Malaysia's Astro2 a threat?
-
i thought the self proplusion unit max speed is 16km on road and 8km off road??Originally posted by kanzer:the FH-2000 and the FH-88 are tow by the 7-ton MAN truck. they do have a self proplusion unit the max speed is i think 4km/h. we are currently working on the SP-Gun on the M109 chasis but have not heard much of the LWSPG by ST -
btw, how will the arty people know where to shoot, besides info from their radar, is it better to get one arty man in each unit that is going out so that he will be able to relay directions to the arty people better? just an idea I got from www.g2mil.com or some website, can't remember. . . thought this is a good one
-
Let's just say that problem had been taken care of..Originally posted by laser51088:btw, how will the arty people know where to shoot, besides info from their radar, is it better to get one arty man in each unit that is going out so that he will be able to relay directions to the arty people better? just an idea I got from www.g2mil.com or some website, can't remember. . . thought this is a good one
-
No really... Singapore may not win by attrition given we do not have the strategic depth (and breath) to scattle the howitzers. What SAF must do in the early stage of the conflict is to throw as much "sh**t" at the enemies sufficient to destroy the immediate and nearest threats, and for te Guards and amoured units to cross over to the enemy's side to gain strategic depth. After that, the arty guns will then have the safety of not being at the receiving end of enemy's arty fire. Thus, I believe that having MLRS system will only help SAF to achieve that quicker. The first 24 hours of any aggression will see SAF needing to quickly achieve a 50km buffer zone around Singapore... otherwise, we are all doomed !!!! The next 48 hours, SAF will need to acquire another 50 Km buffer zone, essentially to make up the 100KM zone around Singapore.Originally posted by laser51088:in an arty shooting match, Singapore will win by attrition if both sides are evenly matched, Sg has alot more of those 52 cal 155mm guns than M'sia, plus old US models in reserve, btw, what about the chassis of the Paladin Sg bought recently?? if they fit a FH2000 gun on it, it can probably serve as a sort of backliner for the tanks and AFVs needing an arty strike in front, but i'm not sure how the LWSPH and the Paladin chassis arty will complement each other. . . and how do the normal FH2000 move anyway??? tow? by what? they got an auxillary diesel on board issit? -
What about round the back, can the navy keep up with that sort of buffer? I'm not very sure. . . and 100km into M'sia will give Sg all sorts of headache from civilian population (no doubt Johor has a large percentage of Chinese, but many malaysians will still be loyal to M'sia)
-
forward observation?Originally posted by wombat:Let's just say that problem had been taken care of.. -
forward observations? but tt will mean loss of sacrificial lies?
how abt working with the air forc, perhaps from UAV to determine the enemy's position. Do take note that malaysia's weakest point is their logistic. IF we can cut or destroy their supply line, i believe would haf won the war.
IN world war 2, the german army still has more den 2 million soldiers n thousands of tanks.but their industries were destroyed n supplies totally cut off..no fuel 4 vehicles and no food for soldiers. if not, i tink the war would haf last another 2 to 5 years more
Perhaps our air force is the real deciding factor if ever we are to win any conflict. -
no air force ever won a war on its on, from the time bombers were first used until now, no accurate way of doing Bomb damage assesment (BDA) has been devised, so even though your bombs may have hit the target, you won't know unless you send in soldeirs to sniff out the place or get some recon done over that place, but if the enemy denies you access, u will never know if your target is destroyed (read that from Dirty Little Secrets of the 20th Century)
anyway, yah, M'sia got a problem if you kill their logistics, so many types of aircraft, all in little numbers, and AFVs all different, the small number of each type of equipment just no justify many different storage places for them, so I should think that if you can destroy a storage area, u can put at least one type of equipment out of use very soon. . . -
Laser51088,Er...i thought that is what recon satellites are for right!IF not, The UAV will be the one doing aerial surveillance over enemy targets.Originally posted by laser51088:no air force ever won a war on its on, from the time bombers were first used until now, no accurate way of doing Bomb damage assesment (BDA) has been devised, so even though your bombs may have hit the target, you won't know unless you send in soldeirs to sniff out the place or get some recon done over that place, but if the enemy denies you access, u will never know if your target is destroyed (read that from Dirty Little Secrets of the 20th Century)
anyway, yah, M'sia got a problem if you kill their logistics, so many types of aircraft, all in little numbers, and AFVs all different, the small number of each type of equipment just no justify many different storage places for them, so I should think that if you can destroy a storage area, u can put at least one type of equipment out of use very soon. . . -
quite frankly... no one can win a war by relying on just either one type of units, one type of weapons or even one type of tactics...Originally posted by Joe Black:No really... Singapore may not win by attrition given we do not have the strategic depth (and breath) to scattle the howitzers. What SAF must do in the early stage of the conflict is to throw as much "sh**t" at the enemies sufficient to destroy the immediate and nearest threats, and for te Guards and amoured units to cross over to the enemy's side to gain strategic depth. After that, the arty guns will then have the safety of not being at the receiving end of enemy's arty fire. Thus, I believe that having MLRS system will only help SAF to achieve that quicker. The first 24 hours of any aggression will see SAF needing to quickly achieve a 50km buffer zone around Singapore... otherwise, we are all doomed !!!! The next 48 hours, SAF will need to acquire another 50 Km buffer zone, essentially to make up the 100KM zone around Singapore.
The key is in the planning... -
Quite hard to do BDA from satellites, else there won't be anymore recon planes already. . . and if they shoot down your UAV??? its small and hard to detect, but if it is detected, its easy to shoot down . . .Originally posted by Mech^O^GATor:Laser51088,Er...i thought that is what recon satellites are for right!IF not, The UAV will be the one doing aerial surveillance over enemy targets. -
Laser51088,Er...i thought that is what recon satellites are for right!IF not, The UAV will be the one doing aerial surveillance over enemy targets.
