Singapore Military Weaknesses
-
Originally posted by LeFire:
DSTA neither design nor build the SAR21 rifle.Its singapore technologies company.DSTA is incharge of ammunition and armament procurement regarding the SAR21 its a join effort,making sure the rifle designed by ST suits singapore armed force
The SAR-21 is a major weakness until DSTA improves it...
1.) The crosshairs are too thick. Reduce them and add a distinctively coloured death-dot instead please.
2.) Absolutely hate the fire-selector. Prefer the nice Heckler-and Koch-type one on the CAR-15/M-16's that I've used. If you need full-auto, thumb can easily flick the switch. You can also unsafe and fire the CAR-15/M-16 one-handed tucked under your arm if the other hand is unavailable/out of action.
3.) Our current SAR-21's can't take M-16 mags without the adaptors! Hello? Things get lost! Esp wth NSmen and NSF's! Lose the adaptor on the battlefield and a Sporean NSman is screwed!
4.) The magazine catch is horrible! Let's count the steps in reloading.
CAR-15 carbine.
1.) Press right index finger on mag drop. Left hand grab new mag from SBO.
2.) Slam in new mag and slap the bolt release.
3.) Ready.
SAR-21 (and other bullpups)
1.) Right hand hold weapon. [b]Left pull out old mag.
2.) Left pull out fresh mag from SBO.
3.) Slam in new mag and hit bolt release.
4.) Ready.
There you go! 1 freaking second wasted! Yucks![/b] -
I thot DSTA is under Sing-Tech?
-
Mech^O^GATor, so who is responsible for designing the SAR-21? I'm confused.
-
It is most likely that DSTA set the requirments and ST Kinetics designed and built the weaoponOriginally posted by LeFire:Mech^O^GATor, so who is responsible for designing the SAR-21? I'm confused. -
DSTA stands for "Defense and Science Technology Agency"it is directly under the singapore Government MoD and Singapore Technologies partially own by Sing govt(Temask Holding).
All arms and weapons procurement or Acquisition goes thought DSTA official planning , evaluation , finance and finally Acquiring
ST job acts like all defense companies like lockheed martin......etc.
They design and construct equipments to meet global and local demand then promote them to foreign customer as well as singapore military forces.
Does that clear your doubt
-
actually, DSTA has acquired the status of a statutory board, so they pretty much take care of themselves and work with, not under mindef for mindef's requirements.Originally posted by Mech^O^GATor:DSTA stands for "Defense and Science Technology Agency"it is directly under the singapore Government MoD and Singapore Technologies partially own by Sing govt(Temask Holding).
All arms and weapons procurement or Acquisition goes thought DSTA official planning , evaluation , finance and finally Acquiring
ST job acts like all defense companies like lockheed martin......etc.
They design and construct equipments to meet global and local demand then promote them to foreign customer as well as singapore military forces.
Does that clear your doubt
they also get their own funding, do their own recruitment, award their own scholarhips and give their own promotions.
its like ministry of education and the teritiary learning institutes. the polytecnics and the 2 gov't universities are all stat boards and not under the jurisdiction of the MOE. they work together sometimes, but they do not answer to them. -
Ah... Ok thx!
So who do I blame for the problems in the SAR-21?
-
that would be the engineers at ST kinetics... they designed it. but seriously, no weapon design is perfect. better to just get used to it and find ways to use it more effectively than to kow peh about what a lousy weapon it is.
they won't change it so fast one lah... they'll want time to let its weaknesses all show before they move to rectify it. makes more sense than fixing one small change at a time too...
and its ultimately a question of getting used to. people are stubborn and reluctant to change. we have things to say cos we've used the m16 before. would an NSF who've never touched a rifle before have the same complaints? -
No man is perfect so that goes the same 4 sar21.Singapore Technologies kinetic is still consider young and has little experience designing rifles even thought they did the ultimax light machine gun.Comparing to HK we are still growing.We will live to see weapons better than Sar21 build and utterly singaporean design i hope one day i will witness this milestone.The older the wiser right!!Originally posted by CX:that would be the engineers at ST kinetics... they designed it. but seriously, no weapon design is perfect. better to just get used to it and find ways to use it more effectively than to kow peh about what a lousy weapon it is.
they won't change it so fast one lah... they'll want time to let its weaknesses all show before they move to rectify it. makes more sense than fixing one small change at a time too...
and its ultimately a question of getting used to. people are stubborn and reluctant to change. we have things to say cos we've used the m16 before. would an NSF who've never touched a rifle before have the same complaints? -
i see i'm almost a year late into this thread, but just like to point out that ST-Kinetics could not have designed the weapon without isreali help. In fact, the isreal's new rifle is called T.A.R. 21
-
the SAR 21 was deigned by my lecturer's cousin (half the family is in army/ST).
maybe he had some inspirational help, but it was definitely a local design. -
Haiz ... going for the conversion course soon ... heard the rifle is heavier than M16?
