Singapore buys tanks Merkava Mk 4

[Leckmichamarsch]

PAP is now a bloated & inefficient company. The new boss is obviously incapable of continuing his father's legacy. The norm now is to have projects poorly thought through. Lets take a look at some failures:

They overspent on YOG by 400%

The National Library was renovated & then less a year later they decided to demolished it because they decided to replace it with a road.

How about the ill fated Budget Terminal? They built some kind of wharehouse that was isolated from the other Terminals. In the end no one wanted to use the BT & now it has been demolished & replaced with Terminal 4 which is integrated with the other terminals

They opened the flood gates to millions of foreigners & no one in the PAP even considered whether the infrastructure could handle the strain. We now see the problems i.e. lack of hospital beds, congested roads & public transport, long queues at the polyclinics,.....

....

Anyone still want to continue voting for the PAP

They brought lots of Ah Nehs n Pinoys who are given jobs stolen from citizens,,,,,,,,,,, they protected only their own jobs n pay

 

[virus]

one key point is the lack of action, the culture to siam issues then to resolve them. no one were of any sane mind to change despite the alarming signs.

government collect $$ from maids, but how much protection did they gave?

government collect ERP yet the roads continue to b congested. no TP in sight, problem persist.

the lack of sufficient police manning the street to instil security allowed gangsterism to take root and pple to take matters into their own hand.

all these point to the person at the helm. his personal failure that not only ruin his own political party but the country at large.

 

[3_M]

Regarding ATGW for the Bionix, there was never a serious consideration to put that in. For several reasons. Its a cumberson system to use, u fire maybe 4 shots, and than have to withdraw to reload. And by the time you deploy it, a well trained tank crew would put 2 rounds into u. Also, for ATGW, their best use is in open areas like in a desert. There is too much vegetation and urban environment that may entangle the wires of the missile. And for an ATGW to defeat the PT-91, u would need the newest generation of tanden warhead against the ERAWA ERA that they PT-91 has, as well as a totally new turret design. And the production run would be too low to justify that.

The biggest problem for ATGM like Milan which fly in flat trajectory is it cannot be used for short range engagement. Milan got a minimum range of 400m which means it ineffective for anything below that. Even at 400m, the accuracy is only about 75%. Our close terrain doesn't really gave us the luxury of engaging targets at long range. Even if the target present itself at say 1.5km away, it will take about 7sec for the missile to reach it during this time the target might disappear into the vegetation, buildins or hills.

Going against PT91 isn't really a problem with Spike, it has tandem warhead and fly a few hundreds meter above ground before gliding down towards the target usually at the turret top where it is lightly armored.

 

[Froggy]

Hey guys, not say I want to say, if Malaysia's Sukhois or T91s can still fly or crawl when they're required then we will call them a target. If the are in mothball what are we discussing here?

 

[Papsmearer]

The biggest problem for ATGM like Milan which fly in flat trajectory is it cannot be used for short range engagement. Milan got a minimum range of 400m which means it ineffective for anything below that. Even at 400m, the accuracy is only about 75%. Our close terrain doesn't really gave us the luxury of engaging targets at long range. Even if the target present itself at say 1.5km away, it will take about 7sec for the missile to reach it during this time the target might disappear into the vegetation, buildins or hills.

Going against PT91 isn't really a problem with Spike, it has tandem warhead and fly a few hundreds meter above ground before gliding down towards the target usually at the turret top where it is lightly armored.

I am not a trained Spike operator, but my understanding is that our version (LR) is still guided by fiber optics wire which again has the possibility of entanglement with vegetation and is of limited use in an urban environment. that version is designed for long range engagement out to 4000m. Regarding the top down attack profile, I understand the Spike operator has to select this mode and manually activate it for the missile to pop up and fire downwards. All this is nice in theory and quite something else if he is under fire. I am not one to think that any T-72 variant is worth anything, but u never know until a weapon system like the PT-91 is actually combat tested.

The best weapon to kill a tank is another tank. that has been true of day one and is true today.

