The merkava It was not in use at the time it was blown up, a drone blew up the tank with a mortar bomb from above while it had 2 soldiers instead of 4..
Other Merkava facts: It makes an absolutely terrible submarine It also is awful at flying It cannot be used as a flotation device in the event of a flood It’s just abysmal as a formula 1 drag racer It is completely inedible It is incapable of using magic It is not able to land on the Sun The tank cannot produce milk in order to feed the crew No matter how many times you ask ot, it will not turn into a cat girl. These have been true facts about the Merkava tank
A video surfaced 3 days ago shows Hamas dropped RPG from quadrocopter right in front of turret near the barrel, the tank burst into fire and followed by sparkling flame from turret.
Just watched it, your desciption is way off. The fire seems to be limited, the tank is immobilized at most. What I am sure is that the propagandists showing this video never show what happens next. The drone is still up and filming, yet theres no footage of tank crew fleeing or it blowing up. I've seen russian tanks destroyed by drones and the damage in those videos looked way more dramatic.
@Zayed Haroon how can you tell this? Did Russians tell you this? T-90's are some what as good as abrams. And when they could beat Pakistani pattons with ages old centurions they certainly can capitalise on shitty tanks made by DRDO. Anyhow arjun might seem like crap in first instance but i have my doubts. DRDO's staff directly taken from IIT's. They don't lack in skill but they do lack in fundings and corrupt hierarchy as an issue for them. About the patton vs centurions. You can find out on your own if you google basantar, asal uttar, battle of longewal. They are skilled even if their tanks may not be good enough. And yeah the T-90's aren't toys.
Drew Sullivan • 12 years ago yes it is true. But going by Israel's tank battle successes, they did better when they were exposed and have travelled speedily to the location they want to have advantage. Which means there's no time to hull down.
Indeed the engine is no barrier to modern Sabot. At most another 10-20 mm of additional RHA. Very sad amount. Israel needs to work towards unmanned MBTs or 2 men tanks with no crew in turret ala T14 Armata style. The Merkava is heading towards obsolescence depending on whether her neighbors have advancement in MBT tech. If Turkey has the new Altay, I would recommend Israel to upgrade
those are almost all tanks. Most tanks are very lightly armored on the top. Meant to protect from shrapnel and not much else. A mortar round to the head will kill almost any tank from above if it lands in the right spot (in that case, directly onto where the breach was located under, thus detonating the shell)
As a former merkava Commander I did not see any problem from the Gunnar having problems with thermal systems due to the engine being in front. Also the fuel compartment are not only in front and if I remember correctly you always can choose to seal off the front fuel from using. Now I'm not saying it is a super tank. Every tank has it issues but I do think it is one of the best tanks for it area of use and the job it has to do.
@@wonkagaming8750 ah. sure dude. think about it i have first-hand experience with this machine. some things are good something are absolute shit. but that is with every machine ever build. thats why we always get better as a human race.....well most of the time
Key word area of use. That is what it is designed for and where it is outstanding. Also it currently isn't designed to face the most modern armor,and is more than sufficient to match and overcome any of it's neighbors and or peers
I was a tank gunner in the IDF when thr MK IV was just a prototype. I just want to address your claim that the engine being in front would hinder the use of the thermal targeting system during the night due to residual engine heat. This is not the case. We can see just fine ;)
@@Korean_Crayon technically correct but he doesn't take in to account two things. 1) Israel's potential full on war enemies (Syria at the moment) don't have the top of the line modern tanks he is comparing it to. 2) The tactics Israel uses for tank warfare. The Merkava was specifically designed for those tactics.
@@benzwebner2515 Syria does have a small fleet of T-90 tanks but those are rather pre occupied right now..... Also I'd guess they recieved no more then 20 of them with a few being damaged in battle already.
I thought that statement sounded wrong. I was on an M1A1 in the Persian Gulf War, and I didn't recall any problems viewing things in the TIS whenever the turret was looking backward over the rear deck (where our engine sits).
They should ditch this flawed Merkava design & adopt the peak of engineering, battle-adapting intelligent Bob Semple design, easily the best tank design any country can hope for.
John Toas I assure you they aren’t. Defending from hostile surrounding middle easter nations and multiple terrorist organizations is indeed a good thing to do.
H@m@s:* hit engine* isre@l: haha, you can't hit me, the engine protect me H@m@s: but your engine is down now and on fire, where you can hide or go? isre@li: well sh*t, i didn't think about this
well, atleast the crew is alive and its still able to shoot back also, the fuel tank can be shot because its just an external one, the main fuel tanks are behind the engine on the floor if i remember correctly other tanks also use external fuel tanks as protection
It's necessary to take into account specifics of the enemy, Israel doesn't need a super-maneuverable tank with strong armor and powerful gun with mighty armor-piercing projectiles , they need multipurpose mobile firing point with protection against handheld anti-tank fighting systems , good long-range observation and detection systems , and long-range weapons with high-explosive and splinter parameters - and for these tasks merkava fit well .
This is very true, and I do agree with you. However, if Israel was to come into conflict for whatever reason with a country that does have capabilities to take out the Merkava effectively, then Israel would be screwed, this is why it is important to try and produce a tank that is a 'Jack of all trades', rather than relying on a vehicle that is only very effective at certain things.
Idk... what about the growing tensions with syria and its allies i really think a t90 or eve a t72 would put the merkava in a atrocious spot like a foreskin in the hands of a rabi
@@BigDCera 😂 yeah well that's the thing, but nowadays tank armour is almost irrelevant, majority of vehicles have the ability to fire projectiles that can penetrate armour way thicker then could possibly be put on a tank so the battles could more or less come down to other factors
@@ChewieeTheGuy Well... Most current NATO tanks can't frontally penetrate each another with a center of mass hit so I don't know where do you get that idea from.
Well, the entire point of the frontal engine layout is that if the tank were hit and penetrated, it would most likely result in a mobility kill, meaning the crew can escape and the tank can be recovered at a later time. If your ammo blows up or you regularly lose crewmembers its much worse. Strategically speaking, it makes a lot of sense, especially if the engine and transmission units can be readily replaced in the field, like on the Leopard 2. In that case you would be able to maintain a high percentage of battle-ready tanks compared to, for example, russian tanks like the T-72 which are still prone to ammo hits, requiring less tank production as well as crew training to maintain a tank force.
yeah he was not saying it would just kill the engine what he means is that it would just negate the engine entirely and just fly through it APFSDS and HEAT of today do not care but as it is it does not really matter who ever shoots first will most likely get a chicken dinner
@@Ganiscol …And my guess there will be more than a single hole in your tank given the force of impact of the round against the engine and the subsequent kinetic reactions occurring within the engine compartment. Never mind any basically trained enemy tank crew will most likely throw follow-on rounds into your immobilized tank whenever possible until you’re good and toasty….
nowadays most hits will be from top, sides, and rear (drones, Kornet). but frontal protection is sine qua non. when Ka Vikhr hits u, should be able to take the impact.
You got to remember the specific needs of the IDF. This tank was designed to fight numerically superior Soviet tanks in defencive battles. It's designed to fight from prepared ridge line fighting positions overlooking open plains.
This video is the proof to how easy it is today, with good video editing skills and convincing voice ,to generate an entire video full of misinformation driven by either total misunderstanding or intentional arrogance. There are two tanks in this world which are the absolute BEST, first one is the American Abrams M1, second one is the Israeli Merkava Mark IV - forget all of the rubbish keyboard warriors and computer games experts tell you. after those two world-wide leaders, you can rank down the rest of the BTs... no means to disrespect it's just hard cold facts
merkava was designed for counter insurgency, it's developpers concentrate their efforts to create armor wich resist against heat charges,such as rpg and atgm. the tank is not designed for symetric wars because it's not in nowadays israel doctrine to fight regular armies because all its neighbours fear a US intervention
That's complete bullshit! The Merkava was designed from the start to be a normal Main Battle Tank just like any other MBT for regular symetric warfare too. Keep in mind it was a big improvement from the Centurion and M60 tanks which were Israel's MBTs prior to 1980's. The Merkava was supposed to have better protection than the Centurion and M60, which it did. Israel also wanted to obtain the Chieftain MBT from the UK, but that request was declined. So they had to come up with their own indigenous tank, which became the Merkava. And even though it still didn't have as good protection as the other western MBTs like Abrams, Leopard or Challenger, it was still a big improvement from the earlier Centurion and M60. But the Merkava was still meant to fight in symetric warfares, which it did in 1983 against Syrian, when it knocked out several Syrian T-62 tanks
Nicole easy peasy lemon squeezy like LifeLongStrong mentioned, the earlier versions were designed for symetric wars, but the nowadays merkava (4&5) are designed for counter insurgency, the israeli battle doctrine changes since yom kippour(1973), they no need to engage a large scale war against its neighbours since usa offer a larger support than before.today the idf is more specialised in pacification and counter insurgency than fight regular armies. and the proof is all countries that have insurgency problems buy israeli weaons(philipines,india,turkey,saudis with the iron dom,...) i don't say that idf isn't prepared against regular armies, but it can only gain time waiting the us intervention to save them. but in the geopolitical situation of israel today, there is no symetric threat despite iran wich is far from it borders and havn't an effecient airforce to bomb israel. and idf could buy foreign mbt like M1A2 or the french leclerc in the case of symetric war
@Shawn Sable lebenon never had t-72,and in Yom kippour, the majority of idf tanks get destroyed by Egyptians maljutka,so by heat.israeli military had always focused it's efforts to offer a better protection against heat. Symetric wars are no longer their priorities for now
@@warmbreeze7996 You just answered your own comment idiot. There is currently no enemy that could threaten Israel in a symmetric war. But that doesn't mean the Merkava Mk.4 can not defeat modern tanks.
You have a lot of good points but contexts is key the merkava was designed with urban operations in mind so a lot emphasis was placed on protecting against HEAT over APFSDS. Keeping the L44 also makes sense in this regard as it's not as long so it won't get hung up on things as easily when traversing the turret. So it makes sense from Israel prospective, though not from a US or Russian stand point.
I was hoping someone would point that out. Most countries MBT are at a large disadvantage in fighting urban environment versus open terrain. Several vets have told me about how they have to protect MBT that are supporting the attack versus focusing on the task. Why else do countries build different vehicles for different jobs. Having a tank that can transport several troops combines 2 or 3 separate vehicles superpowers would use. Despite its drawbacks, the merkava is an excellent tank/apc that fits what Israel faces in almost every engagement. Itd be asinine to build a standard MBT when chances of that particular form of engagement is nill, unlike the superpowers.
@@Idontmatter1234 Eh, no, the troop transport capability is largely useless. If it wasn't, Israel wouldn't invest so much into proper city fighting APCs, the Namer and its predecessors, the Nagmachon and the Achzarit...
If you are so convinced Merkava was made for urban warfare tell me, why is it better at it than any other tank, and dont talk about Trophy, that is Active Protection System that can be mounted on any tank
@@RedEffectChannel More armour on the roof (Mark 4) to protect from top down attacks by RPG's on buildings. www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/MerkavaMk1.html (table at bottom of page) this is the only source I could be bothered to google. It's a great tank for what it is designed for but would be below par in tank on tank against more modern tanks but better as an infantry support tank.
@@RedEffectChannel i don't think it is better than every other tank over all. but as far as operating in urban Terrain goes the merkava does have some advantages. The merkava has better all round armor protection against HEAT Munitions than most MBT, as they tend to have the cold war set up with most of their armor focused around the front arc and thin side armor. It also has a V-shaped belly armor pack to help protect against mines and IEDs. As i said your points are good and im just trying to give some context on why the may have designed it the way they did.
@@thespectator2976 it would be much better if it were in the British tech tree. Where it is now it almost always gets dragged in with the baby Abrams spam.
