Israel - Armor
The War of Independence was fundamentally an infantry war. The operations of the enemy and of Israel were based on infantry units and formations. The few tanks that were then on the scene did not play a decisive role in the battles. Israel had 15 tanks, and the Arab armies had 45 tanks. The mobile and armored forces in the War of Independence were based on armored vehicles, armored troop carriers and armored vehicles with light cannons. Israel had 280 armored vehicles and 20 armored vehicles with cannons. The enemy armies had 620 armored personnel carriers and APCs, 180 of them with cannons.
In the first decades of its emergence into existence, the Israeli state worked on building an effective military doctrine in confronting the Arab armies. The battles of World War II, in which some Jews who later immigrated to the Palestinian territories participated, developed their extensive field experience, and the Zionist gangs quickly benefited from it in the 1948 war, compared to the Arabs, whose nascent armies had not acquired experience in wars. After that, Israel worked to establish regular armed forces similar to its Western counterparts, and soon found some successes in the battles it fought during the 1956 war, as tanks proved successful in confronting the Egyptian army, which had just begun serious arming attempts with the Czechoslovak arms deal in 1955.
In Operation Kadesh, in 1956, the face of things changed - Israel deployed 200 tanks in Sinai, and Egypt 150 tanks. Since then, the war on land between Israel and Arab countries has become mobile and armored. In the Six Day War, 2,500 tanks participated in the battles, and in the Yom Kippur War, 6,200 tanks of all sides participated. Since Operation Kadesh, thousands of tanks have been destroyed in the Israeli-Arab wars. At the center of the art of war on land today is the tank, and it is considered the main decisive weapon in modern warfare. Before Operation Kadesh, Egypt received, as part of the "Czech deal", 300 tanks and superior Soviet tank destroyers of various types: Stalin-3, T-34 and 100-SU tank destroyers. It was an impressive addition to the existing Egyptian fleet of tanks and tank destroyers, which numbered 430 Western vessels of various types.
In this arms race in the Middle East, Israel had the upper hand - both quantitatively and qualitatively. The Arabs obtained new and modern tanks from both the East and the West without any problems, while Israel had to make do with scrap, old and unfit tanks - "Shermans" from World War II, British "Centurions" and American 48-M tanks that were out of use.
No country in the world had agreed to sell new tanks to Israel. To this day it is not clear why various countries agreed to sell Israel, from time to time, new and innovative weapons such as jet planes, but persistently and stubbornly refused to sell Israel new tanks. With no choice, the IDF was forced to acquire control over the armor technologies, rehabilitate the tank scraps obtained and perfect them by implanting new engines and guns. The competition between Israel and the Arabs in the field of tank quality was, in fact, a competition between new Western and Soviet tanks, which were in the hands of the Arabs, and between tanks old, restored and improvised, which were at Israel's disposal.
In the sixties, the Arabs were about to receive the T-62 from the Soviet Union. It was the most modern operational tank in the world at the time, with a powerful 115 mm cannon. The State of Israel stood helpless in the face of this development. It was clear that in the future it would not be possible to continue to exist - through improvisations and "rejuvenation" of the tanks of the 1990s 40 and 50 - quality power ratios are tolerable.
Never before, with the exception of the M60 tanks sold to Israel by the USA in 1971, had a new tank been sold to Israel straight from the factory. This situation forced the IDF to deal with the problem of reassembling tanks, until sometimes, apart from the external appearance, nothing of the original remained in them. The curse of the refusal to sell new tanks turned out to be a blessing on the side: Israel had to establish an infrastructure for the restoration and conversion of tanks, and to raise generations of armed forces personnel who specialized in tank technology.
In the second half of the 1960s, the British were in dire financial straits. They had to renew their fleet of tanks, but could only do so on the condition that they sell the old tanks, and in return develop and manufacture new tanks for themselves. As part of realizing these interests, the British at that time sold Israel Centurion tanks, which were converted in Israel to diesels, and better guns were mounted on them.
In 1966, the British wanted to sell more Centurion tanks to Israel, and therefore they offered a tempting deal: Israel would purchase the Centurion tanks, and the British would positively consider supplying Chieftain tanks to Israel. The Chieftain was at the time the most modern tank in the West, not yet operational, but in its development stages. It was a serious temptation and Israel agreed to the deal, and even took part in the development of the Chieftain. The two Chieftain tanks were transferred to Israel in complete secrecy, and for three years the Armed Forces and the Armored Corps, together with British experts, were engaged in improving them and adapting them to the requirements of the IDF.
