SAF Light strike vehicle(LSV)
-
I bet those most of those serving in the NS(army side) will not be unfamiliar with LSV.A singapore kinetic produce highly mobile vehicle that can accomodate a lot different type of weapon.
LSV
Question is regarding how good is the protection offer against any attack and why SAF never buy a all-round protect US Humvee type multi-purpose vehicle? The LSV is used by SAF during East Timor peace-keeping. Imagine a AK-47 armed militant suddenly dash out from thick-bush and spread at LSV! What will happen? Even Humvee is vulnerable against AK-47,how abt LSV?
US Humvee
-
That's what i've always wondered....anyone care to explain..?
-
cuz we use the landrover for the role that the humvee uses?
-
yah, actually the Humvee isn't as good as the manufacturers advertised it to be....AK rds can actually penetrate when its actually advertised as armoured up to 7.62. I guess its false advertising then...
I think one of the reason why the LSV was used in E. Timor was that the SAF wanted to test the vehicle under real conditions. I mean, the land rover cannot mount gpmg...even if they use benz jeep, its also quite limited...I think the LSV has better suspension and gears, but of cos' the crew will have to put on bullet-proof vests lor...
I think in the real deployment of LSV in a conflict would mean that thye operate like a 'roaming' wolfpack, and they would depend alot on stealth, concealment and speed to engage the enemy...
-
The US use the Hummer as a general vehicle which we like a lot of other countries like UK use the landrover instead.
I have sit in a hummer before and therefore find there is a lot of disadvantage. 1) it is bloody too noisy. 2) It is too heavy and wide 3) it is too hungry for fuel.
If you want armoured plated landrover, they do have.
For the LSV, it is more for a strike role, more like the SAS landrover. Therefore they are more open so that all crew can use their weapons . -
Well the LSV is supposed to be a fast-riding,hard-hitting "stallion".And they are supposed to be moving so friggin fast over open terrain that by the time the enemy gunner aims and fires,the LSV will be in another place liaoz.Besides,in Iraq got lots of complain that Humvees capabilities all bulls**t.
But anyway,in my view,i find tt the LSV has a defect.The rear-gunner cannot fire unless he is standing up.I'm not too sure if its only those fitted with the ATM Spike or Mistral,but if you have a .50cal behind or 40mm AGL behind and the firer has to stand up when the vehicle is moving,den there is a major cockup in design.
Anyone care to comment? -
There is no other way other than to stand up to operate the rear weapon because it has to be over the roof/rollbar to clear the front passenger compartment, and that the weapons are normally portable/semi-portable heavy weapons that are mounted via adapters rather than designed for use on the vehicle only. The only possible purpose built solution to this would be an overhead remote weapon system which would be too heavy for LSV because its chassis is of space frame design for lightweight and rigidity and not so much for strength (but is high strength enough for normal crew served weapons)Originally posted by SpecOps87:Well the LSV is supposed to be a fast-riding,hard-hitting "stallion".And they are supposed to be moving so friggin fast over open terrain that by the time the enemy gunner aims and fires,the LSV will be in another place liaoz.Besides,in Iraq got lots of complain that Humvees capabilities all bulls**t.
But anyway,in my view,i find tt the LSV has a defect.The rear-gunner cannot fire unless he is standing up.I'm not too sure if its only those fitted with the ATM Spike or Mistral,but if you have a .50cal behind or 40mm AGL behind and the firer has to stand up when the vehicle is moving,den there is a major cockup in design.
Anyone care to comment?
Remote weapon system to be more cost effective will be cannon-based type rather than MG-based - because might as well use human gunner to operate the .50 MG immediately rather than via remote TV - eye-hand co-ordination is worse, quicker to bring weapon to bear if aiming directly through iron sights.
