don't understan the text, BUT the fact of Mk.1 "superiority". And you cannot find a real and resonable argument against, beside your "believes".

When you started to talk about facts, give an information of Barak brigade equipment as well as enemies, ok? This text without such information is completely useless.

This post was posted in order to give a bit of background information about what we were talking about...

[REMOV]

To copy T72 ? you call this "to build from scratch" ? Twardy is good tank , but he is mostly riped off from T72 .In fact this is just a T-72M with several upgrades - FCS, more powerful engine and transmission, different sights, reactive and normal armour and so. We should see how it would be work in Malaysia (the export PT-91M version).

Did i exadurated so far ?? I like to keep it real :) No, you're reasonable person so far. But your fellow countrymen are a little bit nervous persons. Youths I think ;)

And yes , Centurion is Sho't (Blaser- you must be talking about magah , it's magah reactive armor ) .I know, but there were Sho'ts with Blaser ERA armor take a look:

http://lebanon82.tripod.com/shot.jpg
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/shot/shot_era.jpg
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/shot/shot3.jpg

[Javehn]

Aha , Lebanon kit .All the tanks that went to lebanon were upgraded , and one of the upgrades is Reactive armor .
I am still looking for T72 against Merkava , but , somehow i just can't find this . Amazes me . But i will find , i promise .

[REMOV]

Here are some numbers for youI know this source. It just a one data to the collection. Not to determine something.

So the T-72 isn't superior in that manner after all... ;) There are your conclusions after this fragments? Strange, I must admit! The Centurions (Sho't) and M60s (Mag'ach) also wasn't designed to fight in such terrain, but works there well, right?

REMOV, your taking this debate too seriously. I'm not trying to have a fight with you.Heheheh... every polemic is somewhat a fight, it's even in word etymology: "Fr polemique < Gr polemikos < polemos, war" ;)

[S'13]

There are your conclusions after this fragments? Strange, I must admit! The Centurions (Sho't) and M60s (Mag'ach) also wasn't designed to fight in such terrain, but works there well, right?

They work but the Merkava works better. :)


Heheheh... every polemic is somewhat a fight, it's even in word etymology: "Fr polemique < Gr polemikos < polemos, war"

Ok, we will fight but still, we don't have to take this fight too seriously.

[Mo]

more pics........

[tony6]

Hey REMOV-have You got any space on Your server?
I could scan some PT-2001 project photos (from "Raport") and send You on Your e-mail so that all those foreigner-guys could see it.
?

[S'13]

more pics........

Merkava MK 1
http://www.voodoo.cz/merkava/images/mk1/mk1_1.gif

http://www.voodoo.cz/merkava/images/mk1/mk1_9.jpg

http://www.voodoo.cz/merkava/images/mk1/mk1_11.jpg

http://www.voodoo.cz/merkava/images/mk1/mk1_4.gif

http://www.ifrance.com/ArmyReco/moyen_orient/Israel/vehicules_lourds/Merkava/merkava1s.jpg

Nice pic of a Sho't Tank
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/shot/shotb82o.jpg

T-72
http://homepage.tinet.ie/~steven/images/t-72.jpg

http://legion.wplus.net/guide/army/ta/t72-4.jpg

http://www.eurus.dti.ne.jp/~freedom3/T-72-2.jpg

http://www.arms.ru/tank/fotos/t72_3a.jpg

[REMOV]

more pics........OK ;)

PT-91 Twardy

http://bluenet.w.interia.pl/militaria/czolgi/pt-91/PT-91Twardy.jpg
http://koalorka.terramail.pl/twardyfot2.jpg
http://koalorka.terramail.pl/twardyfot3.jpg
http://www.pancerni.to2.pl/czolgi/PT-91twardy.jpg
http://www.pancerni.to2.pl/czolgi/PT-91twardy-2.jpg
http://www.pancerni.to2.pl/czolgi/PT-91.jpg

[REMOV]

I could scan some PT-2001 project photos and send You on Your e-mail so that all those foreigner-guys could see it?OK.

[Javehn]

I like how we effectively slaughtered all sign of polan armor on the thread ..
Still looking, i haven't forgot you . By the way , about the battle that 7th brigade participated, where you took this information from ??

[S'13]

By the way , about the battle that 7th brigade participated, where you took this information from ??

http://www.idf.il/hebrew/organization/Armored/hativa7/clali.stm

[wholagun]

Hey REMOV-have You got any space on Your server?
I could scan some PT-2001 project photos (from "Raport") and send You on Your e-mail so that all those foreigner-guys could see it.
?

Kurwa, yeah, tak dlugo nato czekalem. woot Finally. I've be searching for pics for ages and found **** all. If Remov is too slow or won't let you use this site to upload http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/ . Easy to use just browse find the pics and upload and copy and paste the address.

[Javehn]

The one that remov talked about
שמע חבוב , בחיי , פה בפורום בינלאומי תביא להם עובדות .
וחוץ מזה , ברק זה לא חטיבה שבע .
אתה מנסה ללמד אותי מור"קים על החטיבה שלי ?

[S'13]

...מצטער אחי,התבלבלתי, טעות שלי :(

בסוף הבאתי לו עובדות במספרים, הוא אומר לי שהסורים הורידו לנו בין ארבע לעשרים 'מרכבות' מה זה הבולשיט הזה??! :bash:

[REMOV]

Polish BRDM-2 modifications:

BRDM-2M96
http://www.jed.simonides.org/4x4afv/bravo/brdm-2_series/m-96/m96_012.jpg

Also known as the OSR [Opancerzony Samochód Rozpoznawczy) this vehicle is simply a BRDM-2 with hull doors, but without the belly wheels. This gives much more space for the crew or 2 more soldiers can be carried. A main visible difference between a M-96 and the old BRDM-2 is the characteristic door on the both sides of a hull.

BRDM-2M96i
http://www.jed.simonides.org/4x4afv/bravo/brdm-2_series/m-96i/m96i_001.jpg

The M-96i is an improved version of the M-96 and has a new diesel engine, new seats for the crew, new generation heater for the engine and fighting compartment, installation of new stowage arrangements, two-circuit break system and 24V electrical system.

BRDM-2M96ik Jackal
http://www.rmf.fm/wiadomosci/foto/pics/17883.jpg
http://www.rmf.fm/wiadomosci/foto/pics/17881.jpg
Special version made for Polish troops in Iraq, with air-conditioning, IVECO engine, armed with 12,5mm (0.50BMG) WKM-B.

