What's new

Israel's future tank - The "Carmel"

Looks really good; fast and light with creative designed-based protection. The angled armor is really effective protection. The front slope is also really interesting as it can deflect and bounce off enemy shells downwards, but with a slight risk of decapitating the tractors. However it lacks firepower and in no way would be able to compete with 'heavy-weight' MBTs.
 
.
Yet another military thread mentioning israeli defence equipment that has been turned into a political dispute/argument(started almost exclusively by Pakistanis for some weird reason) like many others before. :hitwall:

Jeez.......seriously what are the MOD's here for?:undecided:
Stop this non sense ... i have already applogized for the off topic comment ...
 
.
index.php


index.php


index.php
 
.
a Simulation of Project Carmel
Brig. Gen. (res.) Didi Ben-Yoash, formerly Chief IDF Armored Corps Officer, presented a simulation of Project Carmel – a future technology demonstrator for the IDF Armored Corps – at the 2nd International Ground Warfare & Logistics Conference

Ami Rojkes Dombe | 18/05/2017

Send to a friend
A+A-Size
Share on
Share on
%D7%AA%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%941.jpg

Brig. Gen. (res.) Didi Ben-Yoash, formerly Chief IDF Armored Corps Officer, presented a simulation of Project Carmel – a future technology demonstrator for the IDF Armored Corps. The objective of this long-term program is to develop the technological infrastructure for the future armored platform that will constitute a quantum leap with regard to the primary characteristics of the future platform – operation, weight, size and survivability.

The future armored platform will be light, agile, small, relatively inexpensive and simple to operate and designed primarily for operation in urban areas with the hatches closed. The Carmel platform will be operated by two crewmen seated side-by-side, one of whom will be the platform commander and both of whom will be able to execute all of the activities required in order to operate the platform.

In order to enable operation by two crewmen only, a revolutionary decision-support system will be required. This system will carry out most of the activities currently carried out by the crewmen (including autonomous navigation and driving, target spotting, aiming, independent firing whenever possible plus other features).

The crewmen manning the Carmel platform will only carry out the operations the system cannot execute on its own. The cockpit will be sufficiently spacious to accommodate an additional crew member, who would be able to operate external systems (e.g. ground/aerial autonomous vehicles and stand-off munitions). The third crewmen manning a unit command vehicle will be the commander of the relevant unit (platoon commander/company commander).

The future armored platform will have a hybrid drive system that would enable, among other things, storing of energy so as to fulfill all future operational demands. The platform will be protected by a state-of-the-art active protection system and secured against cyberattacks. The new platform will be able to destroy enemy antitank detachments and rocket launchers. Owing to its small size and light weight, it will be able advance relatively easily through dense urban areas.

Three industries (Rafael, Elbit Systems and IAI) are currently engaged in the installation of the systems required for the operation of the future armored platform by two crewmen. Rafael offered a transparent cockpit. Elbit Systems suggested that the tank be commanded using a crewman's helmet offering similar capabilities to those of the helmet Elbit Systems provides to pilots of fifth-generation fighter aircraft, while IAI offered a combination of both solutions.

According to Ben-Yoash, the Carmel Program draws a lot of interest among the international armored platform community. He stressed that the Carmel Program is a truly revolutionary and unique program in the world of armored and fighting platforms.

"The Carmel Program is intended to develop the technological infrastructure for the future armored platform. In this context, an infrastructure will be developed to enable the employment of all munition types, including missiles. The future active protection program, which is to include highly-developed collective protection in the future, is being developed in the context of the Carmel Program. When it is completed – it will be used for existing platforms (Merkava, Namer & Eitan) as well. This principle (of fitting technologies that had matured in the context of the Carmel Program to existing armored platforms) applies to an extensive range of subjects," concluded Ben-Yoash.

http://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/29665

@Penguin @500 @Natan @Archdemon @GBU-28 @F-15I @mike2000 is back @Blue Marlin @Mountain Jew @Beny Karachun @Adir-M @Ilay @theman111

