More on the Namer

We picked the Namer as our IFV of choice. But I have more to say about it, and a few things I might like to tweak. First, let’s take a good look at the turret.

namer ifv turret

This is from a presentation, so it’s a trifle incomplete. We can see most of the mechanisms though. Note that the popup missile launcher has a pair of MATADOR rockets installed here. These could also be Spike 2 ATGMs. There’s also no indication (at this stage) of an autoloader for the Trophy install, or any indication of the autoloader assembly for the mortar.

Still, it’s a great turret. I really like the firepower in the Namer IFV. We could debate caliber until we’re blue in the face, but 400 rounds of 30x173mm plus two rockets or missiles is very solid. However, I’m a good armchair strategist, and I can always find things I might like to tweak given the opportunity. We’ll go through these in order of ease of doing.

  1. Side skirts. The skirts on Namer aren’t very thick. Thicker skirts would help protect against incoming RPG fire better. Given the vehicle’s size, this is an obvious threat vector, so let’s armor up.

  2. Engine change. The Namer currently uses the AVDS-1790, which generates 1,200 hp. We also know the Namer is very heavy. The CEV version (which has Trophy but no turret) weighs 63.5 tonnes, and the turret is going to mean even more weight. To improve mobility, we’d like ours built with the MTU 883 engine, which makes 1,500 hp. This is the engine used on the Merkava 4, so this change should be pretty easy to do.

  3. Glacis work. Due to being a newer, liquid-cooled engine, the MTU 883-based powerpack is smaller than the one built around the AVDS-1790. A smaller powerpack means there’s more room for glacis armor, so let’s fill the void. There is no such thing as too much armor.

  4. APS change. I like Trophy. It’s combat proven. But IBD Disenroth1 has a system called AMAP-ADS. The Gen 3 version reacts considerably faster than Trophy (0.56 ms for ADS compared to 300-350 ms for Trophy). In Swedish tests, ADS also has a smaller danger space for nearby infantry. Further, in the turret picture above, we note a lack of reloads for Trophy. We can fit a whole bunch of ADS effectors on the Namer, and we’d like to do so.

  5. Additional missiles. Given the deletion of trophy from the turret, it might be nice to see if we could get more missiles in there.


  1. Now a subsidiary of Rheinmetall. 

5 thoughts on “More on the Namer

  1. Daib

    The Russians like adding automatic grenade launchers to their transports these days. Any room for it on your Namer?

    Reply
    1. parvusimperator Post author

      Quite possibly. I would probably expect to mount it as an RWS, but the roof is kind of crowded, especially with the pop-up rocket launchers. Maybe mount something slaved to the commander’s sight, placed right behind it? It would require testing of course.

  2. Mighty_Zuk

    1)The side skirts may occasionally appear thicker or thinner than usual, because the IDF doesn’t have just one standard set of skirts for every tank. There are lighter skirts for everyday duties, and there are very thick skirts for the real heat, in which case the otherwise absent belly armor plates are also added.
    Here is how the Namer looks like after intense combat, showing its thick side skirts. It’s not too visible but it should still be adequately visible:

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-shCp3ko_cHg/W0n3mBmlckI/AAAAAAAABZA/IILgQSpUyygqlEB_3YDaR5O2Z3u1pB7QwCLcBGAs/s1600/20.jpg

    2)The MTU 883 was originally sought for the Namer, yeah. It would be better, but it also costs 3 times as much as the AVDS engine.
    It was very important for the Merkava 4 because without it, it cannot really make enough room for proper armor.
    But the Namer is taller than the Merkava 4’s hull, thus it can achieve a similar, if not identical level of protection even with the old engine.

    https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1U8AC6paOUo/W0n3lwBqCjI/AAAAAAAABY4/AJd0nSZt_GcqdqDKBc8jUryqH_5njZyPACLcBGAs/s1600/19.jpg

    3)Explained in point above.

    4)The AMAP-ADS is much more suitable for lighter platforms, as it gets bulkier the higher you go with platform weight.
    It indeed has a higher reaction time, but it is a result of its utilization of optical sensors instead of radars. This helps it fight against RPGs fired from very short range, although the Trophy has also demonstrated in Gaza to be able to do that (there are 4 videos of interceptions, but the relevant one is the most elusive one, sorry).
    The downside to replacing the radars with optical sensors is that it prevents the vehicle operators from understanding where the shooter is, thus preventing them from closing the firing loop.
    The Trophy’s radars allow the crew to see exactly where the shooter is, and retaliate, sometimes even before the missile reaches the vehicle (in case of long range engagement) which prevents a hit and vastly increases the tank’s lethality.

    5)A Namer always works in a platoon, and then company.
    In a platoon of, say, 4 Namers, a typical platoon will have 8 ATGMs, which is quite substantial. With the added capability to store extra ATGMs inside the vehicle for reloading in cover, it can be further increased.
    With platoons around the world packing 6-10 ATGMs on the vehicles alone, it became pretty pointless to try to raise the number to higher than 2.

    Reply
    1. parvusimperator Post author

      Welcome to the Soapbox. I’ve liked your posts elsewhere. I don’t think I realized that the MTU 883 cost so much more.

      Doesn’t AMAP-ADS have some kind of integrated mini-radar? Or am I thinking of a “potential capability” advertisment?

      Also, thanks for the pictures!

Leave a Reply