MIlitary in the Region
-
Saw it on TV only.... but we've got Hawks and PC-7 over hereOriginally posted by Viper52:Yeh....the only Pigs in the world that fly!
seriously watching them do that dump and burn stunt was fantastic...I was at Melbourne for Australia Day last year and seeing the long plume of flame against the twillight sky was something else....
And Joe Black, have you seen 6 Sqns 50th Anniversary bird with the Pig's head and Boomerang on the tail? Way cool!
hee hee... They do fly pass during Australia Day.... The hawks are really loud compared to the PC-7s -
Heck...as all Melburnains would agree...WA is boring! Except when CVNs go to Fremantle IMO! I also saw the Hawk 127 at Avalon 2001, kinda a pity it didn't fly...Originally posted by Joe Black:Saw it on TV only.... but we've got Hawks and PC-7 over here hee hee... They do fly pass during Australia Day.... The hawks are really loud compared to the PC-7s -
Yeah I know we can't expect perfection, but I mean...that report was riddled with elementary errors. and not just on our strengths, there were problems with the australian entries etc.
I'm sure everyone here can accept the odd mistake, but to have this kind of errors, its really blows their credibility away.... -
Quite agree about WA is boring part... well, at least we do get something right...Originally posted by Viper52:Heck...as all Melburnains would agree...WA is boring! Except when CVNs go to Fremantle IMO! I also saw the Hawk 127 at Avalon 2001, kinda a pity it didn't fly... some consolations I guess... BTW, I wonder why RSAF never put up any show? Don't tell me the excuse is because they've only got trainers here... 
Another thing is that the recent US ships did not have open house. Since Sept 11, all the US ships are closed to the public. Lucky me then since I have twice been onboard the carriers. Been onboard on their AEGIS warships, transport ships and darn missed the Iwo Jima. but I did see the Cobras on the deck, just ran out of time to get onboard... Well in Melbourne, I bet you guys never had such visits right. Sydneysiders do get visits too -
Well you know the RSAF, secrecy over good senseOriginally posted by Joe Black:Quite agree about WA is boring part... well, at least we do get something right... some consolations I guess... BTW, I wonder why RSAF never put up any show? Don't tell me the excuse is because they've only got trainers here...
Another thing is that the recent US ships did not have open house. Since Sept 11, all the US ships are closed to the public. Lucky me then since I have twice been onboard the carriers. Been onboard on their AEGIS warships, transport ships and darn missed the Iwo Jima. but I did see the Cobras on the deck, just ran out of time to get onboard... Well in Melbourne, I bet you guys never had such visits right. Sydneysiders do get visits too
Yes, all visits to USN ships have stopped since Sept 11, I was trying to wrangle a visit to the Carl Vinson when she stopped here in Singapore over Christmas but they said NO, as we found out later due to the arrests. Pity, becos her birds wouild have all the Enduring Freedom nose art and mission marks.
Melbourne has had USN ships, a AEGIS cruiser and destroyer from the constellation CVBG stopped over in Melb while the carrier was in Sydney, and I went on board then. No CV/CVN or LHD/LHA/LPD though, Port Philip Bay is too shallow for those...
I did go with a friend to the Kitty Hawk in Sydney though, took overnight buses to and fro from Melb. It was his 1st carrier so he was really keen, I've been to quite a number of ships already, Carl Vinson, Abe Lincoln, Kitty Hawk, Boxer(LHD), Chosin(CG), Benfold(DDG), Siroco(French Navy LST), an Austin-class LPD(forgot the name), 3 Indian Navy ships and an Italian carrier so far. Great fun! -
Wow... good on you for having been onboard so many ships. I have been onboard mainly the US ships. I didn't bother to visit other ships because of the long queues. The most memorable moments when I went inside a carrier (I believe it was Kitty Hawk) CIC, and also the CIC of an AGEIS cruiser (Bunker Hill). Cool man. I was totally impressed. RSN never allowed such visits into the CIC. I often wonder what the CIC of the MCV looks like...Originally posted by Viper52:Melbourne has had USN ships, a AEGIS cruiser and destroyer from the constellation CVBG stopped over in Melb while the carrier was in Sydney, and I went on board then. No CV/CVN or LHD/LHA/LPD though, Port Philip Bay is too shallow for those...