BRDM-2M97 Zbik (BRDM-2BF)
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/_brdm2b.jpg

The BRDM-2 M-97 "Zbik" aka BRDM-2B , M1977, Zbik szeregowy" (Lit; wildcat-private), OSR Model 97 has a heavily modified vehicle turret with NSVT 12.7mm machine-gun, stowage basket, 2x3 smoke grenade launchers, laser-warning system, pintle mount for a 9P135M AT launcher, GPS, 165hp IVECO diesel engine and all passive optical instruments.

BRDM-2M98 Zbik (BRDM-2B)
http://www.jed.simonides.org/4x4afv/bravo/brdm-2_series/m-98/m98_001.jpg


This M-98 aka Zbik dowódczy (Lit; wildcat command), OSR Model 98 is used by commanders of reconnaissance troops.
It has the same armament as a M-97 but carries more sophisticated reconnaissance equipment which consist of a BAA electro-optical system made by STN Atlas and a AN/PPS-5C aka SEI MSTAR ground surveillance radar.

http://www.wzms.pl/brdm.jpg
The light AA system placed on BRDM-2M96i

[wholagun]

I don't like that Polish terd vechicle. I like how its nice and small. But the shape could use some updating. Keep a simular shape just add a few touches here and there. Also add bigger tires for more traction.

That yellow thing looks like diahreah, little terd (Mr. Hanky) :(

Where is the PT-2001.

[Mo]

love it, love the polish desert camo also, by the way in case no one here has said it, thanks poland for helping us out in Iraq, we do appreciate it!

[wholagun]

http://www.military.cz/army_cr/modernizace/pics/T72M4CZ.jpg

T72M4CZ Newest Czech Rep design.


by the way in case no one here has said it, thanks poland for helping us out in Iraq, we do appreciate it!

Aaahhh jeez.. :oops: I promised myself I wouldn't cry. :hug:

[REMOV]

...מצטער אחי,התבלבלתי, טעות שלי :(
בסוף הבאתי לו עובדות במספרים, הוא אומר לי שהסורים הורידו לנו בין ארבע לעשרים 'מרכבות' מה זה הבולשיט הזה??! :bash:
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/_.gif

[Javehn]

That part was ment to me .
By the way , what is your source to 7th brigade battle ??
You promised you wouldn't cry .... Give me a brake .
By the way , someone in here knows what the hell is the black box from the left side of the T72M4CZ ? Another by the way , CZ meaning.... ?
And do polish have acctually something not reaped off from Russian ?

[wholagun]

You promised you wouldn't cry .... Give me a brake .

Don't tell me you took that seriously.. I guess you don't watch enough TV to get that joke. :roll:



Is it just me or is everyone having problems seeing Remov's pic and his avatar.

[Javehn]

I was joking too Amigo . Sorry that i forgot the :lol: funky icon ..

[Operation Ivy]

Get ready for a lot of Abrams pics woot (not polish but o well :D )

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank34.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank35.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank36.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank37.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank38.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank39.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank40.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank41.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank42.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank43.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank44.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank45.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank46.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank47.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank48.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank49.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank50.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank51.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank52.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank53.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank54.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank55.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank56.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank57.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank58.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank59.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank60.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank61.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank3112.jpg

There ya go :D

[wholagun]

I was joking too Amigo . Sorry that i forgot the :lol: funky icon ..

Makes all the difference in the world. ;)


Get ready for a lot of Abrams pics (not polish but o well )


First off its Polish not polish which you use to shine things with... ;)

Not Polish..... :cantbeli: We gave birth to your modern cavalry.

[REMOV]

http://www.fun.from.hell.pl/2003-12-10/pierwszy-F16-w-kraju.jpg
http://www.militaria.bielsko.com.pl/zloty/2003/big/Pict0180.jpg

The first NATO vehicles in Poland ;)

[UoUo]

Some Merkava for you :


Merkava MK 1


http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava1_idf.jpg

Merkava MK 2

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava2_idf.jpg

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava2d_2.jpg

Merkava MK 3

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava3d_7.jpg

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava3d_2.jpg

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava3d_4.jpg

Merkava MK 4

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava4_gg.jpg

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava4_5.gif

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/merkava4_f.gif


woot woot woot

[Javehn]

Do you see the 4-th picture ? That's tank from my platoon .
Live long and prosper ...

[wholagun]

Why do the Merkava's use the metal chain (threads). Why does US and rest of the world use rubber?


HEY WHERE IS THE PT 2001, you got my hopes up.

[S'13]

http://www.waronline.org/en/IDF/arms/Merk_photos/jump.jpg

http://storm.webvis.net/scrap008.jpg

http://www.metimes.com/2K2/issue2002-18/issue_metpix/us_announces_conference_2.jpg

[Javehn]

Well , if you have pictures of Pt2001 , put them on the web .
Second , it's all about the money . Rubber tracks -****load of money . No ****load of money - no rubber tracks ... :)
Oh , wait , that should be :(
There is no such a things as a rubber tracks . It's metal tracks, and rubber adaptors are attached on them . Rubber can be worn on the tracks , or not . And again, they cost ****load of money . And hardly all tanks in world use rubber tracks !!!

[REMOV]

By the way , someone in here knows what the hell is the black box from the left side of the T72M4CZ ? Another by the way , CZ meaning.... ?There are armoured cupolas of FCS Turms-T made by Officine Galileo (part of Italian company Finmeccanica), optical/thermo sights. The "CZ" means "Czech", because the tank is made by Czechs ;)

And do polish have acctually something not reaped off from Russian ?You know, we were subordinate Soviet Union over 40 years, so most of equipment is Russian made. But there were some Polish inventions - SKOT/Rys APC, TS-11 Iskra jet trainer, light 4x4 vehicles - Honker, and nowadays - SPAAG Loara, SPA Krab, minelayer SUM etc.

[Javehn]

Ah , i tottaly forgot , like the pistol CZ ...
Well , can you show me some chech made (so you prefer to called chech or polans ? ) vehicles , please ?Interesting to look at them .
And that thermal sight look kinda big .

