New Eitan Info

Doing just a little update since I've received new information regarding the Eitan. 

*Eitan is confirmed to have 30mm cannon.
*Namer will be trialed with the new cannon as well beginning next year.
*new touchscreens.
*off-road speed during trials is 50km/h for safety. Said to increase in operational activity.
*Improved synchronization of battle management systems and communications with the fire control systems.
*currently going through final operational assessment phases, soon will have an assigned schedule for acquisition.
*some faults discovered, mainly communication between commander and driver. Now being fixed.

I must say, I'm quite disappointed with the choice of 30mm cannon (XM813) as it provides a lower degree of firepower than a 40mm, and is left behind in the trend of higher caliber munitions, led currently by UK, France, Spain, Russia, and China, and in the long run also the US. 

The 30mm may be enough for Israel at the moment, but looking at the future and the IDF's current focus on a mix of hybrid and mobile warfare, it may not be enough in the long run. It's important to note that at the moment, the IDF does not operate a medium cannon, and as such it doesn't face the logistical constraints of ammo commonality.

However there is quite a logical reason behind the IDF's choice of 30mm over the 40mm.

The current suppliers of cannons and ammo for the 40mm CTAS are France and UK, both are deemed by Israel to be unreliable arms exporters, since both have imposed embargo on Israel, with the latter doing so just a few years ago.

Developing locally would be too time consuming and resource consuming. The IDF only chose to develop its own armament when access to foreign cannons was denied.

The Really Big News?

Namer is said to be trialed with the same turret to provide alternative fire for tanks that may not be around.

For years the debate around Namer's firepower has been central in every discussion regarding its development, and now it is finally here.

Namer has already been tested with 30mm turrets before, namely the RAFAEL Samson 30 Mk-1 and Elbit's UT-30, however it was decided to not purchase either and not to pursue a more suitable one, since these were mainly export oriented turrets.

Namer with Samson 30 Mk 1 turret in trials

What this means essentially is that the IDF will now have not one, but two true IFVs allowing it to operate true mechanized infantry with independent firepower capabilities which include precision strike at long ranges via Spike missiles.

http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4912534,00.html

CIA - Early Merkava 1 Fire Control System

CIA Document Excerpt About Merkava 1 FCS

US attaches have reported the existence of a project (Project 761) to standardize the fire-control procedures of all various Israeli Army tanks by retrofitting them with a standard computer-based system. The Israelis have approached US companies about terms of sale or licensed production of gyro-scopes; resolvers; analog-to-digital converters; micro-processors; and large-capacity, random-access memories suitable for use in tank fire-control systems. These inquiries may be related to Project 761.


The Israelis have announced two newer Merkava models -- the Merkava II and III. The Merkava II is in development, and a prototype may be completed. Israeli press reports claim that the Merkava II may enter production in 1983. The Merkava III is in a design stage and is intended for production in the late 1980s. It may have a turbine engine. The new Merkava models are planned to have improved fire-control systems, armor protection, and suspensions. The Israelis have not specified the fire-control changes.


The first Merkava gun drives may have been installed without stabilizing provisions; historically the Israelis have preferred to fire from a halt. Stabilizing circuits have been retrofitted and adopted for new production.


Merkava's 105mm rifled gun is built by Israel Military Industries (IMI) and is designated the M64-L71A.
The gun is a version of the US M68 gun, which in turn is a US adaptation of the British L7 gun).
A thermal sleeve is provided with most Merkava guns. The Israelis specify that their gun can fire 7 rounds per minute in the field; a trained crew once demonstrated a firing of 12 rounds per minute.


The Merkava commander has a panoramic periscope probably identical to the TRP-2A commander's sight in West German Leopard I tanks. The external sight head resembles the Leopard I's, and published specifications are identical to those of the TRP-2A. The commander's sight is supplied by Israeli Aircraft Industries (IAI). The Israeli sight is specified to have 4- to 20-power zoom magnification, a counterrotating link, and coupling to the gunner's sight. The counter-rotating link keeps the sight pointed at an acquired target as the turret traverses toward the target. 