I did go with a friend to the Kitty Hawk in Sydney though, took overnight buses to and fro from Melb. It was his 1st carrier so he was really keen, I've been to quite a number of ships already, Carl Vinson, Abe Lincoln, Kitty Hawk, Boxer(LHD), Chosin(CG), Benfold(DDG), Siroco(French Navy LST), an Austin-class LPD(forgot the name), 3 Indian Navy ships and an Italian carrier so far. Great fun! -
Sounds like fun. I'd like to get on one of those too.
-
Yeah, I visited the CIC of the CG and DDG when they came over to Melb too, even had the radar operators show us how a Cessna 172 overhead was tracked.
Like I said, security prevails over good sense in the military here...I remember one FPDA Open House when the Brits opened their E-3 front to back, while the E-2 was locked up like there were gold bars inside. -
I wonder how much one can learn by just visiting the CIC of a ship or to view the AEW consoles. When I guess there are "good" reasons why Mindef is so secretive about almost anything.Originally posted by Viper52:Yeah, I visited the CIC of the CG and DDG when they came over to Melb too, even had the radar operators show us how a Cessna 172 overhead was tracked.
Like I said, security prevails over good sense in the military here...I remember one FPDA Open House when the Brits opened their E-3 front to back, while the E-2 was locked up like there were gold bars inside. -
I guess there are 2 ways to deterrence.
1. Show everybody what you've got, what capabilities you can get away with.
2. Hide everything, give foreign intelligence agencies a headache tryin to find out. And hide true strengths. -
if the government is so secretive abt our capabilities... how come there are statistics of our armed forces floating around. are the stats for real?
i've managed to source out our armour stats for my project. but i'm not sure how valid they are.
we need to have deterrence. or else m'sia and indonesia wouldnt give us any respect. gotta show them we're not pushovers. =P -
I assume you had not served your NSF, from the way you wrote. Though much information is in the open, nobody can really confirm the exact stats, as SG manufacture some of the stuff we need. Also even we could, we have no wish to test the efficency of MSD. =)Originally posted by recoil:if the government is so secretive abt our capabilities... how come there are statistics of our armed forces floating around. are the stats for real?
i've managed to source out our armour stats for my project. but i'm not sure how valid they are.
we need to have deterrence. or else m'sia and indonesia wouldnt give us any respect. gotta show them we're not pushovers. =P -
I agreed... the ability of local manufacturing has given SAF an edge...Originally posted by wombat:I assume you had not served your NSF, from the way you wrote. Though much information is in the open, nobody can really confirm the exact stats, as SG manufacture some of the stuff we need. Also even we could, we have no wish to test the efficency of MSD. =)
In fact... no one can be sured now.. how many... of these locally made weapons does SAF possess...
SAF can give any figure they like.... and make as much as they desire.... -
I think a defence budget 6% of our GDP is finite so there's really no basis to expect that there's enough bionixs' stashed away to fight WW3...Originally posted by tripwire:I agreed... the ability of local manufacturing has given SAF an edge...
In fact... no one can be sured now.. how many... of these locally made weapons does SAF possess...
SAF can give any figure they like.... and make as much as they desire....
Besides, most of the money doesn't go towards the army but the air force and navy... its not that easy to hide the numbers of your planes (especially since we don't make F-16s locally) and absolutely impossible to hide your ships (invisible paint anyone?)
-
hahah. agreed. u and your invisible paint.Originally posted by CX:I think a defence budget 6% of our GDP is finite so there's really no basis to expect that there's enough bionixs' stashed away to fight WW3...
Besides, most of the money doesn't go towards the army but the air force and navy... its not that easy to hide the numbers of your planes (especially since we don't make F-16s locally) and absolutely impossible to hide your ships (invisible paint anyone?)
you can't hide everything i guess. but in the first place how come we're producing so many bionixes? like 400+? we arent expecting that much resistance are we? or are we.
