Singapore At War
-
2 LAWs in the front??? Okay... i wont be CAUGHT DEAD in that Tank. Maybe we can buy some cheap T-72s or something, maybe even Israeli M-60A3s. Or buy the M1A1s the US Army is keepin as surplus. US Armed forces operate M1A2s now, M1A3 on the way out of the oven i heard.
By the way, does the SAF armored forces have IVIS? The inter-vehicle-intergrations system helps to improve situation awareness as well as better command and control in the battlefield. -
Sad to say, currently there's no "ivis" system integrated to our armored force. So...Ãt's just the conventional CVC comms for now. But I've seen the prototype "Inter-section" awareness system before, but I don't think it's been implemented yet.
personally, I think these are all crap. -
The IVIS or the armored units?
-
No, we can't buy T72 as there are plans for Malaysia to buy the T84 MBT. We must at least buy M1A1. Actually, M1A1 is enough. What is the IVIS??? i only know the Independent Commander's Sight System.Originally posted by Shotgun:2 LAWs in the front??? Okay... i wont be CAUGHT DEAD in that Tank. Maybe we can buy some cheap T-72s or something, maybe even Israeli M-60A3s. Or buy the M1A1s the US Army is keepin as surplus. US Armed forces operate M1A2s now, M1A3 on the way out of the oven i heard.
By the way, does the SAF armored forces have IVIS? The inter-vehicle-intergrations system helps to improve situation awareness as well as better command and control in the battlefield. -
The IVIS is an inter-vehicular interface system. Basically, inside the M1A2, the TC cockpit has a computer, displaying a minimap. On it, it shows where all his friendly units are. Designated using Symbols. When encounters the enemy, he punches in the grid coordinate of the enemy, and it is updated throughout the system. The system is also linked to the Company FIST, so when fire support is needed, the FIST would have already have the coordinates locked in and sent to their MLRS and guns. Because it displays all the friendlies, it prevents fatricide as the commanders would know where their friendlies are.
Basically, every tank is equipped with GPS to facilitate automatic update of friendly unit positions. -
why would we wanna buy a T-72. It's been has a bad name! We are always trained to engaged T72s during exercise..(or is it T-54?). Movies have been potraiting T-72 been blown up and there's a scrapped T-72 chassis located at the AETC carpark of the armor camp.
Basically, The T-72 is big and bulk and not suitable for SEA terrain.
Correction to the "inter-section battle awareness system" thingy....it's not as complex as you guys think. It's just a simple pager gadget where the section commander can communicate and locate his sctionmate during a firefight.
I think the Bionix ICV do have a IVIS system but not our local Bionix. But if the ICV can have it, so can our's!
Currently none of the armor vehicle has a GPS system. But it'll be implement in the near future so the highest command can monitor the whole army's location. Thus improving battle awareness. -
Okay... how about a T-90? Similar, but more advanced.
-
yah.But it is too heavy for our soil
-
what we need are light tanks not heavy tanks
-
buying the M1A1-Abrams...????do you tink they will sell it.in the gulf war.all the m1A1 used by the americans suffer no damage at all from the enemy...it is highly advanced...izzit 2 heavy n bulky 4 us 2?
-
SAF is trying to cut down on ppl you all still want an M1A1??
M1A1 has a crew of 4. For us, 3 is enough liao.
Future SAF lighttank wish list:
-smoothbore cannon
-computer controlled FCS
-The IVIS thingy
-Thermal Radar
-Amphibous
Hope that Bionix MK2 have:
-IVIS thingy
-TOW missile rack
-some other minor stuff I can't say here :p -
Ahh, sometimes having a few Main Battle tanks will serve as a deterrence alone. The M1A1 has been proven to be almost unkillable, other than a few instances where the tracks got blown off.
If foreign countries know we have say a battalion number of these tanks, don't you think they would have to re-think their tactics on how to go around these beasts?
All light tanks are easily taken out with modern anti-tank weapons, hell even LAWs can do some serious damage if not kill it. There is a need for a heavy armor to divert fire from the light tanks. -
The M1A1 is indeed unkillable but during the Gulf War, a few M1A1 was suddenly paraylysed during Operation desert Storm du to engine problems and suspension problems. The M1A1 is so highly armoured that the engine had problem. One of my teacher, who was once a airborne trooper in United States service was engaged in a mission to destroy a M1 in Bosnia. With many LAW launched at it, the missile simply flew off when it hit the ABRAM's well designed slopes at teh turret fron, sides. and finally, after more than 10 LAW, the mission commander asked the attack to stop and he simply threw grenades into the turret, destroying all the equipments and systems inside.
