Replacement for AMX-10P
-
This vehicle have been in use in SAF armour for quite some time. But it is not well publicised as we seldom see it in the media (such as in NDP) and they are only being publicly displayed in SAF Open House, as shown in the above picture.
Judging from first hand accounts, this troop-carrying vehicle is not very reliable and prone to many problems. This is an amphibous vehicle which can be used in coastal hook operations. What possible vehicles can be its replacement?
-
I'd stick with good ol' M113A2 Ultras.
-
hmmm.... has the SAF ever considered the le clerc to replace out tanks? or is it still too heavy?
-
Why not adopt the Russian BMP3 hull and design a new 90mm tank gun turret for it. I think the BMP3 is amphibious
-
Yes the BMP-3 is amphibous. This vehicle is one of the best in the market for its amphibious capability. Most if not all Russian armoured vehicles are amphibous.
It have superior firepower. A 100mm gun which can fire ATGM, a 30mm cannon and three 7.62 machine guns. Not to mention that it is cheap as compared to its Western counterparts as well. Many developing countries are using it. A NATO country is known to use it,Greece. Another modern country which uses it is South Korea for the marines.
The downside is that the weapons and ammo is different from what we are already using,this may be a problem for logistics. The armour is also known to be weak by Western standards but this can be rectified by upgrades which the Singapore defence industry is capable of.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/bmp-3/ -
Originally posted by Pitot
This AMX-10P of ours is a very well armed IFV, which means it is designed to carry troops for amphibious assaults on beaches. It is not considered a tank on a strict sense although it's firepower is close.
hmmm.... has the SAF ever considered the le clerc to replace out tanks? or is it still too heavy? -
Again, if we can shoot a SPIKE out of a BMP, maybe we can consider. Cos the current ATGM for those bMps still require the gunner to be constantly trained on its target to guide the weapon.
it seems my information outdates itself quite quickly, so can someone verify this? -
I was suggesting SAF use the BMP3 hull onli, with indigenious designed turret. Any way, any chance SAF may be interested in the spike and 30mm gun combo seen at the recent AA2006?
-
SAF operate only 22 AMX-10 PAC90 n 22 AMX-10, due 2 their small number they r not well publicised. Their main role is amphibious assault so any replacement must have good amphibious capability.
-
Originally posted by equlus84
I think this is a viable idea as this will remove the problem of difference in weapons and thus ammo supply. However, this way we will be unable to have the superior firepower present on the original BMP-3 turret.
I was suggesting SAF use the BMP3 hull onli, with indigenious designed turret. Any way, any chance SAF may be interested in the spike and 30mm gun combo seen at the recent AA2006?
I am thinking if the South Koreans who use predominantly US weapons can have the BMP-3 in their marines i am sure we can work things out as well. Anyway we only need to replace 44 AMX-10 (of which half is the heavily armed variant), so we can standardise to using all BMP-3 instead of 2 variants but have a lesser number as compared to the original 44. This way we will have superior firepower and better amphibous capability at a fraction of the cost of purchasing some Western vehicle.
PS. equlus84 i am interested in this Spike and 30mm turret which you have mentioned do you have any pics and info? Sorry i didn't go to the AA2006. -
How abt a BX variant which can do abt 8-10 knots in conditions up to sea state 3 n can right itself when overturned?There's quite alot of rivers to cross in our supposed theatre of operations n a BX variant raise the possibility that we can retrofit the rest of the force when needed.This definitely beats our current way of crossing rivers....
-
Originally posted by FiReDuKe
Firstly without revealing any details i will like to tell you that the BX is unsuitable for rapid amphibious assault on beaches which should be the role of the AMX-10's replacement, even though it is amphibious.
How abt a BX variant which can do abt 8-10 knots in conditions up to sea state 3 n can right itself when overturned?There's quite alot of rivers to cross in our supposed theatre of operations n a BX variant raise the possibility that we can retrofit the rest of the force when needed.This definitely beats our current way of crossing rivers....
Secondly, i have not heard of any armoured vehicle which can right itself when overturn disregarding whether it is in sea state 3 or not. I know for certain that none of the officially acknowledged armoured vehicles in SAF can do this.
Thirdly, to use BX as a basis for a new amphibious assault variant is not ideal as it is even heavier than the SM1! -
double post
-
I think we should have quite a number of M113 lying around, perhaps upgraded them to Arisgator.
http://www.arisspa.it/inglese/arisgator.htm -
Originally posted by gary1910
I think this is a good idea. All we need is to construct 2 types of turrets, one for the role as a 'tank' and one for the role as a IFV. But armour wise will need some improvement. Weight will also be an issue due to the addition of a turret and armour but this can be solved by having a more powerful engine. The clear advantage of doing so will be low cost and we have the ability to made our own vehicles so other countries will never know the true number of vehicles which we have.
I think we should have quite a number of M113 lying around, perhaps upgraded them to Arisgator. -
Hi Tankie1981,
Are you from 4xx of 21Div? IF you are, we are brothers... -
Best thing is , this is a modular addon kit after the initial beach landing coastal hook operation, it could be dismantle and convert it back for land operation.Originally posted by tankee1981:I think this is a good idea. All we need is to construct 2 types of turrets, one for the role as a 'tank' and one for the role as a IFV. But armour wise will need some improvement. Weight will also be an issue due to the addition of a turret and armour but this can be solved by having a more powerful engine. The clear advantage of doing so will be low cost and we have the ability to made our own vehicles so other countries will never know the true number of vehicles which we have.
Just use the one currently for Ultra for IFV and for Fire support role it could be done for M113 but it is best to covert all the AMX-10P to AMX-10PAC90, upgrade the engine and cooling system and should be alright.
44 upgraded AMX-10PAC90
Unknown qty of Arisgator Ultra -
Originally posted by gary1910
Bro, i will like to point out that our version of the AMX-10 is the only ones in the world. In another words, there is only 22 of each of the 2 variants in the world! Thus upgrading the other 22 to AMX-10PAC90 may not make economic sense.
Just use the one currently for Ultra for IFV and for Fire support role it could be done for M113 but it is best to covert all the AMX-10P to AMX-10PAC90, upgrade the engine and cooling system and should be alright.
Personally i feel that it will be ideal to standardise the calibre of the main gun within SAF much like what they are doing for the artillery. Maybe we can have 105mm for the SM1 replacement and the AMX-10P replacement. Then with the 120mm for the supposed MBTs we will only need two types of ammo for our tank main guns. -
Not true, the marine variant of AMX-10P was also bought by Indonesia, abt 40 of ICVs and PAC90s.( not sure what is the ratio)Originally posted by tankee1981:Bro, i will like to point out that our version of the AMX-10 is the only ones in the world. In another words, there is only 22 of each of the 2 variants in the world! Thus upgrading the other 22 to AMX-10PAC90 may not make economic sense.
But non marine variant was bought by many countries and TS90 turret was also mounted on other vehicle.
One thing with 44 PAC90, it should be able to support one mechanised Bde(Amphi).
Well, AMX-13 AVLB( 80s to 90s) or Bionix AVLB (late 90s) is also a very small qty. -
I thought that ours are special and no other country have the same variant as us during my google search. But its also possible that i miss this out. gary will you be so kind to provide a link?
-
u from it? best not to mention anything about the div thing.Originally posted by LAW1:Hi Tankie1981,
Are you from 4xx of 21Div? IF you are, we are brothers...
btw, u guy did not do much tank L/F lately rite?
-
My source is my own Jane's A&A, Indonesia was reported to be the first customer of the marine variant of AMX-10P and AMX-10PAC90( qty: 40), SG is the 2nd customer, not sure whether there is any more as my copy is a few years old.Originally posted by tankee1981:I thought that ours are special and no other country have the same variant as us during my google search. But its also possible that i miss this out. gary will you be so kind to provide a link?
Here one link from the web & check out the pictures of TNI's AMX-10PAC90 on the 2nd link:
http://armyreco.ifrance.com/asie/indonesie/indonesie_index_equipement.htm
http://armyreco.ifrance.com/asie/indonesie/vehicules_legers/amx-10p_marine/amx-10p_indonesie_diaporama.htm -
Hi saline,Originally posted by saline:u from it? best not to mention anything about the div thing.
btw, u guy did not do much tank L/F lately rite?
Yes, I'm from it. Sorry about the mentioning of anything sensitive as I'm trying also not to mention the unit number.....
Almost every 2 years we do L/F. Ain't fun with a 90mm blasting beside you. -
Yes, Tankie1981... Its true Indonesia has AMX10P and other information. But can't say much here...Originally posted by tankee1981:I thought that ours are special and no other country have the same variant as us during my google search. But its also possible that i miss this out. gary will you be so kind to provide a link? -
Finally, someone wrote about AMX10P. We had it sometime now people starts to realise its existence.
I appreciate you guys curiousity about this IFV and APC. Actually, there's alot of things/stuffs about this vechicle I would very much like to share but as you know due to security reasons I can't share it here.
The numbers Spartan mentioned is not really that right.......