[REMOV]

Honker 4x4

http://www.andoria.com.pl/andoria-mot/prod_gr/honker/2_honkery.jpg
http://www.jed.simonides.org/transport/tango/tarpan/honker/honker-2324/honker2324_005.jpg

Special version for Polish troops in Iraq (Scorpion)
http://www1.gazeta.pl/im/1746/z1746619G.jpg
http://www.rmf.fm/wiadomosci/foto/pics/17880.jpg
http://www.rmf.fm/wiadomosci/foto/pics/17882.jpg

Honkers in Iraq:
http://www.radio.com.pl/jedynka/irak/_foto/6.jpg
http://www.army.mil.pl/strona_pl/glowna/irak/iraq_foto/galeria3/patrol1b.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/irak/15.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/irak/102.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/irak/97.jpg
...and BRDM-2M96 in Iraq:
http://www.army.mil.pl/strona_pl/glowna/irak/iraq_foto/galeria4/fot7.jpg

[kinghk]

OTOH the T-34-85 were still in service in 90s (in Yugoslavia) so... the record of longevity belongs to them.

I believe that North Korea still have the T-34/85 in active service.

[REMOV]

Ah , i tottaly forgot , like the pistol CZ ...No, it means Ceska Zbrojovka ;)

Well , (so you prefer to called chech or polans ? ) Ekhm... I'm a Pole (pl. Poles, adj. Polish) from Poland, Czech (pl. Czechs, adj. Czech) are from the Czech Republic. The Polans were an ancient Slavic tribe (something like the Israeli Tribe of Gad or Tribe of Issachar) which united with others create a Kingdom of Poland.

can you show me some chech made (...) vehicles , please ?Interesting to look at them .Uff... OT-64 (Polish-Czech co-operation) lots of Tatra truck and special vehicles, also some soviet vehicles modifications.

[REMOV]

I believe that North Korea still have the T-34/85 in active service.In the reseve maybe, but IMO their main battle tank is T-54/55 (or its Chinese clones).

[wholagun]

why use rubber track over metal. Is there a tactical difference, I can see it being better on the roads. I just figured that Israel wanted to mess up Palestianian roads as further punishment for bombings. (dumb I know but I can't figure why else they'd use metal not rubber) :|

[tony6]

love it, love the polish desert camo also, by the way in case no one here has said it, thanks poland for helping us out in Iraq, we do appreciate it!
...yeah, but it's a pity that Your government don't! (and we still need visas to get to USA. BTW: Germans and French don't need them)
As for PT-2001-I will scan those photos tomorrow (I'm going to bed now-it's 1 a.m. in Poland:)

[wholagun]

As for PT-2001-I will scan those photos tomorrow (I'm going to bed now-it's 1 a.m. in Poland:)

OH your so weak.. 1am please thats not late. You better post them, if your lying about having them. :bash: :bash: :bash: Thats right. :fork: :slap:

[Marmot1]

Three Israeli soldiers were killed and one suffered moderate to serious wounds yesterday when a bomb went off next to their Merkava 3 tank on a road between the Netzarim settlement and the Karni checkpoint in the Gaza Strip, Israeli military officials said. The Merkava is considered the safest tank in the world.

The army said it was preparing to respond to the attack, which marked the first time a roadside bomb managed to seriously penetrate an Israeli tank's armor in the territories. Even in roadside bomb attacks in Lebanon over the past decade the armor of Israeli tanks has never been hit hard enough to strike an entire tank crew.

Military officials said half an hour before the tank was hit, Palestinians opened fire on a civilian convoy guarded by soldiers and set off a bomb that damaged a bus but caused no injuries. The army sent a tank into the area and a huge bomb exploded under it in what appears to have a planned two-stage gun-and-bomb ambush. Hamas and Fatah claimed responsibility.

The tank was toppled on its side and the turret blown off. The only surviving member of the tank crew was evacuated by helicopter to Soroka Hospital in Beersheba.

Channel Two television reporter Sagi Bashan was lightly injured by shrapnel when Israeli soldiers opened fire on him for trying to circumvent a checkpoint while covering the rescue operation. Basham told the soldiers they did not have the right to stop him from entering the area unless they had a written order from the Southern Command indicating it was a closed military area.

The soldiers said they did not have such an order, so he told them he was going in, got into his car and drove by. They then opened fire.

The bomb, an unusually large and sophisticated one weighing perhaps scores of kilograms, apparently hit the Merkava 3 tank - the most sophisticated and best protected model used by the IDF - at an unusual angle. It thus managed to penetrate the armor, according to an initial army investigation of the incident.

The attack will oblige the military to reconsider its regulations on military traffic in the Gaza Strip and is sure to be considered a major victory and morale booster for the Palestinians.

well even the palestinian insurgents found the way to deal with merkava....[/quote]

[Marmot1]

http://www.astercity.net/~zprzemek/images/4.jpg

I know it is not armour but it is one of the projects for polish ground support plane "SCORPION" project was given up in mid 90`s

Somebody said Israeli military budget is 38 bilions..... every year u receive bilions in military aid from USA as part of foreign military sale program but part also part as a support of ISRAELI "defence" capabilities....so with such amout of money it is quite easy to produce MBtank....
P.S check next message for data..

[Marmot1]

Military Israel Top of Page
Military branches:
Israel Defense Forces (IDF) (includes ground, naval, and air components with Air Defense Forces), Pioneer Fighting Youth (Nahal); note - historically there have been no separate Israeli military services
Military manpower - military age:
18 years of age (2003 est.)
Military manpower - availability:
males age 15-49: 1,562,716
note: both sexes are liable for military service (2003 est.)
females age 15-49: 1,516,505
Military manpower - fit for military service:
males age 15-49: 1,279,277
females age 15-49: 1,237,926 (2003 est.)
Military manpower - reaching military age annually:
males: 51,080
females: 53,496 (2003 est.)
Military expenditures - dollar figure:
$8.97 billion (FY02)
Military expenditures - percent of GDP:
8.75% (FY02)

is my data corect? source CIA Factbook updated August 2003


Request For Rise In Israel Military Aid



Washington (JTA) — Congress will be asked to give Israel an increased amount of military aid for 2005. Incremental increases in military aid were agreed upon in the 1990s to offset reduced U.S. economic grants to Israel.

The $2.22 billion in military aid in 2005 is $60 million more than the previous year. The Bush administration will continue helping in “maintaining Israel’s qualitative edge over any combination of adversaries,” the State Department said Monday, adding that it seeks more joint defense projects with the Jewish state.


i was wrong the help is only 2.2bilion in military aid rest is in economic aid....
source http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=8682 if it doesn`t work copy it and paste to your browser.