@@dantesixx1155 Wow your comment is so stupid. None of those coutnries copied the Abrams. Chinese tanks are mostly copied from Soviet/Russia, Pakistan tanks are from China (since arabs can't build their own tanks), the Indian Arjun tank is influenced by German Leopard 2A4 turret (but based on a Soviet T72 chassis), the Japanese Type 90 is also copy of Germany Leopard 2A4 and the new Type 10 is influenced by Leoaprd 2A6.
@Jose Raul Miguens Cruz I'm not sure about the Armata. Its active protection covers 180 degrees at the front, while the Merkava-4 Trophy system covers the tank like a bubble - 360 degrees and whatever comes from the top. Besides that, the Trophy tells from where the threat originated and offers it as a target to be destroyed. As far as I know it's something the Armata would wish to have.
Russia claims it could jam Trophy but no russian atg fired at Trophy was able to hit its targets. .. Lahat is claimed to be able to jam all russian active hard kill System. .. but so far no Lahat was fired at russian hard kill Systems to proof the claim... russian claim is proof to be a lie .... Israel claim is not proof in any real Action so far ... the german ads System is imun against Radar Jammer because it use a huge range of Sensors to detect and locate incomming threat not only a Radar. ..
u kno nothing about warfare or weapons, just bedrooms youtubers who never never gonna be in a real situation or gonna understand filosofy behind designing a weapon
What I really like about your series of videos about the individual negative features of MBT’s of various nations around the world is that you are non-political and unbiased and, so far, haven’t presented any one particular MBT that did not have some flaws and shortcomings to it’s design and makeup; I don’t think we’ll ever find an MBT from you in this “problems” series that won’t have have some issues that could be addressed. There is no such thing as a perfect tank. Keep up the good honest work.
@@manofchaitea6904 on what are you talking about? lol a few? for as i know not even one so far the only one who did was Hezbollah and it was an old version
@@haimlamash6371 Hezbollah took out several in 2006, different models both current and older, and they proved to be easily destroyable with modern Russian weapons like the Rpg- 29, then again so are most tanks.
@Noam Sviri The new Merkava? yeah, I'm sure it has upgraded armor, the IDF have tons of combat experience to build a better tank. The only viable weapons that may defeat new tanks would be the Kornet missile and maybe the RPG 30. The Merkava is an interesting design, and I like to watch as it is improved. All the best.
finaly someone clearing the myth´s of this tank. there is a reason why most nations dont put the engine ine the front of their MBT´s. modern composite armor needs quite some space and a front engine limits the frontarmor design alot.
Israeli tanker are trained to fight in a hull down position whenever possible. In case of war, they also have prepared positions set up. People forget that unlike the Abrams, Merkava is designed for defense with short supply lines.
@@yonghominale8884 blah blah blah. You can't just sit in that hull down position all the time. And once you go to counterattack your supah-stronk-hull-down-tenk will suck miserably.
@@yonghominale8884 The Challenger series was also designed like that, and the lower front plate was summarily neglected in a similar fashion. Fast forward to LIC in the Middle East and a couple of IEDs and ATGMs later, the British Army changed their tune. The only reason that the Israeli armed forces haven't lost more tanks is that they are led by competent commanders that are cognizant of the Merkava's strengths and weaknesses. But that does not excuse a pretty elementary design flaw.
What myths are you talking about? The engine of this tank never was a myth to begin with. Keep in mind the Merkava was meant to offer better protection thant the Centurion and M60 tanks, which were ISrael's Main Battle Tanks until replaced by the Merkava in the 1980. So yes, the engine in the front definitely proved much better protection than compared to the Centurion and M60 that Israel used before. Of course it still wasn't as good as the other Western MBT's like Abrams, Leopard 2 and Challenger. But Israel was't as rich as those other countries, so it did the best with what it had avaibale. Most middle eastern countries still don't even have their own indigenous tanks even to this day.
@@xAlexTobiasxB iam talking about the myth that the merkava tank is the best protected tank in the world. peroid. for israel the merkava is fine, because their potential enemies dont have modern tanks. but against other modern MBT´s, the merkava would not perform well.
I'm a merkava mechanic and I can tell you that there is no fuel tank in the front only at the back of the tank. There is no problem with the thermal vision due to the engine being in the front.
Putting this out there: No damn tank is perfect. Not the Merkava, not the Abrams, not the T-90, not the Type 90 or the Leclerc. Every one of those is an unstoppable war machine in one situation, and a lumbering hunk of metal in another. It's the crew that matters
Yeah. Plus we're getting into the same problem of the early cold war. You have a Heavy tank (let's say, IS-3), the enemy has HEAT rounds that can just go right through. Any armor designed to stop more than an autocannon is pointless weight. Then we got tanks like the Leopard I which didn't have heavy armor, and could be faster than a Heavy tank. Then we figured out how to deal with HEAT, with composites. Our modern day HEAT/Heavy Tank situation is APFSDS vs Armor that just can't be thick enough. You could make armor that will stop APFSDS, but it can't be a composite that resists HEAT, and vice versa. Armor is becoming rather useless again.
Engine in the front would improve the survival of the crew more than the tank itself. The weakness is also mitigated if fighting from behind a sand dune and using gun depression. And quite often they're not taking into account the high end weapons that exist, but rather the cheaper vehicles used by their neighbors that they have to fight all too often. Consider that Israel is also known to have successfully used Centurions and upgraded Shermans about 20 years after World War 2. If it's a small country you need to train crews well, and having a tank where crew survival is often more important than tank survival it comes down to being able to sacrifice vehicles more than people.
These kids play too much war thunder lol, "engine in front bad it get disable easy" The tank itself is not being protected here, its protection for the crew, a round isnt gonna go straight through the engine like that and spall either, since its already going to have to go through the Merkavas armor, and then a massive Diesiel engine and then another armor plate to get to the crew. Are we forgetting Israel is mostly fighting T-55's, 62's, and 72's btw? These tanks are incredibly dated, and most likely not using top of the line munitions. That wouldn't become a problem unless they're battling shit like the Abrams, Leopards and T-90's. You guys need to realise this tank was built and tailored to their situation, not your own little "oh what if" stuff.
Engine is in front b/c there is a door in the back. Every IFV has front engine and so does Merkava. It has little to do with protecting a crew - it feels such statement is made mostly by marketing arm. Maybe against HEAT but not AP rounds. Engine blocks are routinely shot and disabled by anti material rifles and many modern power packs use a lot of aluminium. There is very little armor value in there. Hiding behind sand bar is not a good idea as well as few meters of sand do not add too much protection - you want to hide in a hole in the ground not behind some obstacle as if the enemy sees your massive heat from the engine they simply shoot through sand, through weak frontal armor into your crew.
I like how some people in arma 3 seem to hate this (technically) because it looks "futuristic-ish" for their taste. Meanwhile, the real-life counterpart:
@@dondelchulia3189 Really? I almost feel like it's OP because of how the reactive armor works. In ARMA it can soak up ATGMs and even tank rounds like no other tank in the game.
The best tank is the Kuma-52, unparalleled accuracy and mobility. The T-100 is pretty garbage, and the Slammer is pretty damn close. The T-120 is…it exists? It’s cool but, idk. Thing kinda is too slow, and too big. The Kuma-52 also has less reactive armor but better composite armor. Also the Slammer has the nasty habit of being easily disabled due to the engine being in the front. ArmA 3 players don’t hate the Slammer because it’s futuristic, we hate the slammer because why tf is the US military using a Merkerva and not a Abrams? But I agree, the Slammer has the best ERA in the game but that comes with some heavy trade offs, like the engine being much easier to disable, it being much slower then the T-100 or Kuma-52, and having a larger profile then either of them. I have about 400 hours with the Slammer and about 1000 with the K-52. I’d agree it’s got the best ERA but its composite armor is lacking and its engine is a massive weak point. A lot of the times with hull hits that pen my Kumas I’m able to at least retreat, a lot of the times my Slammers just get disabled. I’d rather retreat to cover before bailing. Also, remember guys don’t forget to pack your tanks with spare medkits ammo and weapons. Happy hunting, get them CSAT bastards boys
You have to be circumcised to drive it?i thought that might be the answer to "the problem with the merkava tank" if I'm going down fighting in a tank I'm sure as hell making sure I've still got my helmet on if you know what I mean
A dirty old man slices your helment off when you're a baby and gives you your first BJ!! Now isn't that just charming indeed! 😵 I never complained about my Catholic upbringing again after I'd heard all that!!😬😟
The Merkava was designed to fight outdated soviet armor, like t55, t62, t64 and maybe t72s The latter was even the most advanced vehicle in the Soviet arsenal when the Merkava began its development and the Merkava was designed with crew protection in mind.
The merkava was more designed to fight urban battles against heat warheads such as rpg's and atgms, its not designed for tank on tank warfare because israel isnt expecting to fight against a near peer armored force, its not the best tank in the world but its the best tank for israel
Greetings from Israel :) Good video, and pretty accurate. here's my rant for for the ranters. A few things to take into consideration about the Role of the Merkava and how this affected it's armor design: The Merkava mark IV (מרכבה סימן 4), mainly faces Infantry armed with RPG's and Surface to Surface missiles, In Mountainous and Urban environments, fighting in guerrilla warfare. The surrounding armies around Israel mainly have tanks like T-72 variants or BMP variants, which the armor on the Merkava IV is more than capable of handling, and the gun can easily penetrate their armor. The Merkava is designed to protect surrounding soldiers, and insure crew survivability, But is also designed to be very maneuverable and use the terrain for it's advantage. The most important thing in a Tank is the training of the crew, and how effective the Crew is in utilizing the tank in combat. IDF (צה"ל) crew training is why the Merkava tanks are considered legendary in their crew survivability. In the end, A tank's armor is important, but only as long as the crew survives. Here's the truth about the Merkava IV: -If you take any modern Tank 1VS1 against the Merkava IV in open ground, The Merkava is probably Screwed. Most modern tanks have a longer Effective engagement range than the Merkava IV. -If it's 1VS1 Urban fight, or a battlefield with hills where the Merkava IV can use the terrain and it's mobility, i'd put my money on the Merkava IV.... the thing shifts like a damn mountain goat! sorry for the long rant... Happy Easter or Passover :) or whatever holiday your celebrating. .חג שמח
It's retarded how people "rate" and "compare" tanks that were built for entirely different countries with entirely different priorities and entirely different theatres of war. Merkava Mk4 does a fine job for the needs of Israel.
Same , aside from increase of noise level for the crew and A FREAKING FUEL TANK AT THE FRONT , its a quiet unique design, especially if u wanna have space on the back
@@Magiktcup well yeah , its a huge down side for the tank since wen shoot , it demoralized it along with the engine How ever ut makes sense tho Remember , the merkava tank is all about crew protection (RIP driver) If they placed it behind engine , sure the engine would protect it but then it will be exposed in the side which is the weakest part of the tank If that explodes then the crew in the turrent and driver will both probably die in the process
This tank was a target practice in 2006 war , many merkavas were destroyed , I went to see them in a tank graveyard museum like place in south Lebanon , this tank is a meme in Lebanon lol
@@אוריה-ז7ע yes but the problem is that it's not efficient enough 15/ 20 % chance of success , before that they add high frequency laser ,but turned out it's not good too , the Russians knows exactly what they are doing.
@@chotob8458 They're developing a new modern series of Merkava tanks. Merkava 4 "Barak" Which is equipped with the most advanced Anti AT System . It's accurate and was developed by "Rafael" The Tank Is expected to start it's service 2021
@@chotob8458 Every tank has problems but the Merkava is proven to be one of the finest tanks. This Russian guy clearly is mad or against Israel. He could've talked about the trashy Russian Anti Aircraft systems whose proven useless against IAF's planes in Syria . But he didn't.
Some of the design philosophy of the Merkava was crew protection over tank protection and who their opponents were going to be. In a small country like Israel it is easier to replace a damage tank than to replace the crew. And for a small country to home design and build a world class tank that actually works is no small feat in itself. In the end does the Merkava help Israel win its wars with those who are trying to destroy Israel.
