[Skybird]

Pro tankers over at SBP-forum said that 12 Merkavas alone were destroyed in recent days. I remember, like one guy there, to have seen 4 burning Merkavas in one video scene alone, some days ago.

I honestly doubt that modern kinetic penetrators like those being used by the US or Germany just "bounce" off that easily, no matter what the angle of armour is. russian penetrators may be loighter, but then, they travel with far higher speed, and are fired with higher muzzle velocity. I asked in their forum once for the flat angle of the Leo2-A5's new frontal turret armour, this wedge that has been added to the original flat A$-armour, and if a hit on the downside of that wedge would not funnel a deflected shot towards the most vulnerable ring connecting the turrent with the hull. They said these flat angled armours are no match for high velocity kinetic penetrators, it is very rare that the just bounce of. More likely is that they penetrate the armour at a deflected angle, getting them stuck effectively inside the armour before it reaches the inside of the tank.

Russian ATGMs are famous for having serious punches, and no other country fields such a huge diversity of missiles like the Russians. I fear some of these, as well as modified TOW missiles, probably really showed that the Merkava is not as much "über" strong as is often said. However, I also remembered to have red somewehre in recent days, that the casualties amongst crews of the hit tanks are very low. The Merkava certainly is, by design and with it's front-mounted motor, the tank with the best crew protection in the world (and best crew escape with it's backside hatch, like an APC). But I wouldn't automatically conclude from that that it also is the most difficult tank to disable. And it also is not only armour angle that decides if a hit is lethal or not, but also material composition.

However, those ATGMs being used surely must have been a nasty surprise for the IDF. And not only Israeli tank analysts and tacticians probably have smoking heads about this war currently.

Lebanon is not really a place made for tank warfare. I think the losses for the main are caused by wrong tactics, that again may be caused by incompetent political leadership, planning a wrong kind of warfare on the basis of thin advise from the military planners that for themselevs were planning on the basis of a rushed enterprise, too little time, and too little reliable intel. It's a complex mixture of variables that finally resulted in surprisingly many tanks beeing lost. One phrase I constantly have on mind concerning this war: "extremely bad preparation". And a major strategic defeat for Israel.