Related threads
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...nts-brig-gen-baruch-matz.496364/#post-9490945

Other IDF APC's/Tanks
Merkava 4 - https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/merkava-4.429628/
Namer - https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/namer-heavy-armoured-infantry-fighting-vehicle-israel.437122/
Eitan - https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/eitan-8x8-apc-armoured-vehicle-personnel-carrier.451093/
This is not a Tank. This is IFV
 
Last edited:
.
Israel has a lot of great engineers, I'm not doubting that you guys can make it but rather whether or not you can afford it.
Don't worry about it, most of the technology already exists, its all about the software and building the actual tanks now
Well, Stealth technology already existed when the F-35 when it was first being developed.

"The F-35 project has been one of the most expensive military projects in history, and will cost upwards of $1.45 trillion by the time it's over. No, that was not a typo. The project price is trillion with a T. What's more, it's not even ready for service yet, and it's already cost $400 billion, according to the Government Accountability Office, which is twice what it was supposed to have cost by now."

The F-35 is going to be a amazing plane no doubt but you can't deny that despite all the advances it is outrageously expensive. I don't think Israel could take on this project without a similar price tag.

What you want could be ridiculously expensive but lets just wait and see what happens.
Don't think its just the F-35 that cost so much, there are tons and tons of technologies that were developed for the F-35 and can be implemented on a bunch of other aircraft, missiles and even ground and sea vehicles and vessels.
The F-35 even when its not operational (It soon will be) is a BEAST, it has a 20-1 kill ratio against trained aggressor pilots in their F-16s

Again, most of the technologies exist, the R&D wont cost too much. For example, the Merkava Mk4 can compete with any tank in the world western or eastern and probably win, yet its price for the IDF is just $3.5 million

We have a saying in Israel, "We will live and see"
This is not a Tank. This is not IFV
This is just simulation, not a final product.
You cant tell what kind of cannon it is, nor tell the size of the tank
It will be made from lightweight materials, so its probably pretty big.
 
. .
This is a consept platform, which is compare to Russian ARMATA platform...................:coffee:
 
.
I think with the Syrian war right next door , Israel is well aware how Camel is the future of warfare .
 
. . .
what is merkava mark 4 Barak? Details plz.......:coffee:
In time for the 2nd International Ground Warfare and Logistics Conference through May 16-17 and the 4th International C5I (C4I plus Cyber) Conference in May 18th, speeches regarding the development of Armored Fighting Vehicles (AFVs) and developing tactics for their use, are being given.

I took the liberty to translate certain sections of these speeches and post them here, and analyze the new information that we're being given here regarding the Barak MBT, a little on the good old Mark 4
So far, in perhaps just a single release with just a single paragraph of text, a great deal of information was gathered on the Barak, and it was talked about here (link).

Let's dig in!

Another aspect is automation. We need automation systems that provide a real added value. Such systems are almost nonexistent at present. I do not want a robot that the enemy will destroy after a minute and a half. I need robots with automatic and semiautomatic modes of operation. Another layer concerns automatic firing. Wherever the human element is involved in the firing, the result is less favorable. The human element has an adverse effect on the precision and timing of the firing. The systems should provide automatic firing. That is the future. The next model of the Merkava tank will have an automatic firing button. The tank will detect and identify the element firing at it and would discharge a round at the source of fire 30 (Probably mistype of 3s) seconds later. You cannot accomplish that with a man in the loop.
Immediately we're given information about 2 innovations the Barak will have:
*Robots - autonomous or semi-autonomous.
*Automatic firing.
Let's talk about robots first.

UGV
This is really self explanatory. UGVs can provide a plethora of capabilities. I have talked about it in my previous post on the Barak (Link can be found above), so I will make it short by giving a few examples; UGVs can provide force protection by carrying IED detecting and jamming equipment, and if it goes undetected, it will take the hit as it'll go first.
Supply lines will be significantly reduced in areas regarded as vulnerable to ambushes by simply driving a pack of freight UGVs.

