The above picture shown that there is an additional weapon possibly a 0.5 HMG mounted on top of the main gun. My question is what is the purpose of it being mounted there? I mean the tank already have a MG mounted coaxially in the turret itself. Here is a link with some similar pictures.

http://www.waronline.org/en/IDF/arms/merkava.htm

The .50 is for Anti-aircraft

There's no such thing as enough firepower, just like there's no such thing as enough money.

for the mk 1-3 there are three 7.62 mm machine guns (two on the turret, one co-axial).
the 0.5 HMG u see is avaliable on the mk 4 and the mk 3 LIC (low intensity conflicts). the mk 3 LIC has an internal 0.5 HMG co-axial. and the mk 4 has a 0.5 co-axial machine gun which enables the tank crew to shoot soft targets from the turret without getting out. and the internal 0.5 HMG are useful in urban warfare.

The 0.5' HMG mounted in-line with main gun is not new in Iseral service.

I remember seeing pictures of M60s also with the 0.5' HMG mounted the same way.

Originally posted by Obersturmfuhrer:

There's no such thing as enough firepower, just like there's no such thing as enough money.

x2

Does it means that the 0.5 HMG is mounted on the main gun externally is for increased firepower for urban warfare in addition to the 3 7.62 MG(2 on turret and 1 coaxially within the turret)?

Nonono, its to give the maintainence people more work to do.

The front mounted 50-cal is not for AA as someone mentioned. This arrangement has existed since Lebanon in 1982 IIRC, for close-in urban anti-personnel work in conjunction with the 2 7.62mm MGs manned by the crew. The 50-cal is remotely operated.

Then what about the coaxially mounted MG within the turret? I forsee problem with mounting the 0.5GMG externally on the main gun,reloading is going to be a major problem!

Originally posted by tankee1981:

Then what about the coaxially mounted MG within the turret? I forsee problem with mounting the 0.5GMG externally on the main gun,reloading is going to be a major problem!

Co-axial weapon is of limited use in urban environment since its field of fire is very limited and it has to point where your main gun is pointing.

well, 0.5 is a nice bridge between the 120mm and 7.62mm. u don't want to wack a tiny land rover with ur 120mm rd, rite? after all the tank carries 50rds of 120mm rds. so each round is precious.
0.5 for AA? not likely. wonder where one gets the idea/info from?

I think the .50 cal mounted above the mian gun is like the .50 cal above the 106 RR we recently phased out. To assist in aiming, where you point is where the rounds should land (baring shot drop, windage etc etc). simplicity!

I read this in a book about Yom Kippur War.

One IDF MBT was completely out of ammo for its main gun and one Egyptian MBT was heading for him ready to fire.

The IDF tank commander, in a desperate move, decided to charge the Egyptian MBT firing his 0.5 HMG at the Egyptian turret.

Although it did no damage, the 0.5 shells smacking into the Egyptian turret unnerved the Egyptian crew and they decided to beat a retreat.

Maybe that's why they insist on a 0.5HMG on every tank.

Another interesting thing they have on some IDF MBTs is a 60mm mortar mounted on the turret for the tank commmnder.

For the Merkava 3 and 4, this Soltam 60mm breech loaded mortar can be fired from within the tank turret.

Unfortunately cannot find pics.

Originally posted by moca

The IDF tank commander, in a desperate move, decided to charge the Egyptian MBT firing his 0.5 HMG at the Egyptian turret.

This man have balls of steel!

The Merkava tank is the first of its kind to feature a motar. I suppose it will be useful for urban warfare where u need to fire at targets over buildings with a range of 2.7km. I am not sure if the 60mm can fire illum and smoke as well. Any info on this?

Before Merkava, the Israelis used the Centurion and the AMX-13.
During the 6-day war, the AMX clashed withthe T-54/55s. The AP shells from the 75mm gun bounced off the hull of the T-55s.

It was then decided that a heavier/better tank (the soon to be Merkava) was required. The AMX was then condemned to the scrap heap..........then came along the military scrap merchant from Singapore..........and the rest is singapore's military history..........

Currently only 2 types of rounds is available HE & WP

Originally posted by Dr Who:

Before Merkava, the Israelis used the Centurion and the AMX-13.
During the 6-day war, the AMX clashed withthe T-54/55s. The AP shells from the 75mm gun bounced off the hull of the T-55s.

It was then decided that a heavier/better tank (the soon to be Merkava) was required. The AMX was then condemned to the scrap heap..........then came along the military scrap merchant from Singapore..........and the rest is singapore's military history..........

If the 75mm round then cannot defeat T-55s armour. They would be useless against T72s esp those with reactive armour.

The AMX13SM1 is useless as a "tank".

But our doctrine has never been on "tanks" but using the them as a 3-man mobile support platform in partner with mechanized infantry.

Originally posted by tankee1981:

This man have balls of steel!

The Merkava tank is the first of its kind to feature a motar. I suppose it will be useful for urban warfare where u need to fire at targets over buildings with a range of 2.7km. I am not sure if the 60mm can fire illum and smoke as well. Any info on this?

It is not a difficult choice be reckless since you're gonna die anyway. But what I also give him top marks for is resourcefulness, which the Israelis seem to have a huge supply of.

The Merkava first saw action in Lebanon - ie urban warfare - against the Syrians. i read somewhere that the 60mm mortar came about through improvisation of tactics of MBT in the urban scenario.

This was also where the Syrians picked up on where the Egyptians left off in Yom Kippur - in heavily utilising infantry against tank. The Syrians created special "tank hunter" commando teams.

This invasion of Lebanon was also where the book on modern urban armour warfare was written. The Israelis also lost a lot of tanks to another kind of Syrian tank hunter teams - the attack chopper. If I'm not wrong, I think the Syrians used a western-made helicopter, probably French.

I have already read the Six Day War, Yom Kippur. I missed the War of Attrition, and am looking forward to other books on Israeli combat. I'm a huge fan.

Originally posted by spencer99:

If the 75mm round then cannot defeat T-55s armour. They would be useless against T72s esp those with reactive armour.

The AMX13SM1 is useless as a "tank".

But our doctrine has never been on "tanks" but using the them as a 3-man mobile support platform in partner with mechanized infantry.

ST Kinetics created modern AT ammo for the SM-1 or AMX-13 75mm gun.

So this thing about the AMX-13 being only for infantry support surely cannot be true?

SAF did intend for the AMX-13 to be a tank, but at that time, officially at least - MAF only had the Scorpion and Indoneisa only had the Scorpion and PT-76 as tanks. (Unofficially the MAF also got something else. That's why at that time unofficially we also got the Centurion.)

And I would say at least the AMX-13, PT-76 and Scorpion are well matched with a slight advantage to the Scorpion for being newer and having a 90mm (correct?) gun.

I guess most Singaporeans are very patriotic soldiers and wouldn't question SAF equipment - especially when they have been obsolete for only the last 50 years.

The retirement age of 55 must also apply to equipment in SAF!

If you don't believe me some of our airbase still got Bloodhound missiles...

Originally posted by spencer99:

If the 75mm round then cannot defeat T-55s armour. They would be useless against T72s esp those with reactive armour.

The AMX13SM1 is useless as a "tank"...

For some data check out:

http://battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=6&id=33&Itemid=49&lang=en

on penetration of armour for various calibre guns see 76mm for approximate equal to our AMX13 tank guns... Hmmm whats the frontal armour or the T-72M.. Like throwing snowballs frightens no-one.

on "If you don't believe me some of our airbase still got Bloodhound missiles... "

Thought all sold for some preserved green tea and dried prawns...? Still have meh??

Originally posted by baer:

For some data check out:

http://battlefield.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=6&id=33&Itemid=49&lang=en

on penetration of armour for various calibre guns see 76mm for approximate equal to our AMX13 tank guns... Hmmm whats the frontal armour or the T-72M.. Like throwing snowballs frightens no-one.

on "If you don't believe me some of our airbase still got Bloodhound missiles... "

Thought all sold for some preserved green tea and dried prawns...? Still have meh??

Have Air Force Museum

Originally posted by moca:

It is not a difficult choice be reckless since you're gonna die anyway. But what I also give him top marks for is resourcefulness, which the Israelis seem to have a huge supply of.

The Merkava first saw action in Lebanon - ie urban warfare - against the Syrians. i read somewhere that the 60mm mortar came about through improvisation of tactics of MBT in the urban scenario.

This was also where the Syrians picked up on where the Egyptians left off in Yom Kippur - in heavily utilising infantry against tank. The Syrians created special "tank hunter" commando teams.

This invasion of Lebanon was also where the book on modern urban armour warfare was written. The Israelis also lost a lot of tanks to another kind of Syrian tank hunter teams - the attack chopper. If I'm not wrong, I think the Syrians used a western-made helicopter, probably French.

I have already read the Six Day War, Yom Kippur. I missed the War of Attrition, and am looking forward to other books on Israeli combat. I'm a huge fan.

Angle of elevation problem for the main gun. When close to a tall object, the main gun cannot elevate enough. So in comes the mortar. I wonder if it is used in a direct or indirect fire mode.

Originally posted by baer:

For some data check out:

on penetration of armour for various calibre guns see 76mm for approximate equal to our AMX13 tank guns... Hmmm whats the frontal armour or the T-72M.. Like throwing snowballs frightens no-one.

on "If you don't believe me some of our airbase still got Bloodhound missiles... "

Thought all sold for some preserved green tea and dried prawns...? Still have meh??

Well, in all fairness 75mm gun is a lot better than those in the tables you posted.

(I think they are WW2 figures? But an interesting note is that our AMX-13 75mm gun was developed from a WW2 german tank gun, probably Panther or something.)

There is a VAST difference in the ammo available to the SAF AMX-13 comppared to WW2. We have the kind of modern armour-piercing rounds that has a head like a hypothermic needle - a rod for punching thru armour. But still, they are useless against modern MBT. The global standard is now 120mm - nearly twice the size of the 75mm gun.

Other than Bloodhound missiles, I even saw a fleet of really old jet fighters from the 60's at one of our airbases. They look like Strikemaster but much older. They are under wraps so I can't really identify them. Look like those 1950's planes with really sexy names like Sabre or Mystere etc...

Probably, along with the Bloodhounds, they are there as decoys.

Originally posted by Dr Who:

Before Merkava, the Israelis used the Centurion and the AMX-13.
During the 6-day war, the AMX clashed withthe T-54/55s. The AP shells from the 75mm gun bounced off the hull of the T-55s.

It was then decided that a heavier/better tank (the soon to be Merkava) was required. The AMX was then condemned to the scrap heap..........then came along the military scrap merchant from Singapore..........and the rest is singapore's military history..........

It is not just the size of the gun that matters...

The AMX-13 can be converted to 90mm or 105mm gun. But Israel did not bother to upgrade her AMX-13 armament but instead retired them from service. (They did perform other modifications to the engine, transmission etc. But not the gun.)

My guess is that the IDF realised after several wars that light tanks are not gonna make it home on the battlefield. The armour is too thin. If I'm not wrong, until today, the IDF does not operate any light tanks.

It is not just the matter of the gun calibre when it comes to armour warfare with the Israeli.

What they value ABOVE ALL ELSE is crew survivability.

During the Yom Kippur War nearly every tank that went into action was hit at least once. More than half of the crews survived hits to their tanks. More than half the tanks were able to be repaired and returned to service.

I highly doubt that if an AMX-13 is hit, much of it will be left.