Why hasn't the Israeli gone for the T-14 Armata approach to tank design...

Israel doesn't need it. The Merkava is tailored for very specific needs, fighting in deserts, fields, olive groves, mountains and most importantly urban areas full of militia with RPGs and IEDs.

At worst they would need to fight some rusty Syrian T72s.

"Engine in front is max protection" is a bit of a meme tho. Israel only did it because the quality of their armor technology was lacking at the time, so they added the engine for some compensation.

If you can make good armor, it's better to put it in the front and use the engine in the rear to balance it.

Why? Did you read the rest of what I wrote?
The israelis prefer the front engine and rear ammo rack/crew space, with the bonus of the rear exit hatch. It's perfect for hull down position shooting while being shot at with RPGs like they've done every week since 2004.

Yeah, sure, they may find it comfortable now but the original design choice did not come from the amazing anti penetration characteristics of the common engine block.

Not a tank

>Why hasn't the Israeli gone for the T-14 Armata approach to tank design?
Because concept of T-14 and similar machines like Block III or Strv 2000 is a result of years-long work and investment in a very industrial developed countries. While Israel armored forces were always kinda poor guys who used everything that they managed to scrap or take. Not really a lot of resources to spare for R&D and shit, they do have problems that require quick and direct approach.

>Israeli's aged and frankly antiquated approach to it.

they kill arabs very successfully tho' could it be their God is right and the arabs is wrong?

because they're cheap jews, why else?

They both worship the same God, user, they just do it differently.

Attached: WWi38Ok.jpg (1680x4370, 1.93M)

>vatnik tank that Russia can't actually produce in any amounts, that is geared towards tank battles
>Compared to glorious Hebrew mbt designed specifically for the purpose it's used for, with proven APS and various urban fighting optimizations (back exit hatch, more MGs, heavy top and bottom armor, built in mortar, ability to carry two passengers without sacrificing any ammo, ability to sacrifice ammo to be used as the most armored ambulance in history, probably some others I don't know about)
Gee, I wonder. Next thing you're gonna tell me is that they should've just bought Chinese?

seething shitskin

Actually a fellow tribe member; I'm trying to point out that if the kiddies they put behind the wheel struggle with the British-derived coziness of the Merks, how do you think they'll fare with slavshit-style scrappiles?

> carry two passengers without sacrificing any ammo
Not true, actually. It's a small and crammed space, which has the main goal of storing ammo. The ammo has to be sacrificed, though if you find yourself having to use a tank as evac vehicle, it's likely that you used it up anyway.
Lots of vehicles and equipment (at least here) is designed like that: it has a solid, standard purpose, but, if an unusual need will arise during battle, with a bit of intended ingenuity, you can have extra options.

Attached: hWDT64i.png (639x428, 719K)

Don't talk about shit you don't know, I've been in there before. It's not comfortable, but soldiers are used to it.
You can even shove three people in there but they're not going to have fun.

Well, duh- it was designed with the option to carry people in mind, but that's meant to be a field-improv option, and it doesn't come without sacrificing the ammo that's stored there (unless it was already used up).
And idk wo you are or what you've done, but I also had the pleasure of joining 2 short rides in a Merk while asking about this very function.

>Why hasn't the Israeli gone for the T-14 Armata approach to tank design?

The Merkava is already a Heavy APC chassis with tank turret. The Soviets are playing catch up to making a heavier BMP-T chassis with the T-15.

Because unlike the Armata, the Merkava isn't actually a parade showpiece that gets orders cut down every few months.

But there's no ammo stored there, it's meant as an entrance to the tank.....
There's ammo to both sides of it, which can be removed to have up to 6 people in there. Is that what you mean?

>Merkava isn't actually a parade showpiece that gets orders cut down every few months.

Of course not, it's the american taxpayer that pays for it.

You know what the T-14 does? It breaks.

It breaks here, it breaks there.
It breaks down everywhere!
It breaks down at parades.
Can't you see how well it's made?

Yeah. Glad we cleared out this misunderstanding. Good day mate.

I fucking hate Israeli jews.

We should just let the heebs and muzzies have it out and the winner gets the ME. Except for half the oil.

wait what? they do?

Yes but why would they change what is already a perfect system for them? Moving the engine to the rear would seriously fuck with the rear exit hatch and crew compartment with little to no benefit

>Purposefully to add armor/protection for crew
It also means they need to lighten the front glacis to make maintenance feasible. The frontal hull armor on the Merkava is fairly nonexistent.

>Purposefully to add armor/protection for crew
I genuinely forget that people THAT retarded are still browsing Jow Forums.

Why the FUCK do you post anything if you don't know shit about it?

Nigga you think we living in a videogame

Attached: IsThisReal.jpg (1280x720, 151K)

Damn 7th brigade...

The Merkava was designed to fight on the Golan Heights, not in urban combat. Hell, the first time they used them in urban warfare (Lebanon 1982, IIRC) they lost a few to ATGMs and RPG fire.

Islam, Catholicism and Judaism are all the same shit, just with different point of views.

so all this warring has been for nothing? just pointless slaughter?

Well First there were the jews slaugthering shit, then christians and nowadays are the muslims.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahamic_religions

it's funny how everybody jerking off to the mbt meme and keep losing poorly amrored tanks innacity to fucking infantry.

let's face it role and mobility wise the mbt is a medium tank. we should build heavy tanks for city that is less mobile but much better armored all round.

We get epic webm's of it, so there is that

The Israeli tank works and the Russian one....doesn't.

Except it's not...
The rear doors are for quick resupply in a hull-down position. Yes soldiers can be carried, but that was not the main purpose.

yknow what else does
youtu.be/vPFCSMNxmWY

*crashes*

>.02 Rubles have been deposited into your account.

"frontal engine for extra protection" is a meme. Engines aren't made of armor-grade metal. The extra protection they offer is minimal because they're soft and get shredded by high-caliber AP munitions.

any tank can drop a thread if either the tension is wrong or it turns too hard

It helps with HEAT ammunition.

Reactive armor helps with HEAT ammunition.

HEAT is not the anti tank ammo of choice. Sabot rounds are and engine isn't armor against that.

Maybe against IEDs? Front of the tank usually takes the hit, better the engine than the driver...

Attached: 1200px-IED_Baghdad_from_munitions.jpg (1200x669, 192K)

Stand off armor and NERA are a thing.

It is in asymetrical warfare, which is what israelis are facing atm.

Uh, the Merkava's driver is still in the front, dude.

Attached: 0-956.jpg (1280x960, 114K)