-
heavier but more well balanced... and the SAR-21 is a "cousin" of the israeli tavor lah... local design... rigggghhhhtttt...Originally posted by PuRe-EviL:Haiz ... going for the conversion course soon ... heard the rifle is heavier than M16? -
My opinion is that our strategy of arms procurement is a weakness. The premise is that we need to have an outright military technological edge in order to deter aggrssors. That means that we must always spend more OR we can't keep the enemies at bay. I would call our strategy "deterrence through strength"
I would prefer if the strategy will be one of deterrence through parity. -
blah isreal fares well in war is cuz God is on their side.
-
Originally posted by dumbdumb!:blah isreal fares well in war is cuz God is on their side.
-
The SAR-21 came out soem time before the TAR-21 did, but I greatly suspect both countries traded a lot of notes. For your information, there is also quite a bit of spark of genius in singapore, and they dun have to be graduates.
The SAR-21 is an amazing rifle, people from all over the world who tried it, love it and gave rave reviews about it, only we Singaporeans seem to pick every fault with it but when given a far inferior system like the M-16 we instantly gloss over it and adapt ourselves to it's shortcomings. Singaporeans suffer from a "made in singapore syndrome" where they are rapidly against anything that is locally manufactured and will be a harsh critic on it, the opposite of the American "not made in USA syndrome" where they will accept their own systems, no matter how flawed and costy but reject using designs from other countries which are far superior and effective.
In all fairness, the SAR-21 is NOT a weakness, short of the OICW, it is one of the most advanced infantry assualt rifles in the world today, and if you bothered to take an objective view on it, you'll realize that it is far superior to the M-16 which the conservative soldier hang to like toddlers to their "blankies".
The SAR-21 is far more forgiving, durable, easy to maintain, egronomic, and most importantly, EAST TO SHOOT AND ACCUCRATE! And they have the stats to prove it. In SAR-21 shoot runs, wowo kings who could not shoot anything with the M-16 were soon hitting targets out to 300 meters with regularity with the SAR-21, with a calculated 90 percent increase in accucracy. In fact it is so good that the army has decided to train all future batches of infantry on M-16s for the reason that the SAR-21 is so good and user friendly that it promotes bad shooting habits and weapons discipline.
It's just blind bias and "weapons from other countries must be better" attitute that appears to be most of the actual reason behind the supposed "criticism" of the SAR-21. The M-16 was a total reject nightmare when it was first introduce to US troops back in vietman, now we see people going "I'll stick to my trusty M-16". Hello people, wake up your idea. Dun be like those marines I've seen who claim in their incredibly idotic conservative ignorance that they can do as much with their "trusty" M-16/203 combo as the OICWS... yeah right...
The SAR-21 is a far more advanced, and capable system then the M-16, and any of Singapore's potential enemies better be wary of it. -
i prefer the G-36k to the M-16! hehe but then again thats cause the G-36 is the base rifle for the OICW! Anyway the SR-21 is a pretty good rifle though i think they really should consider having better iron sights.My friend who was tested it said it was a great weapon but the only thing he did not like was the scope being almost useless in the rain and the lack of a good iron sight prevented him from using the rifle more acurrately.
-
I think this thread shld be moved to the military nuts thread,
this thread should be used mainly for voicing political oppinions -
what about terrain?
-
leave no man behind...Originally posted by Spetznaz:a good leader is not based on some 1 who has da rank 2 show 4
a good leader is some 1 who can lead his troops into battle boost da morale of his troops even if they r fighting a losing battle
and some 1 who will bring his troops back home
during my ns days my encik used to tell us during exercise,
"tough time dun last, tough men do"
my encik 2WO chan K H damn garan!
he's the man i'll fight along side with, anytime.