It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Which is Better? M1A2 or Merkava 4

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 06:22 AM
link   
If I had choice between just these two tanks I would pick Merkava any day! The Tank was build so the crew could survive anything... can't say that about M1A2...

I hate to see people say M1A2 is battle proven... vs who? Iraq's old soviet tanks that had no means of hiding them selves or range to attack? Not to mention no means of defending them selves against air attacks... M1A2 is not battle proven... tank never been used in battle where there was no Air superiority... or the eye in the sky...

Iraq army did not have intelligence, tech, or moral to fight US... all that does not mean M1A2 has passed the test... just means it was successful vs Old Russian tech... Any retard on any tank with longer range, intelligence, modern ammunition can make a kill... so Merkava any day... at least I know I have more chances in it then in M1A2




posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a moot point as it has engaged T-72`s , the adversary it was designed to engage , and it doesn`t matter if they were the latest with ceramic armour/ERA or monkey models with rusted armour - its still a T-72.

and it did kill all it came against.


on the other hand , the DU armour would mean an M1 would be a death trap in europe when russia used neutron bombs



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 04:40 PM
link   
In answer to a couple of people above: the Merk4 is very roomy, it can take several infantery men on or off the battlefield inside it's hull. It has a special backdoor for this.
The round it uses is the new APAM round. A round with a timer so it can be used as HE, AT, anti helicopter or bunkerbuster. so in stead of bringing 4 different type of rounds they only need one type.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
a moot point as it has engaged T-72`s , the adversary it was designed to engage , and it doesn`t matter if they were the latest with ceramic armour/ERA or monkey models with rusted armour - its still a T-72.

and it did kill all it came against.


on the other hand , the DU armour would mean an M1 would be a death trap in europe when russia used neutron bombs


Not like steel does any better; neutron bombs were designed to kill tank columns, and they were designed for that long before the M1 got it's DU armor.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   
actually you coul re crew a T-72 within a short time of the crew getting irradiated - the same can`t be said of the M1A2

and i got a piccie of the Mekhava 4 with its layered armour splayed open by a missile for the world to see.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by (^_^)
If I had choice between just these two tanks I would pick Merkava any day! The Tank was build so the crew could survive anything... can't say that about M1A2...

I hate to see people say M1A2 is battle proven... vs who? Iraq's old soviet tanks that had no means of hiding them selves or range to attack? Not to mention no means of defending them selves against air attacks... M1A2 is not battle proven... tank never been used in battle where there was no Air superiority... or the eye in the sky...

Iraq army did not have intelligence, tech, or moral to fight US... all that does not mean M1A2 has passed the test... just means it was successful vs Old Russian tech... Any retard on any tank with longer range, intelligence, modern ammunition can make a kill... so Merkava any day... at least I know I have more chances in it then in M1A2



I would say the Abram is more effective in battle field situations while the Merkeva is very effective at rolling though unarmed refugee populations. I do note that Hisbullah commandos wielding hand held anti-armer weapons handed the Israeli tankers their arses.



[edit on 6-10-2008 by masonwatcher]



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Due to the neutron flux from a neutron Bomb detonation, DU Armor will become radioactive through neutron capture. U238 will become Pu239 and Pu240 with half lives of 24,110 years and 6563 years... Pu240 undergoes spontaneous fissioning as well as other chemcial side effects.

American battle armor will be rendered useless for 1000's of years.

Non DU armored tanks can be recrewed within 56 -72 hours after neutron stream exposure

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Unknown Perpetrator]



posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   
I'm an ex-Merkava 2b Tank Commander and also was on MK 1 and MK3.

The Merkava is an amazing machine. Each model is built on top of the older model, thus drastically improving a proven very good design.
Speed and firepower are all important factors, but I don't know any tank that can stand the Golan Heights like the Merkava.
M1A2 will break down and halt, American Tanks are traditionally not built for this tough terrain (Sherman/Paton and Abrams).

I don't know which tank is better, but I'll tell you all this: Each Israeli tankist knows from day one that it is the man in the tank that wins.
That is something unique to Israeli tanks - they have amazing people behind them, a lot of them (me too) are people that fell out of pilot course and other quality units.
This high quality personnel is what wins wars, not technology alone.
The rest of the world fails to get it..

In 1973 Israel was outnumbered by Egypt and Syria and had American tanks which blew up easily, and yet we ended the war with tanks in Syria and Egypt not far from Cairo and Damascus.
Some single tanks in the Golan Heights held off entire Syrian Tank battalions with inferior tanks
So I don't know who will win in a Merkava 4 Vs M1A2, but I wouldn't want to be in either tank against Israeli Tankists.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 08:23 PM
link   
As a US Tanker I love my M1s, but the Merkava holds a special place in my heart. I would love to have them in Iraq. 120mm main gun, 7.62 remote weapon station, active countermeasures, a troop compartment, indirect fire capability (!), purposed survivability.... Just a turret mounted runway short of a complete combined arms package. Love it.

Perfect for an insurgency. It would have been great to have Merkavas in Fallujah. It makes my heart flutter to think what I could have done with just a platoon. But thats the mind of a tanker. I guess collapsing buildings by overpressure was fun enough.

I have the upmost respect for Isreali tankers as well. Very adept at the trade.

Tank to tank I'll keep my Abrams. Pretty much anything else, I'd love to get my hands on a Merkava.



posted on Nov, 14 2008 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by WhiteOneActual
 


WhiteOneActual,

I really enjoyed reading your comments.

I too have a lot of the respect to the American Armed Forces.
In particular the logistics are outstanding. And as Napoleon and the Nazis found out the hard way, logistics is many times how a war is won.

Israeli Tank Commander



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 09:49 AM
link   
The Abram tank does use reactive armor and in a head to head battle the abrams will come out on top every time it is a see first strike first killing machine it is unparralled in open terrain but in in urban areas with a short lines of sight the abrams is at a dissadvantage but it manages well it aint easy to manuver a 40ton+ war machine in tigh streets and back alleys. the biggest limit to a fine tuned run and gun hunting machine like the abrams are the R.O.E. The laughable imaginary rules of war are the biggest killer of american troops in todays world where world opinion and politics matter more than lives. No fight is fair and the enemy doesnt always play by the rules thus the abrams is the tank i would wanna be in if on the ground at all! The A-10 would make Hamburgar Meat out of All of them any way! < God Bless America! >



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Abrams IS a combat proven tank, just read about merkava in Gaza



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Honestly don't think we ever really know even if Egypt goes back on their peace treaty with Isreal and attacks. Egyptian Army is poorly trained and lead and good Equipment with bad troops leads to well a real big mess.
US and Isreal will be friends forever even after US and Europe part on bad terms. Now Merkava versus LeCleric is more likely senerio. Merkava hands down.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by (^_^)
 
If you really want to go one on one with an M-1A2 in a merkova.... Please be my guest but make sure you kiss your family goodbye first. As an M-1 tanker I will tell you that the Merkova is a very good vehicle BUT is really a Uparmored APC.... Ive seen way to many T-72 turrents flying 50 or 75 meters to not want to fight in my M-1. The Israili military is great but as my airforce buddy says every time we fly against them we dust that a$$ ! The level of competition the Israeli's have faced is not up to what the US can bring 24/7 for as long as it takes to win.... No 6 day war here.. How about weeks and weeks of sustained NON stop action ! There are not many if any that could sustain that.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join