The Merkava's gunner's sight is mounted in a channel cut into the right front of the turret. Steel ribs set across the channel protect the sight from ricocheting small arms rounds. An armored lid covers the sight when it is not in use.


The gunner's sight is a daylight periscope containing an Nd:YAG laser rangefinder made by the Israeli firm El-Op and a computer-driven reticle. The exact designation and configuration of the sight in deployed Merkavas is unknown. Different international publications have described the sight as having zoom magnification to 12 power or as having two magnifications, unity and 8 power. The acronym SLS, mentioned by some Israelis, may refer to the sight, part of the sight, or an optional night sight.


The Merkava computers are M13-series digital-electronic ballistic computers built by the Israeli firm Elbit. The Merkava fire-control system is often referred to as the Elbit system. The computer receives ranges from the laser rangefinder and several other ballistic inputs from other sensors. The computer then calculates the super-elevation and traverse-offset angles, including a moving-target lead angle in the traverse offset. The angle signals are applied to a ballistic drive that displaces the reticle in the gunner's sight. The reticle is probably linked by a servomechanism to the gun drive machinery, so that it shifts back to center as the gun approaches the correct azimuth and elevation. 


The super-elevation signal is also sent to the hydraulic elevation part of the gun drive. This signal may be used to raise the gun automatically to firing elevation.


The laser rangefinder, cant, and traverse-rate sensors automatically send signals to the computer. The traverse-rate sensor measures the turret traverse rate as the gunner follows a moving target. The computer also automatically receives feedback signals measuring the actual super-elevation and offset angles of the reticle to ensure that these angles match the calculated angles. Ammunition choice can be entered into the computer by any of the turret crew from their control panels. The gunner can enter throw-off angles for each type of ammunition to compensate for the gun jumping up and to one side as it fires. He can also enter windspeed, charge temperatue, gun-barrel droop, and air pressure. The range is displayed to the gunner for use in any manual aiming or range verification. A gun-wear estimate, based on the number of rounds that have been fired from the gun, is stored in the computer.


Elbit also built a model of the Merkava computer and sensor subsystem with automatic sensors for all of the computer inputs. The company claimed in advertisements that the automatic sensor model is being exported (possibly South Africa - Olifant project).


Early Merkava tanks may have had a different computer that was similar to the cam-operated computers in the early US M60s. In 1979 a US attache report on the early production models of Merkava described the computer as a ballistic computer taken directly from M60 supplies. M60 computers were designated M13s by the United States.


The gunner's computer-control panel has a provision for aligning the sight and gun boresights. The alignment procedure may involve introducing an electronic bias in the computer to compensate for the small sight misalignments, instead of precise mechanical misalignments. 


For night firing, all Merkava I tanks have a 1-kilowatt EOS xenon searchlight, probably a passive night sight to replace the commander's panoramic periscope, and possibly an optional gunner's night sight. The searchlight is permanently mounted at the turret rear in a spaced-armor recess. A reflector controlled by the commander opens over the searchlight and directs the beam; the searchlight itself is under armor.
Early production Merkavas had no gunner's night sight, much to the dissatisfaction of the Israeli tankers. The Israelis probably require a gunner's night sight, but none have been identified. The Israelis are also interested in thermal-imaging sights for the Merkavas.


The Merkava gun drive is probably a stabilized electrohydraulic drive designed by the US firm Cadillac Gage and made in Israel under license. Earlier Merkavas had nonstabilized gun drives by Cadillac Gage, called the S.H.L in Israeli publications, but have probably been fitted with an add-on stabilization option.


The Merkava shown at the first official unveiling of the tank at the independence day show in Jerusalem in 1978 had a cylindrical fitting on the top center of the turret. The cylinder was not seen on other Merkavas. The cylinder is unidentified but superficially resembles the Leopard II commander's sight head.




Main gun: 105mm M64-L71A (Israeli made M68).

Gunnery devides: Periscopic daylight sight with Nd:YAG laser rangefinder.
M13A1 digital electronic computer.
Optional night sight.
EOS xenon white/IR searchlight.

Gun drive: S.H.L electrohydraulic drive with optional or retrofitted stabilizing unit.

Commander's sights: Panoramic periscope similar to German TRP-2A.
Separate passive night sight.



https://www.cia.gov/library/readingr...00890001-1.pdf

UPDATE: ATMOS - Hope Restored?

So a few days ago, I talked about a certain revelation on the IDF's cannon artillery acquisition, as it was revealed that it was buying truck-based versions of the ATMOS. 

As it turned out, it was indeed true but only a part of the picture.

IDF's military magazine "Bama'hane" ("In the camp") releases new information that the new artillery piece is 5 years away from being absorbed in the army units, will feature a fully automatic loading, and cut the current crew size (8) in half.

The autoloading feature and reduced crew of 4 is not possible with a truck-based solution, and 5 years would be too much as well. So all this information points towards a Merkava based solution.

Sholef based on Merkava 1

So how should we interpret the alleged purchase of 18 units of the truck-based ATMOS?

Could be perhaps a time-saving decision to allow the IDF to test the rough capabilities of the system and adapt to the new concept of operation while simultaneously developing the vehicle. 

It's also possible to assume that IDF intends to buy truck-based ATMOS for the reservists anyway, or at least the ATHOS, as equipping everyone with a Sholef-style artillery piece would be an overly difficult task.

ATMOS - The Next Big Scandal?

So recently 2 big decisions regarding the cannon artillery of the IDF were made. The first being the cancellation of the bid and a single-source buy, and the other being a purchase of 18 howitzers, which is 3 batteries worth of firepower. 

Let the rant begin:

Background

The IDF has been operating the M109 howitzer for 4 decades now. To put into perspective, Israel's legacy of using the M109 started way back in the Yom Kippur War. 

During the service life of the M109 in Israel, the IDF developed 4 generations of an indigenous tank, assimilated 2 generations of warplanes, and 3 generations of surface ships. 

Through the years, the M109 has been upgraded to the M109A5 standard, and then to the Doher standard, which includes installation of new navigation systems, fire control systems, and general life extension upgrades. Nothing major.

Supposedly, the IDF wasn't meant to receive the later versions, and intended to purchase the Sholef. An artillery vehicle weighing ~70-80 tons that in its time was second to none. Sported a very small crew of 4, a range of 41km, and a fully automatic loading system with an impressive rate of fire, all in a highly armored package.

Budget constraints killed this wonder of a weapon.

Sholef based on Merkava 3 chassis

Starting as far back as 2006, the IDF has been slowly searching for a replacement for the legendary antique called M109, however the low budget caused delays in the process, leading a program that was supposed to end several years ago, to only begin soon. 

The IDF requests for an MRSI capability (unspecified amount of rounds), a 40km range, and precision fire capability. 

The Options

The bidding companies are Elbit as single source, IMI+Rheinmetall, and IAI+KMW

Elbit offers the ATMOS 2000, IMI offers a thorough modernization of the M109, and IAI offers a Bradley chassis (M270) on which KMW's Artillery Gun Module will be installed.

ATMOS 2000 (Elbit)

Starting development almost 2 decades ago, the ATMOS was meant for the export market as a high end solution in a cheap package with intentionally limited capabilities. The ATMOS originally lacks an autoloader and is based on a truck. Basically a mini version of any modern capability. 

Offered a modest MRSI of 3, an optional semi-autoloading system, or full autoloading system.

Despite being sold only on 6x6 and 8x8 truck chassis, Elbit says the ATMOS is a modular package that can be installed on any type of platform and configured in tiers according to the requested capabilities. 