The way the turret declines into the top of the vehicle it seems like it will direct incoming projectiles towards the turret ring which is probably a big weakness.
So I might mention, and I’m a year behind, but there’s a couple reasons why the USA sticks to the L/44. DU rounds, like the ones the USA uses and prefers, can’t really go much faster without either losing penetration ability at worst and seeing almost no meaningful gain at best. The USA also prefers the shorter cannon because it has a long barrel life because it doesn’t bend as much as the 55, which also contributes to barrel life. Those are a couple reasons we’ve stuck with the L/44, but for tungsten rounds, the L/55 is certainly better.
@@little_weed192 At higher velocities (above 1800m/s) tungsten rounds do slightly better than DU (I don't know the specifics of the metallurgy). Those velocities are difficult to achieve and the higher energies needed to reach those velocities cause increased system wear, so the US has stuck with DU because it does perform better at velocities modern tanks typically sling rounds at (1300-1700 m/s). Most other countries stick with tungsten rounds because it is cheaper and easier to acquire and does not require buying from the few countries capable of supplying DU or having their own nuclear program. DU actually stands out because it's used primarily by the US.
Interesting, the engine is something that always bugged me as well. About the L44 gun, can it be that they rather have a shorter gun as they're more likely to operate in cities? After all, the Merk isn't being exported and if Israel suddenly needs extra penn then they can easily press number 2 by having the US fly in some M829A* rounds, which I bet are compatible. (Are they?)
Exhar Khun my guess is that Israel hasn’t upgraded the gun because extra penetration with standard rounds isn’t a problems since Israel is not getting into combat with other tanks and is more concerned with infantry and argon/hollow charges. There is the possible Syrian or Iranian tank encounter but those tanks aren’t on the same level, protection or gun. The engine possibly interfering with thermals is also interesting but I thought the exhausts at the sides would divert most of the heat.
I don't think they are, seeing as the Leopards gun is FAR closer to the M1's and they can't share ammo without issues, I highly doubt the Merkava's shorter calibre gun can fire them without serious safety issues or mechanical issues. Red touches up on the "Hurr durr M1 uses the Leopard 2 gun" myth and points out the ammo isn't compatible.
@@dankoz6340 oh, sorry, what Syrians do you mean? there are 4 factions, one of which is equipped with Russian t 72s and t 90s (by factions I mean, lie 4 different groups that are fighting each other.)
Thanks for the answer, friends. A bit unexpected to me. I'm fairly well read on older tanks and given Israel's experience in the Yom Kippur war (where the US flew in actual US Army/Airforce inventory to replace Israeli losses) I've considered it kind of obvious that Israel would strive for interchangeability with US materiel. On the other hand, Israeli arms manufacturers have grown immensely since that time. Something interesting to read up on for me. Have a good weekend all.
I served in IDF armor so I can tell from more practical perspective: 1) What makes emission in thermals is exhaust system not the engine. In this regard Merkava is not different from T-90 which also has exhaust at side. 2) Merkava is deigned to fight the other tanks in hull down position. So there is no point to increase front hull armor against the APFSDS. Much better to save the weight for side, bottom and top protection. 3) L44 is more than enough against all Syrian and Egyptian tanks. Increasing barrel length will only decrease mobility and probability to hit on move. 4) Turret ammo or Merkava does have blow up panels. Hull ammo does not, but no other tank beside the Abrams have it. Merkava rounds are stored in containers in rear. Thus Merkava and Abrams are two best tanks in regards of ammo storage. 5) At 3:00 u can see that round penetrated the lower hull but did not ignite the fuel tanks. Beside their ignition does not endanger the crew at all.
@@komradearti9935 This chart makes very little sense. 1) Modern ATGM can easily penetrate front hull of Leopard 2 and T-90. 2) At steep angles hitting tank skirts ATGM will lose lots of penetration (Merkava has very thick skirts with explosive content).
@@komradearti9935 1. Because its not a big secret anymore. Around 700-600 mm protection. 2. Tiger tank or IS-3 had all around protection. And it was WW2 with conventional warfare and established frontlines. Today u can easily get round from any direction.
the merkava doesn't need to be protected from apfsds because it wasn't designed to fight modern mbts but old ones with weak shells and infantry with missiles/ its the best tank in the world because it fulfills its design purpose in the best way possible
I can also say the same about the Abrams. I don't think there is a definitive "best MBT" since each tank is built to fulfill the role it needs to. The merkava MK4 will perform extremely well against middle eastern enemies such as Hezbollah, Hamas or Iran that still use old soviet tanks (or M60 tanks in the case of Iran) but the moment it sees a modern MBT it won't perform as well (though probably still better than the god awful T-90)
Each respective military prepares for the most likely adversary Israeli forces will most likely face Syrian equipment. I'm guessing its airforce makes up the difference in its tanks weaknesses.
syrians changed their tank doctrine entirely, now it's not considered a tank but a unit that operates with infantry for tactical manoeuvres, in general, in modern day powerful and portable AT equipment, tanks are obselet
@@SS-ql5mugggggg not obselet at all, with active protection systems tanks can now be immune to atgms and dumbfire rockets , thus any real threats may be only airstrikes and other tanks
@@tomblou1033 you don't really need to destroy it, disable it and that's it. It can only be used effectively if entrenched deep and defended, a tank formation can be held and harrassed by inflicting damage to command tank, a sitting 🦆. Been there done that.
@@SS-ql5mugggggg been sitting in a command tank taking fire ? Or shoting at it ? Well at that nothing stops armies from just putting aps on command vhicles
@@tomblou1033 no I'm glad I wasn't in a tank. We halted a Turkish leopard platoon advancing to Efrin, Syria. We recked havoc on them with simple SPG9. They withdraw after few hours leaving one tank behind that they couldn't even drag
I feel you underestimate the principle of IDF: equipment can be replaced, crew can not. So if the fuel tank or engine is damaged but the crew can escape, that is a win. The steel thickness is also irrelevant nowadays. They have active protection systems and active armor when needed. The interesting question if the tower has any bullet traps.
I feel that there isn't a optimal principle for either - they cant manufacture equipment to satisfy hardware attrition, nor is the population large enough to bridge over substantial losses. If anything, I imagine their real policy is to get other western countries involved before either becomes a problem.
Another thing that wasn't considered was that by having variants of the same vehicle for different roles costs are greatly saved on maintenance and retraining, which has great long-term benefits
@@carrot92 It really shouldn't, flack jackets are meant to stop sharp objects - such as shrapnel - they're usually composed of several layers of pressed nylon or the like. Stab vests are often made of the same materials. Plus, flack jackets are usually pretty thick and having all of that extra material there is very effective for protecting against slashes and stabs with shorter weapons. A balistic vest wouldn't do much against a stab, this is true, but a flack jacket should. At least so far as I'm aware.
yes a flak jacket could stop some sharp objects, but just like plate armor of old it has its limitations. fun fact: when i was in the army and doing some inventory we found an unlabeled box of flak vests, they are quite heavy.
Nah the reason why the abrams still uses the l44 is because apperantly according to matsimus and some guy who imbestigates all kind of tank ammo, im not sure if it was his abrams or how tank armour works video, the depleted uranium rounds perform better in an l44 than in a l55 while giving the same penetration value as a tungsten round in an l55 gun. So a country which doesnt use depleted uranium, the l55 is better for anti tank purposes and for countries with depleted uranium rounds l44 is better.
The M1 was build for a 105mm gun. they had to change a lot just for the L44. It isn't like the Leopard 2 that was build with the 120mm L44 from the start.
No tank is perfect. Merkavah is a decent compromise for the conditions that Israel expects to face on the battlefield. M1 Abrams was designed with Europe in mind, and would not be optimal for Israeli terrain. Merkavah inherited design features from previous versions. There is no perfection in engineering, only trade-offs.
The US is not a defensive military unlike Russia and Israel, so the US doesnt throw its money at defensive/conventional weapons like tanks and SAMs. The US spends its money on evading, disrupting, and destroying these types of defensive weapons. If the US wanted to upgrade the Abrahams or the Patriot system, we would but there is no need . We have bases all over the globe surrounding all of our enemies and can project force on any continent. The best of the US weapons are still secrets and will only be used when necessary. Remember in the Iraq war and all of the talk Iraqi soldiers bodies that were being cooked by direct energy weapons?
If this tank wasn't from like the 70's/80's i'd say the creators saw the war thunder t-34 tactics of driving backwards because the engine stops enemy shells and protects the crew/ammo/vital parts and decided that it was a good idea to make something like that irl xd
The merkva has a back door the crew can use to get out of the tank if it gets hit from the front. It is another reason why the engine is in the front, I'm a merkva mechanic and know the tank pretty well.
@@llllavemder Whew. For a minute there I was tempted to ask what political party he supports. But with a sister like you I'm sure he'll be well guided when those times near.
Great vid! Merkava is far from the "best" mbt in the world. But I do believe it is the best for Israel and the IDF. Israel's enemies do not field advanced top of the line mbt's that can fire apfsds. Instead, it faces rpg's, atgms, heat rounds, and older apfsds rounds from older tanks. As you mentioned, it appears to be quite effective at stopping these rounds, so the merkava seems to be the best choice for the IDF. Great video, loved it!
You have to think about the design of merkava it doesn’t need to be able to go toe to toe with the most advanced modern mbts 95% of what the merkava is going against is old Soviet Cold War surplus tanks that are mostly outdated compared to the merkava
Merkava has paper-thin armor protecting its engine. Other tank doesn't use the engine to protect the crew, but they have much, much thicker front armor that protects everything.
The merkava isnt designed to fight other tanks, the paper thin engine armor is due to the engine's ability to absorb the heat jet from chemical warheads, the most common threat to a merkava
Hello,I wanna point out the flaws in the video, i come with no hate and just want to show some input to the conversation. i in no way claim the Merakava is perfect BTW. But in my opinion the video is full of misinformation. its a long comment though. so prepare yourself... 1. He presumes that the back compartment remains existing and empty,when the tank's space stayed just the same with the engine compartment in the front 2. There is no proof or info about the shells inside the tank as its secretive 3. There arent many notable cases of the merkava running out of ammo,so it clearly has enough shells 4. There arent any heat signatures in possesion of the enemy,the merkava has never fought an enemy with the these abilities,while maybe in a theoretical scenario it will matter, it dosnt. 5. The engine dosnt simply "serve as more armor". it is there to take damage instead of the crew inside. and of course if a shell penetrates the armor to hit the engine,it very well may have killed the men inside instead. this is not a video game and we care about people more than about the tanks. 6. Hollow charges are the thing that kills the crew usually,it protects the crew and blocks most explosive rounds 7. From me talking to merkava gunners,their optics and vision are fine and they dont tend to turn it away from the engine theres more 8. Now a note here,he consistently shows footage of the merkava 3 instead of 4 as an example, and also shows digital models as "proof" 9. Now he talks about the rare occasions of the fuel tank catching fire. this is correct actually,BUT the crew almost always survives unharmed because they are seperated from it,also almost always the tank is repairable. In addition,in the latest years the windbreaker was fitted on all tanks,which eliminates almost all "projectiles" of the type (RPG's ect) before they reach the target 10. the things he says about ammunition are simply misguided as only footage of merkava 2 and 3 are shown(maybe even 1,i couldnt recognize in one of the pics),and as i said there arent many legit inside pics of these compartments as israel keeps its shells pretty secret. 11. Now another note here,all of his "sources" are shady-ass Russian sites and not respectable sources. 12. He claims the merkava has 200mm of armor,but this is one of the most secretive parts about the tank,both the thickness and composition are unknown to the public and there aren't even non-official records,he simply farts the info out of his ass. you can go research yourself. its about as well known as how many nukes we have. we have nukes but its somewhere between 1 to infinity i remind you we have acces to abrams tech,there is no reason for our composition to be bad,but then again...secret 13.he mentions the sloped armor and it being bad for some reason,and then sais "it might be good against heat projectiles but there is not info about its effectiveness"... well...there is no info,as i said. he pulled info out of nowhere and then when presented with a positive claim he sais that there is no info. but the info works for both ways there isnt any info for it being bad either 14. Here i get him on the biggest mistake he made so far. he claims the merkava uses the Rheinmetall L44 tank gun.... but its not. israel produces its own "IMI 120 mm gun" for all of the merkavas to preserve production capability he dosnt even know which gun it actually has,so how is he claiming to know about its effectiveness. about the gun,its 120, smoothbore 5.3 meters long,so its pretty generic and similar to the abrams leopard ect. only produced by Israel so we can tinker with it 15. Now he talks about the trophy,it is good,yeah you can mount it on any tank. but the merkava and abrams are the only ones with it cause its israeli....you can mount the leopard cannon on any tank as well.... now i MAY be biased and may be wrong on some cases. i think that the most important correction to make is the cannon and armor ones,as it dosnt use L44 cannons and dosnt have 200mm per say. thanks for caring about thanks! love you all! now is the Merkava perfect? no. will it win an abrams on a 1v1? yes-no-maybe. depends on the crew probably. for its job,it will do better than any tank. it is built for the types of conflicts israel has to deal with,and israel does have acces to american and german equipment i remind you
1 question, in point 4 you said the enemys are not in posession of heat signature monitoring devices but i thought with infrared optics you can see heat signatures and israels enemy sure has some old t 55 or t 72 tanks wich have that equipment, but wow you sure did put some work in this comment, nice
@@teastroyer2812 yeah i wasnt reffering to t 72s. merkava's main goal was always to deal with insurgents fast. i was reffering to hamas,which has no tanks. now,that might be an issue against modern tanks. imo the merkava has some other benefits such as it being super easy to repair but yeah
6:20 yes you can mount trophy on any tank but you can mount anything on any tank. Trophy is mounted on all new mk4 tanks and it it's most affective way of protecting itself today. It's so affective actually that we consider putting lees armor on our future tanks and more trophy like active protection
There is 2 big drawbacks to these kinds of hard kill APS: collateral damage and an absolutely giant signature (can't remember if it was radio, radar or electronic).