But cannon-based is different because the typical target type (soft-skinned vehicles/shelters), engagement envelope (detect,recognise,identify,engage in same general sector over 3-4 secs) and weapon effects (AP/HE) justify the use of electronic targeting methods to improve accuracy round for round rather than pepper the enemy senselessly -
Maybe ST shall develop a new Multiple-purpose vehicle that offer all round protection and size fit for our terrain! Land Rover cannot take the kind of punishment demanded from LSV.But the idea of sitting inside a open military vehicle makes me insecure! Imagine a big rounds landed quite far away from yr vehicle but the fragment fly at u or enemy armed with a pistol is able to kill or injured u in an ambush! Even Humvee cannot take rifle shot but at least can block a pistol round. Or maybe we don't develop a indigenous one but buy from other countries! Below r a good example of all rounded protected multi-purpose vehicle from UK!
The MLV is designed for tactical mobility with a high level of protection against anti-tank and anti-personnel mines
-
Originally posted by zenden9:
In the first place, should not use the LSV as a base reference vehicle when you want to apply the operation context like that in Iraq/Somalia/Bosnia etc where the main operating terrain is in BUA.
Maybe ST shall develop a new Multiple-purpose vehicle that offer all round protection and size fit for our terrain! Land Rover cannot take the kind of punishment demanded from LSV.But the idea of sitting inside a open military vehicle makes me insecure! Imagine a big rounds landed quite far away from yr vehicle but the fragment fly at u or enemy armed with a pistol is able to kill or injured u in an ambush! Even Humvee cannot take rifle shot but at least can block a pistol round. Or maybe we don't develop a indigenous one but buy from other countries! Below r a good example of all rounded protected multi-purpose vehicle from UK!
[b]The MLV is designed for tactical mobility with a high level of protection against anti-tank and anti-personnel mines[/b]
LSV as it's name suggests is already meant for strike missions - surprise/stealth, speed/agility, overwhelming firepower. These attributes are in direct conflict with the level of protection that is required for vehicles used for peace containment missions in BUA with heavy concentration of hostiles just like in Iraq
So in essence the LSV serves its job adequately if not surpassing its equivalents (compare US Humvee fitted out for the same role). The Humvee should fare better if adequately protected but then it will never become an acceptable strike vehicle in any sense. With the armour that is available today, there can never be a heavily armoured, well protected LSV - you just have to accept it. -
The vulnerabilities of the Hummer was already apparent in Somalia during 1993, looks like they didn't work on it in the nearly ten years they had to correct any flaws in the design.
-
I agree with u on the specs and function of LSV! LSV is meant to be strike missions - surprise/stealth, speed/agility, overwhelming firepower.But if u have read my first posting.This LSV is also used for peace-keeping mission in East Timour as patrol vehicle! If the militant is half as ferocious as Iraqi one. Nobody will dare to sit inside this vehicle. Fortunately,none of fatalitites happen as the militant is only paper tiger!Originally posted by panzerjager:In the first place, should not use the LSV as a base reference vehicle when you want to apply the operation context like that in Iraq/Somalia/Bosnia etc where the main operating terrain is in BUA.
LSV as it's name suggests is already meant for strike missions - surprise/stealth, speed/agility, overwhelming firepower. These attributes are in direct conflict with the level of protection that is required for vehicles used for peace containment missions in BUA with heavy concentration of hostiles just like in Iraq
So in essence the LSV serves its job adequately if not surpassing its equivalents (compare US Humvee fitted out for the same role). The Humvee should fare better if adequately protected but then it will never become an acceptable strike vehicle in any sense. With the armour that is available today, there can never be a heavily armoured, well protected LSV - you just have to accept it.