 

[jubilee1919]

Overall, the argument whether Singapore did or did not rest mainly one one very important aspect i.e. adopted doctrine in tank warfare. From the initial training up to the present, whose doctrine did we follow and developed into our own doctrine? At the end of the day, it is not so much about the weapon of choice but on how well it suits our purpose. The Israelis know Singapore very well since they were the ones who helped Singapore from the very beginning to build and trained our boys.

The purchase could very well be just a rumour, until the news become official.

 

[steffychun]

I am not a trained Spike operator, but my understanding is that our version (LR) is still guided by fiber optics wire which again has the possibility of entanglement with vegetation and is of limited use in an urban environment. that version is designed for long range engagement out to 4000m. Regarding the top down attack profile, I understand the Spike operator has to select this mode and manually activate it for the missile to pop up and fire downwards. All this is nice in theory and quite something else if he is under fire. I am not one to think that any T-72 variant is worth anything, but u never know until a weapon system like the PT-91 is actually combat tested.

The best weapon to kill a tank is another tank. that has been true of day one and is true today.

there's always other means such as the Apache's Hellfire missile.

 

[3_M]

I am not a trained Spike operator, but my understanding is that our version (LR) is still guided by fiber optics wire which again has the possibility of entanglement with vegetation and is of limited use in an urban environment. that version is designed for long range engagement out to 4000m. Regarding the top down attack profile, I understand the Spike operator has to select this mode and manually activate it for the missile to pop up and fire downwards. All this is nice in theory and quite something else if he is under fire. I am not one to think that any T-72 variant is worth anything, but u never know until a weapon system like the PT-91 is actually combat tested.

The best weapon to kill a tank is another tank. that has been true of day one and is true today.

Spike can be fire for low trajectory short range engagement or high trajectory long range engagement with a flip of the switch at the CLU.

Spike also has the fire and track mode and fire and forget mode. In case of position comes under attack during fire and track mode and the operator had to disengage the link command or in the circumstances the fibre optic snap, the missile will simply revert to fire and forget mode and home on to it last lock on point.

 

[kukubird58]

Ok, kuku, we have heard your same old boring shit. U can go back to the bedroom and resume fucking your mother's backside. She is waiting, ok?

hahaha...agree that it is same old boring shits....but it is precisely big bullies like u that I despise of.....
u think u can go round fxxking every mother son and spouting nonsense and talking big and get away with it....
u really don't know what is honour and shame.....
forumers like u must be exposed as duds....

 

[Papsmearer]

Overall, the argument whether Singapore did or did not rest mainly one one very important aspect i.e. adopted doctrine in tank warfare. From the initial training up to the present, whose doctrine did we follow and developed into our own doctrine? At the end of the day, it is not so much about the weapon of choice but on how well it suits our purpose. The Israelis know Singapore very well since they were the ones who helped Singapore from the very beginning to build and trained our boys.

The purchase could very well be just a rumour, until the news become official.

I know what the SAF Armour doctrine is, and its WRONG. The SAF armour doctrine is predicated on fighting on territory that is not Singapore land. hint hint where that is. Its based on utilizing the tanks assets of mobility, firepower, and armour protection. But very few armies in the last 10 years or more have used the tank in this way. In almost every single conflict in the last 20 years involving tanks, eg. Lebanon, gaza strip, Chechya, Iraq, Astan etc. tanks have had to fight in the city and urban areas. I guarantee you for sure 100% if we go north to war, we will have to do so too. these are totally tactics. And the SAF does not train its tank crews to operate in the urban, nor its infantry to do tank-infantry co-operation in the urban area. Armour and AI/Inf have to work as a close team when fighting in build up areas and there is just no doctrine for this. As I have said before, the SAF is just one big wayang show.

 

[jubilee1919]

I know what the SAF Armour doctrine is, and its WRONG. The SAF armour doctrine is predicated on fighting on territory that is not Singapore land. hint hint where that is. Its based on utilizing the tanks assets of mobility, firepower, and armour protection. But very few armies in the last 10 years or more have used the tank in this way. In almost every single conflict in the last 20 years involving tanks, eg. Lebanon, gaza strip, Chechya, Iraq, Astan etc. tanks have had to fight in the city and urban areas. I guarantee you for sure 100% if we go north to war, we will have to do so too. these are totally tactics. And the SAF does not train its tank crews to operate in the urban, nor its infantry to do tank-infantry co-operation in the urban area. Armour and AI/Inf have to work as a close team when fighting in build up areas and there is just no doctrine for this. As I have said before, the SAF is just one big wayang show.

I don't know much as I don't follow nor been involved with the SAF for the past 30 years but looking at some videos, I think we have matured in many ways. There are many Singaporeans with better knowledge of our armed forces and they do give good insights which gives one a greater understanding of where SAF is going.

 

[steffychun]

During one war game scenario I know about, a Colonel complained his tank battalion was wiped out fully by the oppostions AH-64 Apaches. He said that was unfair since the map was an open ground and he wanted tank-to-tank battles.

 

[eatshitndie]

it's true that the most lethal tank killer is from the air, either by chopper or attack aircraft. not just in modern times, but also true in ww2 on the western front. german panzer was simply no match for allied air superiority.

even on the eastern front, soviets were massing ilyushin il-2's (sturmovik) for anti-armor warfare during the battle of kursk. 70 tanks from the 9th panzer division were destroyed by il-2's at kursk on 7 july, 1943. soviets called them flying tanks.

 

[winnipegjets]

I don't know much as I don't follow nor been involved with the SAF for the past 30 years but looking at some videos, I think we have matured in many ways. There are many Singaporeans with better knowledge of our armed forces and they do give good insights which gives one a greater understanding of where SAF is going.

Lots of bs here ...benchmark against SAS, they will be found wanting.

 

[steffychun]

Lots of bs here ...benchmark against SAS, they will be found wanting.

British SAS can rip any scholar generals balls off.

 

[johnny333]

it's true that the most lethal tank killer is from the air, either by chopper or attack aircraft. not just in modern times, but also true in ww2 on the western front. german panzer was simply no match for allied air superiority.

even on the eastern front, soviets were massing ilyushin il-2's (sturmovik) for anti-armor warfare during the battle of kursk. 70 tanks from the 9th panzer division were destroyed by il-2's at kursk on 7 july, 1943. soviets called them flying tanks.

Drones are quite cheap & many 3rd world armies can afford them. It would be ironic if SAFs spent millions or billions on tanks, only to have them wiped out by drones.

 

[Hans168]

one key point is the lack of action, the culture to siam issues then to resolve them. no one were of any sane mind to change despite the alarming signs.

government collect $$ from maids, but how much protection did they gave?

government collect ERP yet the roads continue to b congested. no TP in sight, problem persist.

the lack of sufficient police manning the street to instil security allowed gangsterism to take root and pple to take matters into their own hand.

all these point to the person at the helm. his personal failure that not only ruin his own political party but the country at large.

Back to final days of Qing dynasty????

 

[johnny333]

Overall, the argument whether Singapore did or did not rest mainly one one very important aspect i.e. adopted doctrine in tank warfare. From the initial training up to the present, whose doctrine did we follow and developed into our own doctrine? At the end of the day, it is not so much about the weapon of choice but on how well it suits our purpose. The Israelis know Singapore very well since they were the ones who helped Singapore from the very beginning to build and trained our boys.

The purchase could very well be just a rumour, until the news become official.

Even the Israelis had to modify their doctrine because their opponents changed tactics.

So how do you think an inexperienced paper general(s) isolated in his ivory tower would do. If I was an NS man I would be terrified

 

[Hans168]

Drones are quite cheap & many 3rd world armies can afford them. It would be ironic if SAFs spent millions or billions on tanks, only to have them wiped out by drones.

The Bionix chief Fong Siak Hay was supposed to be designing n making drones in ST.... what happened? After so many years no picture, NO sound.......?!!! Promoted to level of incompetence (Murphy's Law)?

 

[johnny333]

The Bionix chief Fong Siak Hay was supposed to be designing n making drones in ST.... what happened? After so many years no picture, NO sound.......?!!! Promoted to level of incompetence (Murphy's Law)?

With paper generals you would probably have to follow the wasted money $$$$. He probably got promoted & is sitting in another GLC.