@@RockSolitude most likely a radar signature. I wonder if attack helos can defeat the system by firing their guns to damage the electronics, clutter the radar... clearing the way for the ATGM.
2:20 I dont know why this myth is still being propagated. The engine has absolutely no effect on the gunners thermals this has even been confirmed by Merkava crewman. I am honestly beginning to think he just focuses on the bad aspects of other tanks to lift up his godly Soviet tanks.
@@ДушанЂуровић yes, he says a problem about them and immediately follows it up with "well that doesnt matter though because X is so good that it more than makes up for any flaw"
The faults of the Merkava seem to be a non issue considering it's opposition. The Merkava was designed to deal with insurgents as well as Isreal's incompetent neighbours and isn't likely to be confronted with things like Type 99, T-90M (I heard Iraq is getting or has these) or T-14.
Shawn Sable Doesn’t mean they won’t be a threat. Plus Egypt is getting the licence to produce T-90S. And Jordan has Challenger 1 tanks. Along with their stockpiles of older tanks.
baron poorly driven ones yes. Did you not see how poorly armored the large lower plate is? Vs a current gen T90 or even modernized T72s they WILL be penetrating and knocked out.....I understand you may like the tank, but it's got its weaknesses. Just like T series tanks have very poor side armor and ammo carousels that cook the crew. I love the machines but recognize the glaring weakness.
The armor isn't weaker. In fact it's superior to all counterparts. It has ERA integrated inside its armor, and its armor is made of modular, quickly swappable slabs.
the armor of the Markava IV is not weak. modern ATMs can penetrate the thickest armors you can imagine like butter, without an active protection system it does not matter how thick your armor is you will get popped..
“I have yet to see tanks going into battle backwords”
Archer: Am I a joke to you?
Yes.
What about the whippet as well
The Archer is a Tank destroyer, not a Tank.
Then what defines a tank all I see is tracks and armor
@@lolbosss What defines a tanks is mostly its designation, Archer was not designated as a Tank, therefore it isn't, simple yes?
2023 is a bad year for tanks, now The Merkeva has fallen victim.
The merkava It was not in use at the time it was blown up, a drone blew up the tank with a mortar bomb from above while it had 2 soldiers instead of 4..
and trophy system Didn't turnd on, because there was no warning of combat, it was a surprise attack.
@@AllMightBROShut up shekel licker
even with trophy on, it blown up@@AllMightBRO
trophy wasnt designed to destroy artillery shells or drone dropped munition, of which 90% tank casualties consist now@@AllMightBRO
Other Merkava facts:
It makes an absolutely terrible submarine
It also is awful at flying
It cannot be used as a flotation device in the event of a flood
It’s just abysmal as a formula 1 drag racer
It is completely inedible
It is incapable of using magic
It is not able to land on the Sun
The tank cannot produce milk in order to feed the crew
No matter how many times you ask ot, it will not turn into a cat girl.
These have been true facts about the Merkava tank
This comment is so underrated
I don't know about the F1 one, if you blow all your opposition out of the race, I think you'd win
@@acreepykiwi6788 He said F1, not Destruction Derby. ;)
U r g0od lvl idiot
Merkavas also have horrible taste in beachwear and rarely attend the Oscars.
A video surfaced 3 days ago shows Hamas dropped RPG from quadrocopter right in front of turret near the barrel, the tank burst into fire and followed by sparkling flame from turret.
Yes I saw it too
But according to the online military experts, isn't possible 😂
It was the electronics.
Video link? I kinda want to see and research this
Just watched it, your desciption is way off.
The fire seems to be limited, the tank is immobilized at most.
What I am sure is that the propagandists showing this video never show what happens next. The drone is still up and filming, yet theres no footage of tank crew fleeing or it blowing up.
I've seen russian tanks destroyed by drones and the damage in those videos looked way more dramatic.
There is no perfect tank, except for the Bob Semple
Ok CV-6 but how about Big Bob?
@Zayed Haroon they got plenty of T-90's
@Zayed Haroon how can you tell this? Did Russians tell you this? T-90's are some what as good as abrams. And when they could beat Pakistani pattons with ages old centurions they certainly can capitalise on shitty tanks made by DRDO. Anyhow arjun might seem like crap in first instance but i have my doubts. DRDO's staff directly taken from IIT's. They don't lack in skill but they do lack in fundings and corrupt hierarchy as an issue for them.
About the patton vs centurions. You can find out on your own if you google basantar, asal uttar, battle of longewal. They are skilled even if their tanks may not be good enough. And yeah the T-90's aren't toys.
@Zayed Haroon name of 2nd lieutenant Arun Kheterpal still haunts them :))
@@Vikram-jv9wp the abrams are over 40 years old in design. which means it took them this long to come up with an all rounder brawler
Everyone knows the truth: The Bob Semple Tank is the best tank of all time.
liar! everyone know that Tsar tank is the best.
Noo,, T34 is the best! It made by Stalinlium
The Killdozer is best tank. Also home made DIY project!
Of course it is, all hail Bob!
exactly
Almost every other tank uses the crew as an extra layer of armor for the engine.
Weird, but effective!
Monstertruck Other tanks have thicker front armor than the Merkava.
Vassilis Tzaferis, notice that the Merkava has an excellent hull down design.
Drew Sullivan • 12 years ago yes it is true. But going by Israel's tank battle successes, they did better when they were exposed and have travelled speedily to the location they want to have advantage. Which means there's no time to hull down.
Engines will do jack shit towards Apfsds.
Indeed the engine is no barrier to modern Sabot. At most another 10-20 mm of additional RHA. Very sad amount. Israel needs to work towards unmanned MBTs or 2 men tanks with no crew in turret ala T14 Armata style. The Merkava is heading towards obsolescence depending on whether her neighbors have advancement in MBT tech. If Turkey has the new Altay, I would recommend Israel to upgrade
just watched this again since this tank got knocked out by a drone that costs at least 10000 times less than it's price lol
And rpg-7 shell that is old af
even russian tank dont burn from grenades when hatch door is closed
@@Zx17OPv57i Yeah, also the Russians sometimes put a grille over the tank. Everyone in the west laughed at that.
those are almost all tanks. Most tanks are very lightly armored on the top. Meant to protect from shrapnel and not much else. A mortar round to the head will kill almost any tank from above if it lands in the right spot (in that case, directly onto where the breach was located under, thus detonating the shell)
@@gdtacos7082bro I have never seen a single tank detonate from a grenade that small
Even russian tanks take a couple even when the hatch is open
As a former merkava Commander I did not see any problem from the Gunnar having problems with thermal systems due to the engine being in front. Also the fuel compartment are not only in front and if I remember correctly you always can choose to seal off the front fuel from using.
Now I'm not saying it is a super tank. Every tank has it issues but I do think it is one of the best tanks for it area of use and the job it has to do.
A sense in this sea of salt and triggerd people, sir
@@wonkagaming8750 not sure what you mean by that but sure
@@cerbrus828 i meant the there is still someone that had coman sanse and open to problems instead of getting triggered and salty about set subject
@@wonkagaming8750 ah. sure dude. think about it i have first-hand experience with this machine. some things are good something are absolute shit. but that is with every machine ever build. thats why we always get better as a human race.....well most of the time
Key word area of use. That is what it is designed for and where it is outstanding. Also it currently isn't designed to face the most modern armor,and is more than sufficient to match and overcome any of it's neighbors and or peers
I was a tank gunner in the IDF when thr MK IV was just a prototype. I just want to address your claim that the engine being in front would hinder the use of the thermal targeting system during the night due to residual engine heat. This is not the case. We can see just fine ;)
Is most of the other info correct?
It can not be detected with thermal imaging because the unarmed Palestinians don't have those gadgets. btw Hezbollah has.
@@Korean_Crayon technically correct but he doesn't take in to account two things.
1) Israel's potential full on war enemies (Syria at the moment) don't have the top of the line modern tanks he is comparing it to.
2) The tactics Israel uses for tank warfare. The Merkava was specifically designed for those tactics.
@@benzwebner2515 Syria does have a small fleet of T-90 tanks but those are rather pre occupied right now..... Also I'd guess they recieved no more then 20 of them with a few being damaged in battle already.
I thought that statement sounded wrong. I was on an M1A1 in the Persian Gulf War, and I didn't recall any problems viewing things in the TIS whenever the turret was looking backward over the rear deck (where our engine sits).
Never expected a drone would destroy one of these tanks
I also never expected !!! That mean merkava is a 'fake tanks'😂
@@zamriisa8073by your logic that makes the T-90M, T-90A, T-80 and Challenger 2 fake tanks too
technically no tank can survive drone attack on top of the turret or the upper chassis
@@zamriisa8073 you sound dumb af lmao
You will now 🍉
The fact that a $7 million tank being obliterated by homemade rockets costs around $200 is crazy...🤣🤣
And yet israeli are still there 😑
@@Akiratoriyama27bro Just wait and see them resting in peace...🤣🤣
@@nabeelgulli388 you think so they been there for almost eternity 😑 hamas and IDF is same never ending conflict.,
@@Akiratoriyama27 It will end with World war 3...🤣
This misinformation is crazy...
They should ditch this flawed Merkava design & adopt the peak of engineering, battle-adapting intelligent Bob Semple design, easily the best tank design any country can hope for.
Loli4lyf, why not the bob Semple round.
I like the wheels.
Bob for president!
merkava has been ranked as the best in the world so
sainthood for bob
I do like all your Tank commentaries as it does point out all faults no matter who makes the vehicle keep up the good work
Based on game play, not operational or doctrinal requirements......
How about the t14 armata?
joema cano what about the T14 Armata all Tanks have flaws you just have to find it, or use a better penetrator.
