Frag Out! Magazine
Issue link: https://fragout.uberflip.com/i/1308154
another 12 are placed in 6 fire-resistant containers on the floor of the turret. The rest of the ammunition is stored in the rear portion of the hull, in 12 rap- id-removable containers, each of these houses 4 rounds. These are grouped on the left and the right side in the rear, six containers per side. Between them, one may find a dual (top-bottom) hatch that allows the crew to com- fortably and safely leave the MBT when on the battlefield. Contrary to myths surrounding the vehicle, never has Merkava been designed with a troop-car- rying role in mind. It is an optional capability but it requires removal of for- ty-six 105 mm rounds - more than 70% of the total quantity. The space that is created once the ammunition containers are removed can accommodate two injured soldiers on stretchers or up to five soldiers in a sitting position. The Yom Kippur war has shown the dangers posed by the hydraulic system fluid of the turret motor and the stabilizer assembly. The hydraulic system is usually operated at high pressures, with the fluid reaching temperatures of 120 – 140°C. The liquid agent in question is highly flammable as well. For the Merkava Mark 1 a safer, electrohydraulic system has been designed. All of its elements are placed within the turret niche, and they are separated from the crew compartment. The Israeli researchers have also found out that fuel could be used as extra protection against HEAT rounds. 70 mm layer of fuel offers protection equivalent to 10 mm of steel against HEAT rounds. This is why the fuel tanks arranged along the sides of the vehicle are used as an extra protective measure. A lot of attention has also been paid to protection from IEDs and mines. The bottom part of the hull is double-layered, with a fuel tank placed between the layers. The bottom plate is a flat V-shaped sur- face and serves as an explosion dissipating deflector, should an explosion take place under the hull. The suspension system is used as extra means of protection as well. It is based on the Horstmann system derived from the British Centurion and Chieftain MBTs. The primary components are made out of armor steel to provide better protection of the side portions of the hull. The suspension also provides Merkava with good off road capabilities, and it is easy to fix in field conditions. However, it also has a significant disadvantage - its high weight. Batteries, CBRN protection systems, or the 60-liter water tank also act as extra protection. Merkava has also been equipped with a fire extinguishing system. How, all in all, can the protection levels be assessed, in the case of Merkava? Despite the convoluted design and the simple spaced armor layout, it is ev- ident that the designers wanted to achieve a certain level of protection for the front of the vehicle. For the hull, the protection was equivalent to 250 – 300 mm of RHA, against the sabot (APFSDS) rounds. For the APDS rounds, the protection levels were, most probably, higher, considering the high plau- sibility of the ammunition ricocheting, being deflected by the plates set at significant angles. When it comes to HEAT rounds, the hull offered protection levels equivalent to ca. 500 – 550 mm of steel, except for the area in front of the driver that offered less protection. The Merkava Mk 1 turret was uniquely small, with a small frontal picture and high deflection angles. Most of the tur- ret surface, in frontal view, offered protection ranging from 250 up to 330 mm - against the APFSDS rounds. The half-rounded turret base had the weakest protection level (ca. 160 mm). The HEAT protection level was ranging from 350 to 500 mm of steel, depending on the point where the bullet hit. The protection levels listed above can be considered in two different con- texts. The first one pertains to vehicles developed in parallel (between 1974 and 1979) in the United States of America, Germany, and the USSR. The sec- ond context refers to the anti-tank systemsavailable during the period. As we can see, Merkava, despite weighing 7 to 8 tonnes more than the Western MBTs, or even 18 to 22 tonnes more than Soviet designs, offered weaker turret protection levels all in all. However, the hull, thanks to its en- gine-front layout and angled plates offered protection levels similar to the Soviet MBTs. It was even better when it comes to protection against HEAT (shaped charge) rounds. Coming back to the turret, undoubtedly the protec- tion levels were lower concerning kinetic projectiles. One should remember www.fragoutmag.com