-imagines 50 bionixes surrounding 10 m'sian MBTs.-
but i think arty is one thing we produce locally and dont reveal much stats of. havent found much on our arty. =P but thats a good sign i guess. security of some info. =P -
Armour and arty is what they used to protect our arses, without them, we're all just walking targets. Think it's not too sensible to put that out.
Bionix?Well, haven't really got a chance to watch what they are able to do, more of reading what they CAN DO...to what level? Only those driving knows what to expect.
I think as long as we are making ammos, should be pretty much safe. -
Can the 50 Bionixs take out 10 MBT? Given the current armaments, no. Unless they are planning to mount some kinda ATGMs on the IFV. The 10 MBT would probably have to be taken out by the infantry onboard. Is there enough room inside the Bionix to pack a decent ATGM? A Spike Maybe? Or would the Bionix be obliterated by a HEAT round before it gets to deploy?
In "Command n Conquer" yeah, perhaps 50 bionix/similar vehicle can take out medium/heavy tanks with its 25mm gun. But I doubt the 25mm HE can do much against the armor of a main battle tank. -
Why pack ATGM inside the chassis? Why not just marry the Spike launcher to the side of the 25mm turret? Have the Spike sight marry onto the top of the turret integrating with the commander's periscope, then we've got something like the M2 Bradley.Originally posted by Shotgun:Can the 50 Bionixs take out 10 MBT? Given the current armaments, no. Unless they are planning to mount some kinda ATGMs on the IFV. The 10 MBT would probably have to be taken out by the infantry onboard. Is there enough room inside the Bionix to pack a decent ATGM? A Spike Maybe? Or would the Bionix be obliterated by a HEAT round before it gets to deploy?
If you throw enough 25mm HEAT ammo at T91's turret, I believe eventually they will penerate. But then again, I am talking a lot...
In "Command n Conquer" yeah, perhaps 50 bionix/similar vehicle can take out medium/heavy tanks with its 25mm gun. But I doubt the 25mm HE can do much against the armor of a main battle tank. -
Actually the Bionix is an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV), which basically means its a troop carrier, and not a tank destroyer.Originally posted by Shotgun:Can the 50 Bionixs take out 10 MBT? Given the current armaments, no. Unless they are planning to mount some kinda ATGMs on the IFV. The 10 MBT would probably have to be taken out by the infantry onboard. Is there enough room inside the Bionix to pack a decent ATGM? A Spike Maybe? Or would the Bionix be obliterated by a HEAT round before it gets to deploy?
In "Command n Conquer" yeah, perhaps 50 bionix/similar vehicle can take out medium/heavy tanks with its 25mm gun. But I doubt the 25mm HE can do much against the armor of a main battle tank.
When it comes down to war, the IFVs will not be the ones engaging the enemy.
This is the job of our 'hidden' Centurions, Merkavas (if we have any!?) and puny SM1.
But yes, the Bionix 25 has firepower big enuf to cause enuf damage to a MBT.
But when the enemy gears up for war, there's gonna be lots of add-on armour....so lets just leave the punching to the tanks, and keep the tiny infantry carriers out of harm's way.
The BX chassis itself is unsuitable to be modified to house spikes and ATGMs and what have you.
We wanted a vehicle with a low platform.
If we build in anti-tank weaponry, the chassis will rise too high, and the enemy will see us.
Why will it rise too high?
Coz regardless of weaponry, u still need a platform for the vehicle commander to stand.
Mounting ATGMs is possible, but over the head of the standing VC. -
Not really, you want to hang the Spike launchers at the side of the 25mm turret. It will not cause the profile to be raised. If you look the pictures of the latest gen LAV25, they also now carry TOW launchers at the side of the turret, one missile on each side. The guidance sight has to be on top though, it would have to be somewhat like the gunner's sight. The control joystick and firing trigger will be embedded inside the turret, somewhere the VC can easily reach while aiming the "crosshair" at the target.Originally posted by marsupial:Why will it rise too high?
Coz regardless of weaponry, u still need a platform for the vehicle commander to stand.