+Phil. You like hes "All Russian tanks are better than you think and all Western ones are shit" commentaries and think they are unbiased. LoL
John Toas I assure you they aren’t. Defending from hostile surrounding middle easter nations and multiple terrorist organizations is indeed a good thing to do.
Very well made!! Good job man!!
Mat do you followed red videos?
wonka gaming
He probably does he is into tanks and red makes interesting videos about less known problems of some tanks called ”the best in the world”
Howdy Matsimus.
Hi Matt!
Very good until it met those Kornets😁😁😁
H@m@s:* hit engine*
isre@l: haha, you can't hit me, the engine protect me
H@m@s: but your engine is down now and on fire, where you can hide or go?
isre@li: well sh*t, i didn't think about this
well, atleast the crew is alive and its still able to shoot back
also, the fuel tank can be shot because its just an external one, the main fuel tanks are behind the engine on the floor if i remember correctly
other tanks also use external fuel tanks as protection
@@ThatRandomEstonian If combat footage from Gaza has anything to say, they won't be able to hit anything that's not an unarmed child or empty building
@@jeskler how tf do you know the buildings are empty?
@@ThatRandomEstonian true
It's necessary to take into account specifics of the enemy, Israel doesn't need a super-maneuverable tank with strong armor and powerful gun with mighty armor-piercing projectiles , they need multipurpose mobile firing point with protection against handheld anti-tank fighting systems , good long-range observation and detection systems , and long-range weapons with high-explosive and splinter parameters - and for these tasks merkava fit well .
This is very true, and I do agree with you. However, if Israel was to come into conflict for whatever reason with a country that does have capabilities to take out the Merkava effectively, then Israel would be screwed, this is why it is important to try and produce a tank that is a 'Jack of all trades', rather than relying on a vehicle that is only very effective at certain things.
Idk... what about the growing tensions with syria and its allies i really think a t90 or eve a t72 would put the merkava in a atrocious spot like a foreskin in the hands of a rabi
@@BigDCera 😂 yeah well that's the thing, but nowadays tank armour is almost irrelevant, majority of vehicles have the ability to fire projectiles that can penetrate armour way thicker then could possibly be put on a tank so the battles could more or less come down to other factors
@@ChewieeTheGuy
Well... Most current NATO tanks can't frontally penetrate each another with a center of mass hit so I don't know where do you get that idea from.
Well how does he knows the protection of the merkava? Its still classified
Well, the entire point of the frontal engine layout is that if the tank were hit and penetrated, it would most likely result in a mobility kill, meaning the crew can escape and the tank can be recovered at a later time. If your ammo blows up or you regularly lose crewmembers its much worse. Strategically speaking, it makes a lot of sense, especially if the engine and transmission units can be readily replaced in the field, like on the Leopard 2. In that case you would be able to maintain a high percentage of battle-ready tanks compared to, for example, russian tanks like the T-72 which are still prone to ammo hits, requiring less tank production as well as crew training to maintain a tank force.
As it was said in the video, engine is not able to stop most of the modern tank shells
yeah he was not saying it would just kill the engine what he means is that it would just negate the engine entirely and just fly through it APFSDS and HEAT of today do not care but as it is it does not really matter who ever shoots first will most likely get a chicken dinner
With a big hole in your frontal hull armor, there is no such thing as a quick engine swap to get it back into action.
@@Ganiscol …And my guess there will be more than a single hole in your tank given the force of impact of the round against the engine and the subsequent kinetic reactions occurring within the engine compartment.
Never mind any basically trained enemy tank crew will most likely throw follow-on rounds into your immobilized tank whenever possible until you’re good and toasty….
nowadays most hits will be from top, sides, and rear (drones, Kornet). but frontal protection is sine qua non. when Ka Vikhr hits u, should be able to take the impact.
One of the pictures of a destroyed "Merkava" isn't a Merkava. It's a Sabra upgrade kit on an old M60 Patton tank.
Wll G sabra uses the Same armor and gun of the merkava mk4
@@kemalsurmeli7722 thats not true but ok
@Pat Micucci HAHAHAHAHAHAH
@Pat Micucci dead
Lol
Despite its shortcomings I still think the Mk.4 looks pretty awesome.
Yah true
You got to remember the specific needs of the IDF.
This tank was designed to fight numerically superior Soviet tanks in defencive battles.
It's designed to fight from prepared ridge line fighting positions overlooking open plains.
@@CS-zn6pp Yes, it not unlike Sweden's Strv-103, specific for the country's needs.
It’s literally a challenger hull and leopard turret
This video is the proof to how easy it is today, with good video editing skills and convincing voice ,to generate an entire video full of misinformation driven by either total misunderstanding or intentional arrogance.
There are two tanks in this world which are the absolute BEST, first one is the American Abrams M1, second one is the Israeli Merkava Mark IV - forget all of the rubbish keyboard warriors and computer games experts tell you. after those two world-wide leaders, you can rank down the rest of the BTs... no means to disrespect it's just hard cold facts
As a former TC in a CFV with a forward mounted engine i can say it does NOT in any way hinder the thermal vision for the gunner or the TC!
Shut up liar
CV90?
Who cares
@@MrSmoke-gb7tzYes, the CV90A.
@@marcuslagergren5632 I am a cv9030 driver too in the swiss armed forces. I think the cv90 sounds much better than the leopard.
merkava was designed for counter insurgency, it's developpers concentrate their efforts to create armor wich resist against heat charges,such as rpg and atgm. the tank is not designed for symetric wars because it's not in nowadays israel doctrine to fight regular armies because all its neighbours fear a US intervention
That's complete bullshit! The Merkava was designed from the start to be a normal Main Battle Tank just like any other MBT for regular symetric warfare too. Keep in mind it was a big improvement from the Centurion and M60 tanks which were Israel's MBTs prior to 1980's.
The Merkava was supposed to have better protection than the Centurion and M60, which it did.
Israel also wanted to obtain the Chieftain MBT from the UK, but that request was declined.
So they had to come up with their own indigenous tank, which became the Merkava.
And even though it still didn't have as good protection as the other western MBTs like Abrams, Leopard or Challenger, it was still a big improvement from the earlier Centurion and M60.
But the Merkava was still meant to fight in symetric warfares, which it did in 1983 against Syrian, when it knocked out several Syrian T-62 tanks
Nicole easy peasy lemon squeezy
like LifeLongStrong mentioned, the earlier versions were designed for symetric wars, but the nowadays merkava (4&5) are designed for counter insurgency, the israeli battle doctrine changes since yom kippour(1973), they no need to engage a large scale war against its neighbours since usa offer a larger support than before.today the idf is more specialised in pacification and counter insurgency than fight regular armies. and the proof is all countries that have insurgency problems buy israeli weaons(philipines,india,turkey,saudis with the iron dom,...)
i don't say that idf isn't prepared against regular armies, but it can only gain time waiting the us intervention to save them. but in the geopolitical situation of israel today, there is no symetric threat despite iran wich is far from it borders and havn't an effecient airforce to bomb israel.
and idf could buy foreign mbt like M1A2 or the french leclerc in the case of symetric war
@@warmbreeze7996 merkava 4&5? I think you mean 3&4 but not 5
@Shawn Sable lebenon never had t-72,and in Yom kippour, the majority of idf tanks get destroyed by Egyptians maljutka,so by heat.israeli military had always focused it's efforts to offer a better protection against heat. Symetric wars are no longer their priorities for now
@@warmbreeze7996 You just answered your own comment idiot. There is currently no enemy that could threaten Israel in a symmetric war. But that doesn't mean the Merkava Mk.4 can not defeat modern tanks.
You have a lot of good points but contexts is key the merkava was designed with urban operations in mind so a lot emphasis was placed on protecting against HEAT over APFSDS. Keeping the L44 also makes sense in this regard as it's not as long so it won't get hung up on things as easily when traversing the turret. So it makes sense from Israel prospective, though not from a US or Russian stand point.
I was hoping someone would point that out. Most countries MBT are at a large disadvantage in fighting urban environment versus open terrain. Several vets have told me about how they have to protect MBT that are supporting the attack versus focusing on the task. Why else do countries build different vehicles for different jobs. Having a tank that can transport several troops combines 2 or 3 separate vehicles superpowers would use. Despite its drawbacks, the merkava is an excellent tank/apc that fits what Israel faces in almost every engagement. Itd be asinine to build a standard MBT when chances of that particular form of engagement is nill, unlike the superpowers.
@@Idontmatter1234 Eh, no, the troop transport capability is largely useless. If it wasn't, Israel wouldn't invest so much into proper city fighting APCs, the Namer and its predecessors, the Nagmachon and the Achzarit...
If you are so convinced Merkava was made for urban warfare tell me, why is it better at it than any other tank, and dont talk about Trophy, that is Active Protection System that can be mounted on any tank
@@RedEffectChannel More armour on the roof (Mark 4) to protect from top down attacks by RPG's on buildings. www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/MerkavaMk1.html (table at bottom of page)
this is the only source I could be bothered to google. It's a great tank for what it is designed for but would be below par in tank on tank against more modern tanks but better as an infantry support tank.
@@RedEffectChannel i don't think it is better than every other tank over all. but as far as operating in urban Terrain goes the merkava does have some advantages. The merkava has better all round armor protection against HEAT Munitions than most MBT, as they tend to have the cold war set up with most of their armor focused around the front arc and thin side armor. It also has a V-shaped belly armor pack to help protect against mines and IEDs. As i said your points are good and im just trying to give some context on why the may have designed it the way they did.
Every MBTs biggest fear is DJI Mavic 3 Pro
4brushless 1 lipo and an rpg7 with duck tape
How to defeat merkava
Solution: Use KV-2
The derp king
A fart from a Merkava VI engine exhaust will most likely smelt your lovely KV-2 , just sayin ;-)
Soyuz nerushimi
This video is perfectly timed for a war thunder event. Do you play war thunder?
I think he does
Fuck yeah I do
The real life Merkava does have its cons but in war thunder if you park it where it's armor can be affective you will be a bitch the kill.
i do, and i got merkava, and its not so fantastic to be honest. kinda suxx.
@@thespectator2976 it would be much better if it were in the British tech tree. Where it is now it almost always gets dragged in with the baby Abrams spam.
"Problems with Merkava tank"
Me an intellectual: *THE ENGINE*
I mean, I can carry people now
@@randomuser5443 ya meant, I can carry people.
Merkava MK IV M how things go in 2006?
@@fouadjaber4111 *went
And it was ok, I mean, yeah, some comrades were downed, but not that much...
Saving the crew is better than saving the tank.
The price of a Merkava tank is not comparable to the Hamas missile that destroyed the tank💥
A design so good that no-one else has bothered to copy it
But the Indians, Japanese, Chinese, Pakistani, all have copycats mbt of the Abraham
I don’t think these guys got your joke^
@@dantesixx1155 Wow your comment is so stupid. None of those coutnries copied the Abrams. Chinese tanks are mostly copied from Soviet/Russia, Pakistan tanks are from China (since arabs can't build their own tanks), the Indian Arjun tank is influenced by German Leopard 2A4 turret (but based on a Soviet T72 chassis), the Japanese Type 90 is also copy of Germany Leopard 2A4 and the new Type 10 is influenced by Leoaprd 2A6.
@Jose Raul Miguens Cruz
I'm not sure about the Armata. Its active protection covers 180 degrees at the front, while the Merkava-4 Trophy system covers the tank like a bubble - 360 degrees and whatever comes from the top. Besides that, the Trophy tells from where the threat originated and offers it as a target to be destroyed. As far as I know it's something the Armata would wish to have.
why should they copied it. it design only for israel.
Algorithm moment
The tank least likely to catch fire from being hit is the fish tank.
😂
*The most advanced tank in the world, it was easily destroyed by home-made weapons that Israel blockaded for years*
i have two questions for tanks experts:
1-if the engine get destroyed, could the turret still rotate?
