What is this new SAF toy?
-
Merkava! I seriously think that Israel's rethink in their defence policies, esp the Merkavas would see less of the newer mk4 coming in ... and they ARE one of the best.Originally posted by Fairyland:All this at a time when the IDF is re-considering their Merkava effort according to a 1 Sept 04 issue of JDW.
Apparantly some in IDF thinks they shouldn't be into steel......
STK is Singapore's version of Proton? -
Aha, RDF can only hold a beachhead for a limited period, and they do depend for the main force (the armoured units) to quickly link up with them.Originally posted by gary1910:It is stupid to use the causeway becos it will be a chokepoint for us!!!
Go check out the number of type of floating bridges that we have, and lastly our RPL, LSD, FCEP & FCU. ( the last three are all locally made & the numbers are classified), and you will realise that we dun need to have the causeway!!!!!
All we need it just to have our RDF to get the beachhead and the rest will start pouring in via RPL, FCEP & FCU and when it is totally secure even a floating bridge could be constructed if neccessary!!!!
You mentioned various types of landing crafts....but only the RPL is suitable to lift the Bionix and there are only a grand total of 4
The FU/LCU, LCVP/FCEP are not suitable for the Bionixlah.
As for the floating bridge....note it has to be almost 1 km long. How many lanes can be built ?
Compare that to the Causeway that has 6 lanes.
As I say, we shall see the development in the next 1 -2 years. -
Yes, the upgrades have been done - I've been in the vehicle. However, wheeled light armoured vehicles like the V200 are not confined to air-defence roles. The are used by certain infantry and guards units as well.Originally posted by kingkhong79:The V200 in Singapore are being upgraded with diesel engines and automatic transmissions so they are unlikely to be replaced by the terrex which is a bit of an overkill if they r only to be used for airbase air-defence.
The wheeled light armoured vehicles provides something better than sitting around in 3/5 tonners. And they add additional firepower to infantry/guards units.
Armoured units will likely to stick to heavier tracked vehicles. -
Originally posted by observe:
Do you know that our RDF have their own armoured forces?!?
Aha, RDF can only hold a beachhead for a limited period, and they do depend for the main force (the armoured units) to quickly link up with them.
You mentioned various types of landing crafts....but only the RPL is suitable to lift the Bionix and there are only a grand total of [b]4
The FU/LCU, LCVP/FCEP are not suitable for the Bionixlah.
As for the floating bridge....note it has to be almost 1 km long. How many lanes can be built ?
Compare that to the Causeway that has 6 lanes.
As I say, we shall see the development in the next 1 -2 years. [/b]
They could be carry by the FCU which has a capacity for 18 tonnes!!!!!
They will start pouring in with their own AFVs , LSVs etc , easily more than 40-50 vehicles will be landed. They will secure the beachhead.
And you have forgotten that I have mentioned LSD!!!
So after securing the beachhead, the LSD will start to beach & start unloading ,with each LSD could carry abt 38 vehicles including 18 tanks/Bionix!!!
So how many AFVs could we carry ashore????
Do the maths & you will realise that we could easily have more than bde size of armoured force on shore!!!!
As for the floating bridges, when the area is fully secured, even one lane is good enough and if neccessary even two & three bridges could be built!!!!
In the first place as I said, the Bionix are not designed for open sea amphibious assualt, likewise for many IFV/APC.
For Eg, the vanilla M113 has amphibious capability but certainly could not claim to be use for open sea amphibious assualt.
Today only a few truly open sea amphibious assualt armoured vehicles like the AAAV, AAV7A,PT-76, Type-63(Chinese variant of PT-76) & AMX-10 marines variant are open sea capable.
So do not assume that any AFV with amphibious capability means that they could be used in open sea, becos amphibious capability has many classification depending on the water condition, thus many so called amphibious IFV/APC does not means they could be used in open sea , they will be sunk in the rough water!!!!
So for the Bionix vs Terrex debate, SAF frontline armour will not use the Terrex becos of the higher ground pressure of a wheeled AFV, it will have pooer tactical mobility in tropical rain forest as compare to a tracked AFV, the SAF frontline only use the wheeled V-200 for SAM platform.
As for the Terrex amphibious capability, so far there is no report that it is a open sea capable AFV, so your point that the Terrex is better in term of amphibious capability for open sea amphibious assualt is actually not proven.
Since it is not advertise as one, I dun think they could.
Even it is, it will still not be adopted in the armoured forces , at most in the RDF. Becos of different roles thus different needs.
Anyway, Terrex is already out for more than three years & from the start as a private venture by ST as reported, there is no report that SAF is going to adopt it . -
Well we can never be sure. Teo Chee Hean did mention before that the SM1 tank's replacement may not be another tank. So it COULD be that they are looking at wheeled AFV with a main tank gun. And the Terrex does have a variant with a 105mm main gun.Originally posted by gary1910:Anyway, Terrex is already out for more than three years & from the start as a private venture by ST as reported, there is no report that SAF is going to adopt it . -
There is great difference between Terrex and the rest of DSTA/ST/SAF projects, for example the SM1, Bionix,M113 Ultra , Bronco & Primus etc.Originally posted by esesce:Well we can never be sure. Teo Chee Hean did mention before that the SM1 tank's replacement may not be another tank. So it COULD be that they are looking at wheeled AFV with a main tank gun. And the Terrex does have a variant with a 105mm main gun.
There will be a complete news blackout for such projects, announcement will only be made after at least one unit is fully equipped and operational.
Terrex was already been advertised by ST with CGI image even b4 the first prototype was ready for display more than three years ago. Becos it is a private venture by ST, there were no news blackout at all.
Anyway, there is some leaked info on the new light tank from Janes' IDR, go to the new forum for more info.
From the report, I believe that SM1 replacement will certainly be tracked, for whether it will be gun armed, missile armed or hybrid that remain to be seen, but the report seem to pointing toward gun armed. -
Where's the new forum u talked about?
-
Here :Originally posted by esesce:Where's the new forum u talked about?
http://s8.invisionfree.com/Military_Nuts/index.php?showtopic=7&st=30 -
dang it looks like a stryker!
-
indeed. but it shouldn't be hard to differentiate between the two.Originally posted by palmerised:dang it looks like a stryker!
-
haha but of course! ours looks so darn smooth..
bleah, anyways, reports say that the stryker isn't really that good an ifv.. they prefer old mr. gavin.. -
Siah lahz....wat if the new tank to replace the AMX13SM1 is a half-track?THose are a waste man!!!Woot....
-
Yes V200 now has turbo chargered diesel engine...Originally posted by kingkhong79:The V200 in Singapore are being upgraded with diesel engines and automatic transmissions so they are unlikely to be replaced by the terrex which is a bit of an overkill if they r only to be used for airbase air-defence.
The braking system and the turret power system was also upgraded.