I should mention that the US is now conducting a similar program for drone operating via specialized crewman inside a tank, with feasibility testing beginning this year. Read about it here (link).

But now they're talking about automatic firing in tanks so it should have a pretty serious impact on UGV conception. We could see armed UGVs also conducting automatic firing via sensory cues, and there might be legal implications. But the big news, if it is true, is that the IDF will start fielding armed drones at some point (other than EOD), whereas despite Israel's very strong market presence in this field and vast R&D record, Israel has so far been reluctant about using armed drones.

Automatic Firing
For a first time in manned ground vehicle conception perhaps, automatic firing is being talked not as a possibility, but as an actual plan for a vehicle that is already in development and slated to enter service just 4 years from now (2021).
This topic has been a Taboo. When it comes to firing, a man-in-the-loop always was considered the only moral choice to make, preferably with the shooter actually seeing the target.
For reasons I shouldn't mention, many countries have banned unmanned firing procedures.

But it's not exactly that, and perhaps we'll never even talk about robotized firing on human targets in the conventional sense. Because in this case, it's a part of one fail-safe solution. The fire is retaliatory.

In 2011 Trophy revolutionized armor development by exponentially increasing a tank's protective capabilities at just a fraction of the weight of its armor. But it also introduced other advanced features which include Slew-To-Cue. An enemy would fire upon the tank, and the turret would quickly turn towards the target and await the gunner to pull the trigger. This time it's just a modification of this operation. The FCS (Fire Control System) would no longer wait for the gunner or commander. It would identify the firing source, and shoot on its own.

Closing the firing loop as fast as possible was a key capability the IDF has been building in the past few years, and this decision will certainly help to improve it.

Net-Centric Combat
Sadly this is hardly ever talked about in Tank and AFV discussions despite being a crucial aspect of the ground maneuver. The flexibility of the maneuvering forces to adapt to the emerging threats is what determines the result of the battle in the most dominant way.

The network will also affect the organization of the Armored Corps. The network should be secure, stable and reliable. During Operation Protective Edge, the network demonstrated stability for the first time. The information should be delivered quickly and must be relevant and accurate. We cannot accept an accuracy level of 20 meters. We need an accuracy level of up to two meters. With the network, the commander will be required to live and operate in a technological environment. The human element will have to accommodate the information, including on-line command. How do you make decisions under such conditions? That is a very serious question.
It may not be immediately obvious but they're talking about the BMS. In the 2014 Operation Protective Edge, the BMS played a key role in the success of the armored corps, by allowing each tank to maintain clear communication with one another, with higher command, and with forces nearby. Improving the BMS is a given, but its merits are not to be underestimated. Even improved UI (User Interface) can go a long way in adding value to the combat vehicle. Communication is all the rage lately, and rightfully so.

This time however, they're talking about integrating entire systems with the BMS. This should include the FCS, IronVision, Trophy, and more.
This sort of added data input will be significant. Commanders will see targets on a helmet display rather than a touchscreen hidden among numerous other screens in his station. Upon being fired on, they'll see the shooter physically, and the tank could engage targets that are visually hidden but seen on the BMS through the FCS.

For more information
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/merkava-4.429628/page-6

The future armored platform will be light, agile, small, relatively inexpensive and simple to operate and designed primarily for operation in urban areas with the hatches closed. The Carmel platform will be operated by two crewmen seated side-by-side, one of whom will be the platform commander and both of whom will be able to execute all of the activities required in order to operate the platform.

In order to enable operation by two crewmen only, a revolutionary decision-support system will be required. This system will carry out most of the activities currently carried out by the crewmen (including autonomous navigation and driving, target spotting, aiming, independent firing whenever possible plus other features).

