Re:Tanks vs. APCs

At 7:33 PM -0500 1/30/00, Thomas.Barclay wrote:
>Someone commented that people keep thinking an APC is bulletproof.
Heck,
>even today (or not long ago at any rate, there may have been a refit),
I saw
>a TV program indicating the Bradley was succeptible in some locations
to
>fire from infantry support arms (Dshk I think).

Bulletproof is a good design goal though.

>The Israelis have discovered that a tank hull makes a good APC. I can't
>remember if it is a T-55 or T-62 hull or what, but they've created an
APC
>that holds 8-10 guys, is real low slung to the ground (a la Tank which
is
>what the hull is) and has good heavy armour. It's hard to spot, hard to
hit,
>and hard to kill if it is hit. And this was done from old tanks that
were no
>longer combat viable, as tanks. But they make a darn good APC.
>

That would be the Merkava. Custom hull and turret, MkIII & IV models 
ise a 120mm smoothbore (for compatibility with NATO hardware IIRC). 
The engine is in front, doors in the rear allow for access to the 
stowage compartment. They can carry 90 rounds for the main gun (was 
105mm, must be less for the 120), or 45 rounds plus an infantry squad 
or a couple of stretchers (now THAT is a battlefield ambulance you'll 
feel safe in). There was a proposal for buying Merkavas in place of 
M-1s, but the domestic design won out; and did alright in Iraq so it 
can't have been a bad decision.

http://www.dmi.usma.edu/Milresources/Weapons/merkava.htm
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/merkava/index.html

Michael Carter Llaneza
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1991-1950
Devolution is very real to me.
Whenever I hear the "Odd Couple" theme, I get this image of Dennis 
Rodman borrowing Marge Schott's toothbrush.
Like most emails, this one is probbaly a first draft
http://www.flash.net/~maserati/