In November 1966, before the Chieftain tanks were transferred to tests in Israel, two delegations left Israel for Britain. The delegation The first was composed of armed forces personnel headed by Lt. Col. Israel Tilan, and included Major Gideon Argon, Capt. Moshe Kidar and A.D. Moshe Nebo and ten soldiers with the rank of sergeant in regular service, who were trained in the maintenance of the Chieftain systems. The second expedition consisted of five armor officers, who were sent to the British Armor School in Bovington, to be trained in tank operation.
In March 1969, the Chieftain Tank Program Directorate (CMTP) was established under the leadership of Major General Israel Tel. In April 1969, a delegation from the Ordnance Corps went to Leeds, Great Britain, to study the production process of the tank at the factory. The members of the delegation were: Brigadier General Haim Domi, Chief Armaments Officer , Lt. Col. Israel Tilan, head of the tank branch at the Chief Armaments Officer's Headquarters, Lt. Col. Uriel Tamir, head of the works planning branch at the AGA, Col. Mordechai Ron-Ness, commander of the 681 Army, and Lt. Col. Eliezer Yehezkali, head A technical branch of the 681st Military Academy. The delegation met there with General Tal, and for ten days studied the items of equipment, the assemblies necessary for the production of the tank, and the production and assembly processes.
Regarding the continuation of the contacts with the British, Tal explains: The talks that were held with the British were serious, the development was in very early stages, Israel was progressing and Britain had met most of Israel's demands. It was agreed with the British that in the first stage Israel will receive tanks made in Britain, and at the same time would build a tank assembly line in Israel. Israel would receive from Britain assemblies and parts for assembling the tanks in Israel, with the aim of deepening production, and eventually producing the tanks alone. The British commitment was long-term , and far-reaching: both the supply of tanks and help to Israel in establishing a tank industry.
The problem of supplying the chieftains to Israel was repeatedly discussed in the British Cabinet, and on May 1, 1969, a meeting was held dedicated to this issue. The situation in the Suez Canal was at that time serious according to the British assessment. The Egyptians shelled the IDF forces, while the Israelis attacked power stations deep in Egypt. The British Minister of Defense and the British Foreign Secretary expressed fear that Israel would start a pre-emptive war, especially if Britain announced that it would not supply it with the Chieftain tanks, and Israel would feel that the balance of power was changing to its detriment. A war in the Middle East was not desirable for Britain.
The ministers in the British cabinet were divided into two groups: one represented the economic interest and the other the political interest. To calm the economic group, the British foreign minister told the cabinet members that he had succeeded in convincing the Americans to agree not to sell American tanks to Israel instead of the Chieftains, which Britain would refuse to sell, and thus Britain will not lose a traditional potential buyer.
Another British Cabinet meeting took place on October 15, 1969. Because of the Arab threat, everyone was unanimous that modern tanks should not be supplied to Israel, but to prevent An Israeli pre-emptive war As a result, perhaps it is better to continue to deceive Israel. [...] Moreover, Britain has pledged to supply Libya with weapons worth 150 million pounds, including air defense systems and Chieftain tanks, and among the cabinet members there were those who argued that Israel should not be discriminated against But in the meantime, Libya canceled the arms deal and the British decided not to make a decision about Israel and freeze the situation. Thus the decision was postponed until finally, in December 1969, the British finally informed Israel of the cancellation of the Chieftains deal.
In 1966, to Israel's great joy, England made her a dramatic historic proposal. The British needed money to complete the development of their new tank of the future, the "Chieftain", with a 120 mm gun. This tank was supposed to be the most powerful and modern tank of the West. Due to their financial distress, the British offered Israel a "package deal": Israel will purchase hundreds of old "Centurion" tanks (the traditional "scrap") from them, and they, in return, will share with Israel in the final stages of the development of the "Chiptain", will sell "Chiptains" to Israel and will even help establish an assembly line in Israel to produce these tanks. Israel gladly accepted the offer, as it was an ideal solution to the gloomy forecast of the relationship of forces in the region.
The collaboration with the English lasted about three years. Two prototypes of "Chieftain" tanks were transferred to Israel, and Israel worked hard on their understanding and finalizing their development together with English officers and engineers who worked in Israel. But the Arab countries failed the deal. They threatened England with imposing sanctions, such as withdrawing their financial reserves from the English banks and more. There were also demonstrations in several Arab capitals, and a mob attacked embassies.
In November 1969, in the face of Arab pressure, England withdrew from the "Chipatains" deal with Israel. Development, planning and preparation efforts that lasted three years went down the drain, and the State of Israel returned to the starting point. The "Chieftan" affair finally made it clear to Israel that it is alone in the battle. For the first time, the possibility of developing and producing tanks in Israel was considered.
In the Rafah area, eight fighters from the IDF Engineering Corps were killed 15 June 2024 as a result of the bombing of an armored personnel carrier 15 June 2024. At approximately five o’clock in the morning local time, an anti-missile was launched at an armored vehicle containing 8 soldiers and officers, and it exploded immediately and the area was completely engulfed in flames. The explosion caused rebound explosions due to the munitions that were inside. All the soldiers were inside, and the eight were killed instantly and burned inside the vehicle. Hamas announced that it is an RPG, but the IDF is skeptical about this claim.
One of the points that will be examined concerns the conclusions of the investigation that were presented at the beginning of December 2023 on a similar incident, in which 11 Givati fighters were killed as a result of an anti-tank missile that hit the Namar they were in. The investigation revealed that one of the anti-tank missiles fired at the vessel hit the force's Matador missile, which exploded inside the anti-tank missile and caused additional explosions. Following that incident, the IDF instructed all forces that use sniper rifles to remove the shoulder-fired missiles from the fighters' compartment and place them in separate compartments outside.
In the current investigation, they will check whether the explosives of the combat engineering forces were the ones that ignited first and caused the big explosion. If it turns out that it is, the IDF will try to figure out where the explosives can be placed in a way that will not endanger the fighters, but will still be effective for use.
The battle tank has existed for about a hundred years, when in practice in World War II it was crowned as the true ruler of the land battlefield. This control was undermined by the introduction of anti-tank missiles (in the 1950s) and combat helicopters ( in the 1980s). The anti-tank missile is the main and most serious threat against the armor, and in the constant struggle between increasing the missile's penetration and improving the tank's protection, the tank has practically reached its peak - the Chariot 4 tank is the peak of body protection, thus exacting a price due to weight and other characteristics. This tank will face advanced anti-tank missiles in the near future, but it must be remembered that in some cases even a simple anti-tank can hit the tank's weak point and disable (and even destroy) it.
Cage protection, also called statistical protection [migon statisti] (by the IDF), grille protection, ladder protection, net protection or or crinoline armor (after the crinoline dress and its iron skeleton) and in English Slat Armor or Cage Armor, is armor for an armored combat vehicle designed to deal with hollow-charge warhead anti-tank missiles. The older type of armored vehicle protection is by building a rigid wall with a relatively large thickness for the vehicle, so that ammunition fired at it will not penetrate it and harm the crew members.
A series of metal rods are placed near each other, but not close together, at some distance from the body of the armored vehicle. The structure created by the metal rods resembles ladders, or a cage, hence the name of this passive shielding. This shielding configuration is intended against a single-stage hollow charge that is mainly used in anti-tank rockets such as the Lao , RPG-7 and the like. It is ineffective as protection against tandem anti- tank missiles, projectiles or shrapnel, and is used as an additional layer of protection for passive plate armor. Its purpose is to cause structural damage to the hollow charge, which will disrupt its effectiveness, or to cause it to launch at too great a distance from the body of the armored vehicle, thereby reducing its armor penetration ability.
This protection exists today on the American Stryker APCs and the British Warrior vehicles in Iraq and on the D9R bulldozers, the Ngamhoun and the M-88 rescue tank in Israel. The shielding was gradually introduced starting in 2003/4. Following the Israeli success in Gaza and Lebanon, it was decided to apply it to other weapons as well. The success was also recognized internationally, when the American forces operating in Iraq sought to copy the Israeli protection.
The shielding of the D-9 bulldozers in Gaza began during the fighting in the field in 2007. The statistical protection project for the D9R bulldozer is an innovative and creative project that, thanks to original thinking, contributed significantly to the operationalization. The project was motivated by the kidnapping of Corporal Gilad Shalit," says the RCM officer in the HTL, Lt. Col. Doron. The operational need to protect the heavy vehicles arose after one person was injured on the day of Gilad Shalit's abduction to Gaza. After the abduction, the D9R bulldozers of the Civil Engineering Battalion entered Gaza.
In the first week of the war, the bulldozers of the Engineering Corps, which entered the Strip to pave the way for the infantry forces, fired at Palestinians. The first hit to the bulldozer was not long in coming, and then the decision was made to protect them. Following the incident, the head of the RCM branch at the Land Arms Headquarters, Lt. Col. Doron Segal, issued a sweeping directive to protect all IDF bulldozers. According to his instructions, the protection works on the vehicles began while they were operating in the Strip. It was determined that dozens of machiness would be protected in an extremely short schedule, and indeed only a week passed from the idea being raised to its implementation in the field. Due to the tight schedules and because of the need not to harm the activity, deep pits called "graves" were dug so that the shields could be assembled in the field, under the threat of anti-tank fire from the Palestinians. In less than 24 hours, most of the bulldozers were protected and resumed operating in the Gaza Strip.
The complex project was divided between several bodies that worked around the clock. And in cooperation with the 7000 Masha who worked in the field and the members of the National Security Agency who provided the technical solution. The installation of the shielding was carried out in Nazmit and Beit Hillel, and not in the workshops as is customary, thus saving time and costs. The task is usually carried out in workshops for weeks, but the operational need gave rise to a new "venture": assembling the layers of protection by digging pits.
The difference between IAI's "Ram" vehicle and other vehicles from the same group lies in the protection. While other vehicles are lighter and do not include protection, the "Ram" includes protection at several levels according to an international standard called NATO AEP - 55 STANAG 4569 . The basic model comes with protection level 1 and the customer can request higher levels from IAA. It all depends on need and budget. The IAI Ramata factory provides an additional protection kit if the customer wants. There is also statistical shielding against RPGs.
The shielding prevented a fatal injury to human life.
The D9 bulldozer is a caterpillar tractor made by Caterpillar with a bulldozer or "knife" in the front and a sterilizer/rotor in the rear. This is one of the largest bulldozers that Caterpillar makes, with an engine power of 405 horsepower in the R model and 436 horsepower in the newest T model, and weighs about 50 tons. The D9 is able to push a weight of about 72 tons thanks to the powerful engine, transmission and torque converter.
D9 bulldozers have served in the IDF since the 60s of the 20th century, but a protected model - the D9L - entered service on a large scale only in 1986 following the difficult fighting in southern Lebanon. The heavy armor of the D9, in addition to its strong chassis, They made it one of the most durable and protected tools in the IDF, especially against side charges and heavy belly charges. The current model in service is the D9R which, in addition to the armor, also includes cage protection ("ladder protection" or "statistical protection") against rockets and anti-tank missiles. The D9 can also be equipped with a machine gun and smoke detectors when necessary. The D9 has proven the itself as a very important and even decisive tool in the war on terror, and it serves as a protective wall for the maneuvering forces of the IDF, and as an engineering tool that tipped the scales in Israel's favor in the fight against the terrorists.
https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%93%D7%97%D7%A4%D7%95%D7%A8_%D7%93%D7%99-9_%D7%91%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%A6%D7%94%22%D7%9C
The Caterpillar D9, known in the IDF as "Dubi", is a large track-type tractor designed and manufactured by Caterpillar Inc.. It is usually sold as a bulldozer equipped with a detachable large blade and a rear ripper attachment. The D9 has a crew of two: operator and commander. The latest generation of Caterpillar D9 bulldozers in IDF service, the D9R, has a power of 405–410 horsepower (302–306 kW) and drawbar pull of 71.6 metric tons (about 702 kN). The D9 has been produced in the United States since 1955. The D9G model was built from 1961 to 1974 at Caterpillar's East Peoria plant. It had a maximum engine power of 385hp and weighed in at around 31 tons. The D9 has a fuel tank (splash fill) of 963 L (254 gal) and a fuel tank (fast fill) of 939 L (248 gal). It also has a cooling system of 99.8 L (26 gal), an engine crankcase of 48 L (13 gal), and a power train of 150 L (40 gal).
The need for a safe method of removing explosive threats led to the development of the IDF’s new unmanned combat engineering "Panda" Bulldozer. This remote-controlled innovation—an armored robotic system controlled from afar by specially trained personnel to conduct combat engineering tasks. This heavy vehicle has the potential to change the way the IDF operates in routine and operational scenarios, and is revolutionary in that it allows forces to be “on the battlefield” without risking their lives.
“The operational reality and alternating battlefield create new and complex engineering challenges. Our enemies often fight in urban areas and activate explosive devices and traps. This tool is a robotic innovation, armored and shielded, allowing for the effective and quick handling of the obstacles set by the enemy.” —IDF Chief Combat Engineering Officer, BG Ido Mizrachi.
Caterpillar Defense is the world’s foremost supplier of earthmoving equipment, engines and power generators for government agencies and military forces. These reliable and technologically advanced products are used to provide security, generate energy and supply critical aid for millions of people around the globe.
A LONG LEGACY AS A PROVEN PARTNER
Virtually every U.S. military engagement since World War I has relied, in some way, on Caterpillar equipment. The U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Air Force all have used Cat military construction equipment and power solutions for many decades. Today, Caterpillar continues to support men and women in uniform and federal civilians with leading-edge solutions and global support.
https://pdfcoffee.com/idf-d9-overview-pdf-free.html
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