-
Another story went where the platoon commander of the M1 platoon had the disabled tank crew evacuate. The remaining 3 M1s blasted @ the disabled tank but could not kill it. After which, 1 shot finally scored a killer hit, striking between the chasis n the turret, blowing the turret sky high.
Word says, the shipped the chasis back and dumped a new turret on it and it was reactivated into service. Talk about reusability.
If we even just leak word that we operate the M1, most countries won't even want to think about entering into a ground war with Singapore. Pull down the zipper and show em what we've got. -
NOw, the Royal Malaysian Navy is a serious threat to the RSN. They had plans of purchasing scorpene SSK submarines from France and these Submarines are the latest and highly capable. (surely beats the refurbished Challenger class). China is no longer a threat to me. They are so obssesed with BeiJing2008 that they may even forget about the Taiwan matter for the time being, cause a war may eventually take BeiJing 2008 away from them. Whats so great to host an Olympic????? i really don't understand. BTW, all Apaches in Singapore Service will not be equipped with the LongBow technology, unless U.S wants to start an armrace in the region. When Singapore requested for LONGBOW technology to be incorporated into the first batch of 8 AH64D, U.S already turned down the request and Singapore MAY purchase 12 more, not definitely purchase 12 more. BTW, i thnk that Apaches is highly capable but too expensive. only 16 Hellfire missiles can be armed. Look at the UH60 Black hawk, it can be armed with 16 Hellfire too and auto-cannons just like the Apaches and also can transport troops, carry Anti-Shipping missiles and alot more cheaper. I think a Eurocopter Tiger is good enough. Any comments?
-
malaysia has been harping on buying submarines eversince.... (let me count..) 20 YEARs!! ago!!... well.. even if they do purchase the subs, it would be both limited in number (bo lui) and a trained crew (bo lan). so.... i wonder if the RSN ASW ships and planes might also have to end up bidding for a 'certificate of entitilement' to sink that malaysian subs... since obviously... there arent enough malaysian subs to go around for the RSN ships.Originally posted by Patriotic Tim:NOw, the Royal Malaysian Navy is a serious threat to the RSN. They had plans of purchasing scorpene SSK submarines from France and these Submarines are the latest and highly capable. (surely beats the refurbished Challenger class). China is no longer a threat to me. They are so obssesed with BeiJing2008 that they may even forget about the Taiwan matter for the time being, cause a war may eventually take BeiJing 2008 away from them. Whats so great to host an Olympic????? i really don't understand. BTW, all Apaches in Singapore Service will not be equipped with the LongBow technology, unless U.S wants to start an armrace in the region. When Singapore requested for LONGBOW technology to be incorporated into the first batch of 8 AH64D, U.S already turned down the request and Singapore MAY purchase 12 more, not definitely purchase 12 more. BTW, i thnk that Apaches is highly capable but too expensive. only 16 Hellfire missiles can be armed. Look at the UH60 Black hawk, it can be armed with 16 Hellfire too and auto-cannons just like the Apaches and also can transport troops, carry Anti-Shipping missiles and alot more cheaper. I think a Eurocopter Tiger is good enough. Any comments?
And... singapore APache (the first
does come with longbow. the 12 additional apache no need longbow... they are just the firing platform. Blackhawks are good.. but big and not suited for tank hunting like the apache, they are more of a ARMOURED AIR CALVARY. -
patrotic tim,i dowan to sound sacarastic or what,but either your teacher is a great liar,or he was in a war that i had no idea existed!so he was a paratrooper in the US army har?in bosnia ?and he was engaging an M1 Abrams har?last time i read,only the americans had the M1 and also Egypt,and also Saudi Arabia(i think).....so he was an amercian soldier shooting at an amercian tank?i think you been had lah....
anyway,someone mentioned that the very presense of the M1 will cause our potential enemies to rethink their strategies etc etc...we dont need an expensive MBT to do that....our Centurions can do that already and more cheaply as well!what we needed was a MBT that was able to fire its main gun,move around and we had that.and we had them long time ago,maybe from the late 70s to early 80s.some may say that its old and junk,but the main point is that it serves it purpose well,especially when no one around us had any armour corps to speak of.
now that our northern neighbours have started saying that its time to have one(again!),we would have our new tanks up and firing by then!!
i was in armour when doing my NS,and i used to cringe whenever i hear and see the sm1 tank rattle and move pass.and when i saw it moving down the the road for the national parade last year,wah lau,pai seh meh!imagine the very same tanks had rolled down the streets in 1967 were now moving down the streets in 2000!