But wisdom of using this LSV as patrol car for peace-keeping is questioned. Plus if there is future peace-keeping mission other than iraqi require SAF patrol team on road that demand it to handle rigid terrain and protection. What is SAF going to offer? -
The LSV was used by SAF in E.Timor simply because they did not have a better vehicle to do the job. Mobility was the fundamental requirement becaused of the tough terrain over there - Rovers wouldn't be able to do it once laden down. The onboard firefpower of the Flyer compared with standard Rovers in SAF is also a crucial factor.Originally posted by zenden9:I agree with u on the specs and function of LSV! LSV is meant to be strike missions - surprise/stealth, speed/agility, overwhelming firepower.But if u have read my first posting.This LSV is also used for peace-keeping mission in East Timour as patrol vehicle! If the militant is half as ferocious as Iraqi one. Nobody will dare to sit inside this vehicle. Fortunately,none of fatalitites happen as the militant is only paper tiger!
But wisdom of using this LSV as patrol car for peace-keeping is questioned. Plus if there is future peace-keeping mission other than iraqi require SAF patrol team on road that demand it to handle rigid terrain and protection. What is SAF going to offer?
Protection, or the lack of it, was definitely apparent in either vehicle but SAF had to go for it unless they had something like a PANHARD, OTOKAR, Humvee or VAB, which obviously not -
There was this black spider LSV which is believed to be for India on displayed at AA04. Compared to the other versions, it seems to be more armoured as shown in the fitting of windshield and other stuff.
We could probably get that? -
Different requirementOriginally posted by eurofighter:There was this black spider LSV which is believed to be for India on displayed at AA04. Compared to the other versions, it seems to be more armoured as shown in the fitting of windshield and other stuff.
We could probably get that?
By having a windshield means that the front gunner/VC/passenger cannot engage targets with personal front mounted weapons like MGs etc. The idea of having so, trading off the windshield is then for enemy to know that the oncoming LSV has frontal covering fire for the driver, and must stay pinned down until the LSV has at least overrun them or passed them by, to be pick off by the rear gunner or follow-on LSVs.
So it is sound that it will be difficult to engage the LSV crew with aimed fire at range. If there are indeed enemy snipers to worry about for this, then always bear in mind that since LSVs roles are mainly strike missions deep behind enemy lines, meaning maybe in supply depots, airfields, artillery positions etc during or before wartime in enemy rear, regular enemy army will not consider having to deploy sniper elements just to cover their valued assets against commando raids. Anyhow, before the LSVs roll in, brief immediate recce of the terrain by LRRP/ sniper teams would have filtered out enemy counter sniper teams -
I find this entire thread rather strange. I cannot see the relationship between LSV/Humvee and protection. Neither LSV nor Humvee was designed on the basis of protection to their occupants. The fact that the Humvee was used for the wrong purpose (or in the wrong context) in Somalia does not reflect on the vehicle itself. Imagine using an axe to cut tofu - do you blame the axe for not giving a clean cut or do you blame the person using it?Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:The vulnerabilities of the Hummer was already apparent in Somalia during 1993, looks like they didn't work on it in the nearly ten years they had to correct any flaws in the design.
If protection is needed, then used a properly designed armoured vehicle. Even then, they will be vulnerable to some forms of attack. -
Don't think it be fair to compare the Hummer with Singapore LSV. Every weapon is design for a purpose, which it is good at.
Look LSV = light strike vehicle. , while hummer is more of a general purpose Jeep, the purpose is different.
For LSV, the role is "strike" that is to, go in, over rough terrains, search and hit the enemy, so the need is for something light, open so that people inside can shoot freely all around at things without obstruction. Like the SAS have shown, with their open landrover, they can conduct lighting strike on air-field or other targets by driving through shooting up everything, with machine guns, rifles, genardes. With a covered vehicle, that is not achieved, therefore you will see all over the world LSV is all open, due to long proven
experience. You don't want something big, heavy and totally covered like the hummer, which you cannot freely shoot at people. -
Actually,Humvee is a multi-purpose vehicle which can use as a attack(Tow II ,25mm bushhammer or 0.5 fit on top),military armour patrol(US MP use it as patrol car)and other purpose.It is meant to withstand small arm firing and protect the personnel inside but in recent conflict like the iraqi show its inadequate. Armour vehicle is definitely able to handle small arm and even 0.5 MG but for patrolling, the long and wide body to move in narrow urban street will reduce its effective use! The US just need to produce a humvee II with better armour and suspension and it will perfect it.I had mention some new humvee type multi-purpose vehicle in my previous article which may have handle better than present humvee in all areas.Originally posted by dragonstar:I find this entire thread rather strange. I cannot see the relationship between LSV/Humvee and protection. Neither LSV nor Humvee was designed on the basis of protection to their occupants. The fact that the Humvee was used for the wrong purpose (or in the wrong context) in Somalia does not reflect on the vehicle itself. Imagine using an axe to cut tofu - do you blame the axe for not giving a clean cut or do you blame the person using it?