ATMOS in its most recent version

It also comes with 3 options for the cannon - L/39, L/45, L/52.

M109I7 'Spark' (IMI+Rheinmetall)

The consortium offers to take either existing or newly delivered M109 platforms, to the modern standard of L/52 guns, which the IDF requests. The upgrade includes a wide range of improvements including an automatic loading system, new navigation system, new gun laying system allowing autonomy, and a reduced crew.

More information can be found here.

M109I7 computer simulation by IMI

The M109I7 upgrade is said to cost 20% of the PzH 2000, but offer 90% of its capabilities.

However, much of its limitations remain, and thus despite the upgrade, it will remain with a rather slow Rate of Fire, a long shoot&scoot cycle, an above average crew size, and its potential for future upgrades will be limited.

M270 AGM (IAI+KMW)

Perhaps the most unique of the three, the consortium offers to place KMW's Artillery Gun Module on the chassis on which the M270 MLRS is made. The AGM is completely modular and can be placed in its entirety on a vast array of platforms. It contains within it a medium stock of ammunition (30), a fully automatic loading system, and operates autonomously when the crew is inside their cabin at the front of the vehicle.

AGM mounted on Bradley chassis

The AGM aims to bring most of the PzH2000's capabilities in a smaller, modular package.
Choosing the Bradley as a platform, the IDF is thus offered a unique benefit of creating a chassis commonality within the artillery corps. 

The consortium also offers to locate the production at the choosing of the IDF, including the USA. Meaning the IDF could purchase it for almost free, using the aid money.

Current Status

The IDF however, decided to cancel the bid, thus eliminating IAI, IMI, Rheinmetall, and KMW, and going with a single source buy from Elbit, purchasing its ATMOS system.

IAI CEO plans to speak in front of MAFAT to reverse the decision.

The more alarming news is that the IDF intends to purchase 18 units of the ATMOS, fortifying its decision that a single source buy from Elbit is the best decision.

Normally, I would promote that, knowing that it saves a considerable amount of money since the only problem at the moment is budgetary. However the IDF intends to buy the truck-based version of the ATMOS, despite its clear interest in a tracked platform. 

Possible Alternative

Simply put - Revive the Sholef. Nothing more, nothing less.

The Sholef was not economically viable in the late 70's because the industry was still not ready for such a challenge (barely started producing Merkavas), and the economy was still very small and weak, having to deal with another expensive project named Lavi.

But today the Sholef is indeed economically viable. Even more so, it is economically ideal. The Merkava has evolved since the days of the Sholef, and is now, more than ever, suitable for such a task.

The armor is completely modular - No more needless chunks of steel providing unnecessary tank tier protection. It can be reconfigured to meet the lower standards, thus removing a great deal of weight without any effort.

The engine is strong enough - The Merkava 1/2 had a fairly weak engine of 908hp. Now the Sholef can use either the cheap but highly reliable engine of the Merkava 3, or the more expensive but more powerful engine of the Merkava 4.

So why is the Sholef a better alternative to the ATMOS?

Answer: Space, crew, future-proof. 

Truck based solutions are very limited in their carrying capacity. A modern artillery piece needs rather heavy equipment which mainly includes an automatic loading system coupled with a high store of ammo (50+). A Merkava based solution, or alternatively, an Eitan based solution, would offer the ability to use a fully automatic loading system fed with a large amount of ammo and a drastically reduced crew.

The IDF places an emphasis on man power in its current Gideon multi-year plan, which means man-power must be cut down from 7-9 crewmen of the M109 Doher, to an optimal 4-5. It won't happen with the ATMOS's 6-man crew.

Ideal Situation

The IDF would ideally purchase Merkava-based ATMOS systems, imitating the Sholef, replace the Alfa ammo carriers with Eitan-based vehicles, and purchase the ATHOS towed artillery with its semi-automatic loading system.

Sadly, the likelihood of this ever happening is slim.