Defence Minister Teo visits RSAF detachment in US
-
Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean got an update on the Republic of Singapore Air Force's training detachment in the United States when he visited the F-16 detachment in Phoenix Arizona on Sunday.
The training, under the Peace Carvin II detachment, is ongoing at the Luke's Air Force Base.
Rear Admiral Teo also met US Armed Forces personnel as well as leaders of the local community there.
The RSAF has been training in the US for more than ten years and has four training detachments there.
MINDEF says training in the US has helped the RSAF enhance its professional skills as well as the level of inter-operability between the armed forces of both countries.
Singapore and the US have extensive and multi-faceted cooperation between their defence establishments. - CNA -
TEXAS : Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean visited Singapore's Peace Vanguard Apache helicopter detachment in the United States on Sunday.
Rear Admiral Teo tried his hand flying one of Singapore's Apache Longbow attack helicopters based in Texas.
He praised the air force personnel from the Apache detachment for becoming operationally ready after a five-and-a-half month stint there.
He said overall he was very impressed with what the detachment has achieved in the past two-and-a-half years.
Singapore plans to bring the Apache helicopters back by 2006.
Admiral Teo said: "The Apache Longbow moves us along the path toward transformation. That means information dominance, precision weapons and also network-centric warfare.
"The Apache Longbow has a radar, it has got guided missiles and it has got data link between the helicopters.
"This means that it can outsee, out-manoeuvre, outshoot enemy tanks. So you do not really need a tank to fight a tank anymore. You can fight it asymmetrically with a helicopter." - CNA -
looks like singapore not gonna rely on tanks anymore or is it a smokescreen. anyway, can 20 helos be at every spot at the same time as an enemy tank given there r abt 70 pt-91s.Originally posted by alert5:"This means that it can outsee, out-manoeuvre, outshoot enemy tanks. So you do not really need a tank to fight a tank anymore. You can fight it asymmetrically with a helicopter." - CNA -
Partly true, tank killing does not necessary have to be a tank vs tank thingy. This is the very reason why SAF has long have ATGMs even before neighbourning countries have MBTs (beside Thailand) which is never considered a threat to Singapore anyway.Originally posted by rancour5:looks like singapore not gonna rely on tanks anymore or is it a smokescreen. anyway, can 20 helos be at every spot at the same time as an enemy tank given there r abt 70 pt-91s.
However, tanks vs tanks WILL bound to happen, and that particular moment, I'm sure all the tankees involved would rather be in the better armoured tanks than the lightler armoured one. The penetrating power of the tank rounds is also very important. Don't want to be the situation like the US tankees during WWII finding their sherman's gun couldn't penetrate the German Panzars and Tigers.
I still reckon that SAF should still replace the SM1 (although not necessary on a 1:1 basis) with a decent light tank with a good low recoil 120mm gun (like the Thunderbolt). As for the Centurion replacement, it could be easily fulfilled by Sabra 2 or M60-2000, (or Lelerc if we have got the money
) -
its good that our Defence Minister gets to see first hand info and condition of our war machines. however, the last statement on killing tanks not necessarily with a tank....its subjective.
while it is an assurance to the tankees on our side (to have the AH64) i believe it is still necessary to have a good light/med tank which has the capability to kill the enemy tank. also, the survival rate of this new tank (cannot be sm1 in this case) should be put into consideration.
AH64 and tanks or armoured forces/combined arms works hand in hand. i think it make sense to have this small umbrella above our heads during ops.