_________________
Actually satellites are for more complex intelligence gathering...maybe in terms of calculations of enemy strenghts , post strike and pre strike evaluation on stationery objects ......blah blah and very importantly , as esponaige mission . ( b4 an official war ) Satelittles are easily trick by using toy weapons and in cloudy days. ( however currently for the high-end technology , in cloudy days , satellitle can track liao.
However for UAV , mainly it is for live-battle field survellience , close-in recon , follow-up recon on moving objects that satelittle cant track well ,long endurance survellience and can also be paired up with mobile units for target survellience.
And of course UAV are very useful objects to be use as a target drone , cruisemissile , decoys and other purposes.
10 cent opinion again~! -
Sacrificing a UAV is at least much better than sacrificing a soldier.Even if a UAV was shot down still it might be able to manage bring some informations back the ground control.Originally posted by laser51088:Quite hard to do BDA from satellites, else there won't be anymore recon planes already. . . and if they shoot down your UAV??? its small and hard to detect, but if it is detected, its easy to shoot down . . .
That is the one propose of UAV isnt it. -
If the UAV is on his way back , kana shot down , any video caught is received in the mobile control room , the BDA mission is still a success. If the UAV kana shot , b4 capturing any pic , then of course mission fail lah.
I believe BDA is best done by Satelite (with restrictions), UAVs can be reserve for other purposes. -
Yes indeed Satelite can be an alternative but the machine cant capture clear images immmediately when thick clouds passes by, covering the intended locations.When this problem arise the UAV will be put into use for battle plan and recon.Originally posted by foxtrout8:If the UAV is on his way back , kana shot down , any video caught is received in the mobile control room , the BDA mission is still a success. If the UAV kana shot , b4 capturing any pic , then of course mission fail lah.
I believe BDA is best done by Satelite (with restrictions), UAVs can be reserve for other purposes.
The advantages of satelite is providing a much larger area images of places and its safe from enemy retardation.This technology can also allow friendly forces to intercept any communications transfer. -
FH2002 max range with base bleed is only 42... there's no way it could reach 52km!Originally posted by tripwire:i think they bullshiting.....
according to this website
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/data/communiques/archives/2000Nov/data/2000Nov3973/
wat they got are 45cal G5!
according to denel... the maker of G5... the 45cal has a max range of 30km...
VLAP projectile can extend that range by 13.6km to 43.6km at best.....
there is no way malaysia's G5 can hit 52km unless they bought the 52cal G5 arty gun....
furthermore... singapore FH2000 currently has a range of 42km...
according to denel... VLAP projectile can be used on all NATO standard 52cal arty gun.. that would include SAF's FH2000....
so.... in a slug fest.... with both side hammering each other with VLAP projectile ...
FH2000's 53.6km range would easily pummel the malaysian arty's 43.6km range right into the ground....
at worst... IF they do get the 52cal G5... the arty on both side would be evenly match.... -
just wondering, how often do artillery pieces actually fire at maximum range? won't that decrease accuracy? (or just plaster the whole area with submunitions, definitely will hit something)
the side with better intelligence will win in arty shooting match, cos if you can't even detect where the enemy artillery is, you can't fire else later hit your own people, is Singapore's arty target aquisition radar good??? -
laser51088
Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Posts: 341
30 December 2002 · 09:25 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
just wondering, how often do artillery pieces actually fire at maximum range? won't that decrease accuracy? (or just plaster the whole area with submunitions, definitely will hit something)
*************************************************************************************
hardly, depends on FATEP requirements. usually they would only attempt to shoot max range in taiwan or NZ. put it this way, artillery pieces like motars and rifles, needs to be warmed up before they get be accurate. 6 HE rounds should do it.nowadays technology enables us to fire lots of submunitions with the fh2000. cargo, gps, target area marking,... with a very oiled forward observation team, they could call for fire with the appropriate rounds and rain them down on enemy grounds swifly.
*************************************************************************************
the side with better intelligence will win in arty shooting match, cos if you can't even detect where the enemy artillery is, you can't fire else later hit your own people, is Singapore's arty target aquisition radar good???
************************************************************************************
singapore's TPQ36/37 are good back in the eighties, still good now since it still does fulfill it's job. but i heard that the m'sians are introducin a new arty target aquisition system, cobra??? -
i state the range at 52km on the condition that the FH2000 is using the VLAP projectile made by Denel... not BBOriginally posted by Xerovix:FH2002 max range with base bleed is only 42... there's no way it could reach 52km! -
I came across a book about Singapore's military and from reading it many times, i came across a section, stating that sg in the past, was interested in the MLRS system similar to the US but fearing that it will introduce a new capability (which I dubbed Ballistic Range Artillery Capability) to the SEA region, the idea was scrapped.
-
Thats ''Defending the lion city'' right?
-
Yes...thats the one
-
But den, I find tat most of us are saying how can we counter attack back... Wat if the Malaysia counter attack back on us when our troop attempt to enter their states?
Another thing to consider, if Malaysia decide to launch an attack on us. Wont the Indo join in too? -
For wat i know , Indonesia will not be likely to join in the war between Singapore and Malaysia.
Mainly because of her weak economy , small amount of soldier to landspace ratio , inferior weaponary , and political reasons. Logically , she wont want to risk a drop in economy again and risking her mans jus for another country , where at the same time some parts of indonesia is experiencing internal dispute. -
Yes...thats the one
-------------------------------------------------'
I think that book is a ''bible'' here. I believe 90% of military nuts here had read it.