[Russian Texan]

"T34 - the best tank of the war" - it's only a myth.
I'm surprised that You still believe it.

I am not sure if you correctly understood my post about T 34 series being OVERALL the best tank of WW2. Although I do realize that this topic belongs to the history section of the board but would you mind dispelling the myth for me?


German general von Runstedt called the T-34 the "best tank in the world" and von Kleist said it was the "finest in the world." The T-34 had a more powerful cannon than German tanks, a higher top speed (32 MPH versus 25 MPH), and superior sloped armor and superior welded construction. However, the German Tiger and Panther tanks outranged the T34's original 76mm gun, and subsequently a 85mm gun was mounted on a T-34 tank. The T-34/85 was a modification of the T-34 equipped with a more powerful armor and cannon. T-34/85 had a flatter turret which gave this already inovative tank design the look that all tanks adopted after the wars end

[tony6]

OK-here we go:
PT-2001
http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/PT-2001b.jpg

[tony6]

And another image:
http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/PT-2001c.jpg

[tony6]

OK-that's all I got boys:)
http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/PT-2001d.jpg

[wholagun]

SWEET.
Its looks amazing, too bad it won't be built

Can you explain what those pointy boxes mean, (my written/reading Polish ain't too strong)
http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/PT-2001d.jpg


Also what interesting features did it have. Would it be a first rate tank or just an underachiever? Would it be as good as the French Leclair is what I am asking.

[Marmot1]

SWEET.
Its looks amazing, too bad it won't be built

Can you explain what those pointy boxes mean, (my written/reading Polish ain't too strong)
http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/PT-2001d.jpg


Also what interesting features did it have. Would it be a first rate tank or just an underachiever? Would it be as good as the French Leclair is what I am asking.

Clockwise from top right

1Laser protection system Obra 902
2.analog/digital comm. system
a.TRC 9500 radiostation
b.SOTAS phones
3.DAY/NIGHT periscope POD-72
4. Welded turreat
5.Anti fire & anti explosion sys DEUGRA OBRUM
6.TAFIOS anti ABC system
7.RH120-L55 Canon
8.Electric engine and mechanics
-turreat rotation and ballbearing
-Canon elevation mechanism
-stabilisation
9.Fire Control System
day/night sights
-commander/InfraVision
-Gunner thermovision

sorry for some errosr maybe remov will translate it better...or just send me correct form and i will change...

[tony6]

First of all-the project is stopped, not cancelled.
Right now other things have priority but it doesn't mean that it won't be built.
BUMAR scored some big contracts lately (Malaysia, India) so maybe they produce a prototype on their own (without MoD money).
Those "boxes" say what's inside:
-day-night sights:
commander (nigtvision),
cannoner (thermal),
-welded turret,
-anti-laser (don't know how to say it in English) system OBRA,
-TRC9500 radiostation
-SOTAS intercom (now it would be Polish FONET for sure-it's better and standarized for the whole Army vehicles),
-day-night periscope POD-72,
-ABC system Tafios,
-anti-fire (also don't know how to say it English:) DEUGRA system,
-RH 120-L55 Rheinmetal cannon,
-electric stabilisation/cannon lifting drives.

[wholagun]

Because a prototype has not been yet built you can't really say if the tank is any good or not then right?

Few Questions for you:"
1) what kind of armour does it have, reactive, normal or anyother type? 2) what is better about it then the PT 91?
3) what is that box behind the commanders/gunners (9.Fire Control System day/night sights -commander/InfraVision gunner thermovision)?

I though that since the Germans gave us 128 Leo2a4's that the project was done for. I hope we build it, if only for the L55 main gun. I hope that Bumar builds at least one...Oh I hope so :(

[tony6]

1) as far as I know it was to have ceramic/composite armour (front)
2) I don't know what box do You mean..?
probably:
electric engine and mechanics
-turreat rotation and ballbearing
-Canon elevation mechanism
-stabilisation

[wholagun]

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/PT-2001c%20question1.JPG


Can you explain what all those things are.
Is number 4 the engine exhaust?
Number 1 is the box I was refering to in my previous post, this is the box I was refering too.

Is the front sloping armour simular angle as the Leo2a6?

[Marmot1]

1. IS TURREAT HATCH
2.IS DRIVER HATCH
3.YES PROBABLY EXCHAUST NOT 100%SURE
4.FRONT ARMOUR (probably there would be some reactive armour added too...

I wonder what engine they wanna put in it???
there probably would be aditional HMG on the top of turreat and some smoke grenades,etc....

[oldsoak]

Looks like it will be a nice tank. I hope that the project continues and we get to see the new tank. BTW, the gift of leopards to Poland wasnt part of a crafty plan by the Germans to hamstring the Polish competition by any chance ? ;) No, that of course would be nasty...
The 4wd Honker looks interesting - are they sold on the civilian market at all ?

[tony6]

Don't worry-our defence industry workers keep an eye on it:)
There were protest before buying those Leos and they bought only 128 of them (there were plans to buy twice more).
Our basic tank will be Polish made for sure.
As for Honker-yes, I think that they produce civilian version as well.

[Marmot1]

Looks like it will be a nice tank. I hope that the project continues and we get to see the new tank. BTW, the gift of leopards to Poland wasnt part of a crafty plan by the Germans to hamstring the Polish competition by any chance ? ;) No, that of course would be nasty...
The 4wd Honker looks interesting - are they sold on the civilian market at all ?

I heard that iraqi police wants honkers since they are simple in construction and easy to maintain and for the price of 1 basic version of hummer you can buy 16 to 50 Honkers depending on version and protection systems...latest honker is protected against mines (of course smaler ones) and frags...there i currently lot of them in iraq...

http://www.andoria-mot.com.pl/produkty4_pl.html <---producent page(in polish)
http://www.andoria-mot.com.pl/produkty4_en.html (in english)

[Operation Ivy]

Mix of Abrams and Challenger pics woot woot

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank63.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank64.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank65.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank66.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank67.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank68.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank69.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank70.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank71.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank72.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank73.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank74.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank75.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank76.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank77.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank78.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank79.jpg

Two of my Favorite Pics below

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank80.jpg

http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedimages/Tank81.jpg

woot woot woot

[REMOV]

http://www.********************/europe/Pologne/vehicules_a_roues/BRDM-2_Mod96/BRDM-2_Model_98_Poland_01.jpg
http://www.********************/europe/Pologne/vehicules_a_roues/BRDM-2_Mod96/BRDM-2_Model_98_Poland_02.jpg
http://www.********************/europe/Pologne/vehicules_a_roues/BRDM-2_Mod96/BRDM-2_Model_98_Poland_03.jpg
http://www.********************/europe/Pologne/vehicules_a_roues/BRDM-2_Mod96/BRDM-2_Model_98_Poland_04.jpg
http://www.********************/europe/Pologne/vehicules_a_roues/BRDM-2_Mod96/BRDM-2_Model_98_Poland_05.jpg

[wholagun]

Am I the only one who doesn't like the honker. It look so small and cramed. I don't understand how that think can go off road, its tires are as big as tires an my car. There is no way those tires are wide enough to be usefull offroad.

