is it really true in some article that the production of merkava will soon be closed? bad trip yun, #1 tank pa naman sa akin ang merkava

It was rumored that production would be closed. BUT Israel recently made the decision not to do this, so production would continue.

I'll search for the thread at TankNet. They talked about this a few months ago.

here's the article:

Israel’s Merkava Tank: The Tank a Jewish Mother Would Love December 19, 2003

Can we for once skip the misleading military jargon about why the Merkava Tank can be replaced by a future FCS (The U.S. Army’s Future Combat System)? The simple fact is that this is an exact replay of the scheme of Caspar Weinberger which successfully eliminated Israel’s Lavi aircraft. The Lavi was a superb Israeli creation of a needed operation ground support and air superiority fighter aircraft. These are the types of wars wherein Israel has always needed specialized equipment to defend herself against Arab/Muslim massed assaults. Israel has always faced Arab nations who can pour in high numbers of troops, accepting vast casualties and still have more fresh reserves to relieve their battalions. (1,2,3)

Once Weinberger and his Jewish consultant, Dov Zakheim (4) saw the successful performance record of the Lavi, he began pressuring Israel to cancel the Lavi for a wing of F16s made by General Dynamics. Not only did Weinberger want additional sales for the F16 but, he did NOT want a superior, yet cheaper aircraft in the marketplace competing with U.S. products. Weinberger tasked Dov Zakheim, supposedly an Orthodox Jew to undermine and subvert Israel’s self-confidence to continue from successful prototypes to co-production of the Lavi - and by the way, various projects for the Israeli Navy that were on stream. (5)

The F16s airframe dated back to the ‘60s and was NOT designed for close ground support. Although Israel needed a Ground Support aircraft for the type of wars she has always had to fight, the pressure to buy the F16 (which was rather clumsy at low altitudes) forced Israel to eat the change and deep-six the Lavi. Clearly, the Lavi was a far superior aircraft in terms of combining both close ground support and air superiority, with outstanding Israeli electronics and avionics. To this day neither the U.S. or the Europeans have been able to design one aircraft that can competently do both jobs. (7)

The Lavi would have cost $17 Million, as opposed to at least twice that for any current fighting jet from any country, inclusive of spare parts. The Lavi was lighter than the F16, 10% faster ‘on the deck’, had a smaller radar cross section and could carry a heavy load of armaments. It was also designated as a hot trainer that became combat operational at the flip of a switch. America could have used a U.S. Lavi as a complement to its air-stack of F15s and F16s. Having been briefed about the superior capabilities of the Lavi and the fact that its development would create hundreds of American jobs, the American Congress had voted the needed appropriations. Almost immediately after that Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin twisted his Cabinet into voting 12 to 11 to kill the Lavi project, virtually compromising Israel’s strategic relationship with the American Congress as well as destroying thousands of man-hours of strenuous R&D and torpedoing hundreds of jobs of high level Israelis.

Now the Merkava, like the Lavi, is to be eliminated probably because Boeing needs a customer for a grouping of light-weight vehicles which, collectively, are supposed to equal the Merkava. Although the U.S. does need armor like the lightweight ‘Stryker’ that can be easily transported via air, Israel does NOT have that requirement. All of Israel’s enemies can bring troops and equipment to her nearby borders. The 70 ton Merkava Battle Tank was designed specifically to face this threat.

Of course, the M1A2 Abrams Tank (now America’s Main Battle Tank) will be part of the package at twice the price of what a Merkava costs. The Merkava was designed in the 1970s for desert warfare, the rocky terrain of the Golan Heights and with its primary goal, to protect its crew. The Abrams still has major problems with sand sucked up by its engine, too few tank miles between maintenance for suspension, tracks, engine, firing systems, etc. The Abrams was primarily designed for battle in the European theater and NOT the sands of the Middle East.

The Merkava has seen action in every military campaign of the last 20 years and is the combat weapon of choice for IDF commanders confronting organized Terrorist resistance in the PLO-controlled territories. No other system affords soldiers better protection from small-arms attack, roadside bombs and shoulder-fired missiles. Strangely, the U.S. would have had a better tank to fight with (especially in the desert) while securing better protection for its crews had it adopted the Merkava but, the NIH (Not Invented Here) factor dominated. Merkava 5 is the latest version which incorporates battle-tested systems making it the most advanced tank in the world.

Some of the Merkava’s many innovations are improved reactive armor (that absorbs the kinetic energy of an incoming shell, explodes it before it can penetrate the tank and hurt the crew). The Merkava also has a 120mm. smooth-bore gun capable of firing guided munitions, an enhanced gun stabilization system, state-of-the-art night-fighting and fire-control sensors, a positive pressure crew compartment that allows the vehicle to fight in a biological or chemical environment, and even air conditioning. The Merkava is also designed for rear entry, enabling it to double as an infantry transporter.(2) But, if certain U.S. business interests prevail, it will never be produced.