but after seeing them in live firing,movement etc,i realised that they still had a lot to offer to SAF,and they were more than capable during this interin period while we wait for our new tanks... -
Leclerc from france is a good choice too. Though 10 tonnes heavier than T-80 and T-94. It weights only 54,500 tons (combat weight). Operated only by 3 crews with auto loader. A 120 mm smooth bore with effective range of more than 3kms. That could have very great effectiveness in the duel against any MBT day and night. Capable of firing when the tank is moving with a rate of fire at 6 shots/min. The long-range fire control stablized the sight and the gun remains permanenlty pointed at the target selected. A very balanced general protection is obtained not only by modular shielding but also by compactness and thus low visibility, which combined with the very great agility which makes it a very difficult target to hit.Originally posted by m113apc:patrotic tim,i dowan to sound sacarastic or what,but either your teacher is a great liar,or he was in a war that i had no idea existed!so he was a paratrooper in the US army har?in bosnia ?and he was engaging an M1 Abrams har?last time i read,only the americans had the M1 and also Egypt,and also Saudi Arabia(i think).....so he was an amercian soldier shooting at an amercian tank?i think you been had lah....
anyway,someone mentioned that the very presense of the M1 will cause our potential enemies to rethink their strategies etc etc...we dont need an expensive MBT to do that....our Centurions can do that already and more cheaply as well!what we needed was a MBT that was able to fire its main gun,move around and we had that.and we had them long time ago,maybe from the late 70s to early 80s.some may say that its old and junk,but the main point is that it serves it purpose well,especially when no one around us had any armour corps to speak of.
now that our northern neighbours have started saying that its time to have one(again!),we would have our new tanks up and firing by then!!
i was in armour when doing my NS,and i used to cringe whenever i hear and see the sm1 tank rattle and move pass.and when i saw it moving down the the road for the national parade last year,wah lau,pai seh meh!imagine the very same tanks had rolled down the streets in 1967 were now moving down the streets in 2000!
but after seeing them in live firing,movement etc,i realised that they still had a lot to offer to SAF,and they were more than capable during this interin period while we wait for our new tanks...
It is something a Amx-13 crew could only dream to have. Much more impressive than what ST could produce. I'm not saying that ST could not produce MBTs at this level but they really needs time and experiences. They did well in the Bionix but MBTs are the spearhead and target of any assualt. Not 'a everything also can, but say and do is a different thing' Singapore Technologies can build.
I hope whoever going to evaluate and test that MBT ST build must have a clear mind, most importantly stay neutral and scrutinize every aspect of the tank. Making sure that this baby must equally to a M1A2 if not better. If the ST engineers have a f-king hard time from you, they will spend their time working instead of lim teh every 2hrs. -
NOt sure about patriot's post. BUt there were storys about disabled M1s that had to be taken out to ensure no loss of crucial technologies. I find it quite believable.Originally posted by m113apc:patrotic tim,i dowan to sound sacarastic or what,but either your teacher is a great liar,or he was in a war that i had no idea existed!so he was a paratrooper in the US army har?in bosnia ?and he was engaging an M1 Abrams har?last time i read,only the americans had the M1 and also Egypt,and also Saudi Arabia(i think).....so he was an amercian soldier shooting at an amercian tank?i think you been had lah....
anyway,someone mentioned that the very presense of the M1 will cause our potential enemies to rethink their strategies etc etc...we dont need an expensive MBT to do that....our Centurions can do that already and more cheaply as well!what we needed was a MBT that was able to fire its main gun,move around and we had that.and we had them long time ago,maybe from the late 70s to early 80s.some may say that its old and junk,but the main point is that it serves it purpose well,especially when no one around us had any armour corps to speak of.
now that our northern neighbours have started saying that its time to have one(again!),we would have our new tanks up and firing by then!!
i was in armour when doing my NS,and i used to cringe whenever i hear and see the sm1 tank rattle and move pass.and when i saw it moving down the the road for the national parade last year,wah lau,pai seh meh!imagine the very same tanks had rolled down the streets in 1967 were now moving down the streets in 2000!
but after seeing them in live firing,movement etc,i realised that they still had a lot to offer to SAF,and they were more than capable during this interin period while we wait for our new tanks...
I'm quite surprised about the way u rate the Centurion to be the M1's equal. I had the opportunity to visit NTC North Carolina once, and the briefing and footage shown was totally out of the world.
The Singapore Centurions or Tempest will not be anywhere close to the equal of the M1A2 no matter how you upgrade it. The armor alone is incredible. Test have shown that the frontal arc of the Abrams is invulnerable to shaped charge warheads, LAWs, Anti-Tank Missiles. Even Long rod penetrators have difficulty Trying to pierce thru the frontal armor. Believe it or not, a footage was once released, showing a long rod penetrator stuck sticking out in the Abram's Armor.
Given a Singaporean Tempest, which is equipped with a version of reactive armor, it will not survive a) An APFSDS round. b) A follow up missile shot. According to several doctrines, it is common to double or triple fire on Main Battle Tanks. Multiple Missiles will be launched @ a single tank, and if the tank takes a hit, BYE BYE centurion.