[volfram]

Don't worry-our defence industry workers keep an eye on it:)
There were protest before buying those Leos and they bought only 128 of them (there were plans to buy twice more).
Our basic tank will be Polish made for sure.
As for Honker-yes, I think that they produce civilian version as well.
We did not buy those leos,we got them for free.I hope this will be our main batlle tank,it make no sense to spent lot of money to make new tank.It is better to buy license and produce prooven good tank.We already wasted money on proiect that have not chance to be realased.

[Operation Ivy]

Not trying to sound mean here but how is the Leo proven to be a good tank if it has not seen major combat yet. I know it has great armor exc exc but if it hasnt seen major combat i cant agree with you that it has been proven a good tank. Its proably a great tank, it just hasnt really been proven yet (Waits for Leo fans to jump me :D)

[tony6]

Volfram:
Dude, You have a wrong information I guess.
We BOUGHT those Leos but for the very low price:)
We have been donated with MiGs-29 (for 1 Euro).
As for You tank conclusions-well, everybody can have his own opinion...
I prefer Polish-made tanks for example.

[oldsoak]

Now if they did the Honker in a right hand drive .... :D - I'd like to get one !
As to the Leo's - most German kit is pretty well built so it should be a good tank. Having said that , everyone took the piss out off the challenger I and II and they both came right in both gulf wars. Like all tanks, its the training of the crews and the way the tanks are tactically deployed that can make all the difference on the battlefield - a average tank well handled by a good crew can turn the tables on a "better" tank with a poor crew.

[Operation Ivy]

a average tank well handled by a good crew can turn the tables on a "better" tank with a poor crew.


Agreed woot

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6207

[wholagun]

I want the German Leopard 2a6 but I also want German guns. I doubt we will get both. So if I had to choose I would get Polish Tanks and H&K guns mabey even the new XM8.

[wholagun]

Now if they did the Honker in a right hand drive .... - I'd like to get one !


:cantbeli: You can't be serious. Why?
You gotta be Polish, you can't be non Polish and want a Honker.. eeeewwwww.. its so ugly, I don't even understand why the Iraqis want it

Why anyone would want that thing is beyond me.

[tony6]

Because it's pretty good and cheap!
And it prooved to be quite reliable in Iraq conditions.
It's construction is also simple so it's easy to repair if it's necessary.

[wholagun]

Because it's pretty good and cheap!
And it prooved to be quite reliable in Iraq conditions.
It's construction is also simple so it's easy to repair if it's necessary.

Its pretty good? What no way it can be good. Look at that thing the slightest amount of mood and your screwed. its not as rugged as a Humvee and it can't do as much offroad.
Sure its more fuel effiecient, and reliable - usally the simpler the more reliabile look at russian equipment, put it through hell but it'll still work.

They can at least put better tires on the Honker and a better gun mount.

[tony6]

Its pretty good? What no way it can be good. Look at that thing the slightest amount of mood and your screwed. its not as rugged as a Humvee and it can't do as much offroad.
Well I heard from couple of sources that Honker can really do "much offroad". Our soldiers who use them at the foreign missions say that they are not worse than Humvees. I was surprised myself but they know what they say, right?
I saw some pictures of Hum-v being drag by Star 266 truck in the mood after it stucked.
Hum-v may be really good at the desert but in the European climate...we'll see. We will get first 217 Humvees in september 2004.

[wholagun]

What The F***
We will get first 217 Humvees in september 2004 Since when did we buy Humvees?

You say first, you mean there will be more comming? If so how much more?

[tony6]

First 217 Hum-vs will be for 6th Airborne Brigade (18th batallion from my home town Bielsko-Biala:)
They will get them in september 2004 as I said.
Next will be 6th batallion (2005?) and then 4 other light batallions.
We are going to have 1200-1300 Humvees.
USA pays for them (military help:) so You know... :)

And as for this Star 266 dragging Hum-v in the mood-it was in Poland on the Hum-v tests in one of our playgrounds:)

[tony6]

P.S.
Some of those Humvees will be assembled/produced in Poland.
Negotiations are in progress.

[wholagun]

Why didn't I hear of this? So US is giving us the Humvees for free, we paying nothing? WOW not bad I guess. Is this the only thing the US is giving us or is there more still? Are these Humvees new or are they used?

[wholagun]

http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Jul1996/960510-A-4901L-003.jpg

[tony6]

Those Humvees will be know.
It's well known fact in Poland so I'm surprised You didn't hear anything about it.

[wholagun]

Know? you must mean new.

will they be just troop transports or will a few be used for other purposes such as anti tank and anti air etc.

[oldsoak]

quote:

You gotta be Polish, you can't be non Polish and want a Honker.. eeeewwwww.. its so ugly,

Why would I want a Honker ? I like a back to basics 4wd ( speaking as a civilian now ) .At present I have a lada niva which is rough as guts and basic. But it is simple - no gucci electrics and automatic gizmos to go wrong. It starts every time even after a long lay up and she will get you out of sh*t . She's getting old now and will need replacing with another no frills 4wd. Just want something simple, tough and cheap. Dont want a land rover because I just fancy something different. The Honker looks interesting - she aint pretty but neither am I ! :lol:

[volfram]

I read that Hummers will be produced or just assembled in Kaliningrad,Russia.But only civilians versions.