2-could we jam aps radars?
Did you see when the engine on fire they need a bulldozer for push the cannon barrel, so the turret turn sideways
thank you
It should be able to turn unless the batteries run out power and the turret could also be manualy rotated.
Russia claims it could jam Trophy but no russian atg fired at Trophy was able to hit its targets. .. Lahat is claimed to be able to jam all russian active hard kill System. .. but so far no Lahat was fired at russian hard kill Systems to proof the claim... russian claim is proof to be a lie .... Israel claim is not proof in any real Action so far ... the german ads System is imun against Radar Jammer because it use a huge range of Sensors to detect and locate incomming threat not only a Radar. ..
@@fauzaanachmadillah4670 That's because the crew had already abandoned the tank
Amazing video!! Why wasn’t I notified RUclips!! 🤬🤬😡
Well done sir! Channel is doing great!!
Thanks a lot man 😀
@@RedEffectChannel your gay no one likes your videos
@@valentinapetrova9675 *you´re
@@valentinapetrova9675 my guy it's been 2 years
u kno nothing about warfare or weapons, just bedrooms youtubers who never never gonna be in a real situation or gonna understand filosofy behind designing a weapon
Fun fact: Arma 3's "Slammer" tank is based on this one
And the Varsuk is actually a Soviet union prototype.
I honestly wish the M2A1 Slammer was as OP as the Merkava 4 irl lol
Well it's a pretty futuristically looking tank so it does make sense.
How much sloped armour do you want
Merkava: Yes
give me so much sloped armor that the turrent becomes a shell trap....
@@SDeww not really. Its like a clam shell not a bird beak.
It's nickname was the Buttered Clam - fortunately only had Russian Marshmallows to deal with.
What I really like about your series of videos about the individual negative features of MBT’s of various nations around the world is that you are non-political and unbiased and, so far, haven’t presented any one particular MBT that did not have some flaws and shortcomings to it’s design and makeup; I don’t think we’ll ever find an MBT from you in this “problems” series that won’t have have some issues that could be addressed. There is no such thing as a perfect tank. Keep up the good honest work.
Every tank has issues. No one tank is perfect.
The thing is merkava has too many issues to be called "the best tank".
Except The Freebrams
I think you're forgetting the Bob Semple there mate
@@karmallarma5871 Do you mean the best tank in history that outclasses every modern mbt?
KV 2 is perfect tank
Al Yassin 105 say hello 🤗
Best tank in the world? Great coz "this best tank" got blown away just only by "old RPG made in Russian. 😂😂😂😂😂
The bottom line, The Merkeva has served Israel well in real war conditions, and the design would have been dropped if found to be impractical.
Hamas begs to differ, using russian anti tank weapons, they took out quite a few.
@@manofchaitea6904 on what are you talking about? lol a few? for as i know not even one so far the only one who did was Hezbollah and it was an old version
@@haimlamash6371 Hezbollah took out several in 2006, different models both current and older, and they proved to be easily destroyable with modern Russian weapons like the Rpg- 29, then again so are most tanks.
@Noam Sviri The new Merkava? yeah, I'm sure it has upgraded armor, the IDF have tons of combat experience to build a better tank.
The only viable weapons that may defeat new tanks would be the Kornet missile and maybe the RPG 30. The Merkava is an interesting design, and I like to watch as it is improved. All the best.
The design is obsolete compared to the Leopard 2 and the Abrams but it does It's job
Merkava one of the best tanks in the world. (Well, look at the current events how it performs)
Enough said.
finaly someone clearing the myth´s of this tank.
there is a reason why most nations dont put the engine ine the front of their MBT´s. modern composite armor needs quite some space and a front engine limits the frontarmor design alot.
Israeli tanker are trained to fight in a hull down position whenever possible. In case of war, they also have prepared positions set up. People forget that unlike the Abrams, Merkava is designed for defense with short supply lines.
@@yonghominale8884 blah blah blah. You can't just sit in that hull down position all the time. And once you go to counterattack your supah-stronk-hull-down-tenk will suck miserably.
@@yonghominale8884
The Challenger series was also designed like that, and the lower front plate was summarily neglected in a similar fashion. Fast forward to LIC in the Middle East and a couple of IEDs and ATGMs later, the British Army changed their tune.
The only reason that the Israeli armed forces haven't lost more tanks is that they are led by competent commanders that are cognizant of the Merkava's strengths and weaknesses. But that does not excuse a pretty elementary design flaw.
What myths are you talking about? The engine of this tank never was a myth to begin with.
Keep in mind the Merkava was meant to offer better protection thant the Centurion and M60 tanks, which were ISrael's Main Battle Tanks until replaced by the Merkava in the 1980.
So yes, the engine in the front definitely proved much better protection than compared to the Centurion and M60 that Israel used before. Of course it still wasn't as good as the other Western MBT's like Abrams, Leopard 2 and Challenger. But Israel was't as rich as those other countries, so it did the best with what it had avaibale. Most middle eastern countries still don't even have their own indigenous tanks even to this day.
@@xAlexTobiasxB iam talking about the myth that the merkava tank is the best protected tank in the world. peroid.
for israel the merkava is fine, because their potential enemies dont have modern tanks.
but against other modern MBT´s, the merkava would not perform well.
I'm a merkava mechanic and I can tell you that there is no fuel tank in the front only at the back of the tank.
There is no problem with the thermal vision due to the engine being in the front.
This guy is a joke, he got his sources from a Russian website according to other comments.
Nothing but a war thunder nerd
@@PsYDaniel so everything related to russia is propaganda and lies? Got it
Putting this out there:
No damn tank is perfect. Not the Merkava, not the Abrams, not the T-90, not the Type 90 or the Leclerc.
Every one of those is an unstoppable war machine in one situation, and a lumbering hunk of metal in another.
It's the crew that matters
Yeah. Plus we're getting into the same problem of the early cold war. You have a Heavy tank (let's say, IS-3), the enemy has HEAT rounds that can just go right through. Any armor designed to stop more than an autocannon is pointless weight. Then we got tanks like the Leopard I which didn't have heavy armor, and could be faster than a Heavy tank. Then we figured out how to deal with HEAT, with composites.
Our modern day HEAT/Heavy Tank situation is APFSDS vs Armor that just can't be thick enough. You could make armor that will stop APFSDS, but it can't be a composite that resists HEAT, and vice versa. Armor is becoming rather useless again.
Could a composite that can stop APFSDS plus an active proctection system be the ultimate solution?
Engine in the front would improve the survival of the crew more than the tank itself. The weakness is also mitigated if fighting from behind a sand dune and using gun depression. And quite often they're not taking into account the high end weapons that exist, but rather the cheaper vehicles used by their neighbors that they have to fight all too often. Consider that Israel is also known to have successfully used Centurions and upgraded Shermans about 20 years after World War 2. If it's a small country you need to train crews well, and having a tank where crew survival is often more important than tank survival it comes down to being able to sacrifice vehicles more than people.
pretty sure apfsds will spall even more with the engine there and so kill more crew members
Yeah your wrong, the engine would just send much more shrapnel towards the crew.
@@rhodanjones5155 And that is by what logic?
These kids play too much war thunder lol, "engine in front bad it get disable easy"
The tank itself is not being protected here, its protection for the crew, a round isnt gonna go straight through the engine like that and spall either, since its already going to have to go through the Merkavas armor, and then a massive Diesiel engine and then another armor plate to get to the crew.
Are we forgetting Israel is mostly fighting T-55's, 62's, and 72's btw? These tanks are incredibly dated, and most likely not using top of the line munitions.
That wouldn't become a problem unless they're battling shit like the Abrams, Leopards and T-90's. You guys need to realise this tank was built and tailored to their situation, not your own little "oh what if" stuff.
Engine is in front b/c there is a door in the back. Every IFV has front engine and so does Merkava. It has little to do with protecting a crew - it feels such statement is made mostly by marketing arm. Maybe against HEAT but not AP rounds. Engine blocks are routinely shot and disabled by anti material rifles and many modern power packs use a lot of aluminium. There is very little armor value in there. Hiding behind sand bar is not a good idea as well as few meters of sand do not add too much protection - you want to hide in a hole in the ground not behind some obstacle as if the enemy sees your massive heat from the engine they simply shoot through sand, through weak frontal armor into your crew.
I do have to admit, the Merkava looks cool! Like rockets with a pointy tip and not a round tip!
Round tips aren’t scary, pointy tip is scary!
lmao. Yes Dictator. like the one in the cartoon right, with the bird and the coyote....😂😂😂
I like how some people in arma 3 seem to hate this (technically) because it looks "futuristic-ish" for their taste.
Meanwhile, the real-life counterpart:
I hate it cause it’s the worst tank in arma3
@@dondelchulia3189 Really? I almost feel like it's OP because of how the reactive armor works. In ARMA it can soak up ATGMs and even tank rounds like no other tank in the game.
The best tank is the Kuma-52, unparalleled accuracy and mobility. The T-100 is pretty garbage, and the Slammer is pretty damn close. The T-120 is…it exists? It’s cool but, idk. Thing kinda is too slow, and too big. The Kuma-52 also has less reactive armor but better composite armor. Also the Slammer has the nasty habit of being easily disabled due to the engine being in the front. ArmA 3 players don’t hate the Slammer because it’s futuristic, we hate the slammer because why tf is the US military using a Merkerva and not a Abrams? But I agree, the Slammer has the best ERA in the game but that comes with some heavy trade offs, like the engine being much easier to disable, it being much slower then the T-100 or Kuma-52, and having a larger profile then either of them. I have about 400 hours with the Slammer and about 1000 with the K-52. I’d agree it’s got the best ERA but its composite armor is lacking and its engine is a massive weak point. A lot of the times with hull hits that pen my Kumas I’m able to at least retreat, a lot of the times my Slammers just get disabled. I’d rather retreat to cover before bailing. Also, remember guys don’t forget to pack your tanks with spare medkits ammo and weapons. Happy hunting, get them CSAT bastards boys
You have to be circumcised to drive it?i thought that might be the answer to "the problem with the merkava tank" if I'm going down fighting in a tank I'm sure as hell making sure I've still got my helmet on if you know what I mean
Chally Ho real talk, I don’t have my helmet on if you know what I mean and it makes me sad my parents took my helmet off
A dirty old man slices your helment off when you're a baby and gives you your first BJ!! Now isn't that just charming indeed! 😵 I never complained about my Catholic upbringing again after I'd heard all that!!😬😟
I just learned that this $5 million tank can be destroyed by a $300 drone loaded with a mortar round.
Thats not new. Hamas and hezbollah did the same during the Israel-Lebanon war of 2006. Same tank, same weaknesses
They originally were designed to combat rock throwers
This is a very detailed video, Thank You very much for sharing.
The Merkava was designed to fight outdated soviet armor, like t55, t62, t64 and maybe t72s The latter was even the most advanced vehicle in the Soviet arsenal when the Merkava began its development and the Merkava was designed with crew protection in mind.
It was designed to fight stone throwers.
The merkava was more designed to fight urban battles against heat warheads such as rpg's and atgms, its not designed for tank on tank warfare because israel isnt expecting to fight against a near peer armored force, its not the best tank in the world but its the best tank for israel
Greetings from Israel :)
Good video, and pretty accurate.
here's my rant for for the ranters.
A few things to take into consideration about the Role of the Merkava and how this affected it's armor design:
The Merkava mark IV (מרכבה סימן 4), mainly faces Infantry armed with RPG's and Surface to Surface missiles, In Mountainous and Urban environments, fighting in guerrilla warfare.
The surrounding armies around Israel mainly have tanks like T-72 variants or BMP variants, which the armor on the Merkava IV is more than capable of handling, and the gun can easily penetrate their armor.
The Merkava is designed to protect surrounding soldiers, and insure crew survivability, But is also designed to be very maneuverable and use the terrain for it's advantage.