Mounting ATGMs is possible, but over the head of the standing VC. -
Anyone know of this system Thomson Sintra TSM 2064 Variable Depth Sonar?
Any technical data?
Thanks! -
Well, would be nice to have enough armour for "police duty" in occupied territories... But I am talking shit of course...Originally posted by recoil:hahah. agreed. u and your invisible paint.
you can't hide everything i guess. but in the first place how come we're producing so many bionixes? like 400+? we arent expecting that much resistance are we? or are we.
Having that many vehicles probably means that they are aware of the dependence of Sg on raw materials and the potential vulnerability of our arms industries to air raids or sabotage and are making strategic stock-piles to replace damaged or destroyed equipment...
Based on Mindef's strategy of an effective deterrent as the best means of defence, you can never have too much equipment... the fear of getting a black eye is as bad as getting a black eye.
Oh yeah... picked up that Tim Huxley book which i'm sure EVERYBODY on this board has read by now... interesting to know that the Centurions we have were upgraded to IDF specifications... Good stuff... kinda old but still packs quite a punch and can take a lotta punishment. -
no merkavas. u wish. =P i wish too. =POriginally posted by marsupial:Actually the Bionix is an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV), which basically means its a troop carrier, and not a tank destroyer.
When it comes down to war, the IFVs will not be the ones engaging the enemy.
This is the job of our 'hidden' Centurions, Merkavas (if we have any!?) and puny SM1.
But yes, the Bionix 25 has firepower big enuf to cause enuf damage to a MBT.
But when the enemy gears up for war, there's gonna be lots of add-on armour....so lets just leave the punching to the tanks, and keep the tiny infantry carriers out of harm's way.
The BX chassis itself is unsuitable to be modified to house spikes and ATGMs and what have you.
We wanted a vehicle with a low platform.
If we build in anti-tank weaponry, the chassis will rise too high, and the enemy will see us.
Why will it rise too high?
Coz regardless of weaponry, u still need a platform for the vehicle commander to stand.
Mounting ATGMs is possible, but over the head of the standing VC.
so basically as it stands now, our anti-armour capability seems to lie in the hands of our apaches, which could get shot down by handheld SAMs. centurions and AMXs - do you think they're up to it? even though theyre upgraded doesnt really help much coz they're pretty high profile by today's standards.
(looks at blown off turrets everywhere) =P
and finally we have the Flyer which mounts a milan or spike. a bunch of them would probably be wasted with one HEAT round. same goes for our anti-armour infantry.
or am i being overly pessimistic here? are our anti-armour chances that slim against m'sia new MBTs? i certainly hope not... will our mobility make up for the lack of armour/firepower? -
Originally posted by recoil:
We all wish that is the case too... but then again, the Merks are really too heavy. They will need some serious dieting before they can roam around our backyard.
no merkavas. u wish. =P i wish too. =P
Be patient my friend. I'm sure that are too brass in the SAF pissing their pants if they haven't got an answer to the T91. I'm sure something is in the pipeline. It is just not public domain yet. AFAIK there will be a new light tank to replace the SM1. As for MBT, I think they have been looking at acquiring some secondhand ones including AMX-30, M-60A3, etc.
or am i being overly pessimistic here? are our anti-armour chances that slim against m'sia new MBTs? i certainly hope not... will our mobility make up for the lack of armour/firepower?
It still stands that I hope when it comes down to getting a secondhand MBT, SAF will choose Leopard 1A5. Otherwise, they should seriously look at the Swedish CV40-120mm tank... -
Latest gen of LAV25 also weighs the same as an M113, but severely lacks stability and balance. The damned thing tips over almost too easily.Originally posted by Joe Black:Not really, you want to hang the Spike launchers at the side of the 25mm turret. It will not cause the profile to be raised. If you look the pictures of the latest gen LAV25, they also now carry TOW launchers at the side of the turret, one missile on each side. The guidance sight has to be on top though, it would have to be somewhat like the gunner's sight. The control joystick and firing trigger will be embedded inside the turret, somewhere the VC can easily reach while aiming the "crosshair" at the target.