[Marmot1]

quote:

You gotta be Polish, you can't be non Polish and want a Honker.. eeeewwwww.. its so ugly,

Why would I want a Honker ? I like a back to basics 4wd ( speaking as a civilian now ) .At present I have a lada niva which is rough as guts and basic. But it is simple - no gucci electrics and automatic gizmos to go wrong. It starts every time even after a long lay up and she will get you out of sh*t . She's getting old now and will need replacing with another no frills 4wd. Just want something simple, tough and cheap. Dont want a land rover because I just fancy something different. The Honker looks interesting - she aint pretty but neither am I ! :lol:

check couple of posts above there is Honker producer webpage in english so you can contact them if u want :-) and honker comes from Tarpan car it is still modified and improved, it lacks of electronics and thus is ease to be keekp alive without complicated tools...

http://farmacja.eu.org/temp/Russian_ATV.jpg
and this is for you who love Niva ;-)

[Shadow]

I want the German Leopard 2a6 but I also want German guns. I doubt we will get both. So if I had to choose I would get Polish Tanks and H&K guns mabey even the new XM8.

I think Poland has more worse problems then a "not up to-date army".

[fantassin]

Got to talk to a USMC colonel from the Joint Warfare Center last week. He took Poland as an example of what not to do...in his eyes, to keep on buying heavy armour like Leo IIs is a complete stupidity. His basic question was: "What for? against who?"

The US, he told me, would like to see countries like Poland invest in light forces, RoRo ships and transports aircrafts. Having been to Poland, he had been shocked at the quantities of MBTs and IFVs from the Warsaw Pact times that were still draining the defence budget for absolutely no results whatsoever.

To sum it up, he said such purchases were "prestige" purchases intended to look good but that they served no purpose in the current COIN situation faced in different parts of the world.

[volfram]

[quote="fantassin"]Got to talk to a USMC colonel from the Joint Warfare Center last week. He took Poland as an example of what not to do...in his eyes, to keep on buying heavy armour like Leo IIs is a complete stupidity. His basic question was: "What for? against who?"

What for?For selfdefence.

[wholagun]

I think Poland has more worse problems then a "not up to-date army".


yes big problems, especially in government and econmy. But self difense should never be neglected and as seen in our history is very important. The nature of the people is militaristic and agressive much like the Germans (well use to be) and Americans. We pride oursleves on our military and ability to fight. But we can't just focus on government and politics or else we'll be invaded again. By who yolu ask.. Well we asked that from 1919-1930s and look what happened, and then cold war. For us self defense not only makes sense but gives us more power and say in international world. At the same time it brings in money, look at the new US fighter deal US companies will invest 7 billion into our economy.

[wholagun]

Got to talk to a USMC colonel from the Joint Warfare Center last week. He took Poland as an example of what not to do...in his eyes, to keep on buying heavy armour like Leo IIs is a complete stupidity. His basic question was: "What for? against who?"

The US, he told me, would like to see countries like Poland invest in light forces, RoRo ships and transports aircrafts. Having been to Poland, he had been shocked at the quantities of MBTs and IFVs from the Warsaw Pact times that were still draining the defence budget for absolutely no results whatsoever.

To sum it up, he said such purchases were "prestige" purchases intended to look good but that they served no purpose in the current COIN situation faced in different parts of the world.


If you go back and read my posts you'll see I made a simular comment. But to respond to the Generals comments: why do we buy armour and heavy stuff, why, cause it serves our purpose not American purpose. America would like to see us light allowing us to go with them into hot spots etc. But our purpose is to defend the country, we have no business to the extent as America does in the world, lets face it we are not a world power as you are. We just want to defend the country against foreign agression. we do have light units but they are not as mobile yet and we are buying airtransports and ships and we're getting new vehicles etc. We'll use those to go into hotspots. However our main goal is not to go off and fight in foriegn lands, but to defened Poland itslef. Presitige yes, but presidge that makes sense and can be used for defense.

[tony6]

Fantassin:
Buddy, if You were stucked between Russia and Germany You would have a diffrent talk.

[fantassin]

General De Gaulle fought the Russians as an advisor to the Poles in the early 20s (almost married a Polish girl too!) so I know about your history and your invadiung neighbours. I also know about the agenda of the US as far as using its new found friends in Europe.

On the other hand, some pages have to be turned; look at the relationship between FR and GE at the moment. It it possible....but Russia is a different story, I agree.

If you've got time, try to visit the Polish memorial in the Falaise pocket in Normandy where General Maczek (sorry, not sure about the spelling) held on a ridge against the retreating German forces for several days, completely isolated. Good testimony to the fighting skills of the Polish tank units.

[tony6]

The thing is that we've been abandoned by our so called "allies" few times in our history so we know now that when time comes we can count only on ourselves.
Maybe we are little overreacting but we have some reasons:)
As for Falaise-I've never been there. I gotta go someday!

[lekomin]

Got to talk to a USMC colonel from the Joint Warfare Center last week. He took Poland as an example of what not to do...in his eyes, to keep on buying heavy armour like Leo IIs is a complete stupidity. His basic question was: "What for? against who?"

The US, he told me, would like to see countries like Poland invest in light forces, RoRo ships and transports aircrafts. Having been to Poland, he had been shocked at the quantities of MBTs and IFVs from the Warsaw Pact times that were still draining the defence budget for absolutely no results whatsoever.

To sum it up, he said such purchases were "prestige" purchases intended to look good but that they served no purpose in the current COIN situation faced in different parts of the world.

We didn't buy any LeoII's. We got them for free.. all 126 of them to be precise. Would you reject an offer for an equipement for a whole armoured brigade? Leo2A4, Bergpanzers, M113 Comand And Control and Ambulance.. We even got the Mercedes Benz G Class as a liason vehicle and some UNIMOGs for transport. We got both the training and warstock amunition and a free training for all of that. Thats like bonanza ;) One must have been stupid not to get it.
As to other MBTs Poland got rid of the old T55AM2. In all Poland has 126 Leo2A3, around 220 Pt-91 and a few hundreds of t72M. In the future our MBT will be reduced to around 400 in all. Including in it, I hope, will be other batch of Leo2s. The rest will consist of modernised PT91/T72 with a 120mm gun, improved armour/ engine/ FCS.
As for the Marine you were speaking to he is a hypocrite. Look at the Marine division taking part in the Iraq war. It was armour heavy. Abrams tanks were essential. The attack could have not been commenced with Stryker/Humvee light to medium force.
Poland plans to have a basically two tier force structure. The light to medium component will consist of 4 batalions of light infantry (on Humvees) and a number of AMV-equipped batallions in medium force. Those will be the easily deployable units. The heavy element will be tailored to take the brunt of any potential attack from the east. You dont have any chances really in a stryker against a T80. You need a Leo II. Hence telling Poland to go for no-MBT force is simply stupid. We must work to develop and improve our MBTs. US army wanted to shelve plans for major M1A2 improvements (including the diesel engine instead of gas turbine). After the Gulf War II, those plans are again funded and work is in progress.
Currently Poland is spending serious money on the light to medium force (AMV, Humvees, Spike missile, C3) ONLY. When you look at the other central and eastern european armies the Polish is the most balanced one. Look at the Czechs, which will have only around 40 modernised T72M4Cz (something like Pt-91) and no wheeled APC. There is talk of ordering some of the latter but as for now they cannot decide whether they need 100 or 400 of those ;) The Hungarians got some BTR-80 from Russia. You can imagine how a BTR-80 compares with Polish Patria AMV with an 30mm ATK Mk44 Gun with a FLIR in a very good FCS.
take care
lekomin inc

[fantassin]

I gave him the answer "Who took Bagdad?" and he said "yes, you gotta keep a few around but not thousands"....

As for free equipment, the problem is that the maintenance that you need once the procurement is done is never free; it's a well known tactic to bring somebody or a country under influence. The day you disagree with that country, the flow of spare parts slows down or stops...but considering the historical human debt GE owes to PL, it'll take a while before anything like that happens...

That's why the USA was so keen on selling F/A 18 to the French Navy in the 80s rather than see FR develops the Rafale Marine version for the French carriers. Of course the Rafale is much more expensive but it's the price of independance.

BTW, if you need more Leo IIs, Switzerland is trying to get rid of some as well as of about 200 M109s I have heard...best deal, one Euro apiece !

[Marmot1]

Switzerlad??? come on Germans have still spare hunderds...and not for 1euro but for free :-) they wanted to give us more but we refused amd about the parts there is agreement betwen goverments that Leo2 would be modernsed and serviced by polish industry and spare parts would be produced in poland as well...

The problem is that Poland lies in center of europe (geographical center is in poland :-) ) and every major strugle betwen east and west must be fought on polish teritory...there is no other option....so we need MBT and as tou have seen in Bagdad US used M1A2 not humvees on the initial strike to the city....

[fantassin]

Yep, Germany is going from 1568 Leo IIs to 852. That leaves a few for spares...

[wholagun]

I'll have to go one year down the road to visit the Falaise Polish Memorial.

But if we're expecting an attack from the East isn't it better to buy Leo2a6 then create our own tank which can turn out to be a big peice of ****. Leo2a6 is quality work, good armour gun etc. German equipment is quality we should go with the best then create uncertain bad quality and pay for it when the worst of times comes. If we create the PT-2001 it can be crap and with the new russian Black Eagle we have no chance again. Besides we will never be safe fully because Russia has nukes. No matter how much MBTs you have Russia can send one nuke over and there goes Warsaw or Krakow, Wroclaw, Lodz, or Poznan.

Id like to see in Poland something simular to the Rangers, or Green Barets special forces. We need a tough special unit fighting unit that can hit hard, and a unit that can go behind enemy lines and cause havoc like the Green Barets. But in the end keep in mind Napolean and Hitler couldn't beat Russia, if we get attacked we would never win we can only hold out for 2 months unless we get foreign help. Missile defense would also be a good idea. Oh yeah I almost forgot does Poland have nukes, Im pretty sure we do not but I heard somehwere that we have a small amount.

[Herrmannek]

Oh yeah I almost forgot does Poland have nukes, Im pretty sure we do not but I heard somehwere that we have a small amount.

We don't :), but we have two scientific nuclear reactors is it counts :)

[volfram]

Oh yeah I almost forgot does Poland have nukes, Im pretty sure we do not but I heard somehwere that we have a small amount.

We don't :), but we have two scientific nuclear reactors is it counts :)
I have school practice there.

[Herrmannek]

What are you doing there?

[fantassin]

I highly recommand the Falaise pocket...I was there a couple of years ago and I found three 75 mm PAK empty shells, a German jerrycan and some remains of MG42 ammo cases.

Many parts of the battlefields have not changed that much since 1944 and it's quite possible to do "matching" of 1944 era pictures with todays' Normandy.

There is even a Tiger I at the entrance of the town of Vimoutiers...the paint job is crap but the tank is complete.

[wholagun]

Sweet you can actually find shells lying around. did you keep it?

In the village where my grandparents use to live you could still find hand grandes and shells and big tank holes. The hand grandes you don't touch cause they are unstalbe, there was one insident where someone picked one up and threw it and it exploded and the army was called in to clear the forest of old ammuntion.

[fantassin]

The shells went to a friend and the jerrycan was left there...it was in the remains of what probably was a staff car that had been dumped in a dumping ground after having been excavated from a ploughed field.

Injside the remains of the car, I found the foot-plate of a Singer sewing machine...when you read the books about the Normandy campaign, the fact that the germans had looted many french homes was often quoted and sewing machines, bed linen and crockery were especially popular among the "master's race"...57 years after, it was quite incredible to find that !

[REMOV]

We didn't buy any LeoII's. We got them for free.. all 126 of them to be precise. The whole contract - 128 Leopards II and additional vehicles (several M113s, Bergepanzers, trucks and G-Wagens) and spare parts costs 26 420 000 USD. Very cheap used tanks indeed, but not for free.

[REMOV]

Id like to see in Poland something simular to the Rangers, or Green Barets special forces.Have you ever heard about 1. PSK (Pulk Specjalny Komandosow) 1st Special (Commando) Regiment from Lubliniec? ;)

http://www.psk.mil.pl/Obrazki/znakpulku.jpg

[wholagun]

Id like to see in Poland something simular to the Rangers, or Green Barets special forces.Have you ever heard about 1. PSK (Pulk Specjalny Komandosow) 1st Special (Commando) Regiment from Lubliniec? ;)

http://www.psk.mil.pl/Obrazki/znakpulku.jpg

It would seem I haven't.. can you provide some more detail on what the do, weapons training, etc.

[REMOV]

Look at the Czechs, which will have only around 40 modernised T72M4Cz (something like Pt-91) and no wheeled APC. There is talk of ordering some of the latter but as for now they cannot decide whether they need 100 or 400 of those ;) Hmm... abouth a month ago (18th November) the Czech government said, they want 240 APC (Mowag's Piranha, Steyer-Daimler-Puch's Pandur or Patria AMV) for ca. 875 000 000 USD.

[REMOV]

It would seem I haven't.. can you provide some more detail on what the do, weapons training, etc.


Source: http://www.specwarnet.com/europe/Poland_1stPSK.htm

The Polish Army’s 1st Special (Commando) Regiment, or 1 PSK, is one of several special operations units within the Polish military’s force structure. Currently based in Lubliniec, the regiment carries on the traditions of Poland’s World War II special operations forces. These WWII units, organized with the assistance of the US and England, consisted of the 2nd Commando Battalion, the Special Motorized Battalion and the “Parasol” (Umbrella) and “Zoska” Sabotage Battalion .

The modern day unit’s troops are expected to conduct para-commando/ raider type missions in the enemy’s rear areas during war time, and are trained to conduct a wide range of combat operations including: air assault operations, parachute operations, reconnaissance, raids, ambushes, underwater attacks, and supporting hostage rescue operations. The regiment’s soldiers tend to display a higher degree of professionalism, compared to other Polish forces, thanks in part to the unit’s high recruiting standards, and a special training program the regiment implemented several years ago.

Candidates for service in the unit must first successfully undertake basic training and then complete a three-month training course for the unit’s “junior specialists”. During this phase of training troops receive training in close combat, unarmed combat, fighting with specialized equipment, parachuting, land navigation, weapons handling, basic survival skills, and several other skills. After completing their second phase of training, the unit’s new trainees are organized into six-man teams for operations.

In the near future the unit will be reduced in strength to one battalion and aims to become fully professional force. The new battalion, along with GROM and the Navy’s GSP (“Formoza”) combat diver unit, will fall under a new Polish special operations command.

[seventy6er]

Yep, Germany is going from 1568 Leo IIs to 852. That leaves a few for spares...

Actually, 2.125 Leo IIs of all versions were built for the German Army...


http://www.panzerbaer.de/types/pix/bw_kpz_leopard_2_kws-001g.jpg

[tony6]

As for our special forces:
We have GROM & 1st PSK and Formoza in the Navy.
Also there is a psychologic warfare unit.
Next year (2004) SF will have a priority in our military budget.
GROM is to be enlarged (3rd combat team is to be added).
Our SF will be about 1500 soldiers.

[wholagun]

Our SF will be about 1500 soldiers

What thats it.. we just have 1500 special forces units... :cantbeli: **** thats not that much. Do we have a unit that is on stadby at any moment ready for deployment. Not Grom but another one, some sort of rapid reaction unit.

Also what type of equipment do these specal forces use? Is it better then normal amry? In what ways is it better.

[volfram]

What are you doing there?
I made mistake i schould say i had school practice there.Ifinisch school few years ago.We were doing there mainly nothing,playing cards and something like that.Ther was no job for us.

[lekomin]

We didn't buy any LeoII's. We got them for free.. all 126 of them to be precise. The whole contract - 128 Leopards II and additional vehicles (several M113s, Bergepanzers, trucks and G-Wagens) and spare parts costs 26 420 000 USD. Very cheap used tanks indeed, but not for free.
The tanks were for free. Bringing them into active condition from long storage was not.

[lekomin]

Look at the Czechs, which will have only around 40 modernised T72M4Cz (something like Pt-91) and no wheeled APC. There is talk of ordering some of the latter but as for now they cannot decide whether they need 100 or 400 of those ;) Hmm... abouth a month ago (18th November) the Czech government said, they want 240 APC (Mowag's Piranha, Steyer-Daimler-Puch's Pandur or Patria AMV) for ca. 875 000 000 USD.
At first they wanted +400 APCs, then it was only 100, now it seems it is 250. Bear in mind that at first around 250 T72Ms were to be modified into T72M4Cz... It was then reduced to around 100 and then to just 30. They do it at all because the Italian FCS manufactures has a contract clause, they the Czechs must buy a number of FCS otherwise the Italians are to be paid a hefty contract penalty.
Take care Remov
lekomin inc

[fantassin]

True, 2,125 were built for the Bundeswehr but they started mothballing them as early as 1995; the figure I gave is from an official current german publication and only lists the Leo IIs that are actually currently "in line" in GE armoured units.

[Royal]

Look at the Czechs, which will have only around 40 modernised T72M4Cz (something like Pt-91) and no wheeled APC.

I may well be out of date, but I distinctly remember the Czechs using 8 wheeled APC's (which reminded me vaugely of the WWII German 8 wheeled armoured cars) in Bosnia in the late 90's.

[REMOV]

I may well be out of date, but I distinctly remember the Czechs using 8 wheeled APC's (which reminded me vaugely of the WWII German 8 wheeled armoured cars) in Bosnia in the late 90's.You're right - the OT-64 SKOT. It was the Czech-Polish project (mid 60s).

http://panzermodelkit.valka.cz/OT64D12.jpg
http://panzermodelkit.valka.cz/OT64D29.jpg
http://panzermodelkit.valka.cz/OT64D26.jpg
http://panzermodelkit.valka.cz/OT64D02.jpg


Source: http://www.jed.simonides.org/8x8afv/oscar/ot64_series/ot64-series.html

The OT-64 wheeled amphibious personnel carrier is used by mechanised, communications and other specialised units. The OT-64 development was motivated by the need to replace the obsolete OT-810 APC with a newly designed armoured vehicle. The first prototype called SKOT (for “medium wheeled armoured carrier”) was designed in 1959, in 1961 the first test series was produced and a co-operation agreement between the Czechoslovakia and Poland was agreed and joint production commenced. The OT-64 was introduced into both countrie's armed forces in 1964. It was a very good design for its time with good combat and operating characteristics which included; all eight-wheel drive, an interlock of front and rear axles differential, two steerable front axles, central tire-pressure regulation system, a Praga Wilson planetary transmission and other elements.
It is powered by a Tatra diesel engine with air cooling, which permits smooth travel both offroad and on the road. On the road, the vehicle is capable of achieving a speed of about 100 km/h. The vehicle is fully armoured, providing protection of the crew and of the whole mechanized squad against small calibre projectiles and shell splinters.

Protection of the crew is further improved by an overpressure ventilation (NBC) system.

[REMOV]

BRDM-2M98 Zbik B in Iraq
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/_BRDM-2M98_ZbikB_1s.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/_BRDM-2M98_ZbikB_2s.jpg

[Groove]

I lived in the near of Stalowa Wola in Poland. There is / was a big military APC / Tank (?) / Artillery Factory beside of civilian steel products. But i think they build APC all the time.

I would be scared to drive through iraq in a BRDM-2. I think one RPG7 is enough for this APC...

Greetings

Groove