The most important thing in a Tank is the training of the crew, and how effective the Crew is in utilizing the tank in combat.
IDF (צה"ל) crew training is why the Merkava tanks are considered legendary in their crew survivability.
In the end, A tank's armor is important, but only as long as the crew survives.
Here's the truth about the Merkava IV:
-If you take any modern Tank 1VS1 against the Merkava IV in open ground, The Merkava is probably Screwed.
Most modern tanks have a longer Effective engagement range than the Merkava IV.
-If it's 1VS1 Urban fight, or a battlefield with hills where the Merkava IV can use the terrain and it's mobility, i'd put my money on the Merkava IV....
the thing shifts like a damn mountain goat!
sorry for the long rant...
Happy Easter or Passover :)
or whatever holiday your celebrating.
.חג שמח
Btw...thanks a lot for this channel... now we know more weak spot of Merkava...
FALASTIN ❤ UZBEKISTAN
YAMAN ❤ UZBEKISTAN
🇺🇿🇺🇿🇺🇿🌙🇺🇿🇺🇿🇺🇿🇺🇿☝️🇺🇿🇺🇿🇺🇿🇺🇿
“mERkaVa iS dA bEst tAnk”
honest hamas, hezbolla reaction: *Watch my RPG-7 go bang*
It's retarded how people "rate" and "compare" tanks that were built for entirely different countries with entirely different priorities and entirely different theatres of war.
Merkava Mk4 does a fine job for the needs of Israel.
exactly! they need tanks just to broke down houses of civilians or fight against unarrmed people...
the engine protects against rocks thrown by Palestinian children
Commander in thumbnail:
*THE ENEMY IS UNDER US!*
Driver:
*Hold my beer*
“i have yet to see a tank going into battle backwards!”
Archer TD: Uhm excuse me wtf!
The Archer barely moves to begin with
@flip inheck lol
I honestly really like the front engine layout of the Merkava. The back door and its ability to be a qausi troop carrier is a pretty unique design.
Same , aside from increase of noise level for the crew and A FREAKING FUEL TANK AT THE FRONT , its a quiet unique design, especially if u wanna have space on the back
@@Wolfy848 Yer that fuel tank placement is pretty insane. You would be hard pressed to place it in a worse spot.
@@Magiktcup well yeah , its a huge down side for the tank since wen shoot , it demoralized it along with the engine
How ever ut makes sense tho
Remember , the merkava tank is all about crew protection (RIP driver)
If they placed it behind engine , sure the engine would protect it but then it will be exposed in the side which is the weakest part of the tank
If that explodes then the crew in the turrent and driver will both probably die in the process
There is a reason why APCs/IFVs are seperate from Main Battle Tanks in every army in the world.
Best tank in the world ? just a lame propaganda, blown off by cheap home made RPG
This tank was designed to kill unarmed civilians, not other tanks
Merkava is not a Great tank
This tank was a target practice in 2006 war , many merkavas were destroyed , I went to see them in a tank graveyard museum like place in south Lebanon , this tank is a meme in Lebanon lol
Now they equipped them with "Windbreaker" Which is a Anti AT System. It shoots down AT Rockets fired at the tank.
@@אוריה-ז7ע yes but the problem is that it's not efficient enough 15/ 20 % chance of success , before that they add high frequency laser ,but turned out it's not good too , the Russians knows exactly what they are doing.
@@chotob8458 They're developing a new modern series of Merkava tanks.
Merkava 4 "Barak" Which is equipped with the most advanced Anti AT System . It's accurate and was developed by "Rafael"
The Tank Is expected to start it's service 2021
@@chotob8458 Every tank has problems but the Merkava is proven to be one of the finest tanks. This Russian guy clearly is mad or against Israel. He could've talked about the trashy Russian Anti Aircraft systems whose proven useless against IAF's planes in Syria . But he didn't.
@@אוריה-ז7ע only one way to find out who got the better equipments I guess under the pressure of a certain war
Some of the design philosophy of the Merkava was crew protection over tank protection and who their opponents were going to be. In a small country like Israel it is easier to replace a damage tank than to replace the crew. And for a small country to home design and build a world class tank that actually works is no small feat in itself. In the end does the Merkava help Israel win its wars with those who are trying to destroy Israel.
Well, another invincible piece of hardware...
Still better than t90.
The way the turret declines into the top of the vehicle it seems like it will direct incoming projectiles towards the turret ring which is probably a big weakness.
yes but it is a necessary sacrifice for the main type of tactics israel uses
So I might mention, and I’m a year behind, but there’s a couple reasons why the USA sticks to the L/44. DU rounds, like the ones the USA uses and prefers, can’t really go much faster without either losing penetration ability at worst and seeing almost no meaningful gain at best. The USA also prefers the shorter cannon because it has a long barrel life because it doesn’t bend as much as the 55, which also contributes to barrel life. Those are a couple reasons we’ve stuck with the L/44, but for tungsten rounds, the L/55 is certainly better.
Wait tanks still use tungsten I thought they switched to DU cause it’s better in every way
@@little_weed192 At higher velocities (above 1800m/s) tungsten rounds do slightly better than DU (I don't know the specifics of the metallurgy). Those velocities are difficult to achieve and the higher energies needed to reach those velocities cause increased system wear, so the US has stuck with DU because it does perform better at velocities modern tanks typically sling rounds at (1300-1700 m/s). Most other countries stick with tungsten rounds because it is cheaper and easier to acquire and does not require buying from the few countries capable of supplying DU or having their own nuclear program. DU actually stands out because it's used primarily by the US.
Interesting, the engine is something that always bugged me as well. About the L44 gun, can it be that they rather have a shorter gun as they're more likely to operate in cities? After all, the Merk isn't being exported and if Israel suddenly needs extra penn then they can easily press number 2 by having the US fly in some M829A* rounds, which I bet are compatible. (Are they?)
Exhar Khun my guess is that Israel hasn’t upgraded the gun because extra penetration with standard rounds isn’t a problems since Israel is not getting into combat with other tanks and is more concerned with infantry and argon/hollow charges. There is the possible Syrian or Iranian tank encounter but those tanks aren’t on the same level, protection or gun. The engine possibly interfering with thermals is also interesting but I thought the exhausts at the sides would divert most of the heat.
I don't think they are, seeing as the Leopards gun is FAR closer to the M1's and they can't share ammo without issues, I highly doubt the Merkava's shorter calibre gun can fire them without serious safety issues or mechanical issues. Red touches up on the "Hurr durr M1 uses the Leopard 2 gun" myth and points out the ammo isn't compatible.
@@dankoz6340 oh, sorry, what Syrians do you mean? there are 4 factions, one of which is equipped with Russian t 72s and
t 90s (by factions I mean, lie 4 different groups that are fighting each other.)
@@_geck I'm guessing he's refering to the pro-Iranian legitimate government. Do Kurds even have any modern tanks besides T-90s?
Thanks for the answer, friends. A bit unexpected to me. I'm fairly well read on older tanks and given Israel's experience in the Yom Kippur war (where the US flew in actual US Army/Airforce inventory to replace Israeli losses) I've considered it kind of obvious that Israel would strive for interchangeability with US materiel. On the other hand, Israeli arms manufacturers have grown immensely since that time. Something interesting to read up on for me. Have a good weekend all.
The problem of this tank is called: Palestinians. Impossible to fix.
I served in IDF armor so I can tell from more practical perspective:
1) What makes emission in thermals is exhaust system not the engine. In this regard Merkava is not different from T-90 which also has exhaust at side.
2) Merkava is deigned to fight the other tanks in hull down position. So there is no point to increase front hull armor against the APFSDS. Much better to save the weight for side, bottom and top protection.
3) L44 is more than enough against all Syrian and Egyptian tanks. Increasing barrel length will only decrease mobility and probability to hit on move.
4) Turret ammo or Merkava does have blow up panels. Hull ammo does not, but no other tank beside the Abrams have it. Merkava rounds are stored in containers in rear. Thus Merkava and Abrams are two best tanks in regards of ammo storage.
5) At 3:00 u can see that round penetrated the lower hull but did not ignite the fuel tanks. Beside their ignition does not endanger the crew at all.
Good points. Couch expert vs real experience.
@@komradearti9935 This chart makes very little sense.
1) Modern ATGM can easily penetrate front hull of Leopard 2 and T-90.
2) At steep angles hitting tank skirts ATGM will lose lots of penetration (Merkava has very thick skirts with explosive content).
@@komradearti9935 1. Because its not a big secret anymore. Around 700-600 mm protection.
2. Tiger tank or IS-3 had all around protection. And it was WW2 with conventional warfare and established frontlines. Today u can easily get round from any direction.
the merkava doesn't need to be protected from apfsds because it wasn't designed to fight modern mbts but old ones with weak shells and infantry with missiles/ its the best tank in the world because it fulfills its design purpose in the best way possible
I can also say the same about the Abrams. I don't think there is a definitive "best MBT" since each tank is built to fulfill the role it needs to. The merkava MK4 will perform extremely well against middle eastern enemies such as Hezbollah, Hamas or Iran that still use old soviet tanks (or M60 tanks in the case of Iran) but the moment it sees a modern MBT it won't perform as well (though probably still better than the god awful T-90)
HOW DID YOU PREDICT THE FUTURE?!
No idea why anyone would ever think this was the best tank in the world. It is very good but the best? Questionable.
Each respective military prepares for the most likely adversary Israeli forces will most likely face Syrian equipment. I'm guessing its airforce makes up the difference in its tanks weaknesses.
syrians changed their tank doctrine entirely, now it's not considered a tank but a unit that operates with infantry for tactical manoeuvres, in general, in modern day powerful and portable AT equipment, tanks are obselet
@@SS-ql5mugggggg not obselet at all, with active protection systems tanks can now be immune to atgms and dumbfire rockets , thus any real threats may be only airstrikes and other tanks
@@tomblou1033 you don't really need to destroy it, disable it and that's it. It can only be used effectively if entrenched deep and defended, a tank formation can be held and harrassed by inflicting damage to command tank, a sitting 🦆. Been there done that.
@@SS-ql5mugggggg been sitting in a command tank taking fire ? Or shoting at it ?
Well at that nothing stops armies from just putting aps on command vhicles
@@tomblou1033 no I'm glad I wasn't in a tank. We halted a Turkish leopard platoon advancing to Efrin, Syria. We recked havoc on them with simple SPG9. They withdraw after few hours leaving one tank behind that they couldn't even drag
"We know every tank weak spot is in the back"
**shot RPG to the back**
"Well that must burning right now but why?"
If you shoot Merkava in the ass-hatch with RPG-7 - it goes right in to the loader compartment with all of the ammo.
@@LordAlacorn And that means 2 things
OMEGA KAABOOMM
Or a burn out and burning the crew alive
I feel you underestimate the principle of IDF: equipment can be replaced, crew can not. So if the fuel tank or engine is damaged but the crew can escape, that is a win. The steel thickness is also irrelevant nowadays. They have active protection systems and active armor when needed. The interesting question if the tower has any bullet traps.
I feel that there isn't a optimal principle for either - they cant manufacture equipment to satisfy hardware attrition, nor is the population large enough to bridge over substantial losses. If anything, I imagine their real policy is to get other western countries involved before either becomes a problem.
Another thing that wasn't considered was that by having variants of the same vehicle for different roles costs are greatly saved on maintenance and retraining, which has great long-term benefits
This is a tank that lost a war against a concentration camp.. in my opinion useless junk
So basically ...
Merkava: Bringing a flak jacket to a a knife fight?
Given that flack jackets are meant to stop sharp projectiles, that's a pretty good idea.
fair enough @@komradearti9935
The Crimson Fucker a knife will go through a flak jacket
@@carrot92
It really shouldn't, flack jackets are meant to stop sharp objects - such as shrapnel - they're usually composed of several layers of pressed nylon or the like.
Stab vests are often made of the same materials.