Fantasy Tank..
And btw, IAI just unveiled it's autonomous truck (On Oshkosh trucks IDF bought lately.)
20170516_142740.jpg

http://www.israeldefense.co.il/he/node/29674
 
Last edited:
.
Latrun Conference: Carmel tech demonstrator

First I'd like to thank IsraelDefense.co.il for covering a great deal of information given during the 2nd International Ground Warfare Conference held in Latrun this year, and a thank-you to Sirpad from Fresh.co.il forum who also attended the conference and obtained further images of the Carmel technology demonstrator vehicle that were not posted on the IsraelDefense.co.il website.

General Characteristics
-Halving the weight relative to current vehicles. The goal is 35 tons without compromising protection. A lighter platform will better navigate inside tight urban areas.
-Automatic identification, jamming, and destruction capability for every direct threat on a tank and nearby assets.
-Autonomous engagement of enemy targets as immediate retaliation to enemy fire.
-Increased protection, and significant reduction in the vehicle's signature (visual, thermal, noise etc).
-Real time communication between all surrounding vehicles and units, and ad-hoc communication network for sharing targets.
-More advanced weaponry and ammunition than those currently existing. Hinted non-conventional guns.
-Advanced materials and transparent armor.
-Hybrid drive, smart energy management systems.
-Universal platform.
-Cyber protection for the communication and computerized systems inside the vehicle.
-Protected crew capsule with 3-person capacity.
-2 man crew. Third being a platoon or company commander with equipment to control unmanned assets.
-Dual controls for all crewmen to allow replacement of a crewman without leaving one's station.
-Medium caliber armament of unspecified type. Likely above 30mm and around 40-60mm.

Concept Art

Seen with wide FOV periscopes.


Same version but periscopes are absent.


No rear door.


Family includes APC(?), Recon, CEV, and VSHORAD as well as the standard version.

Okay so let's get down to it, shall we?
The concept art surprised pretty much everyone, including me. But not because of its odd shape, but because it's sloppy.
There is no rear door, so how could the crew enter or exit? There is no V-shaped hull, no APS, and no sights for either the RCWS or panoramic sights.
Not to mention the odd shape of the hull makes little sense. It would be reasonable to provide a higher level of protection to the crew capsule (center portion of the vehicle), but the side armor modules are each shaped differently, which means more different components for the sake of aesthetics which the design team of the concept art is responsible for.
The periscopes take up an immense amount of space and therefore pose a weakspot right above the crew compartment. This is sub-optimal because in an urban environment, top protection is vital. However in one of the pictures it is removed.

For the above-mentioned reasons, I am confident that this is NOT going to be the way the Carmel looks like in the final version. But here are a few details that the concept art does give us:

1)The family of vehicles based on Carmel will replace the Namer which currently serves as an APC and CEV, and will soon be converted to IFV as well. There is no mentioning of a troop carrying capacity for the Carmel yet, but because we see an HMG armed variant, it's likely it will be an APC.
It might be stretched, as opposed to the pictures.

2)Interestingly no MBT variant is shown, which is odd because if it will replace the Namer APC and IFV and Nemmera CEV, it will make the Merkava 4 Barak MBT the only one in the Merkava family without a proper long term replacement plan.

Again, the Carmel will be a highly advanced vehicle with a multitude of advanced capabilities and innovative technologies, but the concept art gives us more doubts than answers.

http://zuk-armor-il.blogspot.co.il/2017/05/latrun-conference-carmel-tech.html
 
Last edited:
.
Do you know the position of engine? I think probably front!

Rear Mounted Turret is being used, most probably wont be used as a forward attack tank.
 
.
Looks ugly, though I do like the cockpit and helmet idea. Seems sort unrealistic with all the demands that is being made of this tank. Sorta reminds me of the F-35, it was designed to be the super-fighter of its day able to do anything and everything unfortunately that made it way too EXPENSIVE. I don't think Israel can spend 1 trillion dollars on a do anything and everything tank.
first develop anything in egypt then talk about our products
 
. .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom