most urgently needed weapons......
-
The RSAF should have bought more Vipers, especially another 20-25 more Blk 52+ or the Blk60 variant for the short term drawdown.
-
The person who decided that the SAR-21 should not be able to use M-16 magazines burnt a lot of bridges. I just can't imagine what advantage there is in taking such a drastic step.
And now that they find that it is impractical to mount a M203 on the SAR-21 (or for whatever reasons), we now have a silly situation in the rifle companies with SAR-21, M16/M203 and Ultimax SAW. The last 2 uses M-16 mags but not the SAR-21.
At the same time they also decided that the SAR-21 doesn't need good iron sights or a bayonet.
Just to have a weapon shorter than the M-16, we traded it for a weapon that's heavier, bad ergonomics, no useful iron sights, expensive, no bayonet, no magazine commonality with SAW and M16/M203, no grenade launcher, not suitable for lefties.
I served in the infanrty and am of average height of 1.73m. I never once found the M-16 to be too long. And everyday I used the M-16, I appreciated its accuracy, light weight, balance and great ergonomics.
I'm afraid we might soon find out for ourselves why Malaysia decided to switch back to the M-16/M-4 after a decade with the Steyr AUG bullpup.
I think the most urgent thing for the army is to address all these problems with the SAR-21. -
New stuff:
1. Better protection for general infantry transport. The tonners and land-rovers have zero ballistic protection. M113s and Bionix are for the Armour Infantry.
2. ASM missiles, probably as a follow on to the F-15 order.
3. Anti-radiation missiles. Either HARM or ALARM. We might even have them, but not announced.
4. A way of retreiving wounded personnel in the open or FIBUA. -
1) Believe me RSAF wont stop at 20 F-15SG, more is sure 2 come
2) 105mm being replaced by pegasus but is kept in storage
3) SAF r looking at new light tanks we just have 2 wait a little longer anyway 390 AMX-13 SM1 VS 48 PT-91M who u think will win
4) ARM like HARM........heard something VERY intersting about them
-
What I think we should need is to invent a Self-ventilating body armour with class IIIA protection.. preferably air-con like condition and under the dragon skin concept.. but has to be light.
Now that's a thought.. and could make a tidy profit too.
Actually, I kinda like the SAR21, if they do some minor re-design to the exterior -and not touching the main assembly. The basic model is ok looking, except for the fixed scope (no open-sight) and bayonets. All other present variants are crude looking. For export, apart from reliablility and accuracy, looks are important.
Why can't they do some cosmetic changes to include Pic Rails in place of the scope and to the front assembly as standard... it do not need to look crude. The charging lever do not need to be concealed.. putting a dust-cover at the extractor port is also a good idea. The magazine release catch to be more user friendly and readily accept m-16 mags.
Sorry.. just ranting...
-
There is bayonet for SAR21. I saw the Guard of Honour contingent equiped with bayonet for SAF day parade 2006.
-
Never understand why people keep thinking that the F15SGs are direct replacement for the skyhawks only..
No one notice that some of the ex-skyhawk squadron numbers have been taken over by the F16s already?? -
U mean 143 n145 sqn
-
Actually the recently purchased F15SGs are not direct replacements for our A4 Super Skyhawks, they are compliment to our F16s in supporting better ground strike capabilities while our F16s provide air strike capabilities...Originally posted by insouciant:Never understand why people keep thinking that the F15SGs are direct replacement for the skyhawks only..
No one notice that some of the ex-skyhawk squadron numbers have been taken over by the F16s already??
You are right that our current F16 squadrons are previously A4SU squadrons, just like our 120 Squadron for our AH64 Longbow Apaches are previously Hueys squadron...
Like all people in military interest says, look up Jane's Defence and you can know roughly what's inside our arsenal, and one last thing, don't be surprised that we have more F16 Vipers and they are in the C/D Blk 60+ variants rather than the disclosed Blk 52+ variants... -
i personally feel very comfortable with the SAR as opposed to the m16
-
Me 2
-
Never get to use SAR21 before, only been trained on SSG, M16, M203, SAW, GPMG, 120mm mortar, LAW and Burretta...Originally posted by Hellraiza:i personally feel very comfortable with the SAR as opposed to the m16
-
The 105 Giat is relatively new weapon (around '91-92) if compare to the AMX-13Originally posted by spartan6:1) Believe me RSAF wont stop at 20 F-15SG, more is sure 2 come
2) 105mm being replaced by pegasus but is kept in storage
3) SAF r looking at new light tanks we just have 2 wait a little longer anyway 390 AMX-13 SM1 VS 48 PT-91M who u think will win
4) ARM like HARM........heard something VERY intersting about them 
, they were deployed to startup the RDF concept.
It is because the need to standardise the ammo that is why the reservists are not using the 105 Giat?
The Air Force have Shrike ARMs since A4 days for SEAD, I am not surprised if the F-16s have acquired HARM ARMs for SEAD ops. -
Like all people in military interest says, look up Jane's Defence and you can know roughly what's inside our arsenal, and one last thing, don't be surprised that we have more F16 Vipers and they are in the C/D Blk 60+ variants rather than the disclosed Blk 52+ variants...
Ours confirm are Blk 52+, maybe the confusion as the latest 145 SQN's F16D batch have CFT as std issues plus other goodies just like our 'Mexican' friend's F-16I Sufa.
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article17.html
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article7.html -
All that is available for the SAR21. Just not issued to the troops yet.Originally posted by MobyDog:What I think we should need is to invent a Self-ventilating body armour with class IIIA protection.. preferably air-con like condition and under the dragon skin concept.. but has to be light.
Now that's a thought.. and could make a tidy profit too.
Actually, I kinda like the SAR21, if they do some minor re-design to the exterior -and not touching the main assembly. The basic model is ok looking, except for the fixed scope (no open-sight) and bayonets. All other present variants are crude looking. For export, apart from reliablility and accuracy, looks are important.
Why can't they do some cosmetic changes to include Pic Rails in place of the scope and to the front assembly as standard... it do not need to look crude. The charging lever do not need to be concealed.. putting a dust-cover at the extractor port is also a good idea. The magazine release catch to be more user friendly and readily accept m-16 mags.
Sorry.. just ranting...
Anyway, with regards to the F-15SG, they are meant to complement the Vipers.
The Vipers are the strike aircraft now, taking over the Skyhawk's mudhen duties. -
Actually, to be accurate, the F16C/Ds have more than taken over the A4s as mudhens. They are also tasked with air-intercept with AMRAAMs.
-
How does F-15SG complement F-16s?
And are they looking at other capabilities, like air superiority? -
F-15SGs complement the strike role with additional range and better BVR intercept with the AESA radar.Originally posted by laurence82:How does F-15SG complement F-16s?
And are they looking at other capabilities, like air superiority? -
It's just like in the past we had Hunters as the main striker role for direct ground strike capabilities and A4 Skyhawks as the interceptor role for dogfights and air superiority dominator...Originally posted by LazerLordz:F-15SGs complement the strike role with additional range and better BVR intercept with the AESA radar.
When we phased out Hunters and brought in F5E Tigers, the roles were switched and A4 underwent MLU (Mid Life Upgrading) to A4SU, undertaking what Hunters previously covered and F5E Tigers undertook A4's interceptor role...
F16 Vipers were brought in as an advanced fighter to address to the need of supporting what our F5E Tigers can't and to complement its functions in advanced air superiority warfare... Which we have A4SU Super Skyhawks, F5E Tigers and F16A/B Vipers...
Now that RSAF phased out A4SU Super Skyhawks, as a need to balance the various ground strike roles, interceptor roles and advanced air strike roles and not over burdening our current fleet of F5E Tigers anf F16 Vipers, further variants of F16C/D Blk 52+ Vipers were procured, giving the Vipers multi-roles, multi-operations fighter... F15SG Eagles are purchased as their air & ground strike capabilities were proven to complement the Vipers, thus leaving F5E for interceptor roles... -
I am tempted to reply but this going off thread. So I will keep it really short.
F-5E as an intercepter? It is too slow. -
well primary role as an interceptor with a secondary strike role.Originally posted by touchstone_2000:I am tempted to reply but this going off thread. So I will keep it really short.
F-5E as an intercepter? It is too slow. -
Well, F5E Tigers are subsonic fighter, and with ST Aerospace upgraded its avonics and turbine engine with afterburner, our F5E can take off in short tracked runway and in the air in fast time of four seconds...Originally posted by touchstone_2000:I am tempted to reply but this going off thread. So I will keep it really short.
F-5E as an intercepter? It is too slow. -
errr from the start, F-5Es are supersonic. In fact F-5As are supersonic. What ST really did, was to upgrade the avionics, cockpit system, and rewired it to fire amraams.Originally posted by dork3d:Well, F5E Tigers are subsonic fighter, and with ST Aerospace upgraded its avonics and turbine engine with afterburner, our F5E can take off in short tracked runway and in the air in fast time of four seconds...
Other than that, the F-5S/T is pretty much the same as an F-5E/F
If you are talking about re engine, it is the A4 SU. The original J-65 turbojet was replaced with the non afterburning version of the F404 tubofan engine.
Even then, they made it non after burning. Cos the jet is not design for such speeds anyway. -
Is it? Then me got conned by my friend liao le... He is a pilot on F5E and he told me that...Originally posted by CenturionMBT:errr from the start, F-5Es are supersonic. In fact F-5As are supersonic. What ST really did, was to upgrade the avionics, cockpit system, and rewired it to fire amraams.
Other than that, the F-5S/T is pretty much the same as an F-5E/F
If you are talking about re engine, it is the A4 SU. The original J-65 turbojet was replaced with the non afterburning version of the F404 tubofan engine.
Even then, they made it non after burning. Cos the jet is not design for such speeds anyway. -
lolOriginally posted by dork3d:Is it? Then me got conned by my friend liao le... He is a pilot on F5E and he told me that...