Plus, flack jackets are usually pretty thick and having all of that extra material there is very effective for protecting against slashes and stabs with shorter weapons.
A balistic vest wouldn't do much against a stab, this is true, but a flack jacket should. At least so far as I'm aware.
yes a flak jacket could stop some sharp objects, but just like plate armor of old it has its limitations.
fun fact: when i was in the army and doing some inventory we found an unlabeled box of flak vests, they are quite heavy.
The M1 was tested with the L/55 gun in which everything thing fitted perfectly, but the stabilization would cut out after reaching 10 - 15 MPH
m1? abrams? l/55 rhm? wh the stabilization cut out? i mean..in leopard 2 the l/55 works perfect.
Nah the reason why the abrams still uses the l44 is because apperantly according to matsimus and some guy who imbestigates all kind of tank ammo, im not sure if it was his abrams or how tank armour works video, the depleted uranium rounds perform better in an l44 than in a l55 while giving the same penetration value as a tungsten round in an l55 gun. So a country which doesnt use depleted uranium, the l55 is better for anti tank purposes and for countries with depleted uranium rounds l44 is better.
The M1 was build for a 105mm gun. they had to change a lot just for the L44. It isn't like the Leopard 2 that was build with the 120mm L44 from the start.
@@23GreyFox l44 just refers to the length of the gun
@@a.t6066 I know that.
No tank is perfect. Merkavah is a decent compromise for the conditions that Israel expects to face on the battlefield. M1 Abrams was designed with Europe in mind, and would not be optimal for Israeli terrain. Merkavah inherited design features from previous versions. There is no perfection in engineering, only trade-offs.
Precisely.
The US is not a defensive military unlike Russia and Israel, so the US doesnt throw its money at defensive/conventional weapons like tanks and SAMs. The US spends its money on evading, disrupting, and destroying these types of defensive weapons. If the US wanted to upgrade the Abrahams or the Patriot system, we would but there is no need . We have bases all over the globe surrounding all of our enemies and can project force on any continent. The best of the US weapons are still secrets and will only be used when necessary. Remember in the Iraq war and all of the talk Iraqi soldiers bodies that were being cooked by direct energy weapons?
If this tank wasn't from like the 70's/80's i'd say the creators saw the war thunder t-34 tactics of driving backwards because the engine stops enemy shells and protects the crew/ammo/vital parts and decided that it was a good idea to make something like that irl xd
The merkva has a back door the crew can use to get out of the tank if it gets hit from the front. It is another reason why the engine is in the front, I'm a merkva mechanic and know the tank pretty well.
Not to say you are wrong but that is an is2 tactic
My brother loves tanks, I don't know why. But he keeps on yelling at me every time he sees it.
I'd be yelling too if a tank is charging at me and my infantry buddies.
So you know what not to get him for his birthday. Especially one with weapons intact.
@@rondohunter8966 He has toy tanks. ;)
Your bro don´t know why you yelling all the time you see a damn horse...
@@llllavemder Whew. For a minute there I was tempted to ask what political party he supports. But with a sister like you I'm sure he'll be well guided when those times near.
Great vid! Merkava is far from the "best" mbt in the world. But I do believe it is the best for Israel and the IDF. Israel's enemies do not field advanced top of the line mbt's that can fire apfsds. Instead, it faces rpg's, atgms, heat rounds, and older apfsds rounds from older tanks. As you mentioned, it appears to be quite effective at stopping these rounds, so the merkava seems to be the best choice for the IDF. Great video, loved it!
Great true ....!!!!!
Uhhh, I don’t know right now….
Lol yeah right...
apparently hamas is having field day with the merkavas
Nah...this comments didn't age well
You have to think about the design of merkava it doesn’t need to be able to go toe to toe with the most advanced modern mbts 95% of what the merkava is going against is old Soviet Cold War surplus tanks that are mostly outdated compared to the merkava
Merkava has paper-thin armor protecting its engine. Other tank doesn't use the engine to protect the crew, but they have much, much thicker front armor that protects everything.
The merkava isnt designed to fight other tanks, the paper thin engine armor is due to the engine's ability to absorb the heat jet from chemical warheads, the most common threat to a merkava
Hello,I wanna point out the flaws in the video, i come with no hate and just want to show some input to the conversation. i in no way claim the Merakava is perfect BTW.
But in my opinion the video is full of misinformation. its a long comment though. so prepare yourself...
1.
He presumes that the back compartment remains existing and empty,when the tank's space stayed just the same with the engine compartment in the front
2.
There is no proof or info about the shells inside the tank as its secretive
3.
There arent many notable cases of the merkava running out of ammo,so it clearly has enough shells
4.
There arent any heat signatures in possesion of the enemy,the merkava has never fought an enemy with the these abilities,while maybe in a theoretical scenario it will matter, it dosnt.
5.
The engine dosnt simply "serve as more armor". it is there to take damage instead of the crew inside. and of course if a shell penetrates the armor to hit the engine,it very well may have killed the men inside instead. this is not a video game and we care about people more than about the tanks.
6.
Hollow charges are the thing that kills the crew usually,it protects the crew and blocks most explosive rounds
7.
From me talking to merkava gunners,their optics and vision are fine and they dont tend to turn it away from the engine
theres more
8.
Now a note here,he consistently shows footage of the merkava 3 instead of 4 as an example, and also shows digital models as "proof"
9.
Now he talks about the rare occasions of the fuel tank catching fire. this is correct actually,BUT the crew almost always survives unharmed because they are seperated from it,also almost always the tank is repairable. In addition,in the latest years the windbreaker was fitted on all tanks,which eliminates almost all "projectiles" of the type (RPG's ect) before they reach the target
10.
the things he says about ammunition are simply misguided as only footage of merkava 2 and 3 are shown(maybe even 1,i couldnt recognize in one of the pics),and as i said there arent many legit inside pics of these compartments as israel keeps its shells pretty secret.
11.
Now another note here,all of his "sources" are shady-ass Russian sites and not respectable sources.
12.
He claims the merkava has 200mm of armor,but this is one of the most secretive parts about the tank,both the thickness and composition are unknown to the public and there aren't even non-official records,he simply farts the info out of his ass. you can go research yourself. its about as well known as how many nukes we have. we have nukes but its somewhere between 1 to infinity
i remind you we have acces to abrams tech,there is no reason for our composition to be bad,but then again...secret
13.he mentions the sloped armor and it being bad for some reason,and then sais "it might be good against heat projectiles but there is not info about its effectiveness"... well...there is no info,as i said. he pulled info out of nowhere and then when presented with a positive claim he sais that there is no info. but the info works for both ways there isnt any info for it being bad either
14.
Here i get him on the biggest mistake he made so far. he claims the merkava uses the Rheinmetall L44 tank gun.... but its not. israel produces its own "IMI 120 mm gun" for all of the merkavas to preserve production capability
he dosnt even know which gun it actually has,so how is he claiming to know about its effectiveness.
about the gun,its 120, smoothbore 5.3 meters long,so its pretty generic and similar to the abrams leopard ect. only produced by Israel so we can tinker with it
15. Now he talks about the trophy,it is good,yeah you can mount it on any tank. but the merkava and abrams are the only ones with it cause its israeli....you can mount the leopard cannon on any tank as well....
now i MAY be biased and may be wrong on some cases. i think that the most important correction to make is the cannon and armor ones,as it dosnt use L44 cannons and dosnt have 200mm per say.
thanks for caring about thanks! love you all!
now is the Merkava perfect? no. will it win an abrams on a 1v1? yes-no-maybe. depends on the crew probably.
for its job,it will do better than any tank. it is built for the types of conflicts israel has to deal with,and israel does have acces to american and german equipment i remind you
1 question, in point 4 you said the enemys are not in posession of heat signature monitoring devices but i thought with infrared optics you can see heat signatures and israels enemy sure has some old t 55 or t 72 tanks wich have that equipment, but wow you sure did put some work in this comment, nice
@@teastroyer2812 yeah i wasnt reffering to t 72s.
merkava's main goal was always to deal with insurgents fast. i was reffering to hamas,which has no tanks.
now,that might be an issue against modern tanks. imo the merkava has some other benefits such as it being super easy to repair but yeah
Drion yeah, just ignore Egypt then with its Abrams tanks.
6:20 yes you can mount trophy on any tank but you can mount anything on any tank. Trophy is mounted on all new mk4 tanks and it it's most affective way of protecting itself today. It's so affective actually that we consider putting lees armor on our future tanks and more trophy like active protection
There is 2 big drawbacks to these kinds of hard kill APS: collateral damage and an absolutely giant signature (can't remember if it was radio, radar or electronic).
@@RockSolitude most likely a radar signature. I wonder if attack helos can defeat the system by firing their guns to damage the electronics, clutter the radar... clearing the way for the ATGM.
Then good luck with the APFSDS
@@UserJoy24 Iron fist (elbit's APS system) can, and was tested for countering APFSDS
it fits Israel's needs. After all, you don't need too much protection against unarmed Palestinian civilians.
You are deceived by the sophistication of the Merkava tank. Tanks that are said to be the most advanced can actually be destroyed with cheap rockets
The more people believe Israel's Merkava is problematik, badly designed and weak, the better it is for Israel. Please continue.
1:55 You clearly haven't seen an IS-2 in War Thunder
It doesn’t matter how good a tank is on paper, rather how good it’s crew is in combat.
1:53 *17pdr Archer would like to have a word*
And strv 103
2:20 I dont know why this myth is still being propagated. The engine has absolutely no effect on the gunners thermals this has even been confirmed by Merkava crewman. I am honestly beginning to think he just focuses on the bad aspects of other tanks to lift up his godly Soviet tanks.
what? he made videos about problems on russian tanks too
@@ДушанЂуровић yes, he says a problem about them and immediately follows it up with "well that doesnt matter though because X is so good that it more than makes up for any flaw"
The faults of the Merkava seem to be a non issue considering it's opposition. The Merkava was designed to deal with insurgents as well as Isreal's incompetent neighbours and isn't likely to be confronted with things like Type 99, T-90M (I heard Iraq is getting or has these) or T-14.
Yeah I hate to say it but T90s would probably eat these. And I dont even know if modern 120mm NATO apfsds rounds can frontally deal with T90s.
Egypt has an army of M1A1 tanks.
I imagine the latest M829/DM63?? APFSDS should be sufficient against the majority of armour threats.
Egypt having M1s surprises me.
Shawn Sable Doesn’t mean they won’t be a threat. Plus Egypt is getting the licence to produce T-90S. And Jordan has Challenger 1 tanks. Along with their stockpiles of older tanks.
baron poorly driven ones yes. Did you not see how poorly armored the large lower plate is? Vs a current gen T90 or even modernized T72s they WILL be penetrating and knocked out.....I understand you may like the tank, but it's got its weaknesses. Just like T series tanks have very poor side armor and ammo carousels that cook the crew. I love the machines but recognize the glaring weakness.
The weaker armor might be why they developed Trophy active protection systems. Most of their likely opponents use far inferior tanks.
The armor isn't weaker. In fact it's superior to all counterparts. It has ERA integrated inside its armor, and its armor is made of modular, quickly swappable slabs.
the armor of the Markava IV is not weak. modern ATMs can penetrate the thickest armors you can imagine like butter, without an active protection system it does not matter how thick your armor is you will get popped..
@@introboy1 i haven't seen any combat videos of the trophy system working. only in test videos......
@@introboy1thats quite a red flag already if you do believe
Don't try to fit your template on others .. they made their tank as they needed..
The perfect rank for israel
What? A tanks a tank, doesnt matter who made or designed it, as such it can still have flaws and issues as pointed out
Yes, the merkava is quite good at killing Palestinian civilians
@@Phagastick dont think people that carry ak47 are civilians
@@JohnnyFromFireArms What, is open carrying illegal now?
Merkava III was absolete , legit for it time . Nowdays well , they need a new idea .