If protection is needed, then used a properly designed armoured vehicle. Even then, they will be vulnerable to some forms of attack.
As for the comparing part,actually we all know their own uses and purpose.Is just that SAF misuse the LSV as a patrol vehicle in East timor peace-keeping and jeopardise the safety of our peace-keeper! Some mention SAF don't have a proper one to undertake the task shall make them to arquire one.That's why I brought up this article to suggest SAF buy some humvee type vehicle as we all know SAF is more and more involved in UN mission and the humvee type vehicle will be handy in future peace-keeping mission.Even not for peace-keeping mission,I believe this all-round protected vehicle will definitely be useful in SAF for all kinds of combat type mssions. The humvee type vehicle will stand in between armour vehicle and LSV and I strongly believe we shall fill up this vacum! -
LSV has command presence compared to Benz and Audis!
Paint it white with Singapore flag on the front if you want it to stand out even more.
One can wear a Darth Vader helmet with thermo electric cooling and HMD! -
zenden9,
I think agree with you on the fact, perhaps a more protected vehicle is needed for that type of patrol.
But I am totally again the hummer. I have the chance using a hummer in Australia. And think is will be a wrong choice. 1st, that thing is to wide, too noisy, too heavy and too thristy ! drink fuel like there is no tomorrow. Actually the british army do make use of armoured covered landrovers. That may be a better choice. -
The new US Humvee II is out! The design is quite futuristic especially the door look very artisitic with smaller side door window! Hope this one can really stop AK-47 and M-16 rounds and SAF can consider buying some of it.
-
we have armoured land rovers liao lehOriginally posted by zenden9:The new US Humvee II is out! The design is quite futuristic especially the door look very artisitic with smaller side door window! Hope this one can really stop AK-47 and M-16 rounds and SAF can consider buying some of it. -
The land rover is no way going to compete against this humvee in terms of cross country and power abilities.Plus handling of more different variety weapon.Humvee is going to do a better job as it demonstrate from firing TOW II,25mm Bush hammer machine gun to small M60 GPMG. As previous thread has already indicated.
-
maybe cuz of different doctrines we have no need for them?Originally posted by zenden9:The land rover is no way going to compete against this humvee in terms of cross country and power abilities.Plus handling of more different variety weapon.Humvee is going to do a better job as it demonstrate from firing TOW II,25mm Bush hammer machine gun to small M60 GPMG. As previous thread has already indicated. -
i believe that the SAF introduced LSV into saf arsenal due to serious size consideration it plays relative significant role when traveling in bumpy jungle route..For the singapore army the dsta procurement dept always consider the size of the vehicle as a critical factor.As for the weight, SAF has been emphasising on the mobility and agility of a unit to get to touble spot fast naturally airborne / heliborne will be an excellent alternative.Bear in mind we carry 2 LSV.
if anyone out there have some VCD on the airborne operation / heliborne operation of the united state army will probably get a clearer view.The airborne dropping a single vehicle requires massive cushioning which is uneconomical. -
Rode the Humvee in Taiwan, nothing special just like a Landrover.
Yes, it's a fuel guzzler.
BTW, a LSV is an infantry and Guards asset.