Even in terms of survivability, the Centurion is crapsh.t. Yes Even the Local Tempest. Compared to the M1A2, the ammo compartment is stored in the rear of the turret, which in the event of an ammo explosion, blast doors will seal the ammo compartment from the crew while the blast is directed upwards through blow out panels. A short video clip was released which cameras planted in the turret. Ammunition was detonated in the ammo compartment, the blast door sealed automatically and the footage show no damage watsoever in the crew compartment. Can a Tempest survive an ammo explosion?
I am not saying that the Tempests are worthless, they are infact useful. But comparing it with an M1, the tempest is like a target for live firing. -
About that disabled M1 tank.....I dunno where you guy heard from but I remember reading that from one of Tom Clancy's books about Armor warfare.
There actually more before that. If I din remember wrong, that tank was disabled cause it's stuck in some kindda sandpit. It was later contacted by two T72 MBTs. One Fired the M1 but missed. The other fired it and got a direct hit...but the M1 is still not down. The M1 fired and downed one of the T-72.
The other tried to escape but was also shot down by other M1s that came for the disabled MBT's distress call.
Two M1s tried to pull out the disable M1 but was unable to do so. So the platoon Commander received a green light to destroy their own tank, so that the enemy will not be able to get it.
then the rest of the story is connected to what shotgun had said earlier.
Even Tom Clancy himself laughed at it and could not believe it. So it still remain as a legend in from gulf war cos nobody could confirm it. -
Yeah, since now the topic is deverted to tanks. What do you guys think of the Merkava MBT?
From what I heard, it's one of the biggest tank in the world.. M1A1 is nothing compared to it.
I also read that it has a mortar tube and a back door for easy escape and loading of ammo. I also read that the first version's ammo are load from the top hatches. -
Merkava Mk3/Mk4's primary design criteral is crew survivability. The engine is in the front to provide protection to it's crew. Special 'space armour' is in use along with protected ammo and fuel compartments. Merkava's rear entrance and exit allow its crew to mount and dismount tactically. Since the Merkava can carry a small infantry squad, they could make use for the 60mm motar when no arti. is available.Originally posted by Silenthunter:Yeah, since now the topic is deverted to tanks. What do you guys think of the Merkava MBT?
From what I heard, it's one of the biggest tank in the world.. M1A1 is nothing compared to it.
I also read that it has a mortar tube and a back door for easy escape and loading of ammo. I also read that the first version's ammo are load from the top hatches.
At 62 tonnes, Merkava might have been too heavy for our land. This babe is not small in size too, bigger (Length: 8.78M Width: 3.7M) body means easier target. -
heh heh,i think you misunderstood my post lah shotgun.in no way did i mean that the centurion was better tha the M1.the first centurions came out in the early 50s,and by the time we got them in the late 70's and early 80s from israel and india,they were second hand already.the reason that they were bought was cos most probably they were cheap,the gun could be still used and there was potential to be upgraded(which i suppose applies to all types of SAF weapon systems)
of course i would love to see a coy of M1 tanks on parade,but thats very unlikely..
as mentioned,the weight,the cost, etc would turm against it.also ,the development of the new light tank would mean that mindef would not be interested in buying off the shelf.if they would buy, i guess they would most likely buy the m60A3 version to replace the centurion.(keke...buying old tank to replace older tank!)
as for ST producing our new tank to M1 standards...well we have to be realistic lah....the amercians have been producing tanks for so long already,their learning curve,their experience etc etc.what we can hope for the new tank is,be suitable for our environment,at least a 105mm stablised gun,reasonably armoured etc etc..
judging from the bionix,i guess the new tank would not be too bad and i hope maybe by my next reservist,i can see some new tank going past me in Sungei Gedong..... -
but personally, i believe that it is difficult to use MBTs in Singapore.The reason?MBTs are far too heavy.infact, i don;t really believe there are centurions aka tempest in singapore.It would properbly sink into the soil the moment they get off road.thats why,a light tank which is 18-25 tons will suit our needs.however, following so many reports that s'pore have centurions, maybe they really do exist in Singapore.but if malaysia did purchase their MBTs, maybe you will see the next day's headlines:MINDEF ANNOUNCED THAT MBTS HAVE BEEN UISED BY SAF SINCE 1970.
-
Hey,anyway,does anybody know anything about the light tank?So far the only thing i know about it is.......
105mm gun
3 coaxle machine guns
have 3 crew men
either a new design or merely a turret
built on a bionix chassis.
so,what do you think??
[This message has been edited by CenturionMBT (edited 28 July 2001).]