What hasn’t been published (yet) were results of the Joint Operations (Military Games) where American forces with M1A1s faced off against Israelis in their Merkavas. The results were so one-sided and embarrassing that they were never discussed in military journals. Maj. Gen. Israel Tal, the developer of the Merkava, instructed all involved Israeli personnel to remain silent on these exercises. (It happened more than once.)

Currently, Israel fields 3,900 armored vehicles. This is less than 50% of those fielded by Israel’s enemies who continue to build up their armor arsenal, among them Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. These countries have field over 8,700 tanks among them. Egypt’s force is the most menacing. Over the last dozen years Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak has undertaken a massive upgrade of Egypt’s tank fleet, acquiring more than 880 M1A1 tanks. These vehicles are provided to Egypt as ‘kits’ and assembled in a billion-dollar plant (2) built by "guess who" Caspar Weinberger just outside Cairo. (8)

Weinberger exceeded his authority as Sec. of Defense to build this plant without securing an approved budget from Congress. Weinberger’s original intention was to have Egypt build its own M1A1 Tank out of sight of Congressional overview. Egypt would not only supply tanks for its own use but, then to use excess production to become the supplier of other Arab nations as a side benefit. But, Egypt was not capable of manufacturing the Tank which is why finished components were sent as kits and only ‘assembled’ in Egypt with U.S. technical overview.

Recently, the U.S. government has given the go-ahead for the upgrading of some Egyptian tanks to the more potent M1A2 configuration. With no country threatening its borders, only Israel appears to be the likely target of the Egyptian build-up.

On top of that, Washington approved the sale of new, more lethal 120 mm. Armor-piercing rounds to Egypt for its M1 tanks. This is a deal worth $54 million, is for 10,040 non-standard APFSDS-T shells.(2) The Pentagon and State Department have a standard line for these sales: "It will not alter the military balance in the region" - although, of course, it always does.

Egypt has made no secret of its aim to achieve military parity with the Jewish State and to have a regional military projection capability. Cairo has acquired new and more powerful weapons’ systems, including surface-to-surface missiles with from China and North Korea, WMD capability, fighter aircraft, attack helicopters, naval vessels and, of course, tanks.(2)

Some may recall during the prior Administration while Secretary of Defense William Cohen was observing Operation "Bright Star" (Joint Military Games between U.S. and Egyptian troops) a high ranking Egyptian General said: "We are preparing for war with Israel".

Dr. Yuval Steinitz, Chairman of Israel’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee of the Knesset made this point: "Israel has no strategic depth." (6) (Israel is 50 miles wide at its maximum and only 9 miles where President Bush insists another Arab Palestinian State is to be located.) He also spoke of Israel’s diminishing qualitative edge which numerous American Presidents have ‘pledged’ to maintain. That pledge has diminished along with the unkept promised ‘qualitative’ edge as ARAB NATIONS HAVE THE SAME EQUIPMENT AS IS BEING SOLD TO ISRAEL.

Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is under severe pressure to close down more than 220 Israeli firms, contractors and sub-contractors in order to transfer Israel’s tank manufacturing jobs to Boeing and their sub-contractors. Israel would lose an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 jobs. Many of these are engineers, scientists and skilled factory workers. This would lead to an acceleration of the overseas migration of Israel’s intellectual capital and bring ruin to a key component of Israel’s research and technological base. It would also further erode Israel’s deterrent posture and another vital element of military self-sufficiency.(2)

Effects of this possible shutdown would also be felt in the U.S. where 22% of the Merkava’s content is fabricated. General Dynamics Land Systems, the largest U.S.-based Merkava contractor, is slated to produce 400 engines for the tank at a cost of just under $200 million. Cancelling that contract requires Israel to forfeit 90% of this amount in compensation.

Rumors are circulating that the U.S. has offered to provide Israel with used Abrams tanks that were withdrawn from the Iraqi theater of operations. The U.S. no longer maintains an assembly line for new M1 tanks. In the highly unlikely event the line were to be restarted, the unit cost of an M1 would probably be in excess of its original $9 million cost - which is millions more than the cost of a comparable Merkava. Relying on spare parts from an overseas supplier, even (especially) the U.S. reduces Israel’s military flexibility and control in wartime which can place great strains on an all-important strategic relationship.(2)

Regrettably, Israel will likely be short-changed into buying the M1A2 at twice the cost of the Merkava. It’s a direct replay of the killing off of the Lavi at its cost of $17 million to take on the F16 at a cost of (then) $23 to $26 million in addition to multi-millions in spare parts. Add this to the cost of re-employing all those who were then making the Merkava.

Israel has invested approximately $6.5 Billion in the Merkava. The Merkava R&D served as a test-bed for innovations in not only land combat, but air combat as well. Many of the technologies now appear in the IAF fighter jets, including some of the most advanced systems for battle management, multiple target acquisition, platform survivability, the deployment of active and passive counter-measures, command and control as well as situational management.(2)

The survival of the Merkava is integral to the maintenance of Israel’s qualitative military edge. Terminate the Merkava and the Jewish State loses an essential part of her military readiness. It takes about 40 months to field a Merkava tank from the day the first steel is cut and the first welds are drawn. The Israel Defense Ministry has sub components on order for production roll-out through 2007, new contracts must be signed now to ensure the continuity of production past 2007.

Merkava components and technologies amount to over $200 million in annual export sales by Israel. Add to this the $800 million that Israel is to receive for the upgrade of 170 Turkish M60A1 tanks and the millions more it expects for future Merkava sales. All of this would be lost if the Merkava is cancelled. Without producing the Merkava, according to Brig. Gen. (Res.) Ze’ev Bar-Gil, "Israel will lose its status as one of the leaders of the world in tank technology and will, therefore, lose projects of co-development and co-production of armored systems with other nations." (2)

Unfortunately, Israel never obtained the air superiority/close ground support aircraft she needed. The F16 was a wonderful ‘air superiority’ aircraft but, unlike the Lavi which was designed both for air superiority and as a ground support aircraft, Israel was forced by Cap Weinberger to take General Dynamics slightly altered F16.

But, as they say, "Sorry Charlie, business is business."

Finally found the answer to your query:

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002521.html (Dated 24 December 2003)

Here's an earlier article from Haaretz dated 17 October 2003:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=350893&contrassID=1&subContrassID=5&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

And here are some more discussions from TankNet on the Merkava:

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002595.html (this one from a member who was fortunate to be inside a Merk IV, dated 20 January 2004)

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002351.html (on the .50-cal mounted on the Merk 3 BAZ, dated 20 October 2003)

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001617.html (discussion on Merk 4 v Leo2A4, dated 27 Feb 2003)

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001580.html (Discussion on Haartez article about knocked out Merkava, dated 15 Feb 2003)

Now you know where I get my armor info and why I luv TankNet! :-)

GiB, scholar ka talaga!

Ouch. Looks like we're not the only country with messed-up politics! #:-) This reminds me of the Stryker debate going on here and in other forums online...




Ouch again (for the Americans). Wonder why they're not thinking about getting some Merkavas, or its technology?

Business, of course. Doesn't look good if you bow to your "competition".

Tanker25: Nah, just wasting my time surfing... WHEN I SHOULD BE STUDYING AND FINISHING MY CASE DIGESTS!




Who said they weren't? #:-) Seriously, the Merk and the Abrams are two completely different designs for different scenarios. The Israelis have to contend with lots of MOUT (what with the Palestinians and their intifada [sp?] ) and the rough terrain of the Golan. The US on the other hand focus on battlefields around the world. One can say that the Merk is a "specialized" MBT, tailored for Israel's needs.

BTW, the US Army recently purchased 4 to 8 Ukranian T-84 MBTs to study the ERA slapped on these tanks. Presumably, they offer better protection than the M1A2 for a 50-ton platform. So, yes, from time-to-time they bow down to competition. Hell, the M256 is a German gun, while Chobham has origins in England! #:-)

as a side comment....

one thing for sure IMHO, i'm really impressed with the IDF (impressed being an understatement). I mean, they are probably the best military under pressure. They are great in modification, specially in armored warfare. Imagine, sherman's battling out with the latest MBT's then? I mean, give them a junk and they will definitely improve it to a capable weapon. Argurably, they can easily defeat any arab nation, granting, a 1:1 battle... but then again i'm getting

i think th F-18 can do this kind of job at the same tym as well....correct me f im wrong #:-)

They are challenged (or threatened) on a regular basis so survival of the Jewish state is what drives them to constantly upgrade their militaey capability. It seems no nation will sell them weaponry (except the US) which is why they go out of their way to develop their own weaponry.

In this particular case, Israel, like any other nation is being bullied by American business interests (makes you wonder why some, if not most people around the world hate Americans).

Dr. Mahatir would disagree with you on that one. It is Israel - not the USA - that has its hands on the White House's balls, not the USA having its hands on the Knesset's balls. #:-)




Actually, scuttlebutt says that Israel, when it comes to tanks at least, is more intertwined with Germany than the USA. Tank development between Israel and Germany is quite close. Germany briefly embargoed the delivery of the Europack which was to power the Merkava IV, but the deal went through in the end, hence the existence of the Merkava IV today.

Funny thing also about Israel is that the military aid she gets from the USA is also helping the development of weapons that can be used against the USA. Take the military exchanges between China and Israel for example. China has this heavy ATGM which is practically the same as that developed by Israel. Then there's the Phalcon AWACS system.

BTW, can we just leave the political side-comments like this:




for some other thread? This is thread after all is a NON-POLITICAL DISCUSSION on the Merkava. Yeah, I ain't the moderator, but if anyone likes this discussion clean and free from turning into something like the "MBT and IFV" thread, then